Homosexual Activist: 'SSM Doesn't Destroy Marriage' Is A Lie

[_bcspace]

so spaceboy, how long will we give Gay Marriage so we can see if it reaches 50% divorces like 'true marriage' does in the US?

If I recall correctly, it is already two and a half times the rate of heterosexual marriage in some European countries. Of course the question has absolutely no bearing on the value of heterosexual marriage over homosexual marriage. And, if the homosexual spiritual leadership has it's way as per the OP, there would be no marriage at all, only couplings of varying length to anyone and anything.

[_Droopy]

And notice how the only possible reason one can be opposed to the homosexual agenda is that one must also be homosexual:

Yes, I've been tagged as a closeted, self-hating homosexual for years here. Of course, there is no principled opposition to anything on the Left. Dissent from leftist pieties comes of ignorance (re-education), mental derangement (psychiatric treatment) or wickedness (gulag).

The homosexual marriage movement has the potential to become one of the most relentless and uncompromising threats to individual liberty in the areas of speech, religion, and association in modern history.

Indeed, its already well on its way, and has been for some time.

[_Droopy]

Why is it bcspace that you never voice your opposition to war, conflicts and mass death caused by your government, but you prattle on endlessly about the inconsequential drama of men's sexual preferences?

CFR (yes, its an exercise in masochistic self-flagellation, but standard practice in these cases).

[_Droopy]

so spaceboy, how long will we give Gay Marriage so we can see if it reaches 50% divorces like 'true marriage' does in the US?

It matters little, as only the tiniest fraction of the entire homosexual subculture is ever going to bother with it.

For those who do, I'd anticipate divorce rates of 80% to 90%.

[_canpakes]

The homosexual marriage movement has the potential to become one of the most relentless and uncompromising threats to individual liberty in the areas of speech, religion, and association in modern history.

Indeed, its already well on its way, and has been for some time.

Lol, that's quite a load of weasel words, there.

Let us know when Tǝh Gayz come to drag you from your home to gag you with feather boas, so that we can get some pics.

[_palerobber]

sore loser.

[_mentalgymnast]

...most of the denizens of this board place the homosexual agenda far above anything you seem more concerned about.

That does seem to be a pattern. Also accusing the messenger of being a closet homosexual seems to be the preferential treatment. At least I've noticed that here and there, time after time. Not sure why that is.

Regards,
MG

[_Tchild]

Why is it bcspace that you never voice your opposition to war, conflicts and mass death caused by your government, but you prattle on endlessly about the inconsequential drama of men's sexual preferences?

CFR (yes, its an exercise in masochistic self-flagellation, but standard practice in these cases).

My bad Droopy, you are correct, The U.S. goverment kills brown people for noble and glorious causes. now back to Fox news and more pressing matters for you such as the Kardashians, Honey Boo-boo, men-kissing and Nascar racing. You know, the important stuff.

[_Gadianton]

It's not a stunning admission BC -- I doubt you are stunned and I doubt anyone is stunned.

Let me give the lurkers an example. The EOM claims that the Church believes in separation of Church and state. The Church plays this rhetorical game of supporting the laws of the land and being inclusive at the secular level and all that (and disbelieves in free-market capitalism, which is why it's so desperate for loopholes and government protection for being a religious entity). But it doesn't believe it. It believes that it should control the entire world in a way that would make Kim Jong sweat. But it knows that to get from point A to point B, it has to pretend it believes in this fiction, and it has to use it to the advantage that it can to prevent its competitors from gaining the upper hand.

So at least the gay guy you quoted is honest, vs. the pathological liars that take 10% of your income because you don't have the stones to stand up for yourself.

And besides, it's not clear that Mormons really believe in marriage either given their divorce rates. A contract for time and all eternity and a large percentage can't even make it to 10 years? lol. what a bunch of losers, you Mormons are.

[_Some Schmo]

...most of the denizens of this board place the homosexual agenda far above anything you seem more concerned about.

That does seem to be a pattern. Also accusing the messenger of being a closet homosexual seems to be the preferential treatment. At least I've noticed that here and there, time after time. Not sure why that is.

Regards,
MG

I didn't "accuse" him of being gay. It just seems odd he keeps bringing it up (he's got a comment about it in his signature, ffs). He seems overly fascinated by it, that's all. It's not all that uncommon that those people who tend to speak out against it the most are the ones hiding their own proclivities.

And if he is, who gives a damn anyway? It's not the big deal religitards think it is.