williejonesjr
Veteran
- Joined
- Mar 15, 2017
- Messages
- 921
No. I don't think so. It normalizes the abnormal. Next is peddie & beastiality. And I'm not for that. At all. Ain't no human gettin at me!Was homosexual "marriage" a good idea?
No. I don't think so. It normalizes the abnormal. Next is peddie & beastiality. And I'm not for that. At all. Ain't no human gettin at me!Was homosexual "marriage" a good idea?
Lol!No. I don't think so. It normalizes the abnormal. Next is peddie & beastiality. And I'm not for that. At all. Ain't no human gettin at me!
How does two consenting adults who are in love getting married = p***philia and bestiality becoming legal?No. I don't think so. It normalizes the abnormal. Next is peddie & beastiality. And I'm not for that. At all. Ain't no human gettin at me!
And what things goes into the "against your God" category?If it's against God, it's against God.
thats why i dont even debate with idiots like him. Apparently 2 human being adults loving each other = p***philia and bestiality. Sigh..How does two consenting adults who are in love getting married = p***philia and bestiality becoming legal?
So he's an idiot now? I can't recall that he ever insulted you?thats why i dont even debate with idiots like him. Apparently 2 human being adults loving each other = p***philia and bestiality. Sigh..
The arguments might be refutable, of course, but, especially as it relates to some controversial Supreme Court decisions and other American sociological phenomena, the late Senator Patrick Moynihan and others addressed the issue with the expression "defining deviancy down."How does two consenting adults who are in love getting married = p***philia and bestiality becoming legal?
SourceManon McKinnon said:... That same year columnist Charles Krauthammer expanded Moynihan’s point by proposing the reverse — that not only were we “normalizing what was once considered deviant,” but we were also “finding deviant what was once considered normal.” [snip] In time, the inevitable lower standards and moral relativism brought us the movies, TV shows, fashions, sex norms and web pages we have today. Deviant and normal swapped places.
SourceJohn Schwartz said:... departing from its role of assuring, as neutral observer, that the democratic rules of engagement are observed.” He [Scalia] called up a litany of horrors, state laws that Justice Kennedy’s opinion might ultimately overturn, including “bigamy, same-sex marriage, adult incest, prostitution, masturbation, adultery, fornication, bestiality, and obscenity.” Such laws are only sustainable, he said, under the ability of the nation to base laws on moral choices, as the Court had allowed in Bowers [vs. Hardwick]. “Every single one of these laws is called into question by today’s decision,” Justice Scalia wrote. “This effectively decrees the end of all morals legislation.”
It's the next (il)logical step. It's next on the agenda.How does two consenting adults who are in love getting married = p***philia and bestiality becoming legal?
Thank you and you're welcome.Lol!
You're so funny, thanks for often making my day, God Be Praised for the way you are!
Idiot? Takes one to know one sirthats why i dont even debate with idiots like him. Apparently 2 human being adults loving each other = p***philia and bestiality. Sigh..
Thank you. I'll hold my pee til I get outside. I need those treats.As I read him, @williejonesjr was largely having some fun, posting as a worried little puppy. There's no reason to make him pee on his newspaper, but he might not get any treats for a week, depending upon who is in charge of the kennel.
I've honestly never seen that commenter before. I'm also not in the insulting business, but I will "bark back".So he's an idiot now? I can't recall that he ever insulted you?
How can people even claim to know what love is when they go against the very way they came into this world is beyond me...
Thank you for the receipts.The arguments might be refutable, of course, but, especially as it relates to some controversial Supreme Court decisions and other American sociological phenomena, the late Senator Patrick Moynihan and others addressed the issue with the expression "defining deviancy down."
Source
Furthermore, when writing the dissenting opinion on the Supreme Court's landmark Lawrence vs. Texas ("sodomy") case, the late justice, Antonin Scalia, said that "the Court has taken sides in the culture war."
Source
To my view, and leaving aside, for the most part, what the author of the article claims as Justice Scalia's "litany of horrors," it remains to be seen if Scalia's prediction proves correct: that the decision (and others like it) "effectively decrees the end of all morals legislation."
bingo. (pun intended)No. I don't think so. It normalizes the abnormal. Next is peddie & beastiality. And I'm not for that. At all. Ain't no human gettin at me!
But who are you to say that gay people shouldn't have equal rights? Of course it's abnormal, there are less gay people than straight people.what mecca and valerian do not want to acknowledge is that anything other than what marriage is supposed to be is abnormal and devian
No it really doesn't because there are good things and bad things... no human would look at p***philia and say that it's an ok thing to do unless they were a p***phile themselves... same with bestiality. Homosexuality has nothing to do with those things because it's consensual and not harmful to anyone. Just because a human supports gay marital rights, doesn't mean they support terrible things like p***philia, that would be crazy.legitimizing gay marriage- a deviant (meaning, straying from the norm) justifies any other deviant behavior
What do you mean "by the left"? It's by crazy people who are pedophiles themselves. Also it still has nothing to do with gay people. Plus normal people don't support pedophiles so all we have to do is say that p***philia is not okay (because it's obviously not).there is a movement now to legitimize p***philia as a "sexual preference" by the left
Exactly, that's what I'm saying.Legalizing gay marriage isn't the death knoll of civilization. It doesn't mean that all things are now ok and to be accepted. All it means is that the government looked at the homosexuality issue and decided they had a good case - same sex love hurts no one and is consensual. Marriage gives certain benefits - health insurance, inheritance, taxes - that the government decided it wasn't fair to deny citizens because they fell in mutual love with someone with the wrong genitalia. That's the entire issue.
Advice, as always, both appreciated and taken. With that said, I think Scalia was very articulate, and serves, even in his death, as a sort of counterpoint to, for instance, Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Even his reference to the "culture war," while I think it does include a side-swipe at the Cultural Marxists (and we should know what the Vatican thinks of them), was probably a reference to Bismarck's kulturkampf, which has Catholic/Protestant implications, but has since been redefined to encompass the "war" which rages in the global community at large. I read a lot of far right Catholic writers, including Patrick Buchanan and (I think) the late Robert Bork, just to hear the defenses of "patriarchy" by men who still largely have their testicles in tact lol.Serveto - I wouldn't really take anything scalia said too seriously. His religion often took precedence in his work and you could call him a far right wing catholic reactionary tbh