Banned from MADB

[_JohnStuartMill]

And Droopy, and selek, and Pahoran... I'm starting to see a pattern here.

Maybe these guys defend Mormonism because they're deeply, self-loathingly closeted, and fundamentalism is the only thing restraining them from gobbling all the cock they can find?

I mean, why ELSE would someone give two craps about whether gay people get married?

[_silentkid]

Maybe these guys defend Mormonism because it's the only thing restraining them from gobbling all the cock they can find?

[_Ray A]

And Droopy, and selek, and Pahoran... I'm starting to see a pattern here.

Maybe these guys defend Mormonism because they're deeply, self-loathingly closeted, and fundamentalism is the only thing restraining them from gobbling all the cock they can find?

I mean, why ELSE would someone give two craps about whether gay people get married?

I hesitate to apply that to Miss California.

[_beastie]

Wade and his analogies... even the TBMs know something is up with his homosexual fascination.

It takes a great deal of effort to remain a single Mormon male well into one's fifties.

[_beastie]

Yeah, that was good times. I posted as a TBM for a while, too, believe it or not. I advanced shi**y arguments for the immorality of homosexuality -- really, they were just transparently stupid -- and the more philosophically-literate posters swallowed them whole. I had poor mfbukowski fooled; he really seemed to like "MAhlstrom".

It's remarkably easy to imitate a Mopologist. That doesn't speak well to the merits of their position, does it?

I've also posted as "Bach" and (my favorite) "Satan".

I loved Bach! Didn't your avatar have a little santa hat or something?

It's hilarious you were MAhlstrom. I admit I ignored most of his posts, but now that I know it was you, I'll read some of them.

[_JohnStuartMill]

Yup -- the Santa hat was me.

[_Calculus Crusader]

I mean, why ELSE would someone give two craps about whether gay people get married?

Perhaps because gay "marriage" is an oxymoron.

[_Calculus Crusader]

So, all you guys who are really into federalism are also opposed to the Defense of Marriage Act and marijuana raids by the feds, right? Or do you guys believe that the federal government shouldn't tell the states what to do only when it's doing something you disagree with?

My good dunce,

DOMA makes it so that one state does not have to recognize gay "marriages" from another state and also denies recognition of gay "marriages" at the federal level, which is perfectly consonant with federalism.

[_JohnStuartMill]

I mean, why ELSE would someone give two craps about whether gay people get married?

Perhaps because gay "marriage" is an oxymoron.

This is no longer true.

[_JohnStuartMill]

So, all you guys who are really into federalism are also opposed to the Defense of Marriage Act and marijuana raids by the feds, right? Or do you guys believe that the federal government shouldn't tell the states what to do only when it's doing something you disagree with?

My good dunce,

DOMA makes it so that one state does not have to recognize gay "marriages" from another state and also denies recognition of gay "marriages" at the federal level, which is perfectly consonant with federalism.

You're almost right on this one. It would have been more clear if, instead of DOMA, I referenced the push for a nationwide ban on gay marriages, which is supported by a great deal of you culturally conservative numbskulls.

But I knew my audience when I wrote the paragraph above. I knew I was talking to people who take the "necessary and proper" clause seriously, and who would normally be horrified if the federal government took action that wasn't explicitly blessed by the Constitution.

You can get your panties out of a wad now.