Gay marriage

Gay marriage

There are 61397 comments on the Los Angeles Times story from Mar 28, 2013, titled Gay marriage. In it, Los Angeles Times reports that:

The U.S. Supreme Court is considering two controversial cases involving whether same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry: Proposition 8, California's 2008 ban on gay marriage, and the Defense of Marriage Act, which since 1996 has defined marriage for federal purposes as a union between a man and a woman.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Los Angeles Times.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#9987 Nov 19, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Simple, they were either bisexual from the start or are simply in denial.
Sexual orientation can't be changed.
Apparently for some it can be, or its not as strong an identity as it is for you.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#9988 Nov 19, 2013
Rose_NoHo wrote:
<quoted text>
Marriage is a legal agreement/contract that varies from state to state. If it has gender requirements, those should be removed as they violate the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause.
At it's most basic essence, marriage is a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior.

At it's most extravagant expression, marriage is the reunion of the very roots of humanity. A male and female union, creating an unmatchable expression of humanity on any level of comparison.

Did a fraudulent law change that Blondie?

Smile.
anonymous

Montpellier, France

#9989 Nov 19, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
At it's most basic essence, marriage is a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior.
At it's most extravagant expression, marriage is the reunion of the very roots of humanity. A male and female union, creating an unmatchable expression of humanity on any level of comparison.
Did a fraudulent law change that Blondie?
Smile.
No! No! You're wrong!

At it's infinite essence, marriage is a small, hidden bed of junk where two monkeys can get hormonally jumped up, bounce on each other in a sweaty fashion and produce more livestock.

....then they go out in public and pretend it didn't happen, or if they're gay, they try to sell the movie rights.

You brunettes always have to complicate things!

“Busting Kimare's”

Since: Feb 13

Clitty

#9995 Nov 19, 2013
garylloyd wrote:
Earlier I wrote about the new faculty member who appears in high schools right after same-sex marriage becomes law in the state. He's the LGBT diversity counselor. His purpose is to protect and counsel the supposed LGBT student. Also in his job description is promoting LGBT awareness activities and events such as "Gay Pride Day" "Harvey Milk Day" etc.
Recently, however, we've learned in more than one instance some of these counselors have been referring male high school students to outside "gay youth clubs." These "clubs" have no affiliation with the school and are managed by adult gay males.
In the incident I reported earlier, a student was referred to one of these clubs where he was told that he was gay. Soon after, he was seduced by one of the adult managers of the club.
Let's see how many gay members of this forum have the integrity to condemn this kind of preditory activity.
One incident, Greg? One? You're lying about so many things in the above that I scarcely know where to begin. The ONLY thing truthful in the about is that the student was referred to an outside agency without his parents previous knowledge.

Literally everything else that you've posted is a complete fictionalization of what actually happened.

Please show where the counselor was and LGBT person at the school...
Please show where the counselor was hired specifically as a gay rights advocate...
Please show that the student was assaulted by gay men working at the LGBT resource center...

If you read any of that, then your mind was already at work before you finished the article. Not one of those things was actually said in the article, Buford. Not one.

This is why Greg Kirschmann has no credibility on Topix. He finds one website, or one author, and hangs his entire hat on that. Epic fail. Epic.

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

#9996 Nov 19, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
No! No! You're wrong!
At it's infinite essence, marriage is a small, hidden bed of junk where two monkeys can get hormonally jumped up, bounce on each other in a sweaty fashion and produce more livestock.
....then they go out in public and pretend it didn't happen, or if they're gay, they try to sell the movie rights.
You brunettes always have to complicate things!
I think his hair is gray at this point ...

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#9997 Nov 19, 2013
Toys R Us kid wrote:
<quoted text>
Should be open to gay couples as well if we're to advise we abide by the Constitution.
DUH moron.
The framers of the constitution understood "gay" to mean happy, not same sex sexual attraction/behavior.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#9998 Nov 19, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
At it's most basic essence, marriage is a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior.
At it's most extravagant expression, marriage is the reunion of the very roots of humanity. A male and female union, creating an unmatchable expression of humanity on any level of comparison.
Did a fraudulent law change that Blondie?
Smile.
Toys R Us kid wrote:
<quoted text>
Procreation is not a requirement for marriage.
I thought they taught that in one of your classes....Pull Your Head Out Of Your Ass 101???
---Hey....do you ever wake up tired and wonder which urinary tool to pee with my little hermaphrodite???
That ever happen??????????
I asserted no 'requirement, I simply note the core essence and expression of marriage.

You clearly have no reasoned counter which is why you resorted to a hateful ad homoan troll attack.

Smirk.

garylloyd

Since: Nov 13

Location hidden

#9999 Nov 19, 2013
Dusty Mangina wrote:
<quoted text>
One incident, Greg? One? You're lying about so many things in the above that I scarcely know where to begin. The ONLY thing truthful in the about is that the student was referred to an outside agency without his parents previous knowledge.
Literally everything else that you've posted is a complete fictionalization of what actually happened.
Please show where the counselor was and LGBT person at the school...
Please show where the counselor was hired specifically as a gay rights advocate...
Please show that the student was assaulted by gay men working at the LGBT resource center...
If you read any of that, then your mind was already at work before you finished the article. Not one of those things was actually said in the article, Buford. Not one.
This is why Greg Kirschmann has no credibility on Topix. He finds one website, or one author, and hangs his entire hat on that. Epic fail. Epic.
The bottom line is, you fellows are now recruiting young boys directly from the schools. And in another post I showed you're setting up these recruitment stations in middle schools too -- that's boys as young as 11 years old.

First you convince the school board that it has an out-of-control "bullying" problem that targets "gay" and "transgender" students. Then you force the school board to hire a gay "diversity" counselor. Then he begins referring troubled boys to outside "gay youth clubs."

In Massachusetts these clubs are putting NAMBLA out of business.

Where's your outrage, fella?

garylloyd

Since: Nov 13

Location hidden

#10000 Nov 19, 2013
And then there's Obama ...

Consider the plight of the single mother struggling to raise he teenage sons when this co*ksucker congratulates that NBA player for "coming out."

If she's living in Atlanta she has only to drive on Spring Street any weekend night to see what black homosexuals are truly all about. Thousands of them flock to clubs like Sylvia's to mix and mingle. In Obama's delusional mind they're there to network, talk politics, play chess.

No, co*ksucker, that's not what they're there for.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#10001 Nov 19, 2013
Toys R Us kid wrote:
<quoted text>
Should be open to gay couples as well if we're to advise we abide by the Constitution.
DUH moron.
It is open to any opposite sex gay couple.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#10003 Nov 19, 2013
Toys R Us kid wrote:
<quoted text>
Procreation is not a requirement for marriage.
...
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2013...
...the institution of marriage is the principal manner in which society structures the critically important functions of procreation and the rearing of children, it has long been recognized as “one of the cornerstones of our civilized society.”[36] The Supreme Court itself noted more than a century ago that “the union for life of one man and one woman” is “the sure foundation of all that is stable and noble in our civilization.”[37]

This purpose has been recognized throughout our nation’s history. In California, the situs of the Hollingsworth case, the procreative purpose of marriage has been recognized since the very beginning of the state’s existence as a state. In 1859, the California Supreme Court held that “[t]he first purpose of matrimony, by the laws of nature and society, is procreation.”[38] A century later, the same court recognized that “the institution of marriage” serves “the public interest” because it “channels biological drives that might otherwise become socially destructive” and “ensures the care and education of children in a stable environment.”[39] A half-century after that, on the eve of the Proposition 8 political fight, the California Court of Appeal recognized that “the sexual, procreative,[and] child-rearing aspects of marriage” go “to the very essence of the marriage relation.”[40]
These cases are not anomalies; rather, they carry forward a long and rich historical and philosophical tradition. Henri de Bracton wrote in his 13th-century treatise, for example, that from the jus gentium, or “law of nations,” comes “the union of man and woman, entered into by the mutual consent of both, which is called marriage” and also “the procreation and rearing of children.”[41] William Blackstone, the great expositor of the law, described the relationship of “husband and wife” as “founded in nature, but modified by civil society: the one directing man to continue and multiply his species, the other prescribing the manner in which that natural impulse must be confined and regulated.”[42] He then described the relationship of “parent and child” as being “consequential to that of marriage, being its principal end and design.” And John Locke, whose influence on the American constitutional order may be unsurpassed, described the purpose of marriage,“the end of the conjunction of the species,” as “being not barely procreation, but the continuation of the species.”[43]

This long-standing view was confirmed by the sociological and anthropological evidence introduced into the trial record. The work of the late Claude Lévi-Strauss, the “father of modern anthropology”[44] and former dean of the Académie Française, forms part of the trial record, for example, and includes this observation:“[T]he family—based on a union, more or less durable, but socially approved, of two individuals of opposite sexes who establish a household and bear and raise children—appears to be a practically universal phenomenon, present in every type of society.”[45] Marriage is thus “a social institution with a biological foundation,” wrote [46] Historian G. Robina Quale’s comprehensive sociological survey of the development of marriage from prehistoric times to the present, also part of the trial record, reveals that “Marriage, as the socially recognized linking of a specific man to a specific woman and her offspring, can be found in all societies.”[47]

Given the nearly universal view, across different societies and different times, that a principal, if not the principal, purpose of marriage is the channeling of the unique procreative abilities of opposite-sex relationships into a societally beneficial institution, it strains credulity to contend that same-sex and opposite-sex couples are similarly situated with respect to that fundamental purpose.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#10004 Nov 19, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
The study was not just about married couples.
Exactly.

You can't accurately compare outcomes unless you're comparing like to like- i.e. married same-sex couples to married opposite-sex couples.
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#10005 Nov 19, 2013
Hans wrote:
<quoted text>
Heterosexuals don't molest boys, queers do.
Queers don't molest boys, pedophiles do.

Why not take out a billboard advertisement that explains your ignorance?
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#10006 Nov 19, 2013
garylloyd wrote:
<quoted text>
The bottom line is, you fellows are now recruiting young boys directly from the schools. And in another post I showed you're setting up these recruitment stations in middle schools too -- that's boys as young as 11 years old.
First you convince the school board that it has an out-of-control "bullying" problem that targets "gay" and "transgender" students. Then you force the school board to hire a gay "diversity" counselor. Then he begins referring troubled boys to outside "gay youth clubs."
In Massachusetts these clubs are putting NAMBLA out of business.
Where's your outrage, fella?
It is impossible to 'recruit' anyone to be gay, so we all know that you are lying, AGAIN.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#10007 Nov 19, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Sure we were. That was the context of the discussion.
You lied???
And now you are lying to get out of it???
Snicker.
YOU may have been talking about biological parents.

I wasn't.

Obviously everyone has two biological parents- one male one female.

But their parents- the people raising them- can be same-sex or opposite sex or only one parent. They may have a biological relationship or none at all.

They're still parents.
Xavier Breath

Hoboken, NJ

#10008 Nov 19, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
The framers of the constitution understood "gay" to mean happy, not same sex sexual attraction/behavior.
...and nothing has changed since 1787, has it?

The founders understood women to be too feeble-minded to vote.

The founders understood slaves to be 3/5ths of a person.

Do you have any other stupid comments?

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#10009 Nov 19, 2013
garylloyd wrote:
The difference between the Madri Gras Parade and Gay Pride Parades is the Madri Gras Parade organizers don't allow the filth we see in Gay Pride Parades.
And the behaviors allowed by Gay Pride Parades is without question filth.
For example, over the years the erect penis has become a symbol of gay pride parades seconded only by the rainbow flag. Google Gay Pride Parade and you'll be assaulted with images of men in penis suits, penis masks, hats, riding giant penises shooting confetti, have naked "go-go boys" being chased down the parade route by running penises, etc.
And then the gay members of this forum have the nerve to tell us they're not a sex cult. But if the LGBT is not a sex cult, why all the penises?
Obviously you haven't been to Mardi Gras.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#10010 Nov 19, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
And I'll say again, trait one does help, and trait two also helps, but the two together are deadly. Ultimately, the trait that possesses the most collateral benefits will likely prevail.
The mechanics of genetics prevails, regardless of any moral high ground anyone thinks they have on their side.
And the mechanics of genetics have resulted in a small percentage of homosexuals being born in every generation for millenia; just like a small percentage are left-handed, or redheads.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#10011 Nov 19, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
Obviously, the diversity of personality has a large impact but YES! Imprinting on one's parents is a VERY large factor. Yes, science very much does support it if you're asking the right questions. Psychology is really not a very mature science, even to this day.
What I claim is going to take a lot of time to explain as well as a lot of time to demonstrate. Scientific method is what it is and conducting experiments on human subjects is at a minimum, controversial. For now it's just best to grok the abstractions, not something I'd be inclined to do in full detail on a site like this. People here have a hard enough time dealing with Mendel!
Hmmmm, and yet nearly 100% of homosexuals were born to and raised by opposite-sex heterosexual parents.

And yet children raised by same-sex couples are no more likely to turn out to be gay or lesbian than those raised by opposite-sex hetero parents.

So much for that imprinting theory.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#10012 Nov 19, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
Ohhhhh....you just so cute when you try and convince us that you shouldn't be treated like any other man as it relates to marriage. It would be discriminatory for the state not to treat you like any other man and prohibit you from exercising your fundamental right to marry, enter into a legally recognized union of husband and wife, valid in all fifty states.
Pietro, are you capable of offering a compelling governmental interest served by restricting marriage to being between opposite sex couples? If not, then the restriction is unconstitutional.

You've been posed this question many time, yet you never respond. One could infer that you cannot.

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.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Study: Children Of Same-Sex Parents More Likely... 12 min OccupyThis 16
News Lesbian pastor, United Methodist Church agree t... 1 hr Phyllis Schlafly ... 12
News How Donald Trump is slowly teaching Republicans... 1 hr Solid Blue November 40
News Pastors Rarely Asked to Wed Same-Sex Couples 1 hr Fa-Foxy 71
Maybe god is gay! (Dec '09) 1 hr June VanDerMark 11,297
News 'Free Kim Davis': This is just what gay rights ... (Sep '15) 2 hr who cares 15,833
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 2 hr Frankie Rizzo 38,753
The gay cafe for GLBT, friends and family (Oct '09) 13 hr Frankie Rizzo 68,957
More from around the web