Gay Marriage Debate - Greeneville, TN

Discuss the national Gay Marriage debate in Greeneville, TN.

Do you support gay marriage?

Greeneville opposes
Oppose
 
531
Support
 
270

Vote now in Greeneville:

come on now

Bolingbrook, IL

#7641 Jan 20, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
1. See post above.
2. See post above.
"You also refuse to answer how a marriage segregated from procreation is anything the government has a prevailing interest in protecting and providing for."
-The government interest is to tax? You need to be married for that to happen? REally stretching there... silly stupid.
Simple proof you have no answer.
Next.
Smirk.
-The government interest is to tax? You need to be married for that to happen? REally stretching there... silly stupid.
Simple proof you have no answer.
Not what I said was it.... but nice try.... I said when married t he joint income rises (joint which is different from shacking up and there is no contract combining assets) so again spin denied.
Next
come on now

Bolingbrook, IL

#7642 Jan 20, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
I am responding to general excuses for calling gay unions marriage.
-"Why stop love" It doesn't.
-"Marriage is just two committed people" No it's not just two committed people, it is far more than a friendship.
<quoted text>
-You just did. Those rights and benefits were established over time to protect mothers and children. Gay couples don't qualify or need those same benefits, and would in fact deplete resources for women and children.
Man up, get welfare if two guys can't take care of each other!
<quoted text>
You know exactly what it means.
In fact, marriage hails back to the REunion of genders into the very roots of evolution, genderless simple life forms. Duplicate genders create no such union. They will never be more than a duplicated HALF of what marriage is!
<quoted text>
Didn't say it was about religion or culture, I said it is viciously insensitive to both. Hardly the mark of a sensitive, cultured person.
As noted above, there is nothing 'equal' you've established.
You have no answer for any of the points, it just gets embarrassingly obvious the more you go on.
Smirk.
""Marriage is just two committed people" No it's not just two committed people, it is far more than a friendship."
Man this is like groundhogs day... you keep posting stuff that comes back around to the question you never ever want to or have answered.
You say it far more than a friendship. Then how does a osc couple who can not have children have more than a friendship?.... your words not mine....

"You just did. Those rights and benefits were established over time to protect mothers and children. Gay couples don't qualify or need those same benefits, and would in fact deplete resources for women and children.'

And back to ground hogs day. If what you are saying is true (HUGE IF) then infertile couples "don't qualify or need those same benefits, and would in fact deplete resources for women and children."... unless you can show differently

"You know exactly what it means."
I think I can speak for v v marango and the others when I say I seldom know exactly what you mean.... you REALLY need to work on that.

"n fact, marriage hails back to the REunion of genders into the very roots of evolution, genderless simple life forms. Duplicate genders create no such union. They will never be more than a duplicated HALF of what marriage is!"

Round three for this post of groundhogs day... for the purposes of reproduction, infertile people would just as well be duplicate genders. I mean if you are shooting blanks, or eggs wont fertilize, or the eggs are dried up.... you are no different than the ssc... which of course means in your words "They will never be more than a duplicated HALF of what marriage is!" Again unless you can show otherwise...

Didn't say it was about religion or culture, I said it is viciously insensitive to both. Hardly the mark of a sensitive, cultured person."
If it is not about religin, or society... then who cares if it is insensitive to both?.... How is it any more insensitive than allowing a osc infertile couple to marry when by your logic they can be only friends...

"You have no answer for any of the points, it just gets embarrassingly obvious the more you go on."
Actually I answered ALL of your points. The problem for you is my answers show how flawwed your points are, so you do not call them answers.

“Marriage equality for all”

Since: Jul 07

Illinois

#7643 Jan 20, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Mongrel boy, leave the thinking to the men, find someone to troll who cares.
Snicker.
We know you don't care; That's why you're Kuntmare.

Thanks for feeling compelled to once again share your antiquated opinions. Those, and a quarter, won't get you anything.

SSM is here, permanently, and you're powerless to do anything but whine about it.

Troll on Mangina Man.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#7644 Jan 20, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Mocking 'studies' that without substantiation ALL come to the exact same conclusion is debunking. Not to mention these comments;
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/2465 ...
"According to Marks, over 75% of the 59 studies cited in the APA brief were based on small, non-representative, non-random samples that did not include any minority individuals or families. In addition, almost 50% did not include a heterosexual comparison group and only a few analyzed outcomes that extend beyond childhood, such as income, and educational attainment."
"David Eggebeen, Associate Professor of Human Development and Sociology at Pennsylvania State University, said:
"Dr. Marks' paper, by turning a bright light on the shortcomings of previous work, challenges researchers to develop better data and conduct kinds of analyses that allow more confidence in generalizations. The Regnerus paper introduces a data set based on a national probability sample that has the potential to address some of Mark's criticisms. The analyses in the Regnerus paper are provocative but far from conclusive. These very preliminary findings should not detract from the real importance of this paper, the description of a new data set that offers significant advantages."
Characteristics of a Pedophile :
-Often the pedophile is male and over 30 years of age.
-Single or with few friends in his age group.
-If married, the relationship is more "companion" based with no sexual relations.
-He is often vague about time gaps in employment which may indicate a loss in employment for questionable reasons or possible past incarceration.
By your own words, you are on here for the kids.
The signs are clear VV.
:-)
At best, the people you cite continue to say the same thing; "We don't have enough data, one way or another to definitively say that same-sex parenting results in poor or positive outcomes."

1.) As of Dec. 2012, the median age of Americans was 36.8 years old. So I guess that using your data, we should be leery of every American male who falls within that category.

2.) I am single, but I have many friends within my age group (40+). I have no friends who are under 30. I am not in contact with anyone under the age of 30, other than relatives, who I see about once or twice a year.

3.) Not married--not legally allowed to marry. Isn't that what we're here to talk about?

4.) No gaps in my employment history... No history of incarceration...

5.) I am here to help all gays regardless of age. You, on the other hand, bring up children in almost every single post your place here. In fact you have a laser-like fascination with them. Maybe that says something about you?

You can keep hurling accusations... It doesn't bother me. I have absolutely nothing to hide.

You, however, fit the profile of a heavily closeted, self-loathing gay or bisexual man "to a T".

Your obsession, anger, and vehemence at anything to do with gay men is a classic indication of a defense mechanism called "reaction formation".

You have desires that are in conflict with your beliefs. You can't openly express your desires. So you "form reactions" that help you to repress your true feelings. It throws other people off the trail as well.

You tell yourself, "No one would ever suspect a person who has such a vehement and hatred of homosexuality of being gay."

It's a sham... And it's sad.

I could be wrong. But the likelihood is there. The question should be asked--that's why I continue to raise the issue.

And if memory serves me, to date, you have never come out and said, "I am not a closeted gay man. I do not have and have never had attractions to or sexual experiences with another male."

Rather, you rush to take the attention off yourself by suggesting that I'm a pedophile. You're creating a distraction--taking the attention off yourself by hoping that other (or I) will focus on your accusations.

You're as transparent as a window pane, my dear.

“Marriage equality for all”

Since: Jul 07

Illinois

#7645 Jan 20, 2013
You're right, VV, Kuntmare reads like a cheap novel.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#7647 Jan 20, 2013
George Alan Rekers:

--an American psychologist and ordained Southern Baptist minister

-- was on the founding board of the Family Research Council, a non-profit Christian lobbying organization

--is a former officer and scientific advisor of the National Association for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH), an organization offering conversion therapy intended to change homosexuals into heterosexuals

--has testified in court (1998 Boy Scouts of America hearing, 2004 Arkansas gay adoption case, and 2008 Florida gay adoption case) that homosexuality is sinful and destructive, and against parenthood by gay and lesbian people in a number of court cases involving organizations and state agencies working with children.

--In May 2010 he employed a male prostitute from rentboy.com as a "travel companion" for a two-week vacation in Europe.

--The male escort told CNN he had given Rekers "sexual massages", which included genital touching, while traveling together in Europe.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#7648 Jan 20, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
George Alan Rekers:
--an American psychologist and ordained Southern Baptist minister
-- was on the founding board of the Family Research Council, a non-profit Christian lobbying organization
--is a former officer and scientific advisor of the National Association for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH), an organization offering conversion therapy intended to change homosexuals into heterosexuals
--has testified in court (1998 Boy Scouts of America hearing, 2004 Arkansas gay adoption case, and 2008 Florida gay adoption case) that homosexuality is sinful and destructive, and against parenthood by gay and lesbian people in a number of court cases involving organizations and state agencies working with children.
--In May 2010 he employed a male prostitute from rentboy.com as a "travel companion" for a two-week vacation in Europe.
--The male escort told CNN he had given Rekers "sexual massages", which included genital touching, while traveling together in Europe.
Sounds like he should know.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#7649 Jan 20, 2013
Here is a list of other conservative, republican, religious, "straight" men who were engaging in some "reaction formation"--hoping to hide their true homosexual desires, but caught in sexual exploits with other men...

http://www.salon.com/2012/06/23/lgbts_worst_f...
Tonya

United States

#7650 Jan 20, 2013
I being a lesbian myself, think that you should be able to marry the person you love in every state. Sometimes children need 2 parents an we have 2 children an their dads have never gave them support that they deserve and it should not matter if 2 people love each other and are happy their kids can have 2 adult figures to love an support them an help them make choices.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#7651 Jan 21, 2013
Before you can equate gay unions to marriage, you have to prove they are the same type of relationship.

Marriage is a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior.

Gay couples are a direct defective conflict with the primary goal of evolution.

Bottom line? There is no relationship more opposite marriage.

Smile.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#7652 Jan 21, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
Here is a list of other conservative, republican, religious, "straight" men who were engaging in some "reaction formation"--hoping to hide their true homosexual desires, but caught in sexual exploits with other men...
http://www.salon.com/2012/06/23/lgbts_worst_f...
VV, you have descended into the most base of troll behavior.

Do you know how easy it is for me to post a list of gays well known for promoting gay rights that have been convicted of pedophilia?

Do you of all people, really want to open that bag of worms?

Smile.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#7653 Jan 21, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
VV, you have descended into the most base of troll behavior.
Do you know how easy it is for me to post a list of gays well known for promoting gay rights that have been convicted of pedophilia?
Do you of all people, really want to open that bag of worms?
Smile.
What? Are you talking about NAMBLA? You and I both know that the leaders of the LGBT community have voiced opposition to NAMBLA for decades.

And I'm sure you can come up with a list of gay men who are pedophiles.

But I'm sure I can come up with a list of many other gay men who are not.

So go ahead and post a list.

As you saw from my previous posting--a few posts back-I don't fit the profile of a pedophile. I never have and never will.

You, on the other hand, have made comments and have acted in a way that raises the suspicion that you may be a closeted gay or bisexual man.

List away...

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#7654 Jan 21, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
VV, you have descended into the most base of troll behavior.
Do you know how easy it is for me to post a list of gays well known for promoting gay rights that have been convicted of pedophilia?
Do you of all people, really want to open that bag of worms?
Smile.
Oh... And one other thing... I have never once suggested that all men who oppose same-sex marriage are secretly gay. I have however claimed that there is a profile that fits closeted gays--provided links to a study that shows what that profile is.

Not everyone who opposes same-sex marriage is a closeted homosexual. But some are.

“Marriage equality for all”

Since: Jul 07

Illinois

#7655 Jan 21, 2013
KiMare wrote:
Before you can equate gay unions to marriage, you have to prove they are the same type of relationship.
Marriage is a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior.
Gay couples are a direct defective conflict with the primary goal of evolution.
Bottom line? There is no relationship more opposite marriage.
Smile.
Geriatric troll droppings.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#7656 Jan 21, 2013
President Barack Obama in his second inaugural speech...

"It is now our generation’s task to carry on what those pioneers began. For our journey is not complete until our wives, our mothers, and daughters can earn a living equal to their efforts. Our journey is not complete until our gay brothers and sisters are treated like anyone else under the law – for if we are truly created equal, then surely the love we commit to one another must be equal as well."

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#7658 Jan 21, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
President Barack Obama in his second inaugural speech...
"It is now our generation’s task to carry on what those pioneers began. For our journey is not complete until our wives, our mothers, and daughters can earn a living equal to their efforts. Our journey is not complete until our gay brothers and sisters are treated like anyone else under the law – for if we are truly created equal, then surely the love we commit to one another must be equal as well."
Lots of relationships that are not marriage are based on love.

Before you can equate gay unions to marriage, you have to prove they are the same type of relationship.

Marriage is a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior.

Gay couples are a direct defective conflict with the primary goal of evolution.

Bottom line? There is no relationship more opposite marriage.

Smile.

Since: Dec 09

Knoxville, TN

#7659 Jan 21, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Lots of relationships that are not marriage are based on love.
Before you can equate gay unions to marriage, you have to prove they are the same type of relationship.
Marriage is a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior.
Gay couples are a direct defective conflict with the primary goal of evolution.
Bottom line? There is no relationship more opposite marriage.
Smile.
In this case, the President of the United States' opinion overrides yours.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#7660 Jan 21, 2013
Before you can equate gay unions to marriage, you have to prove they are the same type of relationship.

Marriage is a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior.

Gay couples are a direct defective conflict with the primary goal of evolution.

Bottom line? There is no relationship more opposite marriage.

:-)
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
In this case, the President of the United States' opinion overrides yours.
I didn't state my opinion, I stated reality. Even a President, especially one who has a ponderous propensity for lies cannot override reality.

Smirk.
come on now

Bolingbrook, IL

#7661 Jan 21, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Lots of relationships that are not marriage are based on love.
Before you can equate gay unions to marriage, you have to prove they are the same type of relationship.
Marriage is a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior.
Gay couples are a direct defective conflict with the primary goal of evolution.
Bottom line? There is no relationship more opposite marriage.
Smile.
"Marriage is a cross cultural constraint on evolutionary mating behavior.
Gay couples are a direct defective conflict with the primary goal of evolution."
Which brings us back to ground hogs day.... you refusing to answer the question
You say Gay couples are a direct defective conflict w t he primary goal of evolution... so how do they differ from the infertile couples?... Neither one can contribute to the evolutionary cause.... yet one is allowed to marry... which by your own words is a conflict wth the primary goals...
come on now

Bolingbrook, IL

#7662 Jan 21, 2013
veryvermilion wrote:
<quoted text>
In this case, the President of the United States' opinion overrides yours.
No offence V.V. but I will trust the big O's words when they become more than just lip service.

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.

Greeneville Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Who do you support for Governor in Tennessee in... (Oct '10) 30 min WTSenior 150,169
Tonya bowman is cheating again 1 hr My two cents 18
kimberly harper arrested for assault 1 hr My two cents 2
new sheriff in town made his 1st big change. 1 hr nickel 38
Democrats are delusional 2 hr Digger 1
Who Is Bringing In the Illegal Aliens 2 hr Digger 61
Bad GOP economy in Greeneville breeds crime 2 hr Digger 5
fun thing to do ***Keep a Word~Drop a Word*** (Sep '10) 3 hr Jennifer Renee 4,161
south greene football 5 hr the truth 69
Greene County Commissioners Are So Embarrassing 12 hr resident 63

Greeneville Jobs

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]