Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-S...

Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil Unions

There are 52049 comments on the CBS2 story from Nov 30, 2010, titled Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil Unions. In it, CBS2 reports that:

The Illinois House has approved a measure to legalize civil unions for same-sex couples.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at CBS2.

Rich Daley

Romeoville, IL

#34012 Jun 1, 2012
Actually it is closer to the truth than you realize.
Nytebreid wrote:
<quoted text>
Tired and worn out... like:
"Adam and Steve"
"Can we marry our dogs next"
"Leviticus says..."
"Gays are pedophiles"
"Unnatural"
"Gays spread AIDS"
These are all old, ridiculous statements that demonstrate nothing but fear and ignorance.
Rich Daley

Romeoville, IL

#34013 Jun 1, 2012
Try learning basic grammar you imbecile. Then you can start a plan to get off the Government hand out you lazy slug.
dances with weebles wrote:
<quoted text>
oh, i'm kickin', too... jsut not raisin' a whole let of dust any more.
KK Harvard

Romeoville, IL

#34015 Jun 1, 2012
May I suggest you attend a local GED program before you post again.
taxpayer wrote:
<quoted text>
AND nOW THE BIG lIER will start his crap anything you say is a lie and so what did not need punctuation you read and understood oh big shot keep up the good work LIEING all the time hey teacher shut up and pay for your pension and quit robbing the rest of us
jerry

Haslet, TX

#34016 Jun 2, 2012
Krystal03 wrote:
<quoted text>TY sweetie.. have fun at work :)
i will have prayer for you sunday

Since: Oct 11

Beggs, OK

#34019 Jun 2, 2012
Honest AbeL wrote:
Post your source to back up your statement
<quoted text>
I already did in the original post. All you're showing is your lying capacity. In the original post I said:

Try reading Bruce Bahgemihl's "Biological Exuberance" or if you can't read just go to youtube and search for "homosexuality in animals".

Now once again, post your source that I somehow lied.
Mona Lott

Hoboken, NJ

#34020 Jun 2, 2012
Cool Hand Luke wrote:
So if you accuse your opponents of being queers if they speak out against you, they might be homophobes? You heterophobes are hilarious!
.
Isn't the definition of "Homophobia" An irrational fear of homosexuals?
No, it isn't. But you already know that. You also know that the rest of your post is a big steaming pile of bullshit LIES....OLD lies, at that, yet you keep repeating them. Thanks for proving your malicious intent. NARTH will now credit your account.

Is your luggage handler on vacation?

Since: Feb 07

Location hidden

#34022 Jun 2, 2012
datruth wrote:
How come this long until Civil Unions are fair?! We should have had same-sex marriages legal by now!
That generational cultural knowledge gets in the way of feel good Progressivism.

Since: Oct 09

Location hidden

#34023 Jun 2, 2012
If that is your source then you are out of luck. Animals have never been studied for a life time. Besides anyone engaged in the most elementary animal observation is forced to conclude that animal "homosexuality," "filicide" and "cannibalism" are exceptions to normal animal behavior. Consequently, they cannot be called animal instincts. These observable exceptions to normal animal behavior result from factors beyond their instincts.
Must society embrace cannibalism and filicide also? Hey it is natural. This argument is almost as stupid as the embracing of everyone for who they are even if they are freaks of nature.
Cesar Ades, ethologist and professor of psychology at the University of Sao Paulo, Brazil, explains, "When two males mate, what is present is a demonstration of power, not sex."[8]
Jacque Lynn Schultz, ASPCA Animal Sciences Director of Special Projects, explains further:
Usually, an un-neutered male dog will mount another male dog as a display of social dominance--in other words, as a way of letting the other dog know who's boss. While not as frequent, a female dog may mount for the same reason.
Dr. Bagemihl's interpretation, however, throughout his 750-page book unabashedly favors the animal homosexuality theory. Its pages are filled with descriptions of animal acts that would have a homosexual connotation in human beings. Dr. Bagemihl does not prove, however, that these acts have the same meaning for animals. He simply gives them a homosexual interpretation. Not surprisingly, his book was published by Stonewall Inn Editions, "an imprint of St. Martin's Press devoted to gay and lesbian interest books."
Cheyenne277 wrote:
<quoted text>
I already did in the original post. All you're showing is your lying capacity. In the original post I said:
Try reading Bruce Bahgemihl's "Biological Exuberance" or if you can't read just go to youtube and search for "homosexuality in animals".
Now once again, post your source that I somehow lied.

Since: Oct 11

Beggs, OK

#34024 Jun 2, 2012
Honest AbeL wrote:
If that is your source then you are out of luck. Animals have never been studied for a life time.
<quoted text>
WRONG. A total lie. Many animal populations have been studied through several generations. Especially those in captivity. You really think obvious lies help your argument?

Since: Oct 11

Beggs, OK

#34025 Jun 2, 2012
Honest AbeL wrote:
Besides anyone engaged in the most elementary animal observation is forced to conclude that animal "homosexuality," "filicide" and "cannibalism" are exceptions to normal animal behavior. Consequently, they cannot be called animal instincts. These observable exceptions to normal animal behavior result from factors beyond their instincts.
<quoted text>
Oh really? It's not the instinct of the black widow to devour her mate? Even though she does it every single time? It's just "bad behavior"?

Get an education.

And so animal homosexuality is just "bad behavior" too and has nothing to do with instinct, even though there are many species with no homosexuality and many species with exclusive homosexuality???

Since: Oct 11

Beggs, OK

#34026 Jun 2, 2012
Honest AbeL wrote:
Must society embrace cannibalism and filicide also? Hey it is natural. This argument is almost as stupid as the embracing of everyone for who they are even if they are freaks of nature.
Cesar Ades, ethologist and professor of psychology at the University of Sao Paulo, Brazil, explains, "When two males mate, what is present is a demonstration of power, not sex."[8]
Jacque Lynn Schultz, ASPCA Animal Sciences Director of Special Projects, explains further:
Usually, an un-neutered male dog will mount another male dog as a display of social dominance--in other words, as a way of letting the other dog know who's boss. While not as frequent, a female dog may mount for the same reason.
Dr. Bagemihl's interpretation, however, throughout his 750-page book unabashedly favors the animal homosexuality theory. Its pages are filled with descriptions of animal acts that would have a homosexual connotation in human beings. Dr. Bagemihl does not prove, however, that these acts have the same meaning for animals. He simply gives them a homosexual interpretation. Not surprisingly, his book was published by Stonewall Inn Editions, "an imprint of St. Martin's Press devoted to gay and lesbian interest books."
<quoted text>
Obviously if we had a percentage of our female population that had the urge after sex to devour their mate, we'd be dealing with that since it's harmful to the mate. Homosexuality on the other hand isn't harmful. And yes, there is homosexual behavior in the wild that is exclusively for dominance. There is also homosexual behavior in the wild that occurs because the animal is exclusively homosexual and will never mate with the opposite gender or reproduce during their lifetime. This is especially evident in many species of monkey, birds, walrus, goats and giraffe.

If you don't like it I suggest you find another planet to live on.

Since: Feb 07

Location hidden

#34027 Jun 2, 2012
Origin of the Species has a response to this Progressive Agenda.
That is, everything will work out, even if it's not as was expected.

Since: Oct 09

Location hidden

#34028 Jun 2, 2012
Captive animals takes you out of your "natural" claim. No one has studied animals for a life time. Not even Jane Goodall
Cheyenne277 wrote:
<quoted text>
WRONG. A total lie. Many animal populations have been studied through several generations. Especially those in captivity. You really think obvious lies help your argument?

Since: Oct 09

Location hidden

#34029 Jun 2, 2012
Actually it is about domination as I explained and allowed experts to explain it to you
Cheyenne277 wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh really? It's not the instinct of the black widow to devour her mate? Even though she does it every single time? It's just "bad behavior"?
Get an education.
And so animal homosexuality is just "bad behavior" too and has nothing to do with instinct, even though there are many species with no homosexuality and many species with exclusive homosexuality???

Since: Oct 11

Beggs, OK

#34030 Jun 2, 2012
Honest AbeL wrote:
Captive animals takes you out of your "natural" claim. No one has studied animals for a life time. Not even Jane Goodall
<quoted text>
WRONG AGAIN. Many animals have been tagged and studied throughout their entire lifetime, which in many species is only a few years.

Since: Oct 11

Beggs, OK

#34031 Jun 2, 2012
Honest AbeL wrote:
Actually it is about domination as I explained and allowed experts to explain it to you
<quoted text>
WRONG. Studies have made it clear that there are many species that have a percentage of their population that is exclusively homosexual and will never mate with the opposite gender or reproduce.

Since: Oct 09

Location hidden

#34032 Jun 2, 2012
There has never been a wild animal followed through its entire life for you to lay claim that it was exclusively homosexual. That is simply a crock and you know it
Cheyenne277 wrote:
<quoted text>
Obviously if we had a percentage of our female population that had the urge after sex to devour their mate, we'd be dealing with that since it's harmful to the mate. Homosexuality on the other hand isn't harmful. And yes, there is homosexual behavior in the wild that is exclusively for dominance. There is also homosexual behavior in the wild that occurs because the animal is exclusively homosexual and will never mate with the opposite gender or reproduce during their lifetime. This is especially evident in many species of monkey, birds, walrus, goats and giraffe.
If you don't like it I suggest you find another planet to live on.

Since: Oct 09

Location hidden

#34033 Jun 2, 2012
That is a crock no matter how many times you say it
Cheyenne277 wrote:
<quoted text>
WRONG. Studies have made it clear that there are many species that have a percentage of their population that is exclusively homosexual and will never mate with the opposite gender or reproduce.

Since: Oct 09

Location hidden

#34034 Jun 2, 2012
COMPLETELY NUTS
Cheyenne277 wrote:
<quoted text>
WRONG. Studies have made it clear that there are many species that have a percentage of their population that is exclusively homosexual and will never mate with the opposite gender or reproduce.

Since: Oct 11

Beggs, OK

#34035 Jun 2, 2012
Honest AbeL wrote:
COMPLETELY NUTS
<quoted text>
Post your proof.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Crestwood Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
blue island city budget 50 min Nailed It 12
property taxes and theives (Nov '09) 2 hr No Doubt 173
Blue Island Police need hires? 2 hr Waste 21
Bragassi 9 hr All Lives Matter 4
South Suburban Library District Fri Buford T Justice 11
Prostitutes on 147 (Jan '12) Fri PleaseGoLieDown 30
Are we trying to hide a shady past Arty? (Mar '17) Thu Shadow hitman 40

Crestwood Jobs

Personal Finance

Crestwood Mortgages