mvscal wrote:
Homosexuals are, by definition, fucked up sexual deviants who should not ever under any circumstances be raising children.
according to who.......
^^
Are you fucking retarted?
retarted?
funny shit bro.....
Jsc810 wrote:
Look, I'm the same way, it absolutely disgusts me to think of 2 men. But I'm also disgusted at the thought of an obese heterosexual couple going at it; however, in both instances, I support them being able to be married, if that is what they want to do.
ditto........
Last edited by Felix on Thu Oct 26, 2006 6:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Jimmy Medalions wrote:
Clearly, straight people abuse the system in all kinds of ways. You would be crazy to argue that the faggots, on a percentage basis, would do it less.
Great argument -- "the system is quite open to abuse, so we should make it equal-opportunity, so all people, of every orientation, should be able to abuse it, too."
Brilliant.
Not what I said Dinsy. Go back and re-read it. Letting dong jockeys get married creates more exposure to the system then we already have.
DeWayne Walker wrote:"They could have put 55 points on us today. I was happy they didn't run the score up. . . .
Jimmy Medalions wrote:
Not what I said Dinsy. Go back and re-read it. Letting dong jockeys get married creates more exposure to the system then we already have.
let me ask you something here jimmy......which do you think is/would be a bigger economic drain on our system, homosexual couples being afforded all the benefits of a married couple, or illegal immigrants siphoning off our health care dollars......
Felix wrote:which do you think is/would be a bigger economic drain on our system, homosexual couples being afforded all the benefits of a married couple, or illegal immigrants siphoning off our health care dollars......
mvscal wrote:
According to anybody who does not want fucked up sexual deviants rasing children which is the vast and overwhelming majority of people in this country.
first you said that sex had nothing to do with things, now thats all you can talk about......sex is simply one part of a relationship, not the whole thing.....
btw, if you perform oral sex on your wife there are lots and lots of people that would consider you a deviant........
Dinsdale wrote:Careful Felix...if Sissy gets mad, he might run rough shot all over your ass.
That was after an edit, no less
You got me on that one.
Yes Felix, you are fucking retarded if you don't see a problem w/ cock gobbling faggots raising children. They turn out to be pussy peices of shit like you.
Is it just me or would you rather have a homo babysitting your kid than, mvscal, who quite clearly has got the emotional constrain of someone like this:
Yes Felix, you are fucking retarded if you don't see a problem w/ cock gobbling faggots raising children. They turn out to be pussy peices of shit like you.
what's next.....you gonna tell me I'm a doo doo head.......
I hope you won't take this the wrong way bud but you're a fucking waste of space .......
mvscal wrote:
And gay sex is just one part of a dysfunctional relationship and there is simply no good reason to go out of our way to expose children to such perversity.
nice try numbnuts......
that bait and switch might work on some of the mooks, but it doesn't on me.......
Jimmy Medalions wrote:Clearly, straight people abuse the system in all kinds of ways. You would be crazy to argue that the faggots, on a percentage basis, would do it less.
Then I'm sure it would be no problem for you to provide some data to back up your claim?
"Once upon a time, dinosaurs didn't have families. They lived in the woods and ate their children. It was a golden age."
—Earl Sinclair
"I do have respect for authority even though I throw jelly dicks at them.
Felix wrote:let me ask you something here jimmy......which do you think is/would be a bigger economic drain on our system, homosexual couples being afforded all the benefits of a married couple, or illegal immigrants siphoning off our health care dollars......
How is this even fucking relevant to the discussion at hand? Let me answer that for you: you're getting your ass kicked in this thread and are now trying to deflect it to another issue.
Listen dumbfuck. Neither issue is a plus for the economy and, believe it or not dumbfuck, there is no trade-off between the two.
Get back to us when illegal immigration and mudhole marriage are, in any way, related.
DeWayne Walker wrote:"They could have put 55 points on us today. I was happy they didn't run the score up. . . .
A majority of children in Sweden and Norway are born out of wedlock. Sixty percent of first-born children in Denmark have unmarried parents. Not coincidentally, these countries have had something close to full gay marriage for a decade or more. Same-sex marriage has locked in and reinforced an existing Scandinavian trend toward the separation of marriage and parenthood. The Nordic family pattern--including gay marriage--is spreading across Europe. And by looking closely at it we can answer the key empirical question underlying the gay marriage debate. Will same-sex marriage undermine the institution of marriage? It already has.
nice logic there.......
kids are being born out of wedlock to heterosexual parents because of gay marriage?!?!?!?!?!
that's equivalent to saying that Smith and Wesson is responsible for all gun deaths in this country because they produce firearms.........
Jimmy Medalions wrote: How is this even fucking relevant to the discussion at hand? Let me answer that for you: you're getting your ass kicked in this thread and are now trying to deflect it to another issue.
look bud, your the one that insists that gay marriage is some kind of economic drain to this country.....
I just love smacking you in the face with your own hypocrisy.......
Listen dumbfuck. Neither issue is a plus for the economy and, believe it or not dumbfuck, there is no trade-off between the two.
calm down jimmy, you're getting all emotional here......
I'd hate to think how'd you'd be going off if these homosexual couples were smokers too....
Jimmy Medalions wrote:Clearly, straight people abuse the system in all kinds of ways. You would be crazy to argue that the faggots, on a percentage basis, would do it less.
Then I'm sure it would be no problem for you to provide some data to back up your claim?
Jsc810 wrote:After all, if given the choice, virtually every male I know would like to have that many different sex partners, and would do so if the women were willing.
While true, this is irrelevant to the topic at hand.
DeWayne Walker wrote:"They could have put 55 points on us today. I was happy they didn't run the score up. . . .
Next would be when you offer something more than an apples to bowling balls comparison. Comparing the duration of the average gay relationship to that of the average heterosexual marriage is an assinine comparison. And thanks for the ground breaking info that some gays are into kinky shit. I'll be sure to pass that along to Irie should he ever come back here.
"Once upon a time, dinosaurs didn't have families. They lived in the woods and ate their children. It was a golden age."
—Earl Sinclair
"I do have respect for authority even though I throw jelly dicks at them.
One thing is clear. You can't read worth a damn and like every other liberal pussy you can't stay on topic.
The challenge was issued to prove that faggot marriages would have a higher likeliehood of jamming the system than straight ones. Studies prove that faggots have no self control and can't help themselves. They don't stay together and therefore would have a higher likeliehood of jamming the system. Faggots would get "married" and never go through divorce to lose their benefits.
While not statisically-valid, this thread does prove, without a shadow of a doubt, that you are a dumbfuck.
DeWayne Walker wrote:"They could have put 55 points on us today. I was happy they didn't run the score up. . . .
Jimmy Medalions wrote:
The challenge was issued to prove that faggot marriages would have a higher likeliehood of jamming the system than straight ones. Studies prove that faggots have no self control and can't help themselves. They don't stay together and therefore would have a higher likeliehood of jamming the system. Faggots would get "married" and never go through divorce to lose their benefits.
While not statisically-valid, this thread does prove, without a shadow of a doubt, that you are a dumbfuck.
so you think this gibberish (and that's being kind I assure you) gives some kind of credence to your heart-felt bigotry........
that's okay bud, you don't have to justify your stupidity to anyone except yourself......
I sure hope you'll come back and tell me how bad you're kicking my ass......that'll seal the deal for you....
Last edited by Felix on Thu Oct 26, 2006 9:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Rack the Mong re-set, Nish. i haven't heard that since I flipped thatcher's britain the bird almost 20 years ago.
Jess, it's n abbreviation of Mongoloid, but is used to anyone whose intelligence is suspect. Also, ugly woen, strangely:
"Fuck, look at that Mong"
Luther Wrote:
a butt load of people who sit in those small cubicles pretending to work while submitting a "take."
mvscal wrote:
Homosexuals are, by definition, fucked up sexual deviants who should not ever under any circumstances be raising children.
according to who.......
According to anybody who does not want fucked up sexual deviants rasing children which is the vast and overwhelming majority of people in this country.
Not sure if that would be any worse than crack smoking, unmarried, unemployed (unemployable) 19 year old welfare queens raising children. But then about 75% of a certain demographic is already being raised that way so what does it matter?
This is a topic where you either get it or you just don't.
Those in support of homo marriage have either lost their moral compass ..... or they've never had one.
The overwhelming majority of folks get married for the right reason, and marriage is GOOD for our society.
They THINK it is going to work out, despite the 50/50 odds that we currently see.
That's an entirely different topic.
Many homos seeking marriage would be doing so for the wrong reason.
They, as Dinsdale has accurately pointed out, would be seeking to get over.
That, beyond the very obvious reality that men can be friends with other men, but men MARRY women.
That's the name of that tune.
There is nothing cute, lovely, wonderful, and stable about two faggots being together, and it'll NEVER be marriage, even if societal leaders jam it down the throat of the people.
Jsc, marriage has been, in all times and in all places, between a man and a woman.
Is it your take that only just NOW man has become so very enlightened so that he is finally getting the idea that buttfuckers have been discriminated against ....... in every time and every place ... ?
sc, marriage has been, in all times and in all places, between a man and a woman.
So what? Does that mean it can't ever change?
I don't see where it makes a whit of difference. If two ass boys or two chicken lickers want to say I do, go right ahead, doesn't hurt me at all. Just as many total morons go to vegas every year and do the same damn thing and half of them get divorced a few years later.
Marriage as a sacred institution? Please.
If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator." —GWB Washington, D.C., Dec. 19, 2000
Martyred wrote:
Hang in there, Whitey. Smart people are on their way with dictionaries.
War Wagon wrote:being as how I've got "stupid" draped all over, I'm not really sure.
The acceptance of gay marriages will destroy the system! The gays are responsible for all the faults of hetero marriages. We must get rid of them!
Sin,
No suprise here that republicans are once again claiming that they are the party of moral superiority (when obviously they aren't, especially lately). :roll:
If a loved one in a hetero marriage is hopitalized in an ICU unit, the partner is able to visit them because they are married. Gay & lesbian couples are only asking for the same right (hence, gays aren't asking for special rights as most conservatives spout in their meltdowns). How is that "getting over?"
