Gay Marriages Begin in Wisconsin Afte...

Gay Marriages Begin in Wisconsin After Ruling

There are 500 comments on the EDGE story from Jun 6, 2014, titled Gay Marriages Begin in Wisconsin After Ruling. In it, EDGE reports that:

Rich Gillard, left, and Andrew Petroll kiss after their marriage ceremony at the Milwaukee County Courthouse.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at EDGE.

Christsharians on the DL

Philadelphia, PA

#185 Jun 17, 2014
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
I think your post handle exposes the real ignorant bigot troll.
Well you don't think so clearly, because I never said christianist theocrats may not marry, adopt, serve openly, be protected from arbitrary firing. You stu pid, sexually sick bigot.

Now run along and condemn all those single heterosexuals who have offspring. Since, you know, it's all about [sic] having "a mother and a father."

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#186 Jun 17, 2014
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
'Arbitrary and capricious standard'???
....
In fact, gay couples need protection just to have SEX!!!
...
Snicker smile.
So after mocking me about what I said about gays or lesbians having children, you now say LESBIANS need birth control in order to avoid getting pregnant?

(snicker/smile)

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#187 Jun 18, 2014
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
'Arbitrary and capricious standard'???
....
In fact, gay couples need protection just to have SEX!!!
...
Snicker smile.
DNF wrote:
<quoted text>So after mocking me about what I said about gays or lesbians having children, you now say LESBIANS need birth control in order to avoid getting pregnant?
(snicker/smile)
Um, I said 'gay' couples.

However, lesbian couples can't get pregnant the way normal couples do.

Why are you afraid to admit homosexuality is a birth defect?

Smile.

lides

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#188 Jun 18, 2014
KiMare wrote:
How so?
They are equally infertile, and thus far, you have claimed that the infertility renders the couple to be lesser than other married couples. Were you not such an imbecile, you might see that such a simplistic view carries much more far reaching implications, and unintended consequences.
KiMare wrote:
They are not duplicate gendered.
They are still infertile, moron. What makes their infertility any less applicable than a same sex couple's?
KiMare wrote:
They have a medical condition.
Not necessarily. There are any number of causes of infertility, some of which are even elective. Infertility does not make ANY married couple any lesser than any other. Only an idiot would make such an argument.
KiMare wrote:
What kind of 'logic' are you talking about?
Smirk.
I mean the kind where one can think, and actually see the full implications of an argument they are making, rather than wearing blinders while painting all infertile couples as lesser in an attempt to argue against equal protection of the law for a small subset.

KiMare, you are not only dumb, you are not only bigoted, but you are also thoughtless, and heartless. Your arguments are poorly reasoned and you frequently fail to see the overarching implications of your moronic logic. In short, you are an imbecile.
Strel

Tallahassee, FL

#189 Jun 18, 2014
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Let me repeat it again;
Words describe reality.
Words that falsely describe reality are lies.
Lies hurt everyone.
Laws based on lies are bad laws that hurt everyone.
Smile.
1. It imposes a fraudulent counterfeit on marriage. A lie.
2. Gay marriage is an oxymoron.
3. It isn't based on sex, it is based on significant distinctions.
You are angry because I refuse to ignore your denial and lies. I feel real bad about that.
Smirk.
I'm not angry at all, I don't have a personal dog in this fight, my interest is academic and professional.

Repeating the same arguments that have already been established as irrelevant really doesn't make you appear very smart.

You are just an irrelevant, bigoted troll with apparently nothing better to do in your life. So no anger from me, but a healthy mix of pity and scorn for a coward that cannot answer three relatively simple questions.
Strel

Tallahassee, FL

#190 Jun 18, 2014
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
'Arbitrary and capricious standard'???
A diverse gender distinction IS arbitrary because reality is!
A relationship that normally needs protection NOT to procreate is an emotional distinction from one that NEVER procreates?
In fact, gay couples need protection just to have SEX!!!
With lides, you make dumb and dumber...
Snicker smile.
Yes, arbitrary and capricious. It's your inherently subjective opinion, but more importantly, everything you state is completely irrelevant to the central issue of whether it should be legal or not.

You won't argue the main issue because you have no argument. It's obvious.

You really aren't very good at this.

“Busting Kimare's”

Since: Feb 13

Clitty

#191 Jun 18, 2014
KiMare wrote:
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
'Arbitrary and capricious standard'???
....
In fact, gay couples need protection just to have SEX!!!
...
Snicker smile.
<quoted text>
Um, I said 'gay' couples.
However, lesbian couples can't get pregnant the way normal couples do.
Why are you afraid to admit homosexuality is a birth defect?
Smile.
How can it be possible that after so many years on Topix, arguing against marriage equality, you still don't have a viable argument?

“Busting Kimare's”

Since: Feb 13

Clitty

#192 Jun 18, 2014
KiMare wrote:
KiMare wrote:
Clearly, a mutually sterile, pointlessly duplicate gender couple is inferior to marriage.
<quoted text>
How so?
They are not duplicate gendered.
They have a medical condition.
What kind of 'logic' are you talking about?
Smirk.
Reproduction is STILL not a requirement of marriage.
Your use of adjectives and adverbs exposes your bias.
Pat Robertson s Fatwass

Philadelphia, PA

#193 Jun 18, 2014
KiMare wrote:
KiMare wrote:
Arbitrary
Hey sexually sick mullah, go rail equally about heterosexuals who engage in that sodomy that so obsesses you.

Go bray equally about getting all children out of families where there isn't a "mother and a father" if that's the issue.

Go persecute those who unrepentantly covet if you're so into scripture.

As all this demonstrates you merely have a homosexual fixation.

lides

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#194 Jun 18, 2014
Dusty Mangina wrote:
How can it be possible that after so many years on Topix, arguing against marriage equality, you still don't have a viable argument?
It's not hard if one isn't terribly intelligent.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#195 Jun 18, 2014
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
It's not hard if one isn't terribly intelligent.
The is a great definition of JD.

lides

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#196 Jun 18, 2014
Wondering wrote:
The is a great definition of JD.
Wondering, you are an idiot.

Nice brain fart, moron. Or are they typos when you make them?
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#197 Jun 18, 2014
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
Wondering, you are an idiot.
Nice brain fart, moron. Or are they typos when you make them?
Wow, now you're seeing imaginary brain farts. KA-BOOM!

lides

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#198 Jun 18, 2014
Wondering wrote:
Wow, now you're seeing imaginary brain farts. KA-BOOM!
No, you've just lost the tentative grasp that you had of the English language.

Why should I expect anything remotely intelligent out of you?
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#199 Jun 18, 2014
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
No, you've just lost the tentative grasp that you had of the English language.
Why should I expect anything remotely intelligent out of you?
I don't want you to expect anything from me but facts. You understanding them is a separate issue. That's okay, you're funnier than Jimmy Kimmel and Craig Ferguson put together.

lides

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#200 Jun 18, 2014
Wondering wrote:
I don't want you to expect anything from me but facts. You understanding them is a separate issue. That's okay, you're funnier than Jimmy Kimmel and Craig Ferguson put together.
Of course, Wondering, you have displayed time and time again that you are ignorant of the facts.

You are as funny as, and as smart as, a pile of dog droppings. Although, you are nutty than squirrel droppings.

Face it wondering, you are just too dumb to offer an on topic argument, just as you are too dumb to offer a compelling governmental interest served by denying same sex couples the right to marry that would render such a restriction constitutional. This is why you are constantly offering your own brand of irrelevant drivel.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#201 Jun 18, 2014
KiMare wrote:
Clearly, a mutually sterile, pointlessly duplicate gender couple is inferior to marriage.
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
KiMare, you truly are a moron.
Applying this logic, a heterosexual married couple incapable of procreation is inferior to marriage. Is that really what you mean to say, idiot?
How so?

They are not duplicate gendered.

They have a medical condition.

What kind of 'logic' are you talking about?

Smirk.
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
They are equally infertile, and thus far, you have claimed that the infertility renders the couple to be lesser than other married couples. Were you not such an imbecile, you might see that such a simplistic view carries much more far reaching implications, and unintended consequences.
<quoted text>
They are still infertile, moron. What makes their infertility any less applicable than a same sex couple's?
<quoted text>
Not necessarily. There are any number of causes of infertility, some of which are even elective. Infertility does not make ANY married couple any lesser than any other. Only an idiot would make such an argument.
<quoted text>
I mean the kind where one can think, and actually see the full implications of an argument they are making, rather than wearing blinders while painting all infertile couples as lesser in an attempt to argue against equal protection of the law for a small subset.
KiMare, you are not only dumb, you are not only bigoted, but you are also thoughtless, and heartless. Your arguments are poorly reasoned and you frequently fail to see the overarching implications of your moronic logic. In short, you are an imbecile.
1. They are NOT equally infertile. One is an exception to the rule, the other is the rule.

2. They provide a mother and father role, if alternative methods are used.

Epic fail lides!

Smile.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#202 Jun 18, 2014
KiMare wrote:
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
'Arbitrary and capricious standard'???
....
In fact, gay couples need protection just to have SEX!!!
...
Snicker smile.
<quoted text>
Um, I said 'gay' couples.
However, lesbian couples can't get pregnant the way normal couples do.
Why are you afraid to admit homosexuality is a birth defect?
Smile.
Lesbian couples can't get pregnant via male female intercourse?

Where did you come up with THAT twirl?

And if being gay is a birth defect that makes people unqualified for the same legal protections as everyone else, what other birth defects do you feel should disqualify someone from marriage?

Poor vision? Being left handed? Being hermaphrodite? Infertility?

BTW I saw this today and thought of you right away:
Pennsylvania County Official Can’t Appeal on Gay-Marriage
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-06-18/penn...
Governor Tom Corbett abandoned the defense of the state’s ban on gay marriage last month after U.S. District Judge John E. Jones ruled in favor of the American Civil Liberties Union in a case on behalf of 11 gay couples. The “deep personal disagreement” with the ruling of Theresa Santai-Gaffney, the Schuylkill County issuer of marriage licenses, doesn’t make her a stand-in for the state, Jones said today. He rejected her request to intervene on its behalf.
“If the highest elected official in the commonwealth chooses to abide by our decision, it defies credulity that we would permit a single citizen to stand in for him to perfect an appeal,” Jones wrote.
Santai-Gaffney, the county register of wills, argued that the decision made the state of marriage law and the scope of her duties unclear.
``Nothing could be further from the truth,'' Jones wrote, saying the decision was clarified in a notice issued by the state Department of Health to clerks that handle marriage licenses.
“There is nothing remotely ambiguous about how Santai-Gaffney must perform her duties relative to issuing marriage licenses,” Jones said.“At bottom, we have before us a contrived legal argument by a private citizen who seeks to accomplish what the chief executive of the commonwealth, in his wisdom, has declined to do.”

(kimmie, your contrived legal arguments have always failed and always will fail.)

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#203 Jun 18, 2014
KiMare wrote:
They are not duplicate gendered.
Applying this logic, a heterosexual married couple incapable of procreation is inferior to marriage. Is that really what you mean to say, idiot? so what about single parents?
KiMare wrote:
They have a medical condition.
and you keep saying being gay is a medical condition (birth defect)
KiMare wrote:
What kind of 'logic' are you talking about?
now that's funny coming from you.
KiMare wrote:
1. They are NOT equally infertile. One is an exception to the rule, the other is the rule.
2. They provide a mother and father role, if alternative methods are used.

.
so what about single parents?

and since you approve of alternate methods of providing a mother and father, what is your point really?.“At bottom, we have before us a contrived legal argument by a private citizen who seeks to accomplish what the chief executive of the commonwealth, in his wisdom, has declined to do.”
Pat Robertson s Fatwass

Philadelphia, PA

#204 Jun 18, 2014
KiMare wrote:
KiMare wrote:
1. They are NOT equally infertile. One is an exception to the rule, the other is the rule.
2. They provide a mother and father role, if alternative methods are used.
I sure hope "pastor" Greg Kirschmann is not as disturbed as your post is.

It has never mattered and does not now matter - except to mentally ill people like you - whether a couple wishing to marry is able to or intends to spawn.

If the "mother and father" thing were really the issue - rather than just your homophobic bigotry - then you would equally be trying to disallow any single parent situations. You aren't.

You're very sick is all.

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.

Menomonee Falls Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Gail Lalonde Milwaukee Wisconsin 14 hr jeremy 13
News Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett Shreds Sheriff Davi... 20 hr Always Outspoken 3
News Republicans press professors to spend more time... Mar 22 jeremy 1
News Cutler throws for 221 yards, Bears take advanta... (Sep '10) Mar 21 BearsPhart 296
News Milwaukee County Recognizes the Month of April ... Mar 19 jeremy 1
Serious Flaw in Trumpcare Mar 15 jeremy 2
Paul Ryan plan says Pay more get Less to.... Mar 13 AARP opposesTrump... 1

Menomonee Falls Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Menomonee Falls Mortgages