Chick-fil-Ewwww

[disaster in the making]

Confused wrote:

Thanks for proving my point, as I said sex is the real issue, love your fellow man but don’t bone him.

Kind of makes me wonder how many good Catholics use anal sex as a form of birth control, hay Maggy you out there how many times did your obese ass get boned

[Mona Lott]

NoQ wrote:

<quoted text>
Oooooo....... You fking Dyke, you talk about others eating junk food and being out of shape,HaHaHaHa. I bet you look just as disgusting as Miss Piggy. HaHaHaHa. You stupid cun+, get a life. LMFAO

ASSume away, silly closet queen. We're onto your secret.

[hi hi]

snyper wrote:

<quoted text>
Galvanizing the herd into a stampede?

If a lawful one, sure. If a law-abiding one, absolutely.

That's not what crosses my mind, though. In fact, it's often other people who frame it in violent/physical contexts. I dislike the idea of violence to accomplish these things (BECAUSE we're in a civilized country which allows freedom of speech, freedom of the press, peaceful protest, etc. etc. We're covered by our government; they have our backs -- everyone's backs -- where disagreement is concerned.)

[Cool Hand Luke]

Hey, you had almost 30 queers that agreed with you in the counter protest in Atlanta.

.

Gay ‘marriage’ in high demand? Not according to the U.S. census

Wed Oct 05, 2011 14:39 EST
Comments (2)

October 5, 2011 - The pressure to redefine marriage to include same-sex couples keeps increasing. The impression is given that thousands upon thousands of gays and lesbians are unable to do the one thing they want to do more than anything else: That is, have a wedding.

As if to prove the point, the US Census Bureau announced that it would be counting same-sex households in the 2010 Census. In August the Bureau announced that there are nearly a million. I was surprised by the small number.

But this past week, they reduced their estimate of same sex couple households by nearly thirty percent. In fact, it turns out that there are fewer than 650,000. That’s about six tenths of one percent of total US households.

But an even greater shocker for me was the number of same-sex married households. Gay marriage is legal in six jurisdictions. In Massachusetts, it’s been the law since 2004. Same-sex couples can get married, for example, in Massachusetts and Washington, DC, and live anywhere because nobody’s enforcing DOMA anymore in view of litigation. And yet there are only 131,729 households headed by married same-sex couples. That’s two-tenths of one percent of married households. Talk about the tail wagging the dog!

This census data exposes the two biggest myths created about gay marriage.

The first is that there’s a huge demand for it. No way! In fact, there’s hardly any demand at all. Gay couples are not lined up at city halls hoping for a marriage license.

The second myth is the so-called “marriage equity” argument: That this is just another civil rights movement. Are you going to tell me that it was possible to fuel the civil rights movement with 646,000 couples, when only 131,000 had a real stake in it? It’s laughable.

I have never believed that gays wanted to marry. Their behavior by its very nature is too promiscuous. Gay relationships are for the most part sexually open rather than exclusive.

For us to redefine marriage, thereby altering thousands of years of human history, ignoring all of the benefits marriage offers to individuals, cultures, civilizations and — above all — children, for the sake of 646,000 same-sex households, only 131,000 of which are married, is madness.

Gays and lesbians don’t want marriage; they want their sexual choices affirmed as normal and moral. And that’s what’s behind the blacklisting, boycotting, and suing anybody who even questions homosexuality. They don’t want anyone telling them that how they live is morally problematic. Gays are actively trying to destroy marriage and will take away our freedom of speech and religion in order to do it.

Does this take the church off the hook? No. For years we have helped deconstruct marriage, winking at cohabitation and allowing easy divorce. We’ve allowed politicians to pass bad divorce laws and to loosen the moral standards surrounding marriage. Now it’s all coming back to haunt us. But our job is to rebuild marriage as a sacred institution and to stand our ground and defend it, come what may, from what appears to be a tiny minority.

snyper wrote:

From the article ...
" ... I’m perplexed by the contradictory nature of Cathy’s statement, characterizing those who have the ‘audacity to define what marriage is about’ as ‘prideful’ and ‘arrogant.’ Isn’t that exactly what Cathy was doing? Defining what marriage should be—between a man and a woman?... "
It's standard practice in christendom to do just that: accuse people of doing what is being done to THEM.
It's surprising that so few people get that.

[snyper]

hi hi wrote:

<quoted text>
If a lawful one, sure. If a law-abiding one, absolutely.
That's not what crosses my mind, though. In fact, it's often other people who frame it in violent/physical contexts. I dislike the idea of violence to accomplish these things (BECAUSE we're in a civilized country which allows freedom of speech, freedom of the press, peaceful protest, etc. etc. We're covered by our government; they have our backs -- everyone's backs -- where disagreement is concerned.)

The stampede I was referring to was THEIRS.

[Brown Lipstick]

Sometimes I wonder if marriage should have been created at all. That way homosexuals would have had nothing to defame, humiliate, or degrade but themselves.

[snyper]

This was BRILLIANT writing ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

[hi hi]

snyper wrote:

<quoted text>
The stampede I was referring to was THEIRS.

I thank you.

[equalityboy81]

I'll never go there again.

[fedupwiththemess]

Chick Fila got some good samatches! I am going there right now.

[Imprtnrd]

fedupwiththemess wrote:

Chick Fila got some good samatches! I am going there right now.

You should have posted this in the religious forum.....we give a ratsass if go there. ROTFL@U!

[snyper]

fedupwiththemess wrote:

Chick Fila got some good samatches! I am going there right now.

The Earl of Sandwich is very disappointed in you.

[ConfusedEvenMore]

People make me laugh when they say sex isn’t the problem, well if it isn’t the problem why don’t people just stop doing the disgusting things they do?

[snyper]

ConfusedEvenMore wrote:

People make me laugh when they say sex isn’t the problem, well if it isn’t the problem why don’t people just stop doing the disgusting things they do?

You first.

[CofusedAgain]

snyper wrote:

<quoted text>
You first.

I stopped way back, haven’t had sex in more than 10 years.

[Mona Lott]

CofusedAgain wrote:

<quoted text>
I stopped way back, haven’t had sex in more than 10 years.

Well that explains it.

[snyper]

CofusedAgain wrote:

<quoted text>
I stopped way back, haven’t had sex in more than 10 years.

Poor thing.

[ConfusedHumanNot Animal]

Yeah right, that explains it and poor thing, lol, lol and even more lol. This coming from people who think taking a journey up the tunnel of no entry is okay!
Back in the day I liked a bit of porn now and again like most young men but when I happened to click on the wrong link I was shocked.

What the hell are these maniacs up to I asked myself, after that and doing some research on the continued rise of aids and other sexual diseases I found myself running for cover.

I mean really, people having anal sex and then oral straight afterwards and all that, IT AINT NORMAL YOU FRIGGIN WEIRDOS!

The tunnel of no entry is meant for evacuation only and keep your mouths away from it, how the hell am I supposed to kiss a girl now?

[UnConfused]

You should all do yourselves a favour and check out Frank Zappa’s song Bobby Brown, read the lyrics and watch the track on utube.

There’s some real truth for us all in that track.

[hi hi]

ConfusedHumanNotAnimal wrote:

Yeah right, that explains it and poor thing, lol, lol and even more lol. This coming from people who think taking a journey up the tunnel of no entry is okay!
Back in the day I liked a bit of porn now and again like most young men but when I happened to click on the wrong link I was shocked.
What the hell are these maniacs up to I asked myself, after that and doing some research on the continued rise of aids and other sexual diseases I found myself running for cover.
I mean really, people having anal sex and then oral straight afterwards and all that, IT AINT NORMAL YOU FRIGGIN WEIRDOS!
The tunnel of no entry is meant for evacuation only and keep your mouths away from it, how the hell am I supposed to kiss a girl now?

But what is so interesting to contemplate is *why you concern yourself with it*. You don't go following around women in department stores, so I would imagine, telling them what you think of what they buy. You don't concern yourself with what bands certain teenagers like. What I think everyone pro-gay wants to know is *how and why* this has become such a goddamn big concern for people who otherwise *can't be bothered, EVER, EVER, EVER, with anything that doesn't DIRECTLY, DIRECTLY concern them*. Why this subject? Why the need to "advise" others who don't fucking care about your advice and aren't taking it? Why?