It's Official - Stand and Shout the Gays are Out (link)

[Guest]

not crazy....moronic.
My criticism is that everyone can claim "i just want to be who i really am"...

As long they conform to your narrow-minded, bigoted beliefs that the LDS church has instilled in you about homosexuals...Got it.

I agree that it was moronic to compare homosexuals to charles manson.

I have never said i have a problem with LGBT, except on one issue - marriage.

So you DO have a problem with LGBT - thanks for clearing that up.

Why? because marriage is subsidized by society and thus is no longer a "private" enterprise. I should not be expected to support, via public funds, a situation that i am opposed to. Granted there are many of these "situations" for all of us, and alas, some are satisfied and some are not.

CFR - So you think I should stop paying taxes until religious tax breaks are discontinued? Why should I be "expected to support" a situation that I am opposed to?

However, I have made my argument, not based on theology or morality, but rather from science and virtue.

Where?

I have laid out my claims and received no rebuttal, hardly even a refutation.

Where?

Consider my claim that LGBT is a genetic abnormality and a least favorable condition for evolution and survival of our species.

So survival of our species is one of the reasons you don't want gays getting married? Do you think that gays will somehow cease to exist if they are not given equal treatment under the law. Do you think more people will go gay if homosexual marriage is legal? What a stupid argument.

Consider my claim that LGBT is a psychological development retardation.
Consider my claim that LGBT offers no social virtue as has been reinforced by judicial precedent.

What are you even talking about? Consider my claim that adhering to the LDS religion and supporting bigotry and discrimination are "psychological development retardation"(s).

You mean like the judicial precedent set in cali where judges have refused to allow a bunch of small minded hypocrites impose their "morals" on the rest of us?

All these arguments have been proposed and yet all anyone wants to fixate on is that which they can truly only criticize....my mention of deviant characters and activities. For which i only mention to illustrate the careless logic people put forth as a "reason" why "i just want to be who i really am".

that's because your arguments are idiotic and boil down to the fact that you just don't like gays. For like the 5th time, logic is not one of your strengths. Just admit you don't like gays and that you are comfortable being a bigot. Its simple and you don't need to parrot (and then try to rationalize) nonsensical pseudo-religious-am-radio talking points anymore.

To be honest my alleged 'bigotry' does not bring harm to you at all, i just 'offend' you, but you seem to be hell-bent on not letting me be that way....
... ironically, i have no problem with you being a hypocrite.

When did I say I have a problem with you being a bigot? Not only are you a bigot but your reading comprehension is lacking....and you most likely smell bad...

[_schreech]

yea, me and about 44 other states, the UN, and the Federal Government (ie. doma)



as usual
you = "losing"

No, its you and a minority of americans who continue to favor discrimination:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/147662/First-Time-Majority-Americans-Favor-Legal-Gay-Marriage.aspx

The laws in those states just haven't caught up.

Last time I checked 53>45...

[_Droopy]

It never ceases to amaze that the Left, when confronted by principled opposition to the redefinition of gender, marriage, and family and acceptance of homosexuality as morally and civilizationally indistinguishable from heterosexuality, can resort to nothing more than the biological essentialist argument in which bigotry against a person of a different skin color becomes analogous to principled opposition to the acceptance of a psycho-sexual syndrome affecting a tiny minority of the population and its associated sexual practices, culture and ideology.

Happily, as science provides not a shred of evidence for such a reductionist understanding of the complex and multifaceted origins of homosexuality, people like Bluffalo are left with nothing but the typical self satisfied breast beating in lieu of rational argument.

[_Droopy]

Yes, I get it. You hate gays. If this was 1962 you'd be lynching black people.

This kind of sanctimonious intellectual vacuity is quite enough to indicate that you have nothing to bring to the marketplace of ideas on this issue, Bluff.

Nothing.

[_Droopy]

yea, me and about 44 other states, the UN, and the Federal Government (ie. doma)



as usual
you = "losing"

No, its you and a minority of americans who continue to favor discrimination:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/147662/First-Time-Majority-Americans-Favor-Legal-Gay-Marriage.aspx

The laws in those states just haven't caught up.

Last time I checked 53>45...

1. 53%? Well, I suppose you can take solace that this is better than 51%.

2. Argumentum ad populum, a fallacy of relevance because, well, the number of people who support or don't support something is not an argument for or against it, nor does it contain any evidential reasoning.

[_Buffalo]

It never ceases to amaze that the Left, when confronted by principled opposition to the redefinition of gender, marriage, and family and acceptance of homosexuality as morally and civilizationally indistinguishable from heterosexuality, can resort to nothing more than the biological essentialist argument in which bigotry against a person of a different skin color becomes analogous to principled opposition to the acceptance of a psycho-sexual syndrome affecting a tiny minority of the population and its associated sexual practices, culture and ideology.

Happily, as science provides not a shred of evidence for such a reductionist understanding of the complex and multifaceted origins of homosexuality, people like Bluffalo are left with nothing but the typical self satisfied breast beating in lieu of rational argument.

Bigotry is bigotry, Droops. Just because you guys have a different target now, doesn't mean it's magically not bigotry anymore.

[_Droopy]

Bigotry is bigotry, Droops. Just because you guys have a different target now, doesn't mean it's magically not bigotry anymore.

I think the term "intellectual vacuity" should speak for itself here, or, at least, Bluffalo is a clear representation of its putative definition.

You know, Bluff, you might actually find that you enjoy actually thinking about the beliefs you hold and trying to find rational, logically connected reasons why you believe them and then attempting to persuade others of the strength of your arguments.

I invite you to enter those deeper waters.

[_schreech]

1. 53%? Well, I suppose you can take solace that this is better than 51%.

A MAJORITY is a MAJORITY. Oh, and notice that trend....

2. Argumentum ad populum, a fallacy of relevance because, well, the number of people who support or don't support something is not an argument for or against it, nor does it contain any evidential reasoning.

Uh, doofus, I was responding to SUBgenius's post. Maybe you should give him the same lesson (although I understand that you homophobes need to stick together these days as fewer and fewer people support religious based bigotry)

[Guest]

It never ceases to amaze that the Left, when confronted by principled opposition to the redefinition of gender, marriage, and family and acceptance of homosexuality as morally and civilizationally indistinguishable from heterosexuality, can resort to nothing more than the biological essentialist argument in which bigotry against a person of a different skin color becomes analogous to principled opposition to the acceptance of a psycho-sexual syndrome affecting a tiny minority of the population and its associated sexual practices, culture and ideology.

You really, really need to read your posts either out loud to yourself or to someone else before hitting submit. "Principled opposition" - LOL! My new favorite euphemism for bigotry....

[_Buffalo]

Bigotry is bigotry, Droops. Just because you guys have a different target now, doesn't mean it's magically not bigotry anymore.

I think the term "intellectual vacuity" should speak for itself here, or, at least, Bluffalo is a clear representation of its putative definition.

You know, Bluff, you might actually find that you enjoy actually thinking about the beliefs you hold and trying to find rational, logically connected reasons why you believe them and then attempting to persuade others of the strength of your arguments.

I invite you to enter those deeper waters.

I invite you to, just once, defend your bigotry against gays using reasoning and data based on credible scientific information. I've yet to see you even attempt it.