I'm just trying to help you out. You're sarcasm attempt wasn't received that way because you didn't follow the rules of sarcasm. Keep practicing, I'll assume that last line was another failed attempt.
Gays...you are all being sued!!!! (SIAP)
- Thread starter moxyfruvous
- Start date
LOL. So, you are incapable of coming up with one freakin' single quote to support your nonsensical statement. Sweet. So, you are not only incredibly stupid, you are also a dishonest sob. You're a twofer. Congratulations. Oh, and in your rant we can thank you for again showing people what a irrational rambling looks like. It's devoid of logic and reason, but that's how all your points are made. I hope you didn't take logic in college because you surely flunked the class unless you cheated. Good grief dude, read what you wrote above, besides much of it being a flat out lie, it doesn't even flow to the logical conclusion you are claiming. Wow you are dumb. Baldwin is your muse.
Now, that was some terrible sarcasm.
Wrong. Actually, there's been no reason being used by the other side in these posts against me. LOL. You are continuing the tradition. Just stupid comebacks like "you are a bigot". What's funny is reading the responses because you people continue to see the flaw of that type of reasoning. Seriously, since you won't believe me, go talk to a professor who teaches Logic and ask him/her if you are putting force a soundly reasoned argument/comment. It's not but you guys are so blinded by your belief you fail to notice your logical flaw. Even funnier, is the irony of the comment you and others have made, but again, for you guys to realize the irony you'd have to be at the very least slightly capable of performing some critical thinking skills. Unfortunately, you've shown you're not. You, and others, are getting too emotional on the issue so that you it's leading you to make illogical comebacks at me. It's fine, I don't expect much more from many of the people on here.
Hardly bruised or battered. The arguments being made by the other side have been incredibly weak, and lacking any reasoning. It's hardly been above the taunt of the schoolyard bully, nananannanah. People have had to resort to lying (saying I didn't state why I'm opposed to ssm), lying about why I'm against ssm, etc. Nobody has been able to provide a single quote (even though I offered $1000 if you could find one), where I used religion for my opposition, but the lies from the other side continue. Nor could Freddy (or anyone else) find a single quote where I've claimed gays should be sued, etc.
The bottom line is your arguments against me were so powerful, you wouldn't need to lie. It's been a non-stop lie fest which means you guys are holding a dud hand, and I've called your bluff. Life's a bitch.
It was great sarcasm, it was just lost on you because you've chosen to misrepresent and lie about what I've said. Oh, and when I say "you", I'm not necessarily talking specifically about you, rather those criticizing me in this discussion.
If you made a logical argument against why 2 consenting adults could not enter into a marriage because they happen to be the same gender would be the first time.
You see, it isn't that hard to argue that marriage should be allowed regardless of gender, as it does no damage to society, and in a free society people should be allowed that freedom. Why do you hate freedom?
And you're called a bigot by many people because you hold bigoted view points. That doesn't require critical thinking skills, really just regular ol' thinking skills. It's a shame you can't even grasp that.
This must be another failed attempt at sarcasm. Keep trying, I'll try to remember to give you encouragement when you get it right, but this is way off.
LOL. The discussion has been mostly about whether ssm is a constitutional right. I don't think it is and unlike you, I've explained my position. The Constitution is SILENT on the issue of ssm and it's one that should be decided by the states, not the courts. Disagree with that if you like, but to call my view bigoted, well is just stupid on your part. It's dumb reasoning. It's like people who call opponents of affirmative action programs bigots. It's basically a bullying tactic to silence your opponent because you are incapable of formulating a coherent response. Hey, I understand this is the modus operandi of the left, because you guys can't formulate intelligent, well thought thought out arguments. It's disappointing but I'm not surprised, you've been pulling this crap for years.
"Why do you hate freedom". Once again a stupid statement. Because I don't agree with you on this issue you assume I "hate freedom". Why can't we disagree on the issue without the stupid bigot, hate freedom, etc comments. You don't hear me mocking you for your position on ssm. I may disagree with it but that's fine. I am mocking your comments about me being a bigot, hating freedom, etc. These are the arguments a child would make, not someone who cared about critical thinking or making arguments based on logic and reason.
Why do you boys on the left always resort to the bully tactics? Don't support abortion on demand and the gov't paying for it and you hate women (ie War on Women). Don't support "quotas" on college campuses and you hate blacks, bigots. Don't believe ssm is a right in the constitution and you hate gays. Good grief. Grow up and just accept that people can disagree with you on issues and not have bad intentions. If you want group thought, everyone think the same then move to N. Korea. You'd probably love it there.
No, it's just another example of you failing to read what I wrote. Hey, you've been doing it a lot lately, so you're becoming an expert at twisting around words and moving goalposts. You've probably earned a doctorate in the both fields of study. It's a shame because you used to be an honest debater but those days are long gone now.
And it's not sarcasm, it's fact.
Lulz. Explain where the Constitution addresses marriage at all? But since the Federal Government already recognizes heterosexual marriages, one could make a much better argument that SSM should be legal based on the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment, rather than leaving it to the states, since Federal protection supersedes state laws.
Just admit you don't agree with gay marriage because it's icky, and you found a religion that affirms those beliefs. You don't give a damn about the Federal government supposedly stepping on the toes of bigoted State's. If you wanted to make an argument that the federal government should be out of all marriage and left to the states, you may have a point. A lousy point, but at least you wouldn't be a hypocrite.
I thought you cons were for limited government and personal liberty? Why do you support the government intruding into peoples personal lives when it comes to marriage?
Agreed, the Constitution is silent on ssm (marriage), so leave it up to the states to decide. I've already explained why I don't believe the 14th amendment doesn't apply.
Why would I admit something that isn't true? Why don't you admit that you are flailing away and coming up empty, requiring you to make sh*t up. It's humorous that the only ones bringing up religion (or icky) in this debate are the pro ssm folks. A tactic of a loser is to misrepresent the other person's position. You've done that repeatedly, so we know where you stand.
"If you wanted to make an argument that the federal government should be out of all marriage and left to the states, you may have a point. A lousy point, but at least you wouldn't be a hypocrite. "
I've already made this argument since you want to redefine marriage. I've also asked you to provide a strong rationale for why the gov't should be involved in the marriage business at all if the primarily an emotional union of adults. So far, nobody has provided a strong rationale. IowaHawk claims for the same reasons as the traditional view of marriage. LOL. Natural says because "it's the will of the people". Again, LOL. Neither provides us with a strong rationale for why the gov't should be sanctioning marriage.
You last sentence is a whirlwind of contradiction. Limited gov't =/= no gov't.
"Why do you support the government intruding into peoples personal lives when it comes to marriage?"
This is pure comedic gold. There isn't a better example of the lack of logic being used by you boys on the left.
To answer your question (and it's hard for me not to smile answering it because it's a juicy softball over the hear of the plate, why are you? So, you are arguing the gov't should have NO laws regarding marriage? Not even age restrictions, laws against marry more than one person, or marrying a sibling. Even better, IF you actually believe what you typed then the gov't has NO business in being involved in marriages at all. The gov't shouldn't be backing them or sanctioning them. Of course, I brought this point up above and have already asked the question why the gov't should be involved in marriage at all under the new view of marriage. Even richer, your sentence above means the gov't shouldn't be in the marriage business, yet above you say ""If you wanted to make an argument that the federal government should be out of all marriage and left to the states, you may have a point. A lousy point,". So, you have just called the logical endgame of your argument, "a lousy point".
You don't even know what you're arguing. You are contradicting yourself because you are using such poorly reasoned arguments.
Good grief, man, try to formulate a logical argument that doesn't contradict itself. I do thank you for the laughs though, because you've provided me with rich material to prove the argument I've been making about what the libs have been doing in this post.
It's adorable you think you've made a single decent argument or answered any question in a well thought out manner.
You keep referencing prior arguments you've made, rather than making one, because everyone has already shot everyone of your arguments to hell. It allows you a fake high ground when you know you've been beaten.
Now sink away into your hole. The evil gays can't get you there.
You keep referencing prior arguments you've made, rather than making one, because everyone has already shot everyone of your arguments to hell. It allows you a fake high ground when you know you've been beaten.
Now sink away into your hole. The evil gays can't get you there.
It's adorable you think you've made a single decent argument or answered any question in a well thought out manner.
You keep referencing prior arguments you've made, rather than making one, because everyone has already shot everyone of your arguments to hell. It allows you a fake high ground when you know you've been beaten.
Now sink away into your hole. The evil gays can't get you there.
You keep referencing prior arguments you've made, rather than making one, because everyone has already shot everyone of your arguments to hell. It allows you a fake high ground when you know you've been beaten.
Now sink away into your hole. The evil gays can't get you there.
LOL. You couldn't refute one comment I made. You've habitually lied about what I've said, and now like a good little troll you continue to charge on. You are all over the place in your reasoning. Maybe you should look into signing up for a Logic 101 class at your local community college. It will save you from a ton of embarrassment in the future. You won't be making one point one sentence and then contradicting it in the very next sentence. I haven't laughed so hard in quite a while as I did reading your nonsensical rambling. Thanks, because it really made my day.
hahahhaha
It's not enough that you make rambling arguments, now you have to make the post the same exact message 2 minutes apart. Are you on medication? This would explain a lot. Take it easy, get some rest, stay away from posting. You are a sick puppy or one drunk one.
So you still can't enunciate what you are arguing. Sad. Not surprising, but sad.
Read the Constitution, you may change your (wrong) viewpoint. Probably not, but you lack critical thinking skills, as highlighted by this thread. My apologies.
