The Homosexuality Discussion Thread

[Famine]

The funny thing is that most pedophiles are actually atheist?

Did you mean to phrase that as a question? If so, I have no idea but I doubt it very much, given the sheer volume of children abused by Catholic priests and in Christian foster homes.

If not, please supply your data.

 

[Danoff]

The funny thing is that most pedophiles are actually atheist?

Citation required

 

[Scaff]

I'm struggling to keep with up with your trance from reality(defending myself again). Just yesterday someone said they were a physics/mechanical engineering guru yet they have no degree, well in the professional world people would laugh at that amateurism (This shows acceptance of failure).

If you continue with this utterly inane claim that people need to demonstrate a certain level of qualification to be permitted to discuss a subject with you then you will be leaving GT Planet.

I will make this clear for the final time, you have no mandate to demand or even request this, no part of the AUP requires it and the site owner has never come even close to requiring it at any time. As such you will stop this line now and should you repeat it in any thread at all your membership will be coming to an end.

 

[Bo]

My best friend, who's 14, wrote this as a measure of homosexuality. It sums everything up very nicely:

Love is love. Some people love people of the same gender. They don't need to make babies to be happy. That is all.

 

[Brett]

Please feel free to tackle the Jason Collins & Michael Sam issue, I've yet to see anyone challenge it so far, because it's the truth. The gay card is their protection if a team were to fire those scrubs the backlash from the media would unrelenting.

I answered that pages ago. However, since you completely failed at reading my response, I will quote the post for you.

You do not seem to understand at all how ESPN works. ESPN is looking to have stories, regardless of the actual content, that will keep eyeballs tuned into their programming and thus, more potential to earn money. It looks to have worked with you, as you seem to know anything and everything there is to know about Michael Sam.

And while I made no mention of Jason Collins in that post, the same can be said for him.

If the New Jersey Nets or St Louis Rams had not thought either could contribute to their teams, then neither of the teams would have signed/drafted the two guys. The NBA and NFL are not charities. They do not sign players for the sake of signing players.

In the case of Jason Collins, he has been a role player his entire career. Nets' management felt they needed to add another big man to their roster after Brook Lopez was injured and would be out for the rest of the season. At that point in the season, the choices were slim and Jason Collins was who they thought could best contribute to what they needed. It was an added bonus that he may have brought some extra financial windfall with his signing.

Michael Sam has yet to make the Rams' roster. The Rams did draft him thinking he could have a role on their team. Whatever that role is makes no difference.

However, that is all beside the point in both players' cases. The media is going to cover any story that will get viewers. It makes no difference what the story is about. If it will get viewers, then it will air. It is about making money. You completely fail to recognize that, at least other than acknowledging that both players received a disproportionate amount of air time for their abilities.

You know who else received a disproportionate amount of air time for his abilities? Tim Tebow. However, since he is not gay, there has been no mention of his excessive TV time.

 

[JulesJackson]

Nothing. That's the point.

At the moment they get special treatment - banning them from marrying, serving in the military, adopting children, giving blood and so on and so forth. They shouldn't get special treatment - governments, which take from them without discrimination, should protect their rights without discrimination.

By marking them out as different you are making them more special.

The LBGT mafia promotion just gives me the jitterbugs! How about a Neo Nazi, anti gay preacher having the ability to advertise on public TV. Everyone has the right to exercise their belief in the USA which adheres to the constitution. The pro LBGT actually goes against the constitution, as they limit groups from critiquing them, which is against the 1st amendment. It's censorship look at how Hollywood responds to anyone challenging the LBGT mafia, careers go down the drain.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution .
We live in a nation with laws which we abide to. Our Constitutional Monarchy friends seem to adhere by their rules when the issue was regarding homosexuality specifically in the USA(in my response).

By arguing this you are going against the constitution.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_amendments_to_the_United_States_Constitution
Marriage is limited to one man / one woman.
John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and George Washington would probably need to activate their 1776 powers if the LBGT mafia want's no critiquing.
Anyone wants to challenge the Constitution? Got any takers?

I answered that pages ago. However, since you completely failed at reading my response, I will quote the post for you.



And while I made no mention of Jason Collins in that post, the same can be said for him.

If the New Jersey Nets or St Louis Rams had not thought either could contribute to their teams, then neither of the teams would have signed/drafted the two guys. The NBA and NFL are not charities. They do not sign players for the sake of signing players.

Further, teams in the NBA and NFL are not made up of all superstars. Some players will have to accept the job of being a role player. Jason Collins has been a role player his entire career. After Brook Lopez was injured, Nets' management felt they needed to add another big man to their roster. At that point in the season, the choices were slim and Jason Collins was who they thought could best contribute to what they needed.

Michael Sam has yet to make the Rams' roster. The Rams did draft him thinking he could have a role on their team. Whatever that role is makes no difference.

However, that is all beside the point in both players' cases. The media is going to cover any story that will get viewers. It makes no difference what the story is about. If it will get viewers, then it will air. It is about making money. You completely fail to recognize that, at least other than acknowledging that both players received a disproportionate amount of air time for their abilities.

You know who else received a disproportionate amount of air time for his abilities? Tim Tebow. However, since he is not gay, there has been no mention of his excessive TV time.

Tim Tebow sucks I'll give you that but he did win a Heisman trophy and beat the Steelers, set the highest QBR rating in the last 5mins in 8 consecutive games being over (110). Michael Sam and Jason Collins didn't have the college credentials let alone stats. Tebow sucks for three quarters, but was clutch and you can't hide from that, he won games. I think I'll contact Oprah for a documentary documenting my ravaging heterosexual appetite, might get a book deal as well, probably a 30 min ESPN special.

 

[Brett]

View attachment 162458
The LBGT mafia promotion just gives me the jitterbugs! How about a Neo Nazi, anti gay preacher having the ability to advertise on public TV. Everyone has the right to exercise their belief in the USA which adheres to the constitution. The pro LBGT actually goes against the constitution, as they limit groups from critiquing them, which is against the 1st amendment. It's censorship look at how Hollywood responds to anyone challenging the LBGT mafia, careers go down the drain.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution .
We live in a nation with laws which we abide to. Our Constitutional Monarchy friends seem to adhere by their rules when the issue was regarding homosexuality specifically in the USA(in my response).

By arguing this you are going against the constitution.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_amendments_to_the_United_States_Constitution
Marriage is limited to one man / one woman.
John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and George Washington would probably need to activate their 1776 powers if the LBGT mafia want's no critiquing.
Anyone wants to challenge the Constitution? Got any takers?

You completely fail at understanding the First Amendment. The First Amendment protects citizens from the government. It has no sway over private organizations. Hollywood has every right to not hire any one they do not agree with.

Tim Tebow sucks I'll give you that but he did win a Heisman trophy and beat the Steelers, set the highest QBR rating in the last 5mins in 8 consecutive games being over (110). Michael Sam and Jason Collins didn't have the college credentials let alone stats. Tebow sucks for three quarters, but was clutch and you can't hide from that, he won games. I think I'll contact Oprah for a documentary documenting my ravaging heterosexual appetite, might get a book deal as well, probably a 30 min ESPN special.

You completely failed at reading the actual point I made. Just for the sake of highlighting it for you:

However, that is all beside the point in both players' cases. The media is going to cover any story that will get viewers. It makes no difference what the story is about. If it will get viewers, then it will air. It is about making money. You completely fail to recognize that, at least other than acknowledging that both players received a disproportionate amount of air time for their abilities.

You know who else received a disproportionate amount of air time for his abilities? Tim Tebow. However, since he is not gay, there has been no mention of his excessive TV time.

The only thing I would change about that is I should have added at the end, "I wonder why?".

 

[Danoff]

The LBGT mafia promotion just gives me the jitterbugs! How about a Neo Nazi, anti gay preacher having the ability to advertise on public TV.

If by "public" you mean privately owned broadcasting companies like ABC, NBC, and FOX, well that'd be up to those companies wouldn't it?

Everyone has the right to exercise their belief in the USA which adheres to the constitution. The pro LBGT actually goes against the constitution, as they limit groups from critiquing them, which is against the 1st amendment. It's censorship look at how Hollywood responds to anyone challenging the LBGT mafia, careers go down the drain.

I don't think you understand the 1st amendment. It prohibits the government from censoring speech with laws. What you're talking about is changing how you treat people based on their speech, which is totally legal and common. For example, if you apply for a job and exercise your constitutionally guaranteed right to call the hiring manager a jerk, the cops won't come and arrest you for doing so - meanwhile the manager's future actions are going to be influenced by your speech, and you probably won't get the job.

You've completely misunderstood the constitution.

Our Constitutional Monarchy friends seem to adhere by their rules when the issue was regarding homosexuality specifically in the USA(in my response).

The what now?

Marriage is limited to one man / one woman.

Where?

John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and George Washington would probably need to activate their 1776 powers if the LBGT mafia want's no critiquing.
Anyone wants to challenge the Constitution? Got any takers?

I will fight against every law that the gay community wants to pass preventing anti-gay commentary. So far there haven't been any proposals that I'm aware of.

 

[Famine]

The LBGT mafia promotion just gives me the jitterbugs!

That'll be why you double-posted yet again.

How about a Neo Nazi, anti gay preacher having the ability to advertise on public TV.

How about it?

Everyone has the right to exercise their belief in the USA which adheres to the constitution. The pro LBGT actually goes against the constitution, as they limit groups from critiquing them, which is against the 1st amendment. It's censorship look at how Hollywood responds to anyone challenging the LBGT mafia, careers go down the drain.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution .
We live in a nation with laws which we abide to. Our Constitutional Monarchy friends seem to adhere by their rules when the issue was regarding homosexuality specifically in the USA(in my response).

By arguing this you are going against the constitution.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_amendments_to_the_United_States_Constitution
Marriage is limited to one man / one woman.
John Adams, Benjamin Franklin, Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and George Washington would probably need to activate their 1776 powers if the LBGT mafia want's no critiquing.
Anyone wants to challenge the Constitution? Got any takers?

Apparently you don't understand the Constitution just as much as you don't understand the scientific method, burden of proof and the edit button.

The Constitution is a legal limitation of government. It doesn't say you can say anything you want or that you can't stop people saying what they want - it says the federal government can't stop you.

Given that I'm 5,000 miles away from the Constitution it must be pretty galling to realise I know it better than you do...

 

[JulesJackson]

Sperm donation / surrogacy / IVF

Yes, homosexuals can reproduce. Deal with it.

We are talking one on one not through others methods. And if it was a transgender with gender reassignment not going to happen maybe with a crossdresser as a male is a female vice versa in their world.

 

[Azuremen]

Wow you lack empathy...

Among other things.

I feel he owes Stanford an apology for dragging them into a debate he clearly isn't capable of holding.

 

[Famine]

We are talking one on one not through others methods.

Nope. You asked if they can reproduce. The answer is almost always "yes".

You completely ignored the possibility of infertility, menopause and intersex too - as is so often the case in the "gays shouldn't marry because they can't make babies" argument, because it's too inconvenient for the folk who advance the argument to consider.

 

[Liquid]

We are talking one on one not through others methods. And if it was a transgender with gender reassignment not going to happen maybe with a crossdresser as a male is a female vice versa in their world.

For a start, that is a backtrack. You originally only claimed that homosexuals can't reproduce; it simply isn't true. They can reproduce with many methods used by heterosexual couples too.

You can donate eggs/sperm before you have gender reassignment surgery. Also, you have failed to address the concern about infertile heterosexual couples being able to reproduce which other members posted to you. Care to answer it now? Some heterosexual couples can't conceive. Are they failures as people?

Also, I'd like to hear your opinion on how homosexuality is against nature yet it has been documented in hundreds of other animal species. Yet, homophobia has been documented in just one animal; the human.

How do you define something as being 'against' nature? As @Danny pointed out, you are talking about this on a computer over the internet. Do you not see the irony in talking about what is against nature when computers themselves are 'unnatural'? By which I mean man made. Humans don't have wings, yet we still fly. Aeroplanes. Unnatural.

 

[Carbonox]

Also, I'd like to hear your opinion on how homosexuality is against nature yet it has been documented in hundreds of other animal species. Yet, homophobia has been documented in just one animal; the human.

Oh, but you forgot that magnificent lesson @Agent_47 taught us - we're not actually animals. Rather, we're apparently some sort of a superior species that certainly doesn't have anything in common with mere monkeys or rats. Except for, was it 97% or even 99% of our DNA?

Yes, this was a very sarcastic post.

 

[Danoff]

@GTP_GTDOJO

Did you mean to phrase that as a question? If so, I have no idea but I doubt it very much, given the sheer volume of children abused by Catholic priests and in Christian foster homes.

If not, please supply your data.

Citation required

I haven't forgotten this one.

 

[Dennisch]

@GTP_GTDOJO , @Agent_47

What I would like to know is :

How is asking for equality a special treatment? In my normal, atheist, life asking for equality is asking for the same normal treatment as everybody else. Is this something you guys have learned in church? Do they teach you that asking for equality is asking for special treatment? I know it isn't in the bible, so please tell me where you guys learned this.

 

[JulesJackson]

Let's have some proof here, O'Reilly.

The Great Comrade Obama protects us all especially from than punk Awalki. America citizens should be killed by drones and not tried in court, thankfully Obama obliges by that.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world...07bb60-e066-11e3-8dcc-d6b7fede081a_story.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Security_Agency

Among other things.

I feel he owes Stanford an apology for dragging them into a debate he clearly isn't capable of holding.

My apologies to Stanford and @Azuremen the intellectual savior of the masses, I the career engineer am not worthy of debating with citations. I must learn from the mistakes I've made and see the light of emotional science @Imari. My debating skills are quite rusty and are in need of a constitutional make over by @Famine & Danny. My double posting must have been my incompetence of understanding the American constitution on marriage stating one man/one women @Famine & @Scaff from 5000miles back home. I myself just skimmed it through without actually going through it in detail @Famine.

1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...by_type#Amendments_that_ban_same-sex_marriage

2) http://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/education/all_amendments_usconst.htm

3) http://www.ushistory.org/documents/amendments.htm#amend14

@GTP_GTDOJO

I haven't forgotten this one.

@hsv010 can explain the homosexual tendencies of the catholic priest better than I can, that. Remember Stanford sciences isn't on par with GCSE's science @hsv010 . @Azuremen my good friend did once say I'm just a career engineer, which is very true indeed. We engineers as you guys already know by now have limited knowledge about the constitution, science, and homosexual inequalities in America. We're very blind and like to be censored on our views regarding social issues that adhere to the constitution better yet known as the law. I tried sparknotes @Azurmen but I'm a slow learner so I stuck to chegg and finished school. @Azurmen is the grasshopper hence why I'm a cricket, I don't like jumping to different trades it leaves an empty void of accomplishment. Remember guys @Azuremen is the only credible source, a Stanford Degree has no merit guys @Famine. Your resident genetics expert @Famine

1 )http://news.stanford.edu/pr/95/950310Arc5328.html

2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dean_Hamer


@Imari alot of empathy here for you, I know you'll like it:

Dean Hamer: A genetic linkage analysis showed that gay brothers in these families had an increased probability of sharing DNA markers on the subtelomeric region of the long arm of the X chromosome, Xg28, providing the first direct molecular evidence for genes that influence human sexual orientation. #empathy#emotion#feelings#soft

James Watson founder of DNA

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Watson

You mean me, not @Azure Flare

I originally studied physics and mechanical engineering before moving to programming and design, photography is a hobby/job/art thing to me.

Your use of science is very... black and white for the most part. Which is to be expected from a career engineer.

I like to apologize to all that I've deeply offended and I genuinely mean it, especially Mr. @Azuremen #Haveagreatday

 

[VindictiveScrub]

Wow, this thread has seen some activity since I checked it a few hours ago.

@GTP_GTDOJO and @Agent_47

So you consider it to be special treatment to wish for your classmates to not bully you and assault you frequently and commonly, and to be able to lawfully wed the person you love and obtain the same rights that come with marriage and only marriage in the U.S.? Yes, hate crimes still do exist, but would you like me to bring back the statistic of how many homeless youths identify as LGBT? How is it special treatment to not want to fear for your safety within your own family?

Mmm, the good 'ol argument of "If we support gay marriage, what's next? Pedophilia? Bestiality?" Here's a study that shows that there are more heterosexual pedophiles than homosexual pedophiles: http://focus.psychiatryonline.org/article.aspx?articleid=53036. Being gay doesn't mean you have a latent attraction to children. Find a stronger, less offensive argument.

Lastly, If both of you want to continue using the same argument as to why gay marriage shouldn't be legal, that being just saying "God," then I'm going to reuse one of my earlier comments. Leviticus 20:10 states than any adulterer should be executed, so following the Bible's laws on marriage, we have a lot of people to start executing. Unless you think we shouldn't follow that law, to which I ask why not? We're following the Bible's specific stance on marriage here, no?

I look forward to your answers to my questions.

 

[JulesJackson]

Wow, this thread has seen some activity since I checked it a few hours ago.

@GTP_GTDOJO and @Agent_47

So you consider it to be special treatment to wish for your classmates to not bully you and assault you frequently and commonly, and to be able to lawfully wed the person you love and obtain the same rights that come with marriage and only marriage in the U.S.? Yes, hate crimes still do exist, but would you like me to bring back the statistic of how many homeless youths identify as LGBT? How is it special treatment to not want to fear for your safety within your own family?

Mmm, the good 'ol argument of "If we support gay marriage, what's next? Pedophilia? Bestiality?" Here's a study that shows that there are more heterosexual pedophiles than homosexual pedophiles: http://focus.psychiatryonline.org/article.aspx?articleid=53036. Being gay doesn't mean you have a latent attraction to children. Find a stronger, less offensive argument.

Lastly, If both of you want to continue using the same argument as to why gay marriage shouldn't be legal, that being just saying "God," then I'm going to reuse one of my earlier comments. Leviticus 20:10 states than any adulterer should be executed, so following the Bible's laws on marriage, we have a lot of people to start executing. Unless you think we shouldn't follow that law, to which I ask why not? We're following the Bible's specific stance on marriage here, no?

I look forward to your answers to my questions.

Look here my problem with the LBGT agenda is the advertising of it in the media and people censoring others for critiquing it, the latter being unconstitutional. "Being gay doesn't mean you have latent attraction to children" true but the one's attracted to the same sex certainly are part of the homosexual community, Unless we want to redefine it for consenting adults only. America's government let alone public figure shouldn't be promoting it all, and that includes Obama. Private media can show due it being under a different system, but public media no way. I was probably wrong for saying what I said about Michael Sam and Jason Collins extended coverage but it was on every bloody sport channel. Being yourself in America shouldn't be considered heroic.

 

[Liquid]

Come on @GTP_GTDOJO answer everyone's questions. Don't forget about me and @Dennisch.

We are talking one on one not through others methods. And if it was a transgender with gender reassignment not going to happen maybe with a crossdresser as a male is a female vice versa in their world.

For a start, that is a backtrack. You originally only claimed that homosexuals can't reproduce; it simply isn't true. They can reproduce with many methods used by heterosexual couples too.

You can donate eggs/sperm before you have gender reassignment surgery. Also, you have failed to address the concern about infertile heterosexual couples being able to reproduce which other members posted to you. Care to answer it now? Some heterosexual couples can't conceive. Are they failures as people?

Also, I'd like to hear your opinion on how homosexuality is against nature yet it has been documented in hundreds of other animal species. Yet, homophobia has been documented in just one animal; the human.

How do you define something as being 'against' nature? As @Danny pointed out, you are talking about this on a computer over the internet. Do you not see the irony in talking about what is against nature when computers themselves are 'unnatural'? By which I mean man made. Humans don't have wings, yet we still fly. Aeroplanes. Unnatural.

 

[Dennisch]

. Being yourself in America shouldn't be considered heroic.

And yet, if they want to be themselves, they need special treatment, according to you. And please answer my previous question.

 

[Scaff]

The Great Comrade Obama protects us all especially from than punk Awalki. America citizens should be killed by drones and not tried in court, thankfully Obama obliges by that.

You were warned in regard to dragging this thread off topic (as were all members) and about repeatedly attempting to link education backgrounds to peoples ability to discuss the topic at hand.

I will add in your attitude and condescending tone to the list and give you a three day holiday from GT Planet to consider your conduct. If it continues in this vein on your return the ban will be made permanent.

 

[VindictiveScrub]

Look here my problem with the LBGT agenda is the advertising of it in the media and people censoring others for critiquing it, the latter being unconstitutional. "Being gay doesn't mean you have latent attraction to children" true but the one's attracted to the same sex certainly are part of the homosexual community, Unless we want to redefine it as consenting adults.

Westboro Baptist Church hasn't been censored for its stance on homosexuality. Fox News hasn't been censored, and from what I've seen of them their opinion isn't too far above WBC. As I stated before, I personally don't understand how homosexuality is being advertised when straight couples are constantly talked about and shown on TV shows and news programs every day. Gay couples exist, and just because the news talks about a gay person or a gay couple doesn't mean they're promoting it or forcing it on everyone. There's no point in ignoring it, everyone has seen or knows someone who is gay, so whoop-de-doo.

And it's not an agenda. I've never met a homosexual, or even seen one in a news story telling people how they should be gay or they are lesser, yet I have seen that from religious groups among many organizations.

Forgot to address the pedophilia comment. Straight pedophiles are a part or the straight community, so I don't see the point in this argument.

 

[Danoff]

@hsv010 can explain the homosexual tendencies of the catholic priest better than I can, that. Remember Stanford sciences isn't on par with GCSE's science @hsv010 . @Azuremen my good friend did once say I'm just a career engineer, which is very true indeed. We engineers as you guys already know by now have limited knowledge about the constitution, science, and homosexual inequalities in America. We're very blind and like to be censored on our views regarding social issues that adhere to the constitution better yet known as the law. I tried sparknotes @Azurmen but I'm a slow learner so I stuck to chegg and finished school. @Azurmen is the grasshopper hence why I'm a cricket, I don't like jumping to different trades it leaves an empty void of accomplishment. Remember guys @Azuremen is the only credible source, a Stanford Degree has no merit guys @Famine. Your resident genetics expert @Famine

1 )http://news.stanford.edu/pr/95/950310Arc5328.html

2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dean_Hamer

Was that supposed to be responsive? I see nothing suggesting that atheists are more likely to be pedophiles. If it's buried in there, go dig it out and quote it here.

 

[FoolKiller]

Nothing existed before God. I got to say, this is getting fun, but off topic. Like I said, I don't care if gay people get civil unions, and it gets all the same legal protections as a marriage, but I have a problem with calling it marriage.

Why, it would just be a legal or linguistic term and would force nothing on religious marriage. Why force the government to bend to your will?

Matthew 22:20-21
20 And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription?

21 They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's.

I know! Let's call it legal marriage and religious marriage. As practice of religion is protected the religious can call whatever they want religious marriage.

The commercial aspect of the LBGT is being broadcast 24/7, it's a propaganda machine.

You completely ignored my previous response to you, I see. God forbid you listen to, or try to refute, the statements of someone with experience in media and PR research.

Not all of us have the complexion for the protection. Racism is a much stronger agenda and should never be mingled with the LBGT bedroom issues.

Really? You and @Agent_47 keep saying that.

Guess what we aren't in a perfect world, and we'll never see it. There's no control on how people react and that's a weak example. My stance on the LBGT community: you got your rights and just shut it! But no they have to keep pushing their agenda in the media. Michael Sam and Jason Collins are examples of what's wrong in society, we accept failure. The men aren't qualified for their respected job yet they're pushed beyond belief. Jason Collins had the 5th highest selling jersey in the NBA last year which is unbelievable being that the scrub only average 1point/1rebound, that's what's wrong in society today. Had it been a straight player, he would've be cut. The gay card saved his sorry career. But the media just wants everyone to hush and not critique. Michael Sam 7th round pick got a thirty minute special on ESPN for being gay, the guy had one of the worst combined records in NFL draft history for a defensive end, yet no one mentions it. Stop running from the truth America, it'll only hurt your longevity.

You completely ignored my previous response to you, I see. God forbid...

No one is challenging the Jason Collins or Michael Sam issue I wonder why? Truth hurts!

Didn't you post a video of someone doing just that on CNN? Quit giving them ratings and they'll quit talking about it. The longer people like you complain the longer they'll cash in on your making it an issue.

Oh, and You completely ignored my previous response to you, I see.

I've yet to see anyone challenge it so far, because it's the truth. The gay card is their protection if a team were to fire those scrubs the backlash from the media would unrelenting.

I believe I gave my opinion of Michael Sam from the view of a Rams fan. He had more tackles in his last year of college than three of four (first and second string) of the Rams' DEs, has a better seasonal average than all four DEs, and is far younger than all of them, as they are all pushing 30, he was a good pick for the Rams. Was he the best DE in the draft? No, but he was picked after some punters.

And again, I had no clue about the cake incident until guys like you went on a whinefest about a gay guy acting like a straight guy.

Oh, and something ignored something, my previous response, something something.

<George Washington portrait>

First, nice portrait. No clue how it's relevant, but he is the only president I have 100% respect for.

Second,

Everyone has the right to exercise their belief in the USA which adheres to the constitution. The pro LBGT actually goes against the constitution, as they limit groups from critiquing them, which is against the 1st amendment. It's censorship look at how Hollywood responds to anyone challenging the LBGT mafia, careers go down the drain.

Disclaimer: This is not meant as a personal attack, but just an explanation of how the 1st Amendment does and doesn't work.

I will add in your attitude and condescending tone to the list and give you a three day holiday from GT Planet to consider your conduct. If it continues in this vein on your return the ban will be made permanent.

See how that works?

 

[LeMansAid]

The funny thing is that most pedophiles are actually atheist?

I'd love to say that after stumbling your way through several pages you finally came up with something genuinely challenging and thought provoking, and that I could respond in kind.

You didn't...... so I didn't.

 

[ledhed]

14TH AMENDMENT
AMENDMENT XIV
SECTION 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

SECTION 2.
Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the executive and judicial officers of a state, or the members of the legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such state, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such state.

SECTION 3.
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

SECTION 4.
The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any state shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

SECTION 5.
The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

WEX RESOURCES
Section 1.

 

[VindictiveScrub]

No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

 

[ledhed]

Threads over now .

 

[Dan]

Well, the last eight pages have been... interesting. Silly me, I forgot how cruel people could be on the internet. Not caring about innocent people being tortured and slaughtered in other countries for loving someone, etc. I sincerely hope that most homophobes don't reproduce, so they can't teach their young, impressionable children to hate people that only wish to live and love in peace.

I apologize for liking so many posts. Sorry for spamming your alerts, guys.