Gay Marriage Debate - Greeneville, TN

Discuss the national Gay Marriage debate in Greeneville, TN.

Do you support gay marriage?

Greeneville opposes
Oppose
 
527
Support
 
265

Vote now in Greeneville:

Comments (Page 353)

Showing posts 7,041 - 7,060 of7,625
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7349
Jan 3, 2013
 
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Marriage has nothing to do with a majority.
Marriage is a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior. It has been the norm in every single culture in thousands of years of human existence, apart from any single religion or government.
If you
believe denying marriage to a relationship
will prevent love
If you
demand any committed relationship
has to be called marriage
If you
claim rights and benefits can only be acquired
by a imposition on marriage
If you
equate the diversity of two genders
with the redundancy of same genders
If you
desecrate the sacred tradition of all major religions
and violate the historic practice of every single culture in history
If you
believe a fundamental change to the building block of society
will have absolutely no affect
If you
think a law can change
the reality of crucial distinctions in relationships
If you
pretend duplicating sexuality
is the same as blending masculinity and femininity
If you
condemn some children to parents of only one gender
and deliberately deny some children one natural parent
If you
ignore the design of sexual union
to manipulate a harmful act
If you
violate evolution's law of reproduction
to equate a genetic dead end
If you
risk the healthiest human relationship
to include one of the unhealthiest
If you
parallel the sole birthplace of every other relationship
with one that can reproduce none
If you
dilute all these things
down to just 'a committed relationship of two people'
Then, and only then, can you equate same-sex unions with marriage.
I like to refer to this as your "F U" (as in F*CK YOU) poem. You trot it out every so often, believing that you've created something clever.

All it shows is that you spend an inordinate amount of time involving yourself in other people's private affairs.

And it shows the inordinate amount of power you give to historical activity; when clearly, not all of history is to be embraced. We don't continue to enslave our people. We don't continue to deny women the right to vote. There have been so many social changes over the past decades and centuries.

So, "If YOU" get the feeling to re-post this bit again, remind yourself that striving to live as our forefathers is not always in the best interest of society.
straight up

Concord, NC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7350
Jan 3, 2013
 
I Can clear all this up , butch lesbians do not want to attract the males so they dont dress feminine , we all sin but are saved by grace we do not live under the old testemant .I am pro gay marriage , you should be able to love whomever you want and love with a heart like Jesus love one another doesnt matter creed face sexual orientation monetary worth class and so on and so forth
straight up

Concord, NC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7351
Jan 3, 2013
 
Race not face
ShenaH

Knoxville, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7352
Jan 5, 2013
 
veryvermilion wrote:
Interestingly, we live in a country that is run by the rule of law--not the law of Christianity or any other religion. So our legislators, regardless of your opinion, absolutely have the right to define marriage as they see fit.
And under the law of this country, "mating" isn't a requirement for marriage. Heck, children aren't even mentioned in the traditional Christian wedding vows.
Many couples, who have no intention of having children, are allowed to marry. Are you prepared to change laws to define marriage as only being available to those that produce children?
Give up, Kim. You're wrong on all counts.
If you want to live in a place where the laws are based on religion, go to the Middle East.
Give it up, Tom. You're wrong on all counts.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7353
Jan 5, 2013
 
straight up wrote:
I Can clear all this up , butch lesbians do not want to attract the males so they dont dress feminine , we all sin but are saved by grace we do not live under the old testemant .I am pro gay marriage , you should be able to love whomever you want and love with a heart like Jesus love one another doesnt matter creed face sexual orientation monetary worth class and so on and so forth
Funny. Stupid, but funny.

So butch lesbians are more interested in keeping guys away (must be a real problem for Candy Crowley...), but then another lesbian who doesn't like guys IS attracted.

Yeah, that solves the problem... Google butch lesbian, go to a butch blog site and read why they dress and act the way they do.

Scientifically, a butch is almost transgendered. They are attractive to a barely lesbian female who just barely is not opposite sex attracted. In the spectrum of lesbian sexual defect, they are at opposite ends of the spectrum.

Snicker.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7354
Jan 5, 2013
 
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
You assume that "butch lesbians" dress in a certain way in order to attract other lesbians. Maybe "butch lesbians" just enjoy wearing a particular style of clothing. Many talk about shunning traditional feminine style as a political statement.
My guess is that lesbian women, just like straight men (or gay men or straight women) dress in the way that they do in order to feel good about themselves. If they are going out on the town for the specific purposes of finding someone to go out with, they may dress differently than they do day-to-day.
Gay people are not simple and stupid. We're not always on the look out for a mate. We don't dress in certain ways ONLY to catch someones eye.
Now... Here's my New Year's resolution for you. It's not a clinical recommendation, so you don't have to worry about me being unethical or anything. But here it is... RUN to the nearest mirror. Drop everything right this second and RUSH to one.
Once you get there, stare at your reflection and repeat the following words: "What other people do within the law IS NONE OF MY BUSINESS! How other people wish to live their lives is no concern of mine! If someones actions do not impact me directly, then I don't have any reason to intrude into their life!"
Just repeat it over and over and over. Eventually (hopefully) you'll finally get the message that your concerns should only be about those things that impact you directly.
What other people do with their lives, within the law, is none of your concern.
In your advance degree studies, did you ever look at mating behavior influence and spectrum? There are no 'maybes' queen.

As to resolutions, I already have mine. I am a redeemed cynic who remains barbarian. I would suggest you are responding because I sank the knife of reality to the hilt into the belly of denial and twisted it with a smirk, and you bled. Your resolution should be to immunize yourself from denial. Seriously.

Smirk.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7355
Jan 5, 2013
 
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
I like to refer to this as your "F U" (as in F*CK YOU) poem. You trot it out every so often, believing that you've created something clever.
All it shows is that you spend an inordinate amount of time involving yourself in other people's private affairs.
And it shows the inordinate amount of power you give to historical activity; when clearly, not all of history is to be embraced. We don't continue to enslave our people. We don't continue to deny women the right to vote. There have been so many social changes over the past decades and centuries.
So, "If YOU" get the feeling to re-post this bit again, remind yourself that striving to live as our forefathers is not always in the best interest of society.
I refer to it as the bitch slap of reality to the face of gay twirl idiocy. Did it sting AGAIN???

Do you have any direct rebuttal to the fundamental roots of marriage, a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior, or will you stick with the girly, "I don't want to talk about these things!"

Smile.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7356
Jan 5, 2013
 
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
In your advance degree studies, did you ever look at mating behavior influence and spectrum? There are no 'maybes' queen.
As to resolutions, I already have mine. I am a redeemed cynic who remains barbarian. I would suggest you are responding because I sank the knife of reality to the hilt into the belly of denial and twisted it with a smirk, and you bled. Your resolution should be to immunize yourself from denial. Seriously.
Smirk.
"Is homophobia associated with homosexual arousal?"
Adams HE, Wright LW Jr, Lohr BA.
Department of Psychology, University of Georgia, Athens

Abstract
The authors investigated the role of homosexual arousal in exclusively heterosexual men who admitted negative affect toward homosexual individuals. Participants consisted of a group of homophobic men (n = 35) and a group of nonhomophobic men (n = 29); they were assigned to groups on the basis of their scores on the Index of Homophobia (W. W. Hudson & W. A. Ricketts, 1980). The men were exposed to sexually explicit erotic stimuli consisting of heterosexual, male homosexual, and lesbian videotapes, and changes in penile circumference were monitored. They also completed an Aggression Questionnaire (A. H. Buss & M. Perry, 1992). Both groups exhibited increases in penile circumference to the heterosexual and female homosexual videos. Only the homophobic men showed an increase in penile erection to male homosexual stimuli. The groups did not differ in aggression. Homophobia is apparently associated with homosexual arousal that the homophobic individual is either unaware of or denies.
----------

Sounds like someone I know on here...

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7357
Jan 5, 2013
 
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
I refer to it as the bitch slap of reality to the face of gay twirl idiocy. Did it sting AGAIN???
Do you have any direct rebuttal to the fundamental roots of marriage, a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior, or will you stick with the girly, "I don't want to talk about these things!"
Smile.
"How marriage has changed over centuries"
The Week Editorial Staff | June 1, 2012

When did people start marrying?
The first recorded evidence of marriage contracts and ceremonies dates to 4,000 years ago, in Mesopotamia. In the ancient world, marriage served primarily as a means of preserving power, with kings and other members of the ruling class marrying off daughters to forge alliances, acquire land, and produce legitimate heirs. Even in the lower classes, women had little say over whom they married. The purpose of marriage was the production of heirs, as implied by the Latin word matrimonium, which is derived from mater (mother).

When did the church get involved?
In ancient Rome, marriage was a civil affair governed by imperial law. But when the empire collapsed, in the 5th century, church courts took over and elevated marriage to a holy union. As the church's power grew through the Middle Ages, so did its influence over marriage. In 1215, marriage was declared one of the church's seven sacraments, alongside rites like baptism and penance. But it was only in the 16th century that the church decreed that weddings be performed in public, by a priest, and before witnesses.

----------

So, with the earliest marriages being recorded only about 4,000 years ago, you should keep in mind that the Anatomically modern humans first arose about 200,000 years ago in Africa.

So what did humans do between the 160,000 years where humans existed but did not marry?

I guess this blows a HUGE hole in your contention that "marriage" has always had a place in evolution and mating.

Besides, you know just much as I do that mating takes place outside of marriage all of the time. And you also know that there is no jurisdiction in this country where marriage must take place prior to mating or childbirth. Nor is there a jurisdiction that forces married couples to mate with the purposes of producing an offspring.

Stop linking legal marriage to reproduction. There is a connection, but not to the level you wish.

Bottom line (as my limp wrists types this), this country does not link procreation to legal marriage. What a wedded couple wishes to do in their marriage is entirely up to them.

“Marriage equality for all”

Since: Jul 07

Illinois

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7358
Jan 5, 2013
 
Kimare knows that marriage has nothing to do with procreation.

Zhe's created a trolling act and must not deviate from the script. Notice all the copy and paste re-posts? Those are all part of the act. Each time somebody new drops by the thread, you can be certain that the recycled material will be withdrawn from the word bank and pasted into a reply to said new person.
come on now

Bolingbrook, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7359
Jan 5, 2013
 
Marengo Jon wrote:
Kimare knows that marriage has nothing to do with procreation.
Zhe's created a trolling act and must not deviate from the script. Notice all the copy and paste re-posts? Those are all part of the act. Each time somebody new drops by the thread, you can be certain that the recycled material will be withdrawn from the word bank and pasted into a reply to said new person.
Kinda reminds you of Brian G. He to puts the same old tired illogical word for word cut and past on his posts..... maybe the y are the same people?

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7360
Jan 5, 2013
 
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
"Is homophobia associated with homosexual arousal?"
Adams HE, Wright LW Jr, Lohr BA.
Department of Psychology, University of Georgia, Athens
Abstract
The authors investigated the role of homosexual arousal in exclusively heterosexual men who admitted negative affect toward homosexual individuals. Participants consisted of a group of homophobic men (n = 35) and a group of nonhomophobic men (n = 29); they were assigned to groups on the basis of their scores on the Index of Homophobia (W. W. Hudson & W. A. Ricketts, 1980). The men were exposed to sexually explicit erotic stimuli consisting of heterosexual, male homosexual, and lesbian videotapes, and changes in penile circumference were monitored. They also completed an Aggression Questionnaire (A. H. Buss & M. Perry, 1992). Both groups exhibited increases in penile circumference to the heterosexual and female homosexual videos. Only the homophobic men showed an increase in penile erection to male homosexual stimuli. The groups did not differ in aggression. Homophobia is apparently associated with homosexual arousal that the homophobic individual is either unaware of or denies.
----------
Sounds like someone I know on here...
You are still trying to embarrass me by calling me a closet homosexual?

That is the most shameful thing you can think of?

Too funny.

I'm a hermaphroditic genetic chimera. Literally a lesbian trapped in a straight man.

I'm here for you when you come out of the closet of denial.

Smile.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7361
Jan 5, 2013
 
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
I refer to it as the bitch slap of reality to the face of gay twirl idiocy. Did it sting AGAIN???
Do you have any direct rebuttal to the fundamental roots of marriage, a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior, or will you stick with the girly, "I don't want to talk about these things!"
Smile.
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
"How marriage has changed over centuries"
The Week Editorial Staff | June 1, 2012
When did people start marrying?
TWhat a wedded couple wishes to do in their marriage is entirely up to them.
1. Please tell me how anything you wrote relates to evolutionary mating behavior.

2. So every culture 4,000 years ago had 'kings', and everyone was a king? Seems to me, men married women. Nothing different from right now. Are there a variety of motives, not all love still? Of course. Nothing new there either.

3. The Church wasn't involved before, because Christianity didn't exist. Other religions did, and they were involved in the cross cultural, cross religious constraint of marriage.

4. Primitive cultures also have sophisticated marriage ceremonies.

5. Of course heterosexuals can procreate without marriage. To the serious harm of their own children. You are excusing that??? What a sick and perverted assertion!

6. Sorry queen, SCOTUS has always linked marriage and procreation;

"We are dealing here with legislation which involves one of the basic civil rights of man. Marriage and procreation are fundamental to the very existence and survival of the race."- Skinner v Oklahoma

"Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival."- Loving v Virginia

"Our Court has not recognized a fundamental right to marry that departs in any respect from the right defined by the US Supreme Court in cases like Skinner which acknowledged that marriage is "fundamental to the very existence and survival of the [human] race" because it is the primary institution supporting procreation and child-rearing (316 US at 541; see also Zablocki, 434 US 374; Griswold, 381 US 479). The binary nature of marriage—its inclusion of one woman and one man—reflects the biological fact that human procreation cannot be accomplished without the genetic contribution of both a male and a female. Marriage creates a supportive environment for procreation to occur and the resulting offspring to be nurtured. Although plaintiffs suggest that the connection between procreation and marriage has become anachronistic because of scientific advances in assisted reproduction technology, the fact remains that the vast majority of children are conceived naturally through sexual contact between a woman and a man."- Hernandez v Robels

"It is an institution in the maintenance of which in its purity the public is deeply interested, for it is the foundation of the family and of society, without which there would be neither civilization nor progress. "- Maynard v Hill

Snicker.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7362
Jan 5, 2013
 
come on now wrote:
<quoted text>
Kinda reminds you of Brian G. He to puts the same old tired illogical word for word cut and past on his posts..... maybe the y are the same people?
Why don't you refute my 'illogical words'?

Come on now.

Smirk.

“Marriage equality for all”

Since: Jul 07

Illinois

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7363
Jan 5, 2013
 
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>

I'm a hermaphroditic genetic chimera. Literally a lesbian trapped in a straight man..
Which medical exam has determined the presence of your internal lesbian? Does your wife enjoy dusty muffins?
come on now

Bolingbrook, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7364
Jan 5, 2013
 
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Why don't you refute my 'illogical words'?
Come on now.
Smirk.
I have many times... others have many times... yet you keep posting like you think that "if I post it enough it will be true."

“Marriage equality for all”

Since: Jul 07

Illinois

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7366
Jan 5, 2013
 
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm a hermaphroditic genetic chimera. Literally a lesbian trapped in a straight man.
Which medical exam has determined the presence of your internal lesbian? Does your wife enjoy dusty muffins?

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7367
Jan 5, 2013
 
Marengo Jon wrote:
<quoted text>
Which medical exam has determined the presence of your internal lesbian? Does your wife enjoy dusty muffins?
DNA determined gender.

Clearly we both like women.

No.

Keep it clean, we are talking about my wife and my best friend.

:-)

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7368
Jan 5, 2013
 
come on now wrote:
<quoted text>
I have many times... others have many times... yet you keep posting like you think that "if I post it enough it will be true."
BS.

Lets take one subject. You choose.

Smile.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7369
Jan 5, 2013
 
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
You are still trying to embarrass me by calling me a closet homosexual?
That is the most shameful thing you can think of?
Too funny.
I'm a hermaphroditic genetic chimera. Literally a lesbian trapped in a straight man.
I'm here for you when you come out of the closet of denial.
Smile.
I'm just saying that the rest of us will be here to support you when you finally realize why you get that "funny feeling down there" the next time you write another comment about hot, gay, man-on-man sex.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 7,041 - 7,060 of7,625
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

78 Users are viewing the Greeneville Forum right now

Search the Greeneville Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
A Great Big Fck You 2 min uneducated hick 289
Linda Woolsey Running For Judge -- No Really Sh... 6 min Pearson 45
TN Should state mandate immunizations? New require... (May '11) 6 min Get Real 8,463
TN Who do you support for Governor in Tennessee in... (Oct '10) 7 min Vet 124,046
David Weems wants respect 28 min really 12
Nolichucky River & USN 30 min Dixie Diamond 12
We need this man as our President 32 min BOiaF 58
Greene County Mayor's Race 38 min Savvy 107
I love this forum because?????? 2 hr local resident 245

Greeneville Jobs

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]