Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: Support for Same-Sex Marriage Hits New High of 58%
21 views
Skip to first unread message
sully
Mar 29, 2013, 8:04:56 PM3/29/13
to
On Mar 29, 4:45 pm, r...@somis.org ( RLMeasures) wrote:
> In article
> <629955eb-6451-4d52-bd43-b3da28367...@kn5g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>, sully
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On Mar 29, 7:38=A0am, r...@somis.org ( RLMeasures) wrote:
> > > In article <1MGdnSzuhNJFYMnMnZ2dnUVZ_qydn...@giganews.com>, John Manning
>
> > > <jrobe...@terra.com.br> wrote:
> > > > On 3/28/2013 11:06 PM, =95RLMeasures wrote:
> > > > > In article <l9i9l89nu8u3f8r7c4ctna8955a5ih7...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch
> > > > > <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>
> > > > >> On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 12:19:34 -0700, r...@somis.org (=95RLMeasures) w=
> > rote in
> > > > >> alt.atheism:
>
> > > > >>> In article <ga17l8hjrsf0bbnn497oiabm8l3r3t4...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch
> > > > >>> <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>
> > > > >>>> On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 07:28:32 -0700, r...@somis.org (?LMeasures) wr=
> > ote in
> > > > >>>> alt.atheism:
>
> > > > >>>>> In article <qp94l8le740ak5ria6ra3si4l7252a5...@4ax.com>, Free Lun=
> > ch
> > > > >>>>> <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
> > > > >> ...
> > > > >>>>>> Will we force all couples over 55 who have never had children to
> > > > >>>>>> divorce?
>
> > > > >>>>> ? Who proposed this?
>
> > > > >>>> IT is the natural and necessary conclusion to the argument that ma=
> > rriage
> > > > >>>> is only for procreation.
>
> > > > >>> *** =A0I did not argue that.
>
> > > > >> Then procreation is off the table as an excuse for discriminating
> > > > >> against same sex couples.
>
> > > > > =95 =A0it was never on my table.
>
> > > > Yet you've brought it up numerous times in one way or another.
>
> > > *** =A0the issue has always been word misappropriation.
>
> > that's a lie. I've disproved this, and you continue to ignore it.
>
> *** you can disprove anything using the Internet.
rejection of evidence.
>
> > This is so like TBMs who are shown that there were no
> > pre-Columbian horses, no steel swords, no hebrew writing,
> > no vast cities of cement, and still say the BOM is true
> > history on the very next post.
>
> *** You don't believe them Nephite fellers had drive through dairies?
>
>
>
> > A difference of opinion is when you have a different
> > view on the same underlying fact. If you have a vastly
> > different fact, one of them is wrong. If knowingly repeated
> > it is now a lie.
>
> *** So my old dictionary lied because the definition of marriage did not
> include gay unions?
No, your old dictionary didn't lie. You are lying now.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/marriage
>
>
> > You are lying.
>
> *** my opinion lied?
if your opinion is that you are against gays being called married,
that's an opinion, not a lie.
If you say it is because it is not a valid use of the word "marriage",
that is a lie.
If you are against the use of the word, that can be your opinion and
not a lie.
If you say gays are 'hijacking' the word, there is nothing to steal,
since this was it's usage back before it was a french word, and long
before it transformed to use in the english language.
So THAT'S a lie.
> In article
> <629955eb-6451-4d52-bd43-b3da28367...@kn5g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>, sully
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > On Mar 29, 7:38=A0am, r...@somis.org ( RLMeasures) wrote:
> > > In article <1MGdnSzuhNJFYMnMnZ2dnUVZ_qydn...@giganews.com>, John Manning
>
> > > <jrobe...@terra.com.br> wrote:
> > > > On 3/28/2013 11:06 PM, =95RLMeasures wrote:
> > > > > In article <l9i9l89nu8u3f8r7c4ctna8955a5ih7...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch
> > > > > <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>
> > > > >> On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 12:19:34 -0700, r...@somis.org (=95RLMeasures) w=
> > rote in
> > > > >> alt.atheism:
>
> > > > >>> In article <ga17l8hjrsf0bbnn497oiabm8l3r3t4...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch
> > > > >>> <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>
> > > > >>>> On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 07:28:32 -0700, r...@somis.org (?LMeasures) wr=
> > ote in
> > > > >>>> alt.atheism:
>
> > > > >>>>> In article <qp94l8le740ak5ria6ra3si4l7252a5...@4ax.com>, Free Lun=
> > ch
> > > > >>>>> <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
> > > > >> ...
> > > > >>>>>> Will we force all couples over 55 who have never had children to
> > > > >>>>>> divorce?
>
> > > > >>>>> ? Who proposed this?
>
> > > > >>>> IT is the natural and necessary conclusion to the argument that ma=
> > rriage
> > > > >>>> is only for procreation.
>
> > > > >>> *** =A0I did not argue that.
>
> > > > >> Then procreation is off the table as an excuse for discriminating
> > > > >> against same sex couples.
>
> > > > > =95 =A0it was never on my table.
>
> > > > Yet you've brought it up numerous times in one way or another.
>
> > > *** =A0the issue has always been word misappropriation.
>
> > that's a lie. I've disproved this, and you continue to ignore it.
>
> *** you can disprove anything using the Internet.
rejection of evidence.
>
> > This is so like TBMs who are shown that there were no
> > pre-Columbian horses, no steel swords, no hebrew writing,
> > no vast cities of cement, and still say the BOM is true
> > history on the very next post.
>
> *** You don't believe them Nephite fellers had drive through dairies?
>
>
>
> > A difference of opinion is when you have a different
> > view on the same underlying fact. If you have a vastly
> > different fact, one of them is wrong. If knowingly repeated
> > it is now a lie.
>
> *** So my old dictionary lied because the definition of marriage did not
> include gay unions?
No, your old dictionary didn't lie. You are lying now.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/marriage
>
>
> > You are lying.
>
> *** my opinion lied?
if your opinion is that you are against gays being called married,
that's an opinion, not a lie.
If you say it is because it is not a valid use of the word "marriage",
that is a lie.
If you are against the use of the word, that can be your opinion and
not a lie.
If you say gays are 'hijacking' the word, there is nothing to steal,
since this was it's usage back before it was a french word, and long
before it transformed to use in the english language.
So THAT'S a lie.
Message has been deleted
sully
Mar 29, 2013, 8:11:25 PM3/29/13
to
> <d827b31d-881e-4327-85a6-2fbb07d52...@oz4g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>, sully
>
> <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > <hlwdjsd2-CF6D25.19485728032...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>, Jeann=
> > e
>
> > > Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > > > In article <r-2803131250060...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org ( RLMeasures)
> > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > In article
> > > > > <hlwdjsd2-FEFF21.22354027032...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>, J=
> > eanne
> > > > > Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > In article <r-2703131602120...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org ( RLMeasur=
> > es)
> > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > In article <1qv5l8lkjmvoh1tkgkrnvnn1go2hteh...@4ax.com>, The Revd
> > > > > > > <peel...@degenerate.Grik> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 07:04:33 -0700, r...@somis.org ( RLMeasures=
> > ) wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > >In article
> > > > > > > > ><hlwdjsd2-D249D8.14353026032...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.=
> > edu>,
> > > > > Jeanne
> > > > > > > > >Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > >> In article <r-2603130739300...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> > > Jeanne
> > > > > > > > >> > Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > In article <r-2403131406270...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> > > > > ( RLMeasures)
> > > > > > > > >> > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > In article <-bSdneDiqtZZy9PMnZ2dnUVZ_i2dn...@giganews.=
>
> > > > > > > > >> > sully
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> On Mar 22, 8:06=3DA0pm, r...@somis.org ( RLMeasur=
> > es)
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>> In article
>
> > > > > > > > ><6f3b5a7c-2070-4110-9aac-4930e4bc3...@m9g2000pby.googlegroups.=
> > easures)
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> In article
> > > > > > > <cg2pk8h5uj5or0vgfjg9ct807sd22ss...@4ax.com>, Free
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> Lunch
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>> On Fri, 22 Mar 2013 09:29:44 -0700, r...@somi=
> > s.org (
> > > > > > > > >> > RLMeasures) wr=3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> ote =3D3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> in
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>> alt.atheism:
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>> In article
> > > > > > > <514c13c8$0$56780$edfad...@dtext02.news.tele.dk>,
> > > > > > > > >> > "thom=3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> as p=3D3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> ."
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>> <gudl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>> "?LMeasures" <r...@somis.org> skrev i medde=
> > lelsen
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>news:r-2103130...@10.0.1.3...
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> In article
> > > > > > > > ><514a2c5e$0$56795$edfad...@dtext02.news.tele.dk>,
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> "=3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> thom=3D3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> as p."
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> <gudl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> "?LMeasures" <r...@somis.org> skrev i
> > > meddelelsen
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>news:r-2003130...@10.0.1.3...
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> In article
>
> > > > > > > > ><98b3b834-37c8-45d0-96a4-ffa0f2757...@h1g2000pbg.googlegrou=3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> ps.c=3D3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> om>,
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> sully
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> snip
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> *** =3D3DA0There should be a word for
> > > heterosexual
> > > > > > > unions
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> and=3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> =A0 anoth=3D3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> er word
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> for
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> homosexual unions.
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Nonsense. =3D3DA0They are both exactly th=
> > e same
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> legally.
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> ? 2 penises is not even close to 1 vagina =
> > and 1
> > > > > penis.
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> snip
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> *** =3D3DA0children figure in heterosexu=
> > al
> > > unions.
> > > > > > > > >=3D3DA0That
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> =3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> makes th=3D3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> em
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> different.
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> So if there are no children and no
> > > possibility of
> > > > > > > children
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> ar=3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> e
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> heterosexuals
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> able to marry?
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> ? enter the strawman.
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>> Where?
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>> ? "So if there are no children and no
> > > possibility of
> > > > > > > children
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>> are
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>> heterosexuals able to marry?"
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>> No, that is an objection to the argument that
> > > > > marriage is
> > > > > > > > >> > (only) fo=3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> r
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>> procreation.
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> =3D3DA0I did not say marriage was for procreat=
> > ion
> > > only.
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> =3D3DA0However,
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> h=3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> etero
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> marriage is a good foundation for procreation.
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> It is so because of the promise and demonstrati=
> > on of
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> commitment.
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> Gays already demonstrate that commitment to eac=
> > h
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> other and have for centuries.
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> It's anti-American to deny them equal rights.
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>> *** =3DA0Does a special interest group have the =
> > right to
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>> hijack
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>> words?
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> I've demonstrated that the usage has been broad s=
> > ince
> > > > > the the
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> time it was first uttered in Latin. =A0 You ignor=
> > e facts
> > > > > > > like a TBM.
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> That you are eager to use the term to describe tw=
> > o
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> cards in a card game and deny it to human couples
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> demonstrates the depth of your pathetic bigotry
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> on this manner.
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> JRM has resorted to simply namecalling you on thi=
> > s
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> topic, I can see his point.
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > =95 =A0Manning can not tolerate those who have dif=
> > fering
> > > > > > > > >opinions that
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > he
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > can
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > not change.
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > Anyone who tolerates your kind of bigotry can only
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > be a bigot him[her]self.
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > **** =A0Prop 8 may eventually be overturned by the Sup=
> > remes but
> > > > > > > it passed
> > > > > > > > >> > > > easily.
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > It would pass even more easily if on the ballot today.
>
> > > > > > > > >> > =A0Why would it pass more easily today if support for same=
> > -sex
> > > > > > > > >> > marriage
> > > > > > > > >> > has incresed?
>
> > > > > > > > >> Oooops. You caught me. Let me rephrase.
>
> > > > > > > > >> It would be roundly defeated in a landslide vote if on the b=
> > allot
> > > > > again.
>
> > > > > > > > > =A0maybe but there are a number of heteros who think the GLBT
> > > > > > > > >community
> > > > > > > > >has gone over the top. =A0If I were the decider I would gladly=
> > choose
> > > > > to let
> > > > > > > > >non-heteros own the word "marriage", and use the term "domesti=
> > c
> > > > > > > > >partnership" for hetero couples. =A0However, in time it seems =
> > likely
> > > > > > > > >that
> > > > > > > > >the beastie boys will start pressuring the GLBT community to a=
> > llow
> > > > > > > > >"marriage" to their favorite female German shepherd or whoever=
> > they
> > > > > > > > >hook
> > > > > > > > >up with and a new battle over equal rights for Everybody will =
> > take
> > > > > place.
> > > > > > > > >.
>
> > > > > > > > Indeed. =A0Once you start redefining marriage, who knows where =
> > it will
> > > > > > > > end?
>
> > > > > > > =A0Another worry is where will it end? =A0If marriage to German s=
> > hepherds
> > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > okayed, what next chihuahuas? =A0rabbits? =A0chickens?
>
> > > > > > When did any of them become able to give legal informed consent?
>
> > > > > =A0there is no law that requires consent for beastial relationships.
>
> > > > Sex when one of the partners does not consent is rape. And rape is
> > > > generally considered a Bad Thing.
>
> > > =A0For one of my exes rape brought happiness - as long as it was done the
> > > way she liked.
>
> > consensual rape. I broke up w/ a gf like that. Too confusing.
>
> ** Did she like to be spanked? The thing that got to me is she liked to
> have her clothes ripped off but she did not know how to operate a sewing
> machine.
no, she wanted to fight back. Then she'd get pissed
off and frustrated when I stopped.
VERY confusing.
>
>
>
> > But you know that is not what Jeanne meant and you are doing
> > a mo-mo linguistic gymnastic.
>
> ** If Jeanne did not say what she meant I have no clue as to what she was
> thinking.
She was talking about consent. It's not clear to you
because you tried to conflate gay marriage with pedophelia
much like Mormons conflate horses and tapirs.
We don't have a better word for the unusual
sexual behavior where someone desires to be
forcibly taken. I think that is because many
men believe that forcing a woman to sex is
generally what she wants anyway, especially
when men are aroused.
But that's the way men in power get to have it.
They get to limit use of the word marriage
and expand the use of the word rape to mean
whatever suits them at the time.
>
> <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > <hlwdjsd2-CF6D25.19485728032...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>, Jeann=
> > e
>
> > > Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > > > In article <r-2803131250060...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org ( RLMeasures)
> > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > In article
> > > > > <hlwdjsd2-FEFF21.22354027032...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>, J=
> > eanne
> > > > > Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > In article <r-2703131602120...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org ( RLMeasur=
> > es)
> > > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > In article <1qv5l8lkjmvoh1tkgkrnvnn1go2hteh...@4ax.com>, The Revd
> > > > > > > <peel...@degenerate.Grik> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 07:04:33 -0700, r...@somis.org ( RLMeasures=
> > ) wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > >In article
> > > > > > > > ><hlwdjsd2-D249D8.14353026032...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.=
> > edu>,
> > > > > Jeanne
> > > > > > > > >Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > >> In article <r-2603130739300...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> > > ( RLMeasures)
> > > > > > > > >> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > >> > In article
>
> > > <hlwdjsd2-9D35EE.16452824032...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,> > > =
> > > > > > > > >> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > >> > In article
>
> > > Jeanne
> > > > > > > > >> > Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > In article <r-2403131406270...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> > > > > ( RLMeasures)
> > > > > > > > >> > > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > In article <-bSdneDiqtZZy9PMnZ2dnUVZ_i2dn...@giganews.=
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > On 3/23/2013 8:50 PM, =95RLMeasures wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > In article
>
> > > <a2419356-915a-4681-ba90-aef8c7c21...@f5g2000yqp.googlegroups.com>,
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > In article
>
>
> > > > > > > > >> > sully
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> On Mar 22, 8:06=3DA0pm, r...@somis.org ( RLMeasur=
> > es)
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>> In article
>
> > > > > > > > ><6f3b5a7c-2070-4110-9aac-4930e4bc3...@m9g2000pby.googlegroups.=
> > com>,
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>> sully
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>> <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> On Mar 22, 10:52=3D3DA0am, r...@somis.org ( RLM=
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>> sully
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>> <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > easures)
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> In article
> > > > > > > <cg2pk8h5uj5or0vgfjg9ct807sd22ss...@4ax.com>, Free
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> Lunch
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>> On Fri, 22 Mar 2013 09:29:44 -0700, r...@somi=
> > s.org (
> > > > > > > > >> > RLMeasures) wr=3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> ote =3D3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> in
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>> alt.atheism:
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>> In article
> > > > > > > <514c13c8$0$56780$edfad...@dtext02.news.tele.dk>,
> > > > > > > > >> > "thom=3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> as p=3D3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> ."
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>> <gudl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>> "?LMeasures" <r...@somis.org> skrev i medde=
> > lelsen
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>news:r-2103130...@10.0.1.3...
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> In article
> > > > > > > > ><514a2c5e$0$56795$edfad...@dtext02.news.tele.dk>,
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> "=3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> thom=3D3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> as p."
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> <gudl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> "?LMeasures" <r...@somis.org> skrev i
> > > meddelelsen
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>news:r-2003130...@10.0.1.3...
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> In article
>
> > > > > > > > ><98b3b834-37c8-45d0-96a4-ffa0f2757...@h1g2000pbg.googlegrou=3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> ps.c=3D3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> om>,
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> sully
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> snip
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> *** =3D3DA0There should be a word for
> > > heterosexual
> > > > > > > unions
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> and=3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> =A0 anoth=3D3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> er word
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> for
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> homosexual unions.
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Nonsense. =3D3DA0They are both exactly th=
> > e same
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> legally.
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> ? 2 penises is not even close to 1 vagina =
> > and 1
> > > > > penis.
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> snip
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> *** =3D3DA0children figure in heterosexu=
> > al
> > > unions.
> > > > > > > > >=3D3DA0That
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> =3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> makes th=3D3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> em
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> different.
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> So if there are no children and no
> > > possibility of
> > > > > > > children
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> ar=3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> e
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> heterosexuals
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> able to marry?
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> ? enter the strawman.
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>> Where?
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>> ? "So if there are no children and no
> > > possibility of
> > > > > > > children
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>> are
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>> heterosexuals able to marry?"
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>> No, that is an objection to the argument that
> > > > > marriage is
> > > > > > > > >> > (only) fo=3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> r
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>> procreation.
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> =3D3DA0I did not say marriage was for procreat=
> > ion
> > > only.
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> =3D3DA0However,
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> h=3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> etero
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> marriage is a good foundation for procreation.
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> It is so because of the promise and demonstrati=
> > on of
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> commitment.
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> Gays already demonstrate that commitment to eac=
> > h
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> other and have for centuries.
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> It's anti-American to deny them equal rights.
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>> *** =3DA0Does a special interest group have the =
> > right to
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>> hijack
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>> words?
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> I've demonstrated that the usage has been broad s=
> > ince
> > > > > the the
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> time it was first uttered in Latin. =A0 You ignor=
> > e facts
> > > > > > > like a TBM.
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> That you are eager to use the term to describe tw=
> > o
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> cards in a card game and deny it to human couples
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> demonstrates the depth of your pathetic bigotry
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> on this manner.
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> JRM has resorted to simply namecalling you on thi=
> > s
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> topic, I can see his point.
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > =95 =A0Manning can not tolerate those who have dif=
> > fering
> > > > > > > > >opinions that
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > he
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > can
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > not change.
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > Anyone who tolerates your kind of bigotry can only
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > be a bigot him[her]self.
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > > **** =A0Prop 8 may eventually be overturned by the Sup=
> > remes but
> > > > > > > it passed
> > > > > > > > >> > > > easily.
>
> > > > > > > > >> > > It would pass even more easily if on the ballot today.
>
> > > > > > > > >> > =A0Why would it pass more easily today if support for same=
> > -sex
> > > > > > > > >> > marriage
> > > > > > > > >> > has incresed?
>
> > > > > > > > >> Oooops. You caught me. Let me rephrase.
>
> > > > > > > > >> It would be roundly defeated in a landslide vote if on the b=
> > allot
> > > > > again.
>
> > > > > > > > > =A0maybe but there are a number of heteros who think the GLBT
> > > > > > > > >community
> > > > > > > > >has gone over the top. =A0If I were the decider I would gladly=
> > choose
> > > > > to let
> > > > > > > > >non-heteros own the word "marriage", and use the term "domesti=
> > c
> > > > > > > > >partnership" for hetero couples. =A0However, in time it seems =
> > likely
> > > > > > > > >that
> > > > > > > > >the beastie boys will start pressuring the GLBT community to a=
> > llow
> > > > > > > > >"marriage" to their favorite female German shepherd or whoever=
> > they
> > > > > > > > >hook
> > > > > > > > >up with and a new battle over equal rights for Everybody will =
> > take
> > > > > place.
> > > > > > > > >.
>
> > > > > > > > Indeed. =A0Once you start redefining marriage, who knows where =
> > it will
> > > > > > > > end?
>
> > > > > > > =A0Another worry is where will it end? =A0If marriage to German s=
> > hepherds
> > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > okayed, what next chihuahuas? =A0rabbits? =A0chickens?
>
> > > > > > When did any of them become able to give legal informed consent?
>
> > > > > =A0there is no law that requires consent for beastial relationships.
>
> > > > Sex when one of the partners does not consent is rape. And rape is
> > > > generally considered a Bad Thing.
>
> > > =A0For one of my exes rape brought happiness - as long as it was done the
> > > way she liked.
>
> > consensual rape. I broke up w/ a gf like that. Too confusing.
>
> ** Did she like to be spanked? The thing that got to me is she liked to
> have her clothes ripped off but she did not know how to operate a sewing
> machine.
no, she wanted to fight back. Then she'd get pissed
off and frustrated when I stopped.
VERY confusing.
>
>
>
> > But you know that is not what Jeanne meant and you are doing
> > a mo-mo linguistic gymnastic.
>
> ** If Jeanne did not say what she meant I have no clue as to what she was
> thinking.
She was talking about consent. It's not clear to you
because you tried to conflate gay marriage with pedophelia
much like Mormons conflate horses and tapirs.
We don't have a better word for the unusual
sexual behavior where someone desires to be
forcibly taken. I think that is because many
men believe that forcing a woman to sex is
generally what she wants anyway, especially
when men are aroused.
But that's the way men in power get to have it.
They get to limit use of the word marriage
and expand the use of the word rape to mean
whatever suits them at the time.
linuxgal
Mar 29, 2013, 9:12:53 PM3/29/13
to
The Revd wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 16:09:18 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Well, for one thing, atheists have larger vocabularies than Jews, so we
>> are able to express ourselves without resorting to language that would
>> offend the Ineffable.
>
> Well, for another thing, I'm not a jew. This is an 'anti-semitic'®™
> newsgroup. And you still have no morality to discuss.
>
I see. Nazis go to Jewish newsgroups, Fundies go to atheist newsgroups.
I suppose the underlying motive of trolls crosses all boundaries.
--
Halftime at Circvs Maximvs, and the Lions lead the Christians 326-0
> On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 16:09:18 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Well, for one thing, atheists have larger vocabularies than Jews, so we
>> are able to express ourselves without resorting to language that would
>> offend the Ineffable.
>
> Well, for another thing, I'm not a jew. This is an 'anti-semitic'®™
> newsgroup. And you still have no morality to discuss.
>
I see. Nazis go to Jewish newsgroups, Fundies go to atheist newsgroups.
I suppose the underlying motive of trolls crosses all boundaries.
--
Halftime at Circvs Maximvs, and the Lions lead the Christians 326-0
Jeanne Douglas
Mar 29, 2013, 8:12:32 PM3/29/13
to
In article <r-2903130...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (?RLMeasures)
wrote:
> In article
> <hlwdjsd2-A80931...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>, Jeanne
> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <r-2803131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (?RLMeasures)
> > wrote:
> >
> > > In article <mag9l81beh6vnm8u1...@4ax.com>, The Revd
> > > <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 21:51:10 GMT, logan....@gmail.com (Logan
> > > > Sacket) wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 15:48:52 -0700 (PDT), sully <suls...@yahoo.com>
> > > > >wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >>On Mar 27, 1:53 pm, logan.sac...@gmail.com (Logan Sacket) wrote:
> > > > >>> On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 15:48:28 -0300, John Manning
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>snip
> > > > >>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Ha, I saw that one coming.
> > > > >>> If you have a response that Manning can't answer, you get plonked.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>Do you have any gay men as friends?
> > > > >
> > > > >Yes
> > > > >
> > > > >>I have some very good friends that are gay. That they
> > > > >>want to have the same committed relationships and
> > > > >>family as I do is certainly not absurd.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>Do you think it absurd that they would want that?
> > > > >
> > > > >No
> > > > >
> > > > >>Not all my gay friends want such things, just
> > > > >>like not all my hetero friends want such things.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>JRM has less patience than I do with confirmed
> > > > >>bigots - maybe because I used to be one.
> > > > >
> > > > >I have no problem if two people want to be in that kind of
> > > > >relationship, but lets not pretend that it is what it isn't.
> > > > >Calling one a bigot because they don't agree with the moral and future
> > > > >implications of making a homosexual relationship equal to a hetro
> > > > >relationship is intolerant and devisive.
> > > >
> > > > There simply is no moral equivalence between hetero and homo
> > > > relationships, no matter how much our cultural and media elites bleat.
> > >
> > > ? Homosexuals see heterosexuals as slightly weird.
> >
> > Evidence?
>
> ? That was my take after arguing with homosexuals who blamed the
> altar-boy scandal on heterosexuals.
How is that seeing heterosexuals as "slightly weird"?
--
JD
"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden
wrote:
> In article
> <hlwdjsd2-A80931...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>, Jeanne
> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <r-2803131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (?RLMeasures)
> > wrote:
> >
> > > In article <mag9l81beh6vnm8u1...@4ax.com>, The Revd
> > > <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 21:51:10 GMT, logan....@gmail.com (Logan
> > > > Sacket) wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 15:48:52 -0700 (PDT), sully <suls...@yahoo.com>
> > > > >wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >>On Mar 27, 1:53 pm, logan.sac...@gmail.com (Logan Sacket) wrote:
> > > > >>> On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 15:48:28 -0300, John Manning
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>snip
> > > > >>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Ha, I saw that one coming.
> > > > >>> If you have a response that Manning can't answer, you get plonked.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>Do you have any gay men as friends?
> > > > >
> > > > >Yes
> > > > >
> > > > >>I have some very good friends that are gay. That they
> > > > >>want to have the same committed relationships and
> > > > >>family as I do is certainly not absurd.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>Do you think it absurd that they would want that?
> > > > >
> > > > >No
> > > > >
> > > > >>Not all my gay friends want such things, just
> > > > >>like not all my hetero friends want such things.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>JRM has less patience than I do with confirmed
> > > > >>bigots - maybe because I used to be one.
> > > > >
> > > > >I have no problem if two people want to be in that kind of
> > > > >relationship, but lets not pretend that it is what it isn't.
> > > > >Calling one a bigot because they don't agree with the moral and future
> > > > >implications of making a homosexual relationship equal to a hetro
> > > > >relationship is intolerant and devisive.
> > > >
> > > > There simply is no moral equivalence between hetero and homo
> > > > relationships, no matter how much our cultural and media elites bleat.
> > >
> > > ? Homosexuals see heterosexuals as slightly weird.
> >
> > Evidence?
>
> ? That was my take after arguing with homosexuals who blamed the
> altar-boy scandal on heterosexuals.
How is that seeing heterosexuals as "slightly weird"?
--
JD
"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden
Message has been deleted
Jeanne Douglas
Mar 29, 2013, 8:14:19 PM3/29/13
to
In article <r-2903130...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures)
wrote:
> In article
> <hlwdjsd2-5E2F84...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>, Jeanne
> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <r-2803131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures)
> > wrote:
> >
> > > In article <v399l89app04j7jmr...@4ax.com>, The Revd
> > > <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 11:50:00 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >In article <5ov6l8dvuc6sv1f0t...@4ax.com>, The Revd
> > > > ><pee...@degenerate.Grik> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 20:03:09 -0300, John Manning
> > > > >> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> >On 3/27/2013 7:55 PM, �RLMeasures wrote:
> > > > >> >> In article <2YWdndXZ1-8LY8_M...@giganews.com>, John
> > > > >> >> Manning
> > > > >> >> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >>> On 3/27/2013 11:04 AM, •RLMeasures wrote:
> > > > >> >>>> In article
> > > > >> >>>>
> <hlwdjsd2-D249D8...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
> > > > >Jeanne
> > > > >> >>>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>
> > > > >> >>>>> In article <r-2603130...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> Jeanne
> > > > >> >>>>>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> In article <r-2403131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> > > (•RLMeasures)
> > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>> In article <-bSdneDiqtZZy9PM...@giganews.com>,
> > > > >John Manning
> > > > >> >>>>>>>> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>> On 3/23/2013 8:50 PM, •RLMeasures wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> In article
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > ><a2419356-915a-4681...@f5g2000yqp.googlegroups.com>,
> > > > >sully
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> <suls...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 22, 8:06=A0pm, r...@somis.org ( RLMeasures)
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> In article
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>
> <6f3b5a7c-2070-4110-9aac-4930e4bc3...@m9g2000pby.googlegroups.com>,
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> sully
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 22, 10:52=3DA0am, r...@somis.org ( RLMeasures)
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article
> > > > >> >>>>>> RLMeasures) wr=
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> ote =3D
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> ."
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <gudl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "?LMeasures" <r...@somis.org> skrev i meddelelsen
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> heterosexual
> > > unions
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and=
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> anoth=3D
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> legally.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ? 2 penises is not even close to 1 vagina and 1
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> penis.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> snip
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *** =3DA0children figure in heterosexual
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unions.
> > > > >> >>>> =3DA0That
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> =
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> makes th=3D
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> procreation.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> =3DA0I did not say marriage was for procreation only.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> =3DA0However,
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> h=
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> commitment.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Gays already demonstrate that commitment to each
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> hijack
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> words?
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> I've demonstrated that the usage has been broad since
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> the
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> the
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> time it was first uttered in Latin. You ignore facts
> > > like a TBM.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> That you are eager to use the term to describe two
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> differing
> > > > >> >>>>>> same-sex
> > > > >> >>>>
> > > > >> >>>> • maybe but there are a number of heteros who think the GLBT
> > > community
> > > > >> >>>> has gone over the top. If I were the decider I would gladly
> choose
> > > > >to let
> > > > >> >>>> non-heteros own the word "marriage", and use the term "domestic
> > > > >> >>>> partnership" for hetero couples. However, in time it seems
> > > > >> >>>> .
> > > > >> >>>>
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>> After getting his ass kicked for being a bigot, Measures
> > > > >> >>> attempts distraction with cringe-worthy humor.
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> *** As I understand it the female German shepherd in South
> > > > >> >> Oxnard
> > > > >> >> was
> > > > >> >> quite happy. I guess it would be safe to say that man and dog
> > > > >> >> lived
> > > > >> >> happily ever after - or at least until death do us part. .
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >You seem to relish this kind of thing.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Are you against it? Are you some kind of fucking bigot?
> > > > >> <snigger>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >*** Beastie boys should have equal rights too.
> > > >
> > > > Of course they should. Everyone should. Even people who want to
> > > > marry those of other races!
> > >
> > > *** how about other species?
> >
> > When those other species can give legal informed consent.
>
> � why wouldn't tail wagging count?
How would that be considered legal informed consent?
wrote:
> In article
> <hlwdjsd2-5E2F84...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>, Jeanne
> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <r-2803131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures)
> > wrote:
> >
> > > In article <v399l89app04j7jmr...@4ax.com>, The Revd
> > > <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 11:50:00 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >In article <5ov6l8dvuc6sv1f0t...@4ax.com>, The Revd
> > > > ><pee...@degenerate.Grik> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 20:03:09 -0300, John Manning
> > > > >> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> >On 3/27/2013 7:55 PM, �RLMeasures wrote:
> > > > >> >> In article <2YWdndXZ1-8LY8_M...@giganews.com>, John
> > > > >> >> Manning
> > > > >> >> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >>> On 3/27/2013 11:04 AM, •RLMeasures wrote:
> > > > >> >>>> In article
> > > > >> >>>>
> <hlwdjsd2-D249D8...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
> > > > >Jeanne
> > > > >> >>>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>
> > > > >> >>>>> In article <r-2603130...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> > > > >> >>>>> (•RLMeasures)
> > > > >> >>>>> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>> In article
> > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > ><hlwdjsd2-9D35EE...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
> > > > >> >>>>> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>> In article
> > > > >> >>>>>>
> Jeanne
> > > > >> >>>>>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> In article <r-2403131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> > > (•RLMeasures)
> > > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>> In article <-bSdneDiqtZZy9PM...@giganews.com>,
> > > > >John Manning
> > > > >> >>>>>>>> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>> On 3/23/2013 8:50 PM, •RLMeasures wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> In article
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > ><a2419356-915a-4681...@f5g2000yqp.googlegroups.com>,
> > > > >sully
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> <suls...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 22, 8:06=A0pm, r...@somis.org ( RLMeasures)
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> In article
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>
> <6f3b5a7c-2070-4110-9aac-4930e4bc3...@m9g2000pby.googlegroups.com>,
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> sully
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 22, 10:52=3DA0am, r...@somis.org ( RLMeasures)
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article
> > > <cg2pk8h5uj5or0vgfjg9ct807sd22ss...@4ax.com>, Free
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lunch
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 22 Mar 2013 09:29:44 -0700, r...@somis.org (
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lunch
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>> RLMeasures) wr=
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> ote =3D
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> in
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> alt.atheism:
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article
> > > <514c13c8$0$56780$edfad...@dtext02.news.tele.dk>,
> > > > >> >>>>>> "thom=
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> as p=3D
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> alt.atheism:
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article
> > > <514c13c8$0$56780$edfad...@dtext02.news.tele.dk>,
> > > > >> >>>>>> "thom=
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> ."
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <gudl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "?LMeasures" <r...@somis.org> skrev i meddelelsen
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:r-2103130...@10.0.1.3...
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article
> > > > >> >>>> <514a2c5e$0$56795$edfad...@dtext02.news.tele.dk>,
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "=
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> thom=3D
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article
> > > > >> >>>> <514a2c5e$0$56795$edfad...@dtext02.news.tele.dk>,
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "=
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> as p."
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <gudl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "?LMeasures" <r...@somis.org> skrev i
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> meddelelsen
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:r-2003130...@10.0.1.3...
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>> <98b3b834-37c8-45d0-96a4-ffa0f2757...@h1g2000pbg.googlegrou=
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> ps.c=3D
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <gudl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "?LMeasures" <r...@somis.org> skrev i
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> meddelelsen
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:r-2003130...@10.0.1.3...
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>> <98b3b834-37c8-45d0-96a4-ffa0f2757...@h1g2000pbg.googlegrou=
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> om>,
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sully
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> snip
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *** =3DA0There should be a word for
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sully
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> snip
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> heterosexual
> > > unions
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and=
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> anoth=3D
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> er word
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> homosexual unions.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nonsense. =3DA0They are both exactly the same
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> homosexual unions.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> legally.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ? 2 penises is not even close to 1 vagina and 1
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> penis.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> snip
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *** =3DA0children figure in heterosexual
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> unions.
> > > > >> >>>> =3DA0That
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> =
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> makes th=3D
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> em
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> different.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So if there are no children and no possibility
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
> > > children
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ar=
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> different.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So if there are no children and no possibility
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
> > > children
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ar=
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> e
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> heterosexuals
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> able to marry?
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ? enter the strawman.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where?
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ? "So if there are no children and no possibility
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
> > > children
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> heterosexuals able to marry?"
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, that is an objection to the argument that
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> marriage
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is
> > > > >> >>>>>> (only) fo=
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> r
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> heterosexuals
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> able to marry?
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ? enter the strawman.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Where?
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ? "So if there are no children and no possibility
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of
> > > children
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> heterosexuals able to marry?"
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, that is an objection to the argument that
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> marriage
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is
> > > > >> >>>>>> (only) fo=
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> procreation.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> =3DA0I did not say marriage was for procreation only.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> =3DA0However,
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> h=
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> etero
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> marriage is a good foundation for procreation.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> It is so because of the promise and demonstration of
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> marriage is a good foundation for procreation.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> commitment.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Gays already demonstrate that commitment to each
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> other and have for centuries.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> It's anti-American to deny them equal rights.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> *** =A0Does a special interest group have the right to
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> It's anti-American to deny them equal rights.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> hijack
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> words?
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> I've demonstrated that the usage has been broad since
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> the
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> the
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> time it was first uttered in Latin. You ignore facts
> > > like a TBM.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> That you are eager to use the term to describe two
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> cards in a card game and deny it to human couples
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> demonstrates the depth of your pathetic bigotry
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> on this manner.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> JRM has resorted to simply namecalling you on this
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> demonstrates the depth of your pathetic bigotry
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> on this manner.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>> topic, I can see his point.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> • Manning can not tolerate those who have
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> differing
> > > > >> >>>> opinions that
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> he
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> can
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> not change.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>> Anyone who tolerates your kind of bigotry can only
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>> be a bigot him[her]self.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>> **** Prop 8 may eventually be overturned by the Supremes
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> he
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> can
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> not change.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>> Anyone who tolerates your kind of bigotry can only
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>> be a bigot him[her]self.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>> but
> > > > >it passed
> > > > >> >>>>>>>> easily.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> It would pass even more easily if on the ballot today.
> > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>> • Why would it pass more easily today if support for
> > > > >it passed
> > > > >> >>>>>>>> easily.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> It would pass even more easily if on the ballot today.
> > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>> same-sex
> > > > >marriage
> > > > >> >>>>>> has incresed?
> > > > >> >>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>> Oooops. You caught me. Let me rephrase.
> > > > >> >>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>> It would be roundly defeated in a landslide vote if on the
> > > ballot again.
> > > > >> >>>>>> has incresed?
> > > > >> >>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>> Oooops. You caught me. Let me rephrase.
> > > > >> >>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>> It would be roundly defeated in a landslide vote if on the
> > > > >> >>>>
> > > > >> >>>> • maybe but there are a number of heteros who think the GLBT
> > > community
> > > > >> >>>> has gone over the top. If I were the decider I would gladly
> choose
> > > > >to let
> > > > >> >>>> non-heteros own the word "marriage", and use the term "domestic
> > > > >> >>>> partnership" for hetero couples. However, in time it seems
> > > likely that
> > > > >> >>>> the beastie boys will start pressuring the GLBT community to
> > > > >> >>>> allow
> > > > >> >>>> the beastie boys will start pressuring the GLBT community to
> > > > >> >>>> "marriage" to their favorite female German shepherd or whoever
> > > they hook
> > > > >> >>>> up with and a new battle over equal rights for Everybody will
> > > take place.
> > > > >> >>>> up with and a new battle over equal rights for Everybody will
> > > > >> >>>> .
> > > > >> >>>>
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>> After getting his ass kicked for being a bigot, Measures
> > > > >> >>> attempts distraction with cringe-worthy humor.
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> *** As I understand it the female German shepherd in South
> > > > >> >> Oxnard
> > > > >> >> was
> > > > >> >> quite happy. I guess it would be safe to say that man and dog
> > > > >> >> lived
> > > > >> >> happily ever after - or at least until death do us part. .
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >You seem to relish this kind of thing.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Are you against it? Are you some kind of fucking bigot?
> > > > >> <snigger>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >*** Beastie boys should have equal rights too.
> > > >
> > > > Of course they should. Everyone should. Even people who want to
> > > > marry those of other races!
> > >
> > > *** how about other species?
> >
> > When those other species can give legal informed consent.
>
> � why wouldn't tail wagging count?
How would that be considered legal informed consent?
Message has been deleted
Jeanne Douglas
Mar 29, 2013, 8:17:33 PM3/29/13
to
> <hlwdjsd2-41AADE...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>, Jeanne
> > > <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 16:10:14 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote in
> > > > alt.atheism:
> > > >
> > > > >In article <qNadnXqZVu9dn87M...@giganews.com>, John
> > > > >> >>>>> Jeanne
> > > > >> >>>>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>> In article <r-2303131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> > > > >> >>>>>>> ,
> > > > >> >>>>>>> sully
> > > > >> >>>>>>> <suls...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>> On Mar 22, 8:11=A0pm, r...@somis.org (=95RLMeasures) wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>> In article
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>
> <b0f735a3-32ee-4146-a505-21696be9a...@kw7g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>
> > > > >> >>>>> ,
> > > > >> >>>>> sull=
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> snip
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Lie. =A0You claim that gays cannot be married because
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> they cannot have children.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>> *** =A0Not true. =A0I said that hetero couples are
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>> different
> > > > >> >>>>> because they
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>> produce children.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>> Many do not or unable.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> If you are backing off that
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> particular argument, say so rather than pretend you
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> didn't.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>> *** =A0then quote me.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>> Right above, this is how irrational you are.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>> My uncle and aunt couldn't have children. They
> > > > >> >>>>>>>> adopted.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>> They get to be "married" in spite of your myopic
> > > > >> >>>>>>>> bigotry.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> *** I have never said that marriage should be denied to
> > > > >> >>>>>>> gays
> > > > >> >>>>>>> who
> > > > >> >>>>>>> want
> > > > >> >>>>>>> such, I'm saying that in my opinion "domestic partners" is a
> > > > >> >>>>>>> more
> > > > >> >>> fitting
> > > > >> >>>>>>> name for this type of couple.
> > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>> Yes, we are all perfectly aware of your bigoted opinion.
> > > > >> >>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>> • "domestic partner" is bigoted?
> > > > >> >>>>
> > > > >> >>>> Separate but equal is classical bigotry.
> > > > >> >>>>
> > > > >> >>> • Are not the rights equal?
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> Of course not.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > • then name an unequal one.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> The right to be legally married.
> > > > >
> > > > >*** That's your opinion. My opinion is different. You are quite
> unlikely
> > > > >to be able to change other's opinions John.
> > > >
> > > > If same sex marriage is not allowed in a particular place, that is a
> > > > fact, not an opinion.
> > >
> > > ** What if the alternative to marriage was domestic partnership?
> >
> > Separate but equal is unconstitutional.
>
> • for education, not copulation.
I don't recall that distinction being made.
> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <r-2803131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures)
> > wrote:
> >
> > > In article <v447l819h4q6vucmq...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch
>
> > In article <r-2803131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures)
> > wrote:
> >
> > > <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 16:10:14 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote in
> > > > alt.atheism:
> > > >
> > > > >In article <qNadnXqZVu9dn87M...@giganews.com>, John
> > > > >Manning
> > > > ><jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> On 3/27/2013 11:19 AM, •RLMeasures wrote:
> > > > >> > In article
> > > > >> > <hlwdjsd2-C233BD...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
> > > > ><jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> On 3/27/2013 11:19 AM, •RLMeasures wrote:
> > > > >> > In article
> > > Jeanne
> > > > >> > Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >> In article <r-2603130...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> (•RLMeasures)
> > > > >> >> wrote:
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >>> In article
> > > > >> >>>
> > > <hlwdjsd2-1AA395...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
> > > > >> > Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >> In article <r-2603130...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> (•RLMeasures)
> > > > >> >> wrote:
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >>> In article
> > > > >> >>>
> > > Jeanne
> > > > >> >>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>>> In article <r-2403131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> > > > >> >>>> (•RLMeasures)
> > > > >> >>>> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>
> > > > >> >>>>> In article
> > > > >> >>>>>
> <hlwdjsd2-15ADDE...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
> > > > >> >>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>>> In article <r-2403131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> > > > >> >>>> (•RLMeasures)
> > > > >> >>>> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>
> > > > >> >>>>> In article
> > > > >> >>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>> Jeanne
> > > > >> >>>>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>> In article <r-2303131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> > > (•RLMeasures)
> > > > >> >>>>>> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> In article
> > > > >> >>>>>>>
> <4a39d9ac-6ae7-4817...@9g2000yqy.googlegroups.com>
> > > > >> >>>>>> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> In article
> > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> ,
> > > > >> >>>>>>> sully
> > > > >> >>>>>>> <suls...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>> On Mar 22, 8:11=A0pm, r...@somis.org (=95RLMeasures) wrote:
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>> In article
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>
> <b0f735a3-32ee-4146-a505-21696be9a...@kw7g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>
> > > > >> >>>>> ,
> > > > >> >>>>> sull=
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> Lie. =A0You claim that gays cannot be married because
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> they cannot have children.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>> *** =A0Not true. =A0I said that hetero couples are
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>> different
> > > > >> >>>>> because they
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>> produce children.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>> Many do not or unable.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> If you are backing off that
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> particular argument, say so rather than pretend you
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>> didn't.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>> *** =A0then quote me.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>> Right above, this is how irrational you are.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>> My uncle and aunt couldn't have children. They
> > > > >> >>>>>>>> adopted.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>>> They get to be "married" in spite of your myopic
> > > > >> >>>>>>>> bigotry.
> > > > >> >>>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>>> *** I have never said that marriage should be denied to
> > > > >> >>>>>>> gays
> > > > >> >>>>>>> who
> > > > >> >>>>>>> want
> > > > >> >>>>>>> such, I'm saying that in my opinion "domestic partners" is a
> > > > >> >>>>>>> more
> > > > >> >>> fitting
> > > > >> >>>>>>> name for this type of couple.
> > > > >> >>>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>>> Yes, we are all perfectly aware of your bigoted opinion.
> > > > >> >>>>>
> > > > >> >>>>> • "domestic partner" is bigoted?
> > > > >> >>>>
> > > > >> >>>> Separate but equal is classical bigotry.
> > > > >> >>>>
> > > > >> >>> • Are not the rights equal?
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> Of course not.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > • then name an unequal one.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> The right to be legally married.
> > > > >
> > > > >*** That's your opinion. My opinion is different. You are quite
> unlikely
> > > > >to be able to change other's opinions John.
> > > >
> > > > If same sex marriage is not allowed in a particular place, that is a
> > > > fact, not an opinion.
> > >
> > > ** What if the alternative to marriage was domestic partnership?
> >
> > Separate but equal is unconstitutional.
>
> • for education, not copulation.
I don't recall that distinction being made.
Jeanne Douglas
Mar 29, 2013, 8:20:27 PM3/29/13
to
In article <r-2903130...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (?RLMeasures)
wrote:
> In article
> <hlwdjsd2-383C33...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>, Jeanne
> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <r-2803131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (?RLMeasures)
> > wrote:
> >
> > > In article
> > > <hlwdjsd2-29F99D...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
> > > Jeanne
> > > Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > In article <r-2703131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (?RLMeasures)
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > In article <qNadnXiZVu8xnM7M...@giganews.com>, John
> > > > > Manning
> > > > > <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On 3/27/2013 11:17 AM, The Revd wrote:
> > > > > > > On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 07:04:33 -0700, r...@somis.org (?RLMeasures)
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> In article
> > > > > > >>
> <hlwdjsd2-D249D8...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
> > > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>>> In article
> > > > > > >>>>
> <hlwdjsd2-9D35EE...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
> > > > > > >>>>> wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> In article
> <-bSdneDiqtZZy9PM...@giganews.com>, John
> > > > > Manning
> > > > > > >>>>>> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>>> On 3/23/2013 8:50 PM, a??RLMeasures wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>>>>> In article
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>
> <a2419356-915a-4681...@f5g2000yqp.googlegroups.com>,
> > > > > > >> >,
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> sully
> > > > > > > will
> > > > > > > end?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That's what they said about freeing the slaves, giving women the
> > > > > > right to vote,
> > > > >
> > > > > ? An extremely egregious mistake.
> > > >
> > > > Which one? Or both?
> > >
> > > ? women voting of course.
> >
> >
> > Okay. Explain to me why that was "an extremely egregious mistake"?
>
> ? Example: If women had not been allowed to vote in the last election,
> Willard Romney might have won.
And we'd be in depression.
How does that make women voting an egregious mistake?
wrote:
> In article
> <hlwdjsd2-383C33...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>, Jeanne
> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <r-2803131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (?RLMeasures)
> > wrote:
> >
> > > In article
> > > <hlwdjsd2-29F99D...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
> > > Jeanne
> > > Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > In article <r-2703131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (?RLMeasures)
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > In article <qNadnXiZVu8xnM7M...@giganews.com>, John
> > > > > Manning
> > > > > <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On 3/27/2013 11:17 AM, The Revd wrote:
> > > > > > > On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 07:04:33 -0700, r...@somis.org (?RLMeasures)
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> In article
> > > > > > >>
> <hlwdjsd2-D249D8...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
> > > > > > >> Jeanne
> > > > > > >> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>> In article <r-2603130...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> (?RLMeasures)
> > > > > > >> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>> In article <r-2603130...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> > > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>>> In article
> > > > > > >>>>
> <hlwdjsd2-9D35EE...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
> > > > > Jeanne
> > > > > > >>>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>>> In article <r-2403131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> > > > > > >>>>> (?RLMeasures)
> > > > > > >>>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>>> In article <r-2403131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> > > > > > >>>>> wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> In article
> <-bSdneDiqtZZy9PM...@giganews.com>, John
> > > > > Manning
> > > > > > >>>>>> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>>> On 3/23/2013 8:50 PM, a??RLMeasures wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>>>>> In article
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>
> <a2419356-915a-4681...@f5g2000yqp.googlegroups.com>,
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>> sully
> > > > > > >>>>>>>> <suls...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> On Mar 22, 8:06=A0pm, r...@somis.org ( RLMeasures) wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> In article
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >> <6f3b5a7c-2070-4110-9aac-4930e4bc3...@m9g2000pby.googlegroups.com
> > > > > > >>>> sully
> > > > > > >>>>>>>> <suls...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> On Mar 22, 8:06=A0pm, r...@somis.org ( RLMeasures) wrote:
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> In article
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >> >,
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> sully
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> marriage is a good foundation for procreation.
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> It is so because of the promise and demonstration of
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> commitment.
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Gays already demonstrate that commitment to each
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> other and have for centuries.
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> It's anti-American to deny them equal rights.
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> *** =A0Does a special interest group have the right to
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> hijack
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> words?
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> I've demonstrated that the usage has been broad since
> the the
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> time it was first uttered in Latin. You ignore facts
> like a
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> TBM.
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> That you are eager to use the term to describe two
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> cards in a card game and deny it to human couples
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> demonstrates the depth of your pathetic bigotry
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> on this manner.
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> JRM has resorted to simply namecalling you on this
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> topic, I can see his point.
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>>>> a?? Manning can not tolerate those who have differing
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> It is so because of the promise and demonstration of
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> commitment.
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Gays already demonstrate that commitment to each
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> other and have for centuries.
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> It's anti-American to deny them equal rights.
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> *** =A0Does a special interest group have the right to
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> hijack
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> words?
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> I've demonstrated that the usage has been broad since
> the the
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> time it was first uttered in Latin. You ignore facts
> like a
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> TBM.
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> That you are eager to use the term to describe two
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> cards in a card game and deny it to human couples
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> demonstrates the depth of your pathetic bigotry
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> on this manner.
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> JRM has resorted to simply namecalling you on this
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>> topic, I can see his point.
> > > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > > >> opinions that
> > > > > > >>>>>>>> he
> > > > > > >>>>>>>> can
> > > > > > >>>>>>>> not change.
> > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>>> Anyone who tolerates your kind of bigotry can only
> > > > > > >>>>>>> be a bigot him[her]self.
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> **** Prop 8 may eventually be overturned by the Supremes
> but it
> > > > > > >>>>>> passed
> > > > > > >>>>>> easily.
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>> It would pass even more easily if on the ballot today.
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>> ? Why would it pass more easily today if support for same-sex
> > > > > > >>>>>>>> he
> > > > > > >>>>>>>> can
> > > > > > >>>>>>>> not change.
> > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>>> Anyone who tolerates your kind of bigotry can only
> > > > > > >>>>>>> be a bigot him[her]self.
> > > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>>> **** Prop 8 may eventually be overturned by the Supremes
> but it
> > > > > > >>>>>> passed
> > > > > > >>>>>> easily.
> > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > >>>>> It would pass even more easily if on the ballot today.
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>> marriage
> > > > > > >>>> has incresed?
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> Oooops. You caught me. Let me rephrase.
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> It would be roundly defeated in a landslide vote if on the
> > > > > > >>> ballot
> > > > > > >>> again.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> ? maybe but there are a number of heteros who think the GLBT
> > > > > > >>>> has incresed?
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> Oooops. You caught me. Let me rephrase.
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> It would be roundly defeated in a landslide vote if on the
> > > > > > >>> ballot
> > > > > > >>> again.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> community
> > > > > > >> has gone over the top. If I were the decider I would gladly
> choose
> > > > > > >> to
> > > > > > >> let
> > > > > > >> non-heteros own the word "marriage", and use the term "domestic
> > > > > > >> partnership" for hetero couples. However, in time it seems
> > > > > > >> likely
> > > > > > >> that
> > > > > > >> the beastie boys will start pressuring the GLBT community to
> > > > > > >> allow
> > > > > > >> "marriage" to their favorite female German shepherd or whoever
> > > they hook
> > > > > > >> up with and a new battle over equal rights for Everybody will
> > > > > > >> take
> > > > > > >> place.
> > > > > > >> .
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Indeed. Once you start redefining marriage, who knows where it
> > > > > > >> has gone over the top. If I were the decider I would gladly
> choose
> > > > > > >> to
> > > > > > >> let
> > > > > > >> non-heteros own the word "marriage", and use the term "domestic
> > > > > > >> partnership" for hetero couples. However, in time it seems
> > > > > > >> likely
> > > > > > >> that
> > > > > > >> the beastie boys will start pressuring the GLBT community to
> > > > > > >> allow
> > > > > > >> "marriage" to their favorite female German shepherd or whoever
> > > they hook
> > > > > > >> up with and a new battle over equal rights for Everybody will
> > > > > > >> take
> > > > > > >> place.
> > > > > > >> .
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > will
> > > > > > > end?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That's what they said about freeing the slaves, giving women the
> > > > > > right to vote,
> > > > >
> > > > > ? An extremely egregious mistake.
> > > >
> > > > Which one? Or both?
> > >
> > > ? women voting of course.
> >
> >
> > Okay. Explain to me why that was "an extremely egregious mistake"?
>
> ? Example: If women had not been allowed to vote in the last election,
> Willard Romney might have won.
And we'd be in depression.
How does that make women voting an egregious mistake?
Jeanne Douglas
Mar 29, 2013, 8:21:11 PM3/29/13
to
In article <r-2903130...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures)
wrote:
> In article
> <hlwdjsd2-CF6D25...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>, Jeanne
> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <r-2803131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures)
> > wrote:
> >
> > > In article
> > > <hlwdjsd2-FEFF21...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
> > > Jeanne
> > > Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > In article <r-2703131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures)
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > In article <1qv5l8lkjmvoh1tkg...@4ax.com>, The Revd
> > > > > <pee...@degenerate.Grik> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 07:04:33 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures)
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >In article
> > > > > > >> > > > > > • Manning can not tolerate those who have differing
> > > > > shepherds
> > > > > is
> > > > > okayed, what next chihuahuas? rabbits? chickens?
> way she liked.
Then it was hardly rape, now was it?
wrote:
> In article
> <hlwdjsd2-CF6D25...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>, Jeanne
> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <r-2803131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures)
> > wrote:
> >
> > > In article
> > > <hlwdjsd2-FEFF21...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
> > > Jeanne
> > > Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > In article <r-2703131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures)
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > In article <1qv5l8lkjmvoh1tkg...@4ax.com>, The Revd
> > > > > <pee...@degenerate.Grik> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 07:04:33 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures)
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >In article
> > > > > > ><hlwdjsd2-D249D8...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
> > > Jeanne
> > > > > > >Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> In article <r-2603130...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> > > Jeanne
> > > > > > >Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> In article <r-2603130...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> (•RLMeasures)
> > > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> > In article
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> > In article
> > > > > > >> >
> <hlwdjsd2-9D35EE...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
> > > > > Jeanne
> > > > > > >> > Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > > In article <r-2403131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> > > > > Jeanne
> > > > > > >> > Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > > In article <r-2403131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> > > (•RLMeasures)
> > > > > > >> > > wrote:
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > > In article
> > > > > > >> > > wrote:
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > > In article
> > > > > > >opinions that
> > > > > > >> > > > > > he
> > > > > > >> > > > > > can
> > > > > > >> > > > > > not change.
> > > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > Anyone who tolerates your kind of bigotry can only
> > > > > > >> > > > > be a bigot him[her]self.
> > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > **** Prop 8 may eventually be overturned by the Supremes
> > > > > > >> > > > but
> > > > > it passed
> > > > > > >> > > > easily.
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > It would pass even more easily if on the ballot today.
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > • Why would it pass more easily today if support for same-sex
> > > > > > >> > > > > > he
> > > > > > >> > > > > > can
> > > > > > >> > > > > > not change.
> > > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > > Anyone who tolerates your kind of bigotry can only
> > > > > > >> > > > > be a bigot him[her]self.
> > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > >> > > > **** Prop 8 may eventually be overturned by the Supremes
> > > > > > >> > > > but
> > > > > it passed
> > > > > > >> > > > easily.
> > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > >> > > It would pass even more easily if on the ballot today.
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > marriage
> > > > > > >> > has incresed?
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Oooops. You caught me. Let me rephrase.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> It would be roundly defeated in a landslide vote if on the
> > > > > > >> ballot
> > > again.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >• maybe but there are a number of heteros who think the GLBT
> > > > > > >> > has incresed?
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Oooops. You caught me. Let me rephrase.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> It would be roundly defeated in a landslide vote if on the
> > > > > > >> ballot
> > > again.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >community
> > > > > > >has gone over the top. If I were the decider I would gladly
> > > > > > >choose
> > > to let
> > > > > > >non-heteros own the word "marriage", and use the term "domestic
> > > > > > >partnership" for hetero couples. However, in time it seems likely
> > > > > > >that
> > > > > > >the beastie boys will start pressuring the GLBT community to allow
> > > > > > >"marriage" to their favorite female German shepherd or whoever
> > > > > > >they
> > > > > > >hook
> > > > > > >up with and a new battle over equal rights for Everybody will take
> > > place.
> > > > > > >.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Indeed. Once you start redefining marriage, who knows where it
> > > > > > will
> > > > > > end?
> > > > >
> > > > > • Another worry is where will it end? If marriage to German
> > > > > > >has gone over the top. If I were the decider I would gladly
> > > > > > >choose
> > > to let
> > > > > > >non-heteros own the word "marriage", and use the term "domestic
> > > > > > >partnership" for hetero couples. However, in time it seems likely
> > > > > > >that
> > > > > > >the beastie boys will start pressuring the GLBT community to allow
> > > > > > >"marriage" to their favorite female German shepherd or whoever
> > > > > > >they
> > > > > > >hook
> > > > > > >up with and a new battle over equal rights for Everybody will take
> > > place.
> > > > > > >.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Indeed. Once you start redefining marriage, who knows where it
> > > > > > will
> > > > > > end?
> > > > >
> > > > > shepherds
> > > > > is
> > > > > okayed, what next chihuahuas? rabbits? chickens?
> > > >
> > > > When did any of them become able to give legal informed consent?
> > >
> > > • there is no law that requires consent for beastial relationships.
> > > > When did any of them become able to give legal informed consent?
> > >
> >
> >
> > Sex when one of the partners does not consent is rape. And rape is
> > generally considered a Bad Thing.
>
> • For one of my exes rape brought happiness - as long as it was done the
> >
> > Sex when one of the partners does not consent is rape. And rape is
> > generally considered a Bad Thing.
>
> way she liked.
Then it was hardly rape, now was it?
Jeanne Douglas
Mar 29, 2013, 8:24:27 PM3/29/13
to
> <hlwdjsd2-CF0773...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>, Jeanne
> > > Jeanne
> > > Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > In article <r-2703130...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures)
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > In article
> > > > > <hlwdjsd2-EA3651...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
> > > > > > > > > Manning
> > > > > > > > > <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >>> sully
> > > > > > > > > > >> posts
> > > > > > > > > > >> expressing his bigotry, finally turns the page!
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > *** I'm still opposed to word hijacking by a small
> > > > > > > > > > > special
> > > > > interest
> > > > > > > > > > > group
> > > > > > > > > > > that is okay with using violence to advance their agenda.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Call for citation that there's any organized violence by
> > > > > > > > > > gays
> > > > > > > > > > to advance their equal rights.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > *** Act Up is one such group.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > What organized violence did they commit?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > � They unabashedly threw condoms inside St. Patrick's Cathedral
> > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > NYC
> > > > > > > when the Archbishop was speaking. This could easily have caused
> > > > > > > heart
> > > > > > > attacks and deaths among TBRCs.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > How is that violence?
> > > > >
> > > > > � Tossing condoms in the direction of a Cardinal inside a Catholic
> > > > > church
> > > > > is clearly an act of war as well as a cardinal sin. It's obvious
> > > > > that
> > > > > you
> > > > > are not a devout Catholic Jeanne.
> > > >
> > > > Thank goodness for that!!!
> > >
> > > � amen
> > > >
> > > > And I still ask where the violence was.
> > >
> > > � in tossing condoms at a Cardinal. The only thing worse would be
> > > tossin' them at a pope.
> >
> > How is tossing a tiny rubber thing an act of violence?
>
> � You are not a Cardinal JD so you have a different perspective. BTW
> the most reliable condoms are no longer made of rubber, it's now a tough
> plastic film.
But throwing one still isn't an act of violence.
> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <r-2803131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures)
> > wrote:
> >
> > > In article
> > > <hlwdjsd2-A84028...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
>
> > In article <r-2803131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures)
> > wrote:
> >
> > > In article
> > > Jeanne
> > > Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > In article <r-2703130...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures)
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > In article
> > > > > <hlwdjsd2-EA3651...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
> > > > > Jeanne
> > > > > Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > In article <r-2603130...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures)
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > In article
> > > > > > > <hlwdjsd2-55EBA1...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>
> > > > > Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > In article <r-2603130...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures)
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > In article
> > > > > > > ,
> > > > > > > Jeanne
> > > > > > > Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > In article <r-2503131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> > > > > > > Jeanne
> > > > > > > Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> (�RLMeasures)
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > In article
> <StCdnbiGvaBs8tLM...@giganews.com>, John
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > In article
> > > > > > > > > Manning
> > > > > > > > > <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On 3/24/2013 6:25 PM, •RLMeasures wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > In article
> > > <FtqdnR0iocvjwNPM...@giganews.com>, John
> > > > > > > > > > On 3/24/2013 6:25 PM, •RLMeasures wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > In article
> > > > > > > > > > > Manning
> > > > > > > > > > > <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >> On 3/23/2013 8:56 PM, •RLMeasures wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >>> In article
> > > > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > <4a39d9ac-6ae7-4817...@9g2000yqy.googlegroups.com>,
> > > > > > > > > > > <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >> On 3/23/2013 8:56 PM, •RLMeasures wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >>> In article
> > > > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > > > >>> sully
> > > > > > > > > > >>> <suls...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > > > >>>> On Mar 22, 8:11=A0pm, r...@somis.org (=95RLMeasures)
> > > > > > > > > > >>>> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>> In article
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > >
> > > <b0f735a3-32ee-4146-a505-21696be9a...@kw7g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,
> > > > > > > > > sull=
> > > > > > > > > > >>>> y
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > > > >>>> On Mar 22, 8:11=A0pm, r...@somis.org (=95RLMeasures)
> > > > > > > > > > >>>> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>> In article
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > >
> > > <b0f735a3-32ee-4146-a505-21696be9a...@kw7g2000pbb.googlegroups.com>,
> > > > > > > > > sull=
> > > > > > > > > > >>>> y
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> snip
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> Lie. =A0You claim that gays cannot be married
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> because
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> they cannot have children.
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>> *** =A0Not true. =A0I said that hetero couples are
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>> different
> > > > > > > > > because they
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>> produce children.
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > > > >>>> Many do not or unable.
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> If you are backing off that
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> particular argument, say so rather than pretend you
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> didn't.
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>> *** =A0then quote me.
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > > > >>>> Right above, this is how irrational you are.
> > > > > > > > > > >>>> My uncle and aunt couldn't have children. They
> > > > > > > > > > >>>> adopted.
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > > > >>>> They get to be "married" in spite of your myopic
> > > > > > > > > > >>>> bigotry.
> > > > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > > > >>> *** I have never said that marriage should be denied
> > > > > > > > > > >>> to
> > > > > > > > > > >>> gays
> > > > > > > > > > >>> who
> > > > > > > > > > >>> want
> > > > > > > > > > >>> such,
> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > >> Hell freezes over! Mr Measures, after likely hundreds of
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> Lie. =A0You claim that gays cannot be married
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> because
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> they cannot have children.
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>> *** =A0Not true. =A0I said that hetero couples are
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>> different
> > > > > > > > > because they
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>> produce children.
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > > > >>>> Many do not or unable.
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> If you are backing off that
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> particular argument, say so rather than pretend you
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>> didn't.
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>> *** =A0then quote me.
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > > > >>>> Right above, this is how irrational you are.
> > > > > > > > > > >>>> My uncle and aunt couldn't have children. They
> > > > > > > > > > >>>> adopted.
> > > > > > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > > > >>>> They get to be "married" in spite of your myopic
> > > > > > > > > > >>>> bigotry.
> > > > > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > > > > >>> *** I have never said that marriage should be denied
> > > > > > > > > > >>> to
> > > > > > > > > > >>> gays
> > > > > > > > > > >>> who
> > > > > > > > > > >>> want
> > > > > > > > > > >>> such,
> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > >> posts
> > > > > > > > > > >> expressing his bigotry, finally turns the page!
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > *** I'm still opposed to word hijacking by a small
> > > > > > > > > > > special
> > > > > interest
> > > > > > > > > > > group
> > > > > > > > > > > that is okay with using violence to advance their agenda.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Call for citation that there's any organized violence by
> > > > > > > > > > gays
> > > > > > > > > > to advance their equal rights.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > *** Act Up is one such group.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > What organized violence did they commit?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > � They unabashedly threw condoms inside St. Patrick's Cathedral
> > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > NYC
> > > > > > > when the Archbishop was speaking. This could easily have caused
> > > > > > > heart
> > > > > > > attacks and deaths among TBRCs.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > How is that violence?
> > > > >
> > > > > � Tossing condoms in the direction of a Cardinal inside a Catholic
> > > > > church
> > > > > is clearly an act of war as well as a cardinal sin. It's obvious
> > > > > that
> > > > > you
> > > > > are not a devout Catholic Jeanne.
> > > >
> > > > Thank goodness for that!!!
> > >
> > > � amen
> > > >
> > > > And I still ask where the violence was.
> > >
> > > � in tossing condoms at a Cardinal. The only thing worse would be
> > > tossin' them at a pope.
> >
> > How is tossing a tiny rubber thing an act of violence?
>
> � You are not a Cardinal JD so you have a different perspective. BTW
> the most reliable condoms are no longer made of rubber, it's now a tough
> plastic film.
But throwing one still isn't an act of violence.
Jeanne Douglas
Mar 29, 2013, 8:26:44 PM3/29/13
to
In article <r-2903130...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (?RLMeasures)
wrote:
> In article
> <hlwdjsd2-998C46...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>, Jeanne
> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <r-2803131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (?RLMeasures)
> > wrote:
> >
> > > In article
> > > <hlwdjsd2-D3823D...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
> > > Jeanne
> > > > > > >>> a?? They unabashedly threw condoms inside St. Patrick's
> > > > > > is resorting to childishness, misdirection and distraction.
> > > > >
> > > > > ? Act Up did toss condoms inside St Patricks.
> > > >
> > > > And we're all still waiting for you to explain how that's an act of
> > > > violence.
> > >
> > > ? I did.
> >
> > You didn't. You did not.
>
> ? To a Cardinal, tossing 100s of condoms around inside God's Holy Church
> is an act of over the top violence.
You still haven't explained HOW it is an act of violence.
wrote:
> In article
> <hlwdjsd2-998C46...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>, Jeanne
> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <r-2803131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (?RLMeasures)
> > wrote:
> >
> > > In article
> > > <hlwdjsd2-D3823D...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
> > > Jeanne
> > > Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > In article <r-2703131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (?RLMeasures)
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > In article <2PSdnVFxQtiCYM_M...@giganews.com>, John
> > >
> > > > In article <r-2703131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (?RLMeasures)
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Manning
> > > > > <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On 3/27/2013 10:28 AM, a??RLMeasures wrote:
> > > > > > > In article
> > > > > > > <hlwdjsd2-EA3651...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>
> > > > > > > ,
> > > > > > > Jeanne
> > > > > > > Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> In article <r-2603130...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> > > > > > >> (a??RLMeasures)
> > > > > <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On 3/27/2013 10:28 AM, a??RLMeasures wrote:
> > > > > > > In article
> > > > > > > <hlwdjsd2-EA3651...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>
> > > > > > > ,
> > > > > > > Jeanne
> > > > > > > Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> In article <r-2603130...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> > > > > > >> wrote:
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>> In article
> > > > > > >>>
> <hlwdjsd2-55EBA1...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
> > > > > > >>> Jeanne
> > > > > > >>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>>> In article <r-2503131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> > > > > > >>>> (a??RLMeasures)
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>> In article
> > > > > > >>>
> <hlwdjsd2-55EBA1...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
> > > > > > >>> Jeanne
> > > > > > >>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>>> In article <r-2503131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> Cathedral
> > > > > > >>> in
> > > > > > >>> NYC
> > > > > > >>> when the Archbishop was speaking. This could easily have
> > > > > > >>> caused
> > > > > > >>> heart
> > > > > > >>> attacks and deaths among TBRCs.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> How is that violence?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > a?? Tossing condoms in the direction of a Cardinal inside a
> > > > > > >>> in
> > > > > > >>> NYC
> > > > > > >>> when the Archbishop was speaking. This could easily have
> > > > > > >>> caused
> > > > > > >>> heart
> > > > > > >>> attacks and deaths among TBRCs.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> How is that violence?
> > > > > > >
> Catholic
> > > > > > > church
> > > > > > > is clearly an act of war as well as a cardinal sin. It's obvious
> > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > you
> > > > > > > are not a devout Catholic Jeanne.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Since he's badly lost all his bigoted arguments, Mr Measures
> > > > > > > church
> > > > > > > is clearly an act of war as well as a cardinal sin. It's obvious
> > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > you
> > > > > > > are not a devout Catholic Jeanne.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > is resorting to childishness, misdirection and distraction.
> > > > >
> > > > > ? Act Up did toss condoms inside St Patricks.
> > > >
> > > > And we're all still waiting for you to explain how that's an act of
> > > > violence.
> > >
> > > ? I did.
> >
> > You didn't. You did not.
>
> ? To a Cardinal, tossing 100s of condoms around inside God's Holy Church
> is an act of over the top violence.
You still haven't explained HOW it is an act of violence.
Jeanne Douglas
Mar 29, 2013, 8:32:50 PM3/29/13
to
In article <r-2903130...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures)
wrote:
> In article <MKOdnZ0Y24HgZsnM...@giganews.com>, John Manning
> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
> > > <suls...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >
> >
> >
> > There's a big difference between a mere opinion and
> > open unabashed bigotry.
>
> *** Are heterosexual unions exactly equal to homosexual unions?
Of course they are.
wrote:
> In article <MKOdnZ0Y24HgZsnM...@giganews.com>, John Manning
> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>
> > On 3/28/2013 10:35 PM, •RLMeasures wrote:
> > > In article
> > > <ad1869e1-1ab3-4b0d...@z6g2000pbd.googlegroups.com>, sully
> > On 3/28/2013 10:35 PM, •RLMeasures wrote:
> > > In article
> > > <suls...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> On Mar 27, 1:53=A0pm, logan.sac...@gmail.com (Logan Sacket) wrote:
> > >>> On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 15:48:28 -0300, John Manning
> > >>>
> > >> snip
> > >>
> > >>>
> > >>> Ha, I saw that one coming.
> > >>> If you have a response that Manning can't answer, you get plonked.
> > >>
> > >> Do you have any gay men as friends?
> > >>
> > >> On Mar 27, 1:53=A0pm, logan.sac...@gmail.com (Logan Sacket) wrote:
> > >>> On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 15:48:28 -0300, John Manning
> > >>>
> > >> snip
> > >>
> > >>>
> > >>> Ha, I saw that one coming.
> > >>> If you have a response that Manning can't answer, you get plonked.
> > >>
> > >> Do you have any gay men as friends?
> > >>
> > >> I have some very good friends that are gay. That they
> > >> want to have the same committed relationships and
> > >> family as I do is certainly not absurd.
> > >>
> > >> Do you think it absurd that they would want that?
> > >>
> > >> want to have the same committed relationships and
> > >> family as I do is certainly not absurd.
> > >>
> > >> Do you think it absurd that they would want that?
> > >>
> > >> Not all my gay friends want such things, just
> > >> like not all my hetero friends want such things.
> > >>
> > >> JRM has less patience than I do with confirmed
> > >> bigots - maybe because I used to be one.
> > >
> > > • JRM does not tolerate other opinions.
> > >> like not all my hetero friends want such things.
> > >>
> > >> JRM has less patience than I do with confirmed
> > >> bigots - maybe because I used to be one.
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > There's a big difference between a mere opinion and
> > open unabashed bigotry.
>
> *** Are heterosexual unions exactly equal to homosexual unions?
Of course they are.
Jeanne Douglas
Mar 29, 2013, 8:33:41 PM3/29/13
to
In article <svnbl8pcufl77acbu...@4ax.com>,
The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 12:31:21 -0300, John Manning
> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
> >They are legally in 15 countries, including in nine states in the USA.
> >
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage#Legal_recognition
>
> Legal equivalence is not the same as moral equivalence. In fact,
> there is no moral equivalence in any of the 15 countries or 9 states.
Since morality is a religious concept, it is completely irrelevant to
marriage in secular society.
The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 12:31:21 -0300, John Manning
> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
> >
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage#Legal_recognition
>
> Legal equivalence is not the same as moral equivalence. In fact,
> there is no moral equivalence in any of the 15 countries or 9 states.
Since morality is a religious concept, it is completely irrelevant to
marriage in secular society.
Jeanne Douglas
Mar 29, 2013, 8:35:17 PM3/29/13
to
> In article <qf-dnW-fHLzQZMnM...@giganews.com>, linuxgal
> <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
> > �RLMeasures wrote:
> > >
> > > � didn't slaves get 3/5 of a vote?
> > >
> >
> > Slaves vote, that's rich. They were counted as 60% of a man for
> > purposes of apportioning representatives in Congress.
>
> � So slaves never voted?
How could they have?
Property doesn't vote.
> <linu...@cleanposts.com> wrote:
>
> > �RLMeasures wrote:
> > >
> > > � didn't slaves get 3/5 of a vote?
> > >
> >
> > Slaves vote, that's rich. They were counted as 60% of a man for
> > purposes of apportioning representatives in Congress.
>
> � So slaves never voted?
How could they have?
Property doesn't vote.
Jeanne Douglas
Mar 29, 2013, 8:36:45 PM3/29/13
to
In article <8t0bl8posmsjdvmhf...@4ax.com>,
The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 19:56:22 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
> <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <r3n9l8hme4n5poij4...@4ax.com>,
> > The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 17:51:20 -0500, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 12:19:34 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote in
> >> >alt.atheism:
> >> >
> >> >>In article <ga17l8hjrsf0bbnn4...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch
> >> >><lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 07:28:32 -0700, r...@somis.org (?LMeasures) wrote in
> >> >>> alt.atheism:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> >In article <qp94l8le740ak5ria...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch
> >> >>> marriage
> >> >>> is only for procreation.
> >> >>
> >> >>*** I did not argue that.
> >> can't.
> >
> >Elderly opposite sex couples cannot procreate so they can't be allowed
> >to marry, either.
>
> It's not *just* about procreation. They can always adopt if they
> choose to. And the child will then have proper parents, not a couple
> of sexual degenerates.
What sexual degenerates?
The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 19:56:22 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
> <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <r3n9l8hme4n5poij4...@4ax.com>,
> > The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 17:51:20 -0500, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 12:19:34 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote in
> >> >alt.atheism:
> >> >
> >> >>In article <ga17l8hjrsf0bbnn4...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch
> >> >><lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 07:28:32 -0700, r...@somis.org (?LMeasures) wrote in
> >> >>> alt.atheism:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> >In article <qp94l8le740ak5ria...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch
> >> >>> ><lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
> >> >...
> >> >>> >> Will we force all couples over 55 who have never had children to
> >> >>> >> divorce?
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >? Who proposed this?
> >> >>>
> >> >>> IT is the natural and necessary conclusion to the argument that
> >> >...
> >> >>> >> Will we force all couples over 55 who have never had children to
> >> >>> >> divorce?
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >? Who proposed this?
> >> >>>
> >> >>> marriage
> >> >>> is only for procreation.
> >> >>
> >> >>*** I did not argue that.
> >> >
> >> >Then procreation is off the table as an excuse for discriminating
> >> >against same sex couples.
> >>
> >> No, it's not. Opposite sex couples may procreate, same sex couples
> >> >Then procreation is off the table as an excuse for discriminating
> >> >against same sex couples.
> >>
> >> can't.
> >
> >Elderly opposite sex couples cannot procreate so they can't be allowed
> >to marry, either.
>
> It's not *just* about procreation. They can always adopt if they
> choose to. And the child will then have proper parents, not a couple
> of sexual degenerates.
What sexual degenerates?
Jeanne Douglas
Mar 29, 2013, 8:37:04 PM3/29/13
to
In article <0o0bl89ajmmu6dpl9...@4ax.com>,
The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 19:55:14 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
> <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <r-2803131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures)
> >wrote:
> >
> >> In article <v447l819h4q6vucmq...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch
> >> <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 16:10:14 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote in
> >> > alt.atheism:
> >> >
> >> > >In article <qNadnXqZVu9dn87M...@giganews.com>, John
> >> Jeanne
> >> > >> > Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >> In article <r-2603130...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> >> > >> >>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>>> In article <r-2403131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> >> > >> >>>>> u>,
> >> > >> >>>>> Jeanne
> >> > >> >>>>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> >> > >> >>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>> In article <r-2303131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> >> > >> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> In article
> >> > >> > <cg2pk8h5uj5or0vgfjg9ct807sd22ss...@4ax.com>, Free
> >> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Lunch
> >> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> No, that is an objection to the argument that marriage
> >> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> is
Because it's NEVER equal.
The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 19:55:14 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
> <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <r-2803131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures)
> >wrote:
> >
> >> In article <v447l819h4q6vucmq...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch
> >> <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 16:10:14 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote in
> >> > alt.atheism:
> >> >
> >> > >In article <qNadnXqZVu9dn87M...@giganews.com>, John
> >> > >Manning
> >> > ><jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > >> On 3/27/2013 11:19 AM, •RLMeasures wrote:
> >> > >> > In article
> >> > >> > <hlwdjsd2-C233BD...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
> >> > ><jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > >> On 3/27/2013 11:19 AM, •RLMeasures wrote:
> >> > >> > In article
> >> Jeanne
> >> > >> > Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> >> In article <r-2603130...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> >> > >> >> (•RLMeasures)
> >> > >> >> wrote:
> >> > >> >>
> >> > >> >>> In article
> >> > >> >>>
> >> <hlwdjsd2-1AA395...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>, Jeanne
> >> > >> >> wrote:
> >> > >> >>
> >> > >> >>> In article
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> >> > >> >>>
> >> > >> >>>> In article <r-2403131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> >> > >> >>>> (•RLMeasures)
> >> > >> >>>> wrote:
> >> > >> >>>>
> >> > >> >>>>> In article
> >> > >> >>>>> <hlwdjsd2-15ADDE...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.ed
> >> > >> >>>> wrote:
> >> > >> >>>>
> >> > >> >>>>> In article
> >> > >> >>>>> u>,
> >> > >> >>>>> Jeanne
> >> > >> >>>>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> >> > >> >>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>> In article <r-2303131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> >> (•RLMeasures)
> >> > >> >>>>>> wrote:
> >> > >> >>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>>> In article
> >> > >> >>>>>>> <4a39d9ac-6ae7-4817...@9g2000yqy.googlegroups.c
> >> > >> >>>>>> wrote:
> >> > >> >>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>>> In article
> >> > >> >>>>>>> om>
> >> > >> >>>>>>> ,
> >> > >> >>>>>>> sully
> >> > >> >>>>>>> <suls...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> > >> >>>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>>> ,
> >> > >> >>>>>>> sully
> >> > >> >>>>>>> <suls...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> > >> >>>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>>>> On Mar 22, 8:11=A0pm, r...@somis.org (=95RLMeasures) wrote:
> >> > >> >>>>>>>>> In article
> >> > >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>> <b0f735a3-32ee-4146-a505-21696be9a...@kw7g2000pbb.googlegroups.c
> >> > >> >>>>> om>
> >> > >> >>>>> ,
> >> > >> >>>>> sull=
> >> > >> >>>>>>>> y
> >> > >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>>>>> <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> > >> >>>>>>>>>> On Mar 22, 10:52=3DA0am, r...@somis.org ( RLMeasures)
> >> > >> >>>>>>>>> In article
> >> > >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>> <b0f735a3-32ee-4146-a505-21696be9a...@kw7g2000pbb.googlegroups.c
> >> > >> >>>>> om>
> >> > >> >>>>> ,
> >> > >> >>>>> sull=
> >> > >> >>>>>>>> y
> >> > >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>>>>> <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> > >> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> In article
> >> > >> > <cg2pk8h5uj5or0vgfjg9ct807sd22ss...@4ax.com>, Free
> >> > >> >>>>>>>>>>> Lunch
> >> > >> >>>>>>>>>>>> is
> >> > >> >>>>>>> such, I'm saying that in my opinion "domestic partners" is a
> >> > >> >>>>>>> more
> >> > >> >>> fitting
> >> > >> >>>>>>> name for this type of couple.
> >> > >> >>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>> Yes, we are all perfectly aware of your bigoted opinion.
> >> > >> >>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>> • "domestic partner" is bigoted?
> >> > >> >>>>
> >> > >> >>>> Separate but equal is classical bigotry.
> >> > >> >>>>
> >> > >> >>> • Are not the rights equal?
> >> > >> >>
> >> > >> >> Of course not.
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > • then name an unequal one.
> >> > >> >
> >> > >>
> >> > >>
> >> > >> The right to be legally married.
> >> > >
> >> > >*** That's your opinion. My opinion is different. You are quite
> >> > >unlikely
> >> > >to be able to change other's opinions John.
> >> >
> >> > If same sex marriage is not allowed in a particular place, that is a
> >> > fact, not an opinion.
> >>
> >> ** What if the alternative to marriage was domestic partnership?
> >
> >Separate but equal is unconstitutional.
>
> Why, if it's equal?
> >> > >> >>>>>>> more
> >> > >> >>> fitting
> >> > >> >>>>>>> name for this type of couple.
> >> > >> >>>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>>> Yes, we are all perfectly aware of your bigoted opinion.
> >> > >> >>>>>
> >> > >> >>>>> • "domestic partner" is bigoted?
> >> > >> >>>>
> >> > >> >>>> Separate but equal is classical bigotry.
> >> > >> >>>>
> >> > >> >>> • Are not the rights equal?
> >> > >> >>
> >> > >> >> Of course not.
> >> > >> >
> >> > >> > • then name an unequal one.
> >> > >> >
> >> > >>
> >> > >>
> >> > >> The right to be legally married.
> >> > >
> >> > >*** That's your opinion. My opinion is different. You are quite
> >> > >unlikely
> >> > >to be able to change other's opinions John.
> >> >
> >> > If same sex marriage is not allowed in a particular place, that is a
> >> > fact, not an opinion.
> >>
> >> ** What if the alternative to marriage was domestic partnership?
> >
> >Separate but equal is unconstitutional.
>
Because it's NEVER equal.
Jeanne Douglas
Mar 29, 2013, 8:37:27 PM3/29/13
to
In article <ei0bl8d0g283lmf00...@4ax.com>,
The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 19:25:35 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
> <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <mag9l81beh6vnm8u1...@4ax.com>,
> >> >wrote:
>
> Everything. Apparently moral disapproval of homosexuality was the
> primary rationale for DOMA.
Which is why it will be declared unconstitutional.
The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 19:25:35 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
> <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <mag9l81beh6vnm8u1...@4ax.com>,
> > The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 21:51:10 GMT, logan....@gmail.com (Logan
> >> Sacket) wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 15:48:52 -0700 (PDT), sully <suls...@yahoo.com>
> >
> >> On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 21:51:10 GMT, logan....@gmail.com (Logan
> >> Sacket) wrote:
> >>
> >> >wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>On Mar 27, 1:53�pm, logan.sac...@gmail.com (Logan Sacket) wrote:
> >> >>> On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 15:48:28 -0300, John Manning
> >> >>>
> >> >>snip
> >> >>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Ha, I saw that one coming.
> >> >>> If you have a response that Manning can't answer, you get plonked.
> >> >>
> >> >>Do you have any gay men as friends?
> >> >
> >> >Yes
> >> >>On Mar 27, 1:53�pm, logan.sac...@gmail.com (Logan Sacket) wrote:
> >> >>> On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 15:48:28 -0300, John Manning
> >> >>>
> >> >>snip
> >> >>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Ha, I saw that one coming.
> >> >>> If you have a response that Manning can't answer, you get plonked.
> >> >>
> >> >>Do you have any gay men as friends?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >>I have some very good friends that are gay. That they
> >> >>want to have the same committed relationships and
> >> >>family as I do is certainly not absurd.
> >> >>
> >> >>Do you think it absurd that they would want that?
> >> >
> >> >No
> >> >
> >> >>Not all my gay friends want such things, just
> >> >>like not all my hetero friends want such things.
> >> >>
> >> >>JRM has less patience than I do with confirmed
> >> >>bigots - maybe because I used to be one.
> >> >
> >> >>I have some very good friends that are gay. That they
> >> >>want to have the same committed relationships and
> >> >>family as I do is certainly not absurd.
> >> >>
> >> >>Do you think it absurd that they would want that?
> >> >
> >> >No
> >> >
> >> >>Not all my gay friends want such things, just
> >> >>like not all my hetero friends want such things.
> >> >>
> >> >>JRM has less patience than I do with confirmed
> >> >>bigots - maybe because I used to be one.
> >> >
> >> >I have no problem if two people want to be in that kind of
> >> >relationship, but lets not pretend that it is what it isn't.
> >> >Calling one a bigot because they don't agree with the moral and future
> >> >implications of making a homosexual relationship equal to a hetro
> >> >relationship is intolerant and devisive.
> >>
> >> There simply is no moral equivalence between hetero and homo
> >> relationships, no matter how much our cultural and media elites bleat.
> >
> >What does morality have to do with it?
> >> >relationship, but lets not pretend that it is what it isn't.
> >> >Calling one a bigot because they don't agree with the moral and future
> >> >implications of making a homosexual relationship equal to a hetro
> >> >relationship is intolerant and devisive.
> >>
> >> There simply is no moral equivalence between hetero and homo
> >> relationships, no matter how much our cultural and media elites bleat.
> >
>
> Everything. Apparently moral disapproval of homosexuality was the
> primary rationale for DOMA.
Which is why it will be declared unconstitutional.
Jeanne Douglas
Mar 29, 2013, 8:39:44 PM3/29/13
to
In article <ce0bl8lfl9beci7lk...@4ax.com>,
The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
> >� Homosexuals see heterosexuals as slightly weird.
>
> Hence the rampant heterophobia�� in a homopolis�� such as San
> Francisco.
You mean the city where only 15.4% of the population is gay?
The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
>
> Hence the rampant heterophobia�� in a homopolis�� such as San
> Francisco.
You mean the city where only 15.4% of the population is gay?
Jeanne Douglas
Mar 29, 2013, 8:41:15 PM3/29/13
to
In article <2rnbl8t04kilk072t...@4ax.com>,
The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
> >� it's a wild and crazy world.
>
> The other homopolis��, New York City, is almost as bad.
You mean the city with only 6% gay population.
The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
>
> The other homopolis��, New York City, is almost as bad.
You mean the city with only 6% gay population.
Jeanne Douglas
Mar 29, 2013, 8:41:31 PM3/29/13
to
In article <3d0bl81646hagbhlb...@4ax.com>,
The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 19:47:13 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
> <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <jdg9l817nb2q95mqs...@4ax.com>,
> > The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
> >> On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 15:03:54 -0700 (PDT), sully <suls...@yahoo.com>
> >> wrote:
> >
> >
> >> >If you have no problem with the relationship, then
> >> >I assume you have no problem with the morality
> >> >of their relationship.
> >>
> >> There *isn't* any.
> >
> >Why do you say that?
>
> Homosexual relationships are *defined* by their absence of morality.
Defined by whom?
The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 19:47:13 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
> <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <jdg9l817nb2q95mqs...@4ax.com>,
> > The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
> >> On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 15:03:54 -0700 (PDT), sully <suls...@yahoo.com>
> >> wrote:
> >
> >
> >> >If you have no problem with the relationship, then
> >> >I assume you have no problem with the morality
> >> >of their relationship.
> >>
> >> There *isn't* any.
> >
> >Why do you say that?
>
> Homosexual relationships are *defined* by their absence of morality.
Defined by whom?
Jeanne Douglas
Mar 29, 2013, 8:48:36 PM3/29/13
to
In article <r-2903130...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (?RLMeasures)
wrote:
> In article <e50bl8ddj6ppej1f6...@4ax.com>, The Revd
> <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 18:45:21 -0700, r...@somis.org (?RLMeasures) wrote:
> >
> > >In article <9699l8hbh8i4n0j3s...@4ax.com>, The Revd
> > ><pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
> > >
> > >> On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 12:44:45 -0700, r...@somis.org (?RLMeasures) wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >In article
> > >> ><hlwdjsd2-2F818B...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
> > >> >Jeanne
> > >> >Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >> In article <r-2703130...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (?RLMeasures)
> > >> >> wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > In article
> > >> >> > <hlwdjsd2-D249D8...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
> > >Jeanne
> > >> >> > Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > > In article <r-2603130...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> > >> >> > > (?RLMeasures)
> > >> >> > > wrote:
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > > In article
> > >> >> > > >
> <hlwdjsd2-9D35EE...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
> > >> >> > > > Jeanne
> > >> >> > > > Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >> > > >
> > >> >> > > > > In article <r-2403131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> > >(?RLMeasures)
> > >> >> > > > > wrote:
> > >> >> > > > >
> > >> >> > > > > > In article
> <-bSdneDiqtZZy9PM...@giganews.com>, John
> > >> >> > > > > > Manning
> > >> >> > > > > > <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
> > >> >> > > > > > > > <suls...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >> >> > > > > > > >
> > >> >> > > > > > > >> On Mar 22, 8:06=A0pm, r...@somis.org ( RLMeasures)
> > >> >> > > > > > > >> wrote:
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>> In article
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> >> > <6f3b5a7c-2070-4110-9aac-4930e4bc3...@m9g2000pby.googlegroups.com>,
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>> sully
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>> <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>> On Mar 22, 10:52=3DA0am, r...@somis.org (
> > >RLMeasures) wrote:
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>>> In article
> > >> >> consent?
> > >> >
> > >> >? Doggie consent can be determined by a canine psychologist.
> > >>
> > >> In fact, consent can be assumed from the absence of a refusal of
> > >> consent.
> > >
> > >? In the case in South Oxnard, the Oxnard police determined that the dog
> > >enjoyed time spent with her owner and that if the neighbors did not like
> > >what they saw, they should stop standing on boxes to see over the fence.
> >
> > Exactly so. Self-inflicted.
>
> ? Good Christians need to keep close tabs on anything they consider immoral.
They can keep close tabs on anything they want. They just can't make
other people live by their rules.
wrote:
> In article <e50bl8ddj6ppej1f6...@4ax.com>, The Revd
> <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 18:45:21 -0700, r...@somis.org (?RLMeasures) wrote:
> >
> > >In article <9699l8hbh8i4n0j3s...@4ax.com>, The Revd
> > ><pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
> > >
> > >> On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 12:44:45 -0700, r...@somis.org (?RLMeasures) wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >In article
> > >> ><hlwdjsd2-2F818B...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
> > >> >Jeanne
> > >> >Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> >> In article <r-2703130...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (?RLMeasures)
> > >> >> wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >> > In article
> > >> >> > <hlwdjsd2-D249D8...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
> > >Jeanne
> > >> >> > Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > > In article <r-2603130...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> > >> >> > > (?RLMeasures)
> > >> >> > > wrote:
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > > In article
> > >> >> > > >
> <hlwdjsd2-9D35EE...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
> > >> >> > > > Jeanne
> > >> >> > > > Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >> > > >
> > >> >> > > > > In article <r-2403131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> > >(?RLMeasures)
> > >> >> > > > > wrote:
> > >> >> > > > >
> > >> >> > > > > > In article
> <-bSdneDiqtZZy9PM...@giganews.com>, John
> > >> >> > > > > > Manning
> > >> >> > > > > > <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
> > >> >> > > > > >
> > >> >> > > > > > > On 3/23/2013 8:50 PM, a??RLMeasures wrote:
> > >> >> > > > > > > > In article
> > >> >> > > > > > > >
> > >> >> > > >
> > >> ><a2419356-915a-4681...@f5g2000yqp.googlegroups.com>,
> > >> >sully
> > >> >> > > > > > > On 3/23/2013 8:50 PM, a??RLMeasures wrote:
> > >> >> > > > > > > > In article
> > >> >> > > > > > > >
> > >> >> > > >
> > >> ><a2419356-915a-4681...@f5g2000yqp.googlegroups.com>,
> > >> >> > > > > > > > <suls...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >> >> > > > > > > >
> > >> >> > > > > > > >> On Mar 22, 8:06=A0pm, r...@somis.org ( RLMeasures)
> > >> >> > > > > > > >> wrote:
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>> In article
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> >> > <6f3b5a7c-2070-4110-9aac-4930e4bc3...@m9g2000pby.googlegroups.com>,
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>> sully
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>> <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>> On Mar 22, 10:52=3DA0am, r...@somis.org (
> > >RLMeasures) wrote:
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>>> In article
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>>> marriage is a good foundation for procreation.
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>> It is so because of the promise and demonstration of
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>> commitment.
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>> Gays already demonstrate that commitment to each
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>> other and have for centuries.
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>> It's anti-American to deny them equal rights.
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>> *** =A0Does a special interest group have the right
> > >to hijack
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>> words?
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>
> > >> >> > > > > > > >> I've demonstrated that the usage has been broad since
> > >the the
> > >> >> > > > > > > >> time it was first uttered in Latin. You ignore facts
> > >like a
> > >> >> > > > > > > >> TBM.
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>
> > >> >> > > > > > > >> That you are eager to use the term to describe two
> > >> >> > > > > > > >> cards in a card game and deny it to human couples
> > >> >> > > > > > > >> demonstrates the depth of your pathetic bigotry
> > >> >> > > > > > > >> on this manner.
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>
> > >> >> > > > > > > >> JRM has resorted to simply namecalling you on this
> > >> >> > > > > > > >> topic, I can see his point.
> > >> >> > > > > > > >
> > >> >> > > > > > > > a?? Manning can not tolerate those who have differing
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>> It is so because of the promise and demonstration of
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>> commitment.
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>> Gays already demonstrate that commitment to each
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>> other and have for centuries.
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>> It's anti-American to deny them equal rights.
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>>
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>> *** =A0Does a special interest group have the right
> > >to hijack
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>> words?
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>
> > >> >> > > > > > > >> I've demonstrated that the usage has been broad since
> > >the the
> > >> >> > > > > > > >> time it was first uttered in Latin. You ignore facts
> > >like a
> > >> >> > > > > > > >> TBM.
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>
> > >> >> > > > > > > >> That you are eager to use the term to describe two
> > >> >> > > > > > > >> cards in a card game and deny it to human couples
> > >> >> > > > > > > >> demonstrates the depth of your pathetic bigotry
> > >> >> > > > > > > >> on this manner.
> > >> >> > > > > > > >>
> > >> >> > > > > > > >> JRM has resorted to simply namecalling you on this
> > >> >> > > > > > > >> topic, I can see his point.
> > >> >> > > > > > > >
> > >> >> > opinions that
> > >> >> > > > > > > > he
> > >> >> > > > > > > > can
> > >> >> > > > > > > > not change.
> > >> >> > > > > > >
> > >> >> > > > > > >
> > >> >> > > > > > > Anyone who tolerates your kind of bigotry can only
> > >> >> > > > > > > be a bigot him[her]self.
> > >> >> > > > > >
> > >> >> > > > > > **** Prop 8 may eventually be overturned by the
> Supremes but it
> > >> >> > > > > > passed
> > >> >> > > > > > easily.
> > >> >> > > > >
> > >> >> > > > > It would pass even more easily if on the ballot today.
> > >> >> > > >
> > >> >> > > > ? Why would it pass more easily today if support for same-sex
> > >> >> > > > > > > > he
> > >> >> > > > > > > > can
> > >> >> > > > > > > > not change.
> > >> >> > > > > > >
> > >> >> > > > > > >
> > >> >> > > > > > > Anyone who tolerates your kind of bigotry can only
> > >> >> > > > > > > be a bigot him[her]self.
> > >> >> > > > > >
> > >> >> > > > > > **** Prop 8 may eventually be overturned by the
> Supremes but it
> > >> >> > > > > > passed
> > >> >> > > > > > easily.
> > >> >> > > > >
> > >> >> > > > > It would pass even more easily if on the ballot today.
> > >> >> > > >
> > >marriage
> > >> >> > > > has incresed?
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > Oooops. You caught me. Let me rephrase.
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > It would be roundly defeated in a landslide vote if on the ballot
> > >again.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > ? maybe but there are a number of heteros who think the GLBT
> > >> >> > > > has incresed?
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > Oooops. You caught me. Let me rephrase.
> > >> >> > >
> > >> >> > > It would be roundly defeated in a landslide vote if on the ballot
> > >again.
> > >> >> >
> community
> > >> >> > has gone over the top. If I were the decider I would gladly choose
> > >to let
> > >> >> > non-heteros own the word "marriage", and use the term "domestic
> > >> >> > partnership" for hetero couples. However, in time it seems
> likely that
> > >> >> > the beastie boys will start pressuring the GLBT community to allow
> > >> >> > "marriage" to their favorite female German shepherd or whoever
> they hook
> > >> >> > up with and a new battle over equal rights for Everybody will take
> > >place.
> > >> >> > .
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> When did German shepherds gain the ability to give legal informed
> > >> >> > has gone over the top. If I were the decider I would gladly choose
> > >to let
> > >> >> > non-heteros own the word "marriage", and use the term "domestic
> > >> >> > partnership" for hetero couples. However, in time it seems
> likely that
> > >> >> > the beastie boys will start pressuring the GLBT community to allow
> > >> >> > "marriage" to their favorite female German shepherd or whoever
> they hook
> > >> >> > up with and a new battle over equal rights for Everybody will take
> > >place.
> > >> >> > .
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> consent?
> > >> >
> > >> >? Doggie consent can be determined by a canine psychologist.
> > >>
> > >> In fact, consent can be assumed from the absence of a refusal of
> > >> consent.
> > >
> > >? In the case in South Oxnard, the Oxnard police determined that the dog
> > >enjoyed time spent with her owner and that if the neighbors did not like
> > >what they saw, they should stop standing on boxes to see over the fence.
> >
> > Exactly so. Self-inflicted.
>
> ? Good Christians need to keep close tabs on anything they consider immoral.
They can keep close tabs on anything they want. They just can't make
other people live by their rules.
Jeanne Douglas
Mar 29, 2013, 8:49:12 PM3/29/13
to
In article <d40bl8li29u90h8g2...@4ax.com>,
The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 19:48:57 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
> <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <r-2803131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures)
> >wrote:
> >
> >> In article
> >> <hlwdjsd2-FEFF21...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>, Jeanne
> >> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > In article <r-2703131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures)
> >> > > <pee...@degenerate.Grik> wrote:
> >> > > > >> > > > > > • Manning can not tolerate those who have differing
Why? Why do you want the freedom to rape women?
The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 19:48:57 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
> <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <r-2803131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures)
> >wrote:
> >
> >> In article
> >> <hlwdjsd2-FEFF21...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>, Jeanne
> >> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > In article <r-2703131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures)
> >> > > <pee...@degenerate.Grik> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > > On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 07:04:33 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > >In article
> >> > > > On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 07:04:33 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > >In article
> >> > > > ><hlwdjsd2-D249D8...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
> >> Jeanne
> >> > > > >Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >> In article <r-2603130...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> >> Jeanne
> >> > > > >Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >> In article <r-2603130...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> >> > > > >> (•RLMeasures)
> >> > > > >> wrote:
> >> > > > >>
> >> > > > >> > In article
> >> > > > >> > <hlwdjsd2-9D35EE...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.ed
> >> > > > >> wrote:
> >> > > > >>
> >> > > > >> > In article
> >> > > > >> > u>,
> >> > > Jeanne
> >> > > > >> > Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > > >> >
> >> > > > >> > > In article <r-2403131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> >> > > Jeanne
> >> > > > >> > Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > > >> >
> >> > > > >> > > In article <r-2403131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> >> (•RLMeasures)
> >> > > > >> > > wrote:
> >> > > > >> > >
> >> > > > >> > > > In article <-bSdneDiqtZZy9PM...@giganews.com>,
> >> > > John Manning
> >> > > > >> > > > <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
> >> > > > >> > > >
> >> > > > >> > > wrote:
> >> > > > >> > >
> >> > > > >> > > > In article <-bSdneDiqtZZy9PM...@giganews.com>,
> >> > > John Manning
> >> > > > >> > > > <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
> >> > > > >> > > >
> >> > > > >> > > > > On 3/23/2013 8:50 PM, •RLMeasures wrote:
> >> > > > >> > > > > > In article
> >> > > > >> > > > > >
> >> > > > >> > <a2419356-915a-4681...@f5g2000yqp.googlegroups.co
> >> > > > >> > > > > > In article
> >> > > > >> > > > > >
> >> > > > >opinions that
> >> > > > >> > > > > > he
> >> > > > >> > > > > > can
> >> > > > >> > > > > > not change.
> >> > > > >> > > > >
> >> > > > >> > > > >
> >> > > > >> > > > > Anyone who tolerates your kind of bigotry can only
> >> > > > >> > > > > be a bigot him[her]self.
> >> > > > >> > > >
> >> > > > >> > > > **** Prop 8 may eventually be overturned by the Supremes
> >> > > > >> > > > but
> >> > > it passed
> >> > > > >> > > > easily.
> >> > > > >> > >
> >> > > > >> > > It would pass even more easily if on the ballot today.
> >> > > > >> >
> >> > > > >> > • Why would it pass more easily today if support for same-sex
> >> > > > >> > > > > > he
> >> > > > >> > > > > > can
> >> > > > >> > > > > > not change.
> >> > > > >> > > > >
> >> > > > >> > > > >
> >> > > > >> > > > > Anyone who tolerates your kind of bigotry can only
> >> > > > >> > > > > be a bigot him[her]self.
> >> > > > >> > > >
> >> > > > >> > > > **** Prop 8 may eventually be overturned by the Supremes
> >> > > > >> > > > but
> >> > > it passed
> >> > > > >> > > > easily.
> >> > > > >> > >
> >> > > > >> > > It would pass even more easily if on the ballot today.
> >> > > > >> >
> >> > > > >> > marriage
> >> > > > >> > has incresed?
> >> > > > >>
> >> > > > >> Oooops. You caught me. Let me rephrase.
> >> > > > >>
> >> > > > >> It would be roundly defeated in a landslide vote if on the ballot
> >> again.
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >• maybe but there are a number of heteros who think the GLBT
> >> > > > >> > has incresed?
> >> > > > >>
> >> > > > >> Oooops. You caught me. Let me rephrase.
> >> > > > >>
> >> > > > >> It would be roundly defeated in a landslide vote if on the ballot
> >> again.
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >community
> >> > > > >has gone over the top. If I were the decider I would gladly choose
> >> to let
> >> > > > >non-heteros own the word "marriage", and use the term "domestic
> >> > > > >partnership" for hetero couples. However, in time it seems likely
> >> > > > >that
> >> > > > >the beastie boys will start pressuring the GLBT community to allow
> >> > > > >"marriage" to their favorite female German shepherd or whoever they
> >> > > > >hook
> >> > > > >up with and a new battle over equal rights for Everybody will take
> >> place.
> >> > > > >.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > >has gone over the top. If I were the decider I would gladly choose
> >> to let
> >> > > > >non-heteros own the word "marriage", and use the term "domestic
> >> > > > >partnership" for hetero couples. However, in time it seems likely
> >> > > > >that
> >> > > > >the beastie boys will start pressuring the GLBT community to allow
> >> > > > >"marriage" to their favorite female German shepherd or whoever they
> >> > > > >hook
> >> > > > >up with and a new battle over equal rights for Everybody will take
> >> place.
> >> > > > >.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Indeed. Once you start redefining marriage, who knows where it will
> >> > > > end?
> >> > >
> >> > > • Another worry is where will it end? If marriage to German
> >> > > shepherds
> >> > > is
> >> > > okayed, what next chihuahuas? rabbits? chickens?
> >> >
> >> > When did any of them become able to give legal informed consent?
> >>
> >> • there is no law that requires consent for beastial relationships.
> >
> >
> >Sex when one of the partners does not consent is rape. And rape is
> >generally considered a Bad Thing.
>
> Then it needs to be redefined.
> >> > > > end?
> >> > >
> >> > > • Another worry is where will it end? If marriage to German
> >> > > shepherds
> >> > > is
> >> > > okayed, what next chihuahuas? rabbits? chickens?
> >> >
> >> > When did any of them become able to give legal informed consent?
> >>
> >> • there is no law that requires consent for beastial relationships.
> >
> >
> >Sex when one of the partners does not consent is rape. And rape is
> >generally considered a Bad Thing.
>
Why? Why do you want the freedom to rape women?
Jeanne Douglas
Mar 29, 2013, 8:50:22 PM3/29/13
to
In article <030bl8l4j5iodq6jo...@4ax.com>,
The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 19:50:11 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
> >> >
> >> > Which one? Or both?
> >>
> >> • women voting of course.
Yes, a vastly greater world.
The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 19:50:11 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
> <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <r-2803131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures)
> >wrote:
> >
> >> In article
> >> <hlwdjsd2-29F99D...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>, Jeanne
>
> >In article <r-2803131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures)
> >wrote:
> >
> >> In article
> >> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > In article <r-2703131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures)
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > In article <qNadnXiZVu8xnM7M...@giganews.com>, John
> >>
> >> > In article <r-2703131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures)
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > > That's what they said about freeing the slaves, giving women the
> >> > > > right to vote,
> >> > >
> >> > > • An extremely egregious mistake.
> >> > > > right to vote,
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> > Which one? Or both?
> >>
> >> • women voting of course.
> >
> >
> >Okay. Explain to me why that was "an extremely egregious mistake"?
>
> Look what's happened since.
> >
> >Okay. Explain to me why that was "an extremely egregious mistake"?
>
Yes, a vastly greater world.
The Revd
Mar 29, 2013, 9:00:27 PM3/29/13
to
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 16:52:44 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
>In article <lenbl81aq5et2q3dm...@4ax.com>, The Revd
><pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
>> ><hlwdjsd2-5E2F84...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>, Jeanne
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >> On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 20:03:09 -0300, John Manning
>> >> > > >> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > > >> >On 3/27/2013 7:55 PM, �RLMeasures wrote:
>> >> > > >> >> In article <2YWdndXZ1-8LY8_M...@giganews.com>, John
>
>� amen. The tail tells no tales.
If it's a male dog impregnating a woman, all the more so!
>In article <lenbl81aq5et2q3dm...@4ax.com>, The Revd
><pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
>> ><hlwdjsd2-5E2F84...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>, Jeanne
>> >Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> In article <r-2803131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures)
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > In article <v399l89app04j7jmr...@4ax.com>, The Revd
>> >
>> >> In article <r-2803131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures)
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 11:50:00 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
>> >> > >
>> >> > > >In article <5ov6l8dvuc6sv1f0t...@4ax.com>, The Revd
>> >> > > ><pee...@degenerate.Grik> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 11:50:00 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
>> >> > >
>> >> > > >In article <5ov6l8dvuc6sv1f0t...@4ax.com>, The Revd
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >> On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 20:03:09 -0300, John Manning
>> >> > > >> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > > >> >On 3/27/2013 7:55 PM, �RLMeasures wrote:
>> >> > > >> >> In article <2YWdndXZ1-8LY8_M...@giganews.com>, John
>> >> > > >> >> Manning
>> >> > > >> >> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>> >> > > >> >>
>> >> > > >> >>> On 3/27/2013 11:04 AM, •RLMeasures wrote:
>> >> > > >> >>>> In article
>> >> > > >> >>>>
>> ><hlwdjsd2-D249D8...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
>> >> > > >Jeanne
>> >> > > >> >>>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > > >> >>>>
>> >> > > >> >>>>> In article <r-2603130...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
>> >> > > >> >>>>> (•RLMeasures)
>> >> > > >> >>>>> wrote:
>> >> > > >> >>>>>
>> >> > > >> >>>>>> In article
>> >> > > >> >>>>>>
>> >> > > ><hlwdjsd2-9D35EE...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
>> >> > > >> >> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>> >> > > >> >>
>> >> > > >> >>> On 3/27/2013 11:04 AM, •RLMeasures wrote:
>> >> > > >> >>>> In article
>> >> > > >> >>>>
>> ><hlwdjsd2-D249D8...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
>> >> > > >Jeanne
>> >> > > >> >>>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > > >> >>>>
>> >> > > >> >>>>> In article <r-2603130...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
>> >> > > >> >>>>> (•RLMeasures)
>> >> > > >> >>>>> wrote:
>> >> > > >> >>>>>
>> >> > > >> >>>>>> In article
>> >> > > >> >>>>>>
>> >Jeanne
>> >> > > >> >>>>>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > > >> >>>>>>
>> >> > > >> >>>>>>> In article <r-2403131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
>> >> > (•RLMeasures)
>> >> > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
>> >> > > >> >>>>>>>
>> >> > > >> >>>>>>>> In article <-bSdneDiqtZZy9PM...@giganews.com>,
>> >> > > >John Manning
>> >> > > >> >>>>>>>> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>
>> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>> On 3/23/2013 8:50 PM, •RLMeasures wrote:
>> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> In article
>> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >> > > >> >>>>>>
>> >> > >
>><a2419356-915a-4681...@f5g2000yqp.googlegroups.com>, sully
>> >> > > >> >>>>>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > > >> >>>>>>
>> >> > > >> >>>>>>> In article <r-2403131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
>> >> > (•RLMeasures)
>> >> > > >> >>>>>>> wrote:
>> >> > > >> >>>>>>>
>> >> > > >> >>>>>>>> In article <-bSdneDiqtZZy9PM...@giganews.com>,
>> >> > > >John Manning
>> >> > > >> >>>>>>>> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>
>> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>> On 3/23/2013 8:50 PM, •RLMeasures wrote:
>> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>> In article
>> >> > > >> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >> > > >> >>>>>>
>> >> > >
>> >> > > >> >>> After getting his ass kicked for being a bigot, Measures
>> >> > > >> >>> attempts distraction with cringe-worthy humor.
>> >> > > >> >>
>> >> > > >> >> *** As I understand it the female German shepherd in South
>Oxnard
>> >> > > >> >> was
>> >> > > >> >> quite happy. I guess it would be safe to say that man and
>dog lived
>> >> > > >> >> happily ever after - or at least until death do us part. .
>> >> > > >> >>
>> >> > > >> >
>> >> > > >> >
>> >> > > >> >You seem to relish this kind of thing.
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > > >> Are you against it? Are you some kind of fucking bigot?
>> >> > > >> <snigger>
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >*** Beastie boys should have equal rights too.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Of course they should. Everyone should. Even people who want to
>> >> > > marry those of other races!
>> >> >
>> >> > *** how about other species?
>> >>
>> >> When those other species can give legal informed consent.
>> >
>> >� why wouldn't tail wagging count?
>>
>> Good point.
>> >> > > >> >>> attempts distraction with cringe-worthy humor.
>> >> > > >> >>
>> >> > > >> >> *** As I understand it the female German shepherd in South
>Oxnard
>> >> > > >> >> was
>> >> > > >> >> quite happy. I guess it would be safe to say that man and
>dog lived
>> >> > > >> >> happily ever after - or at least until death do us part. .
>> >> > > >> >>
>> >> > > >> >
>> >> > > >> >
>> >> > > >> >You seem to relish this kind of thing.
>> >> > > >>
>> >> > > >> Are you against it? Are you some kind of fucking bigot?
>> >> > > >> <snigger>
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >
>> >> > > >*** Beastie boys should have equal rights too.
>> >> > >
>> >> > > Of course they should. Everyone should. Even people who want to
>> >> > > marry those of other races!
>> >> >
>> >> > *** how about other species?
>> >>
>> >> When those other species can give legal informed consent.
>> >
>> >� why wouldn't tail wagging count?
>>
>
>� amen. The tail tells no tales.
If it's a male dog impregnating a woman, all the more so!
The Revd
Mar 29, 2013, 9:01:24 PM3/29/13
to
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 17:14:19 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
What is it with you people and this legal informed consent bullshit?
Don't you understand that marriage is being redefined?
Don't you understand that marriage is being redefined?
The Revd
Mar 29, 2013, 9:02:32 PM3/29/13
to
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 17:50:22 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
>> >> > > > >>>>>>>> • Manning can not tolerate those who have differing
Only from a numerical point of view.
The Revd
Mar 29, 2013, 9:03:47 PM3/29/13
to
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 17:49:12 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
>> >> > > > >> > > > > > • Manning can not tolerate those who have differing
Remove this consent nonsense and it won't be rape any more.
The Revd
Mar 29, 2013, 9:05:00 PM3/29/13
to
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 17:11:25 -0700 (PDT), sully <suls...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
>> <d827b31d-881e-4327-85a6-2fbb07d52...@oz4g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>, sully
>>
>> <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > > <hlwdjsd2-CF6D25.19485728032...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>, Jeann=
>> > e
>>
>> > > Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>> > > > In article <r-2803131250060...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org ( RLMeasures)
>> > > > wrote:
>>
>> > > > > In article
>> > > > > <hlwdjsd2-FEFF21.22354027032...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>, J=
>> > eanne
>> > > > > Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > > > > > In article <r-2703131602120...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org ( RLMeasur=
>> > es)
>> > > > > > wrote:
>>
>> > > > > > > In article <1qv5l8lkjmvoh1tkgkrnvnn1go2hteh...@4ax.com>, The Revd
>> > > > > > > <peel...@degenerate.Grik> wrote:
>>
>> > > > > > > > On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 07:04:33 -0700, r...@somis.org ( RLMeasures=
>> > ) wrote:
>>
>> > > > > > > > >In article
>> > > > > > > > ><hlwdjsd2-D249D8.14353026032...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.=
>> > edu>,
>> > > > > Jeanne
>> > > > > > > > >Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> In article <r-2603130739300...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
>> > > Jeanne
>> > > > > > > > >> > Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > In article <r-2403131406270...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
>> > > > > ( RLMeasures)
>> > > > > > > > >> > > wrote:
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > In article <-bSdneDiqtZZy9PMnZ2dnUVZ_i2dn...@giganews.=
>> > com>,
>> > > > > > > John Manning
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > <jrobe...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > On 3/23/2013 8:50 PM, =95RLMeasures wrote:
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > In article
>>
>> > > <a2419356-915a-4681-ba90-aef8c7c21...@f5g2000yqp.googlegroups.com>,
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > sully
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> On Mar 22, 8:06=3DA0pm, r...@somis.org ( RLMeasur=
>> > es)
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>> In article
>>
>> > > > > > > > ><6f3b5a7c-2070-4110-9aac-4930e4bc3...@m9g2000pby.googlegroups.=
>> > s.org (
>> > > > > > > > >> > RLMeasures) wr=3D
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> ote =3D3D
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> as p=3D3D
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> ."
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>> <gudl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>> "?LMeasures" <r...@somis.org> skrev i medde=
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> thom=3D3D
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> ps.c=3D3D
>> > > heterosexual
>> > > > > > > unions
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> and=3D
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> =A0 anoth=3D3D
>> > e same
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> legally.
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> ? 2 penises is not even close to 1 vagina =
>> > and 1
>> > > > > penis.
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> snip
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> *** =3D3DA0children figure in heterosexu=
>> > al
>> > > unions.
>> > > > > > > > >=3D3DA0That
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> =3D
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> makes th=3D3D
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> r
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>> procreation.
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> =3D3DA0I did not say marriage was for procreat=
>> > ion
>> > > only.
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> =3D3DA0However,
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> h=3D
>> > on of
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> commitment.
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> Gays already demonstrate that commitment to eac=
>> > right to
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>> hijack
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>> words?
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> I've demonstrated that the usage has been broad s=
>> > ince
>> > > > > the the
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> time it was first uttered in Latin. =A0 You ignor=
>> > allot
>> > > > > again.
>>
>> > > > > > > > > =A0maybe but there are a number of heteros who think the GLBT
>> > > > > > > > >community
>> > > > > > > > >has gone over the top. =A0If I were the decider I would gladly=
>> > �choose
>> > > > > to let
>> > > > > > > > >non-heteros own the word "marriage", and use the term "domesti=
>> > c
>> > > > > > > > >partnership" for hetero couples. =A0However, in time it seems =
>> > likely
>> > > > > > > > >that
>> > > > > > > > >the beastie boys will start pressuring the GLBT community to a=
>> > llow
>> > > > > > > > >"marriage" to their favorite female German shepherd or whoever=
>> > �they
>> > > > > > > > >hook
>> > > > > > > > >up with and a new battle over equal rights for Everybody will =
>> > take
>> > > > > place.
>> > > > > > > > >.
>>
>> > > > > > > > Indeed. =A0Once you start redefining marriage, who knows where =
>> > it will
>> > > > > > > > end?
>>
>> > > > > > > =A0Another worry is where will it end? =A0If marriage to German s=
>> > hepherds
>> > > > > > > is
>> > > > > > > okayed, what next chihuahuas? =A0rabbits? =A0chickens?
>> > > way she liked.
>>
>> > consensual rape. � I broke up w/ a gf like that. � Too confusing.
>>
>> ** �Did she like to be spanked? �The thing that got to me is she liked to
>> have her clothes ripped off but she did not know how to operate a sewing
>> machine.
>
>no, she wanted to fight back. Then she'd get pissed
>off and frustrated when I stopped.
>
>VERY confusing.
>
>>
>>
>>
>> > But you know that is not what Jeanne meant and you are doing
>> > a mo-mo linguistic gymnastic.
>>
>> ** �If Jeanne did not say what she meant I have no clue as to what she was
>> thinking.
>
>She was talking about consent. It's not clear to you
>because you tried to conflate gay marriage with pedophelia
>much like Mormons conflate horses and tapirs.
Why do you think some sexual disorientations are morally superior to
others?
wrote:
>> <d827b31d-881e-4327-85a6-2fbb07d52...@oz4g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>, sully
>>
>> <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > > <hlwdjsd2-CF6D25.19485728032...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>, Jeann=
>> > e
>>
>> > > Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>> > > > In article <r-2803131250060...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org ( RLMeasures)
>> > > > wrote:
>>
>> > > > > In article
>> > > > > <hlwdjsd2-FEFF21.22354027032...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>, J=
>> > eanne
>> > > > > Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > > > > > In article <r-2703131602120...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org ( RLMeasur=
>> > es)
>> > > > > > wrote:
>>
>> > > > > > > In article <1qv5l8lkjmvoh1tkgkrnvnn1go2hteh...@4ax.com>, The Revd
>> > > > > > > <peel...@degenerate.Grik> wrote:
>>
>> > > > > > > > On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 07:04:33 -0700, r...@somis.org ( RLMeasures=
>> > ) wrote:
>>
>> > > > > > > > >In article
>> > > > > > > > ><hlwdjsd2-D249D8.14353026032...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.=
>> > edu>,
>> > > > > Jeanne
>> > > > > > > > >Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> In article <r-2603130739300...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
>> > > ( RLMeasures)
>> > > > > > > > >> wrote:
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > In article
>>
>> > > <hlwdjsd2-9D35EE.16452824032...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,> > > =
>> > > > > > > > >> wrote:
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > In article
>>
>> > > Jeanne
>> > > > > > > > >> > Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > In article <r-2403131406270...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
>> > > > > ( RLMeasures)
>> > > > > > > > >> > > wrote:
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > In article <-bSdneDiqtZZy9PMnZ2dnUVZ_i2dn...@giganews.=
>> > com>,
>> > > > > > > John Manning
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > <jrobe...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > On 3/23/2013 8:50 PM, =95RLMeasures wrote:
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > In article
>>
>> > > <a2419356-915a-4681-ba90-aef8c7c21...@f5g2000yqp.googlegroups.com>,
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > sully
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> On Mar 22, 8:06=3DA0pm, r...@somis.org ( RLMeasur=
>> > es)
>> > > wrote:
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>> In article
>>
>> > > > > > > > ><6f3b5a7c-2070-4110-9aac-4930e4bc3...@m9g2000pby.googlegroups.=
>> > com>,
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>> sully
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>> <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> On Mar 22, 10:52=3D3DA0am, r...@somis.org ( RLM=
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>> sully
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>> <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > easures)
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> wrote:
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> In article
>> > > > > > > <cg2pk8h5uj5or0vgfjg9ct807sd22ss...@4ax.com>, Free
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> Lunch
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>> On Fri, 22 Mar 2013 09:29:44 -0700, r...@somi=
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> wrote:
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> In article
>> > > > > > > <cg2pk8h5uj5or0vgfjg9ct807sd22ss...@4ax.com>, Free
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> Lunch
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>> > s.org (
>> > > > > > > > >> > RLMeasures) wr=3D
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> ote =3D3D
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> in
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>> alt.atheism:
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>> In article
>> > > > > > > <514c13c8$0$56780$edfad...@dtext02.news.tele.dk>,
>> > > > > > > > >> > "thom=3D
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>> alt.atheism:
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>> In article
>> > > > > > > <514c13c8$0$56780$edfad...@dtext02.news.tele.dk>,
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> as p=3D3D
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> ."
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>> <gudl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>> "?LMeasures" <r...@somis.org> skrev i medde=
>> > lelsen
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>news:r-2103130...@10.0.1.3...
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> In article
>> > > > > > > > ><514a2c5e$0$56795$edfad...@dtext02.news.tele.dk>,
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> "=3D
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>news:r-2103130...@10.0.1.3...
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> In article
>> > > > > > > > ><514a2c5e$0$56795$edfad...@dtext02.news.tele.dk>,
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> thom=3D3D
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> as p."
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> <gudl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> "?LMeasures" <r...@somis.org> skrev i
>> > > meddelelsen
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>news:r-2003130...@10.0.1.3...
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> In article
>>
>> > > > > > > > ><98b3b834-37c8-45d0-96a4-ffa0f2757...@h1g2000pbg.googlegrou=3D
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> <gudl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> "?LMeasures" <r...@somis.org> skrev i
>> > > meddelelsen
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>news:r-2003130...@10.0.1.3...
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> In article
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> ps.c=3D3D
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> om>,
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> sully
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> snip
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> *** =3D3DA0There should be a word for
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> sully
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> snip
>>
>> > > heterosexual
>> > > > > > > unions
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> and=3D
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> =A0 anoth=3D3D
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> er word
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> for
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> homosexual unions.
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Nonsense. =3D3DA0They are both exactly th=
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> for
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> homosexual unions.
>>
>> > e same
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> legally.
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> ? 2 penises is not even close to 1 vagina =
>> > and 1
>> > > > > penis.
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> snip
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> *** =3D3DA0children figure in heterosexu=
>> > al
>> > > unions.
>> > > > > > > > >=3D3DA0That
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> =3D
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> makes th=3D3D
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> em
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> different.
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> So if there are no children and no
>> > > possibility of
>> > > > > > > children
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> ar=3D
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> different.
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> So if there are no children and no
>> > > possibility of
>> > > > > > > children
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> e
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> heterosexuals
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> able to marry?
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> ? enter the strawman.
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>> Where?
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>> ? "So if there are no children and no
>> > > possibility of
>> > > > > > > children
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>> are
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>> heterosexuals able to marry?"
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>> No, that is an objection to the argument that
>> > > > > marriage is
>> > > > > > > > >> > (only) fo=3D
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> heterosexuals
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> able to marry?
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> ? enter the strawman.
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>> Where?
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>> ? "So if there are no children and no
>> > > possibility of
>> > > > > > > children
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>> are
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>> heterosexuals able to marry?"
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>> No, that is an objection to the argument that
>> > > > > marriage is
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> r
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>> procreation.
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> =3D3DA0I did not say marriage was for procreat=
>> > ion
>> > > only.
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> =3D3DA0However,
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> h=3D
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> etero
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> marriage is a good foundation for procreation.
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> It is so because of the promise and demonstrati=
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> marriage is a good foundation for procreation.
>>
>> > on of
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> commitment.
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> Gays already demonstrate that commitment to eac=
>> > h
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> other and have for centuries.
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> It's anti-American to deny them equal rights.
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>> *** =3DA0Does a special interest group have the =
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> other and have for centuries.
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> It's anti-American to deny them equal rights.
>>
>> > right to
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>> hijack
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>> words?
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> I've demonstrated that the usage has been broad s=
>> > ince
>> > > > > the the
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> time it was first uttered in Latin. =A0 You ignor=
>> > e facts
>> > > > > > > like a TBM.
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> That you are eager to use the term to describe tw=
>> > > > > > > like a TBM.
>>
>> > o
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> cards in a card game and deny it to human couples
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> demonstrates the depth of your pathetic bigotry
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> on this manner.
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> JRM has resorted to simply namecalling you on thi=
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> cards in a card game and deny it to human couples
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> demonstrates the depth of your pathetic bigotry
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> on this manner.
>>
>> > s
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> topic, I can see his point.
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > =95 =A0Manning can not tolerate those who have dif=
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> topic, I can see his point.
>>
>> > fering
>> > > > > > > > >opinions that
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > he
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > can
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > not change.
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > Anyone who tolerates your kind of bigotry can only
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > be a bigot him[her]self.
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > **** =A0Prop 8 may eventually be overturned by the Sup=
>> > > > > > > > >opinions that
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > he
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > can
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > not change.
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > Anyone who tolerates your kind of bigotry can only
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > be a bigot him[her]self.
>>
>> > remes but
>> > > > > > > it passed
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > easily.
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > It would pass even more easily if on the ballot today.
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > =A0Why would it pass more easily today if support for same=
>> > > > > > > it passed
>> > > > > > > > >> > > > easily.
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> > > It would pass even more easily if on the ballot today.
>>
>> > -sex
>> > > > > > > > >> > marriage
>> > > > > > > > >> > has incresed?
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> Oooops. You caught me. Let me rephrase.
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> It would be roundly defeated in a landslide vote if on the b=
>> > > > > > > > >> > marriage
>> > > > > > > > >> > has incresed?
>>
>> > > > > > > > >> Oooops. You caught me. Let me rephrase.
>>
>> > allot
>> > > > > again.
>>
>> > > > > > > > > =A0maybe but there are a number of heteros who think the GLBT
>> > > > > > > > >community
>> > > > > > > > >has gone over the top. =A0If I were the decider I would gladly=
>> > �choose
>> > > > > to let
>> > > > > > > > >non-heteros own the word "marriage", and use the term "domesti=
>> > c
>> > > > > > > > >partnership" for hetero couples. =A0However, in time it seems =
>> > likely
>> > > > > > > > >that
>> > > > > > > > >the beastie boys will start pressuring the GLBT community to a=
>> > llow
>> > > > > > > > >"marriage" to their favorite female German shepherd or whoever=
>> > �they
>> > > > > > > > >hook
>> > > > > > > > >up with and a new battle over equal rights for Everybody will =
>> > take
>> > > > > place.
>> > > > > > > > >.
>>
>> > > > > > > > Indeed. =A0Once you start redefining marriage, who knows where =
>> > it will
>> > > > > > > > end?
>>
>> > > > > > > =A0Another worry is where will it end? =A0If marriage to German s=
>> > hepherds
>> > > > > > > is
>> > > > > > > okayed, what next chihuahuas? =A0rabbits? =A0chickens?
>>
>> > > > > > When did any of them become able to give legal informed consent?
>>
>> > > > > =A0there is no law that requires consent for beastial relationships.
>> > > > > > When did any of them become able to give legal informed consent?
>>
>>
>> > > > Sex when one of the partners does not consent is rape. And rape is
>> > > > generally considered a Bad Thing.
>>
>> > > =A0For one of my exes rape brought happiness - as long as it was done the
>> > > > Sex when one of the partners does not consent is rape. And rape is
>> > > > generally considered a Bad Thing.
>>
>> > > way she liked.
>>
>> > consensual rape. � I broke up w/ a gf like that. � Too confusing.
>>
>> ** �Did she like to be spanked? �The thing that got to me is she liked to
>> have her clothes ripped off but she did not know how to operate a sewing
>> machine.
>
>no, she wanted to fight back. Then she'd get pissed
>off and frustrated when I stopped.
>
>VERY confusing.
>
>>
>>
>>
>> > But you know that is not what Jeanne meant and you are doing
>> > a mo-mo linguistic gymnastic.
>>
>> ** �If Jeanne did not say what she meant I have no clue as to what she was
>> thinking.
>
>She was talking about consent. It's not clear to you
>because you tried to conflate gay marriage with pedophelia
>much like Mormons conflate horses and tapirs.
Why do you think some sexual disorientations are morally superior to
others?
The Revd
Mar 29, 2013, 9:05:45 PM3/29/13
to
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 16:54:24 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote:
>In article <hnnbl8tqvbhre9utn...@4ax.com>, The Revd
><pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 08:11:23 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote:
>>
>> >In article <e50bl8ddj6ppej1f6...@4ax.com>, The Revd
>> ><pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 18:45:21 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >In article <9699l8hbh8i4n0j3s...@4ax.com>, The Revd
>> >> ><pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
>Jeanne
>> >> >> >Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> In article <r-2703130...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures)
>> >> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> > In article
>> >> >> >> > > > Jeanne
>> >> >> >> > > > Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> >> > > > > In article <r-2403131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
>> >> >> >> > > > > > Manning
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > > <suls...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >> On Mar 22, 8:06=A0pm, r...@somis.org (
>RLMeasures) wrote:
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>> In article
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> >
><6f3b5a7c-2070-4110-9aac-4930e4bc3...@m9g2000pby.googlegroups.com>,
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>> sully
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>> <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>> On Mar 22, 10:52=3DA0am, r...@somis.org (
>> >> >RLMeasures) wrote:
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>> In article
>heterosexual
>> >> >> >unions
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> and=
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >> anoth=3D
>> >> >legally.
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> ? 2 penises is not even close to 1 vagina and 1
>> >> >penis.
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> snip
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> procreation.
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>> =3DA0I did not say marriage was for
>procreation only.
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>> =3DA0However,
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>> h=
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>> commitment.
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>> Gays already demonstrate that commitment to each
>> >> >to hijack
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>> words?
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >> I've demonstrated that the usage has been broad since
>> >> >the the
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >> time it was first uttered in Latin. You ignore facts
>> >> >like a
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >> TBM.
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >> That you are eager to use the term to describe two
>> >Supremes but it
>> >> >again.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > • maybe but there are a number of heteros who think the GLBT
>> >community
>> >> >> >> > has gone over the top. If I were the decider I would gladly choose
>> >> >to let
>> >> >> >> > the beastie boys will start pressuring the GLBT community to allow
>> >> >> >> consent?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >• Doggie consent can be determined by a canine psychologist.
>>
>> You can't condemn what you don't see!
>
>• Good Christians somehow manage to.
Based on hearsay?
>In article <hnnbl8tqvbhre9utn...@4ax.com>, The Revd
><pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 08:11:23 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote:
>>
>> >In article <e50bl8ddj6ppej1f6...@4ax.com>, The Revd
>> ><pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 18:45:21 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >In article <9699l8hbh8i4n0j3s...@4ax.com>, The Revd
>> >> ><pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 12:44:45 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >In article
>> >> >>
>><hlwdjsd2-2F818B...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
>> >> >> On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 12:44:45 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >In article
>> >> >>
>Jeanne
>> >> >> >Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> In article <r-2703130...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures)
>> >> >> >> wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> > In article
>> >> >> >> > <hlwdjsd2-D249D8...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
>> >> >Jeanne
>> >> >> >> > Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > > In article <r-2603130...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
>> >> >Jeanne
>> >> >> >> > Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> >
>(•RLMeasures)
>> >> >> >> > > wrote:
>> >> >> >> > >
>> >> >> >> > > > In article
>> >> >> >> > > >
>> ><hlwdjsd2-9D35EE...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
>> >> >> >> > > wrote:
>> >> >> >> > >
>> >> >> >> > > > In article
>> >> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> >> > > > Jeanne
>> >> >> >> > > > Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> >> > > > > In article <r-2403131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
>> >> >(•RLMeasures)
>> >> >> >> > > > > wrote:
>> >> >> >> > > > >
>> >> >> >> > > > > > In article
>> ><-bSdneDiqtZZy9PM...@giganews.com>, John
>> >> >> >> > > > > wrote:
>> >> >> >> > > > >
>> >> >> >> > > > > > In article
>> >> >> >> > > > > > Manning
>> >> >> >> > > > > > <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>> >> >> >> > > > > >
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > On 3/23/2013 8:50 PM, •RLMeasures wrote:
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > > In article
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >
>> >> >> >> > > >
>> >> >>
>><a2419356-915a-4681...@f5g2000yqp.googlegroups.com>, sully
>> >> >> >> > > > > >
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > On 3/23/2013 8:50 PM, •RLMeasures wrote:
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > > In article
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >
>> >> >> >> > > >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > > <suls...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >> On Mar 22, 8:06=A0pm, r...@somis.org (
>RLMeasures) wrote:
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>> In article
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> >
><6f3b5a7c-2070-4110-9aac-4930e4bc3...@m9g2000pby.googlegroups.com>,
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>> sully
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>> <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>> On Mar 22, 10:52=3DA0am, r...@somis.org (
>> >> >RLMeasures) wrote:
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>> In article
>> >> >> ><cg2pk8h5uj5or0vgfjg9ct807sd22ss...@4ax.com>, Free
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>> Lunch
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>> <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> On Fri, 22 Mar 2013 09:29:44 -0700,
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>> Lunch
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>> <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> On Fri, 22 Mar 2013 09:29:44 -0700,
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>> in
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> alt.atheism:
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>> In article
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>> <514c13c8$0$56780$edfad...@dtext02.news.tele.dk>,
>> >> >> >> > > > "thom=
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >> as p=3D
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> alt.atheism:
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>> In article
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>> <514c13c8$0$56780$edfad...@dtext02.news.tele.dk>,
>> >> >> >> > > > "thom=
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>> ."
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>> <gudl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>> "?LMeasures" <r...@somis.org> skrev i
>meddelelsen
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>> <gudl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>> "?LMeasures" <r...@somis.org> skrev i
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>> news:r-2103130...@10.0.1.3...
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> In article
>> >> >> >> > <514a2c5e$0$56795$edfad...@dtext02.news.tele.dk>,
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> "=
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >> thom=3D
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> In article
>> >> >> >> > <514a2c5e$0$56795$edfad...@dtext02.news.tele.dk>,
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> "=
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>> as p."
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> <gudl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> "?LMeasures" <r...@somis.org> skrev i
>meddelelsen
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> news:r-2003130...@10.0.1.3...
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> In article
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> > <98b3b834-37c8-45d0-96a4-ffa0f2757...@h1g2000pbg.googlegrou=
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >> ps.c=3D
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> <gudl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> "?LMeasures" <r...@somis.org> skrev i
>meddelelsen
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> news:r-2003130...@10.0.1.3...
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> In article
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>
>> >> >> >> > <98b3b834-37c8-45d0-96a4-ffa0f2757...@h1g2000pbg.googlegrou=
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>> om>,
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> sully
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> snip
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> *** =3DA0There should be a word for
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> sully
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> snip
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>heterosexual
>> >> >> >unions
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> and=
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >> anoth=3D
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>> er word
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> for
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> homosexual unions.
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Nonsense. =3DA0They are both exactly the same
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> for
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> homosexual unions.
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >legally.
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> ? 2 penises is not even close to 1 vagina and 1
>> >> >penis.
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> snip
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> *** =3DA0children figure in
>heterosexual unions.
>> >> >> >> > =3DA0That
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> =
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >> makes th=3D
>heterosexual unions.
>> >> >> >> > =3DA0That
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> =
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >> makes th=3D
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>> em
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> different.
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> So if there are no children and no
>> >possibility of
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> children
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> ar=
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> different.
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> So if there are no children and no
>> >possibility of
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> children
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> ar=
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >> e
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> heterosexuals
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> able to marry?
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> ? enter the strawman.
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>> Where?
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>> ? "So if there are no children and no
>> >possibility of
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>> children
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>> are
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>> heterosexuals able to marry?"
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> No, that is an objection to the argument that
>> >> >marriage is
>> >> >> >> > > > (only) fo=
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >> r
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> heterosexuals
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>>> able to marry?
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>>> ? enter the strawman.
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>>> Where?
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>> ? "So if there are no children and no
>> >possibility of
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>> children
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>> are
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>>> heterosexuals able to marry?"
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> No, that is an objection to the argument that
>> >> >marriage is
>> >> >> >> > > > (only) fo=
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>>> procreation.
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>> =3DA0I did not say marriage was for
>procreation only.
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>> =3DA0However,
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>> h=
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >> etero
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>> marriage is a good foundation for procreation.
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>> It is so because of the promise and demonstration of
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>>> marriage is a good foundation for procreation.
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>> commitment.
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>> Gays already demonstrate that commitment to each
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>> other and have for centuries.
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>> It's anti-American to deny them equal rights.
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>> *** =A0Does a special interest group have the right
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>> It's anti-American to deny them equal rights.
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>>
>> >> >to hijack
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>> words?
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >> I've demonstrated that the usage has been broad since
>> >> >the the
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >> time it was first uttered in Latin. You ignore facts
>> >> >like a
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >> TBM.
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >> That you are eager to use the term to describe two
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >> cards in a card game and deny it to human couples
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >> demonstrates the depth of your pathetic bigotry
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >> on this manner.
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >> JRM has resorted to simply namecalling you on this
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >> demonstrates the depth of your pathetic bigotry
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >> on this manner.
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >>
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >> topic, I can see his point.
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > > • Manning can not tolerate those who have differing
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > >
>> >> >> >> > opinions that
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > > he
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > > can
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > > not change.
>> >> >> >> > > > > > >
>> >> >> >> > > > > > >
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > Anyone who tolerates your kind of bigotry can only
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > be a bigot him[her]self.
>> >> >> >> > > > > >
>> >> >> >> > > > > > **** Prop 8 may eventually be overturned by the
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > > he
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > > can
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > > not change.
>> >> >> >> > > > > > >
>> >> >> >> > > > > > >
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > Anyone who tolerates your kind of bigotry can only
>> >> >> >> > > > > > > be a bigot him[her]self.
>> >> >> >> > > > > >
>> >Supremes but it
>> >> >> >> > > > > > passed
>> >> >> >> > > > > > easily.
>> >> >> >> > > > >
>> >> >> >> > > > > It would pass even more easily if on the ballot today.
>> >> >> >> > > >
>> >> >> >> > > > • Why would it pass more easily today if support for same-sex
>> >> >> >> > > > > > easily.
>> >> >> >> > > > >
>> >> >> >> > > > > It would pass even more easily if on the ballot today.
>> >> >> >> > > >
>> >> >marriage
>> >> >> >> > > > has incresed?
>> >> >> >> > >
>> >> >> >> > > Oooops. You caught me. Let me rephrase.
>> >> >> >> > >
>> >> >> >> > > It would be roundly defeated in a landslide vote if on the ballot
>> >> >> >> > > > has incresed?
>> >> >> >> > >
>> >> >> >> > > Oooops. You caught me. Let me rephrase.
>> >> >> >> > >
>> >> >again.
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > • maybe but there are a number of heteros who think the GLBT
>> >community
>> >> >> >> > has gone over the top. If I were the decider I would gladly choose
>> >> >to let
>> >> >> >> > non-heteros own the word "marriage", and use the term "domestic
>> >> >> >> > partnership" for hetero couples. However, in time it seems
>> >likely that
>> >> >> >> > partnership" for hetero couples. However, in time it seems
>> >> >> >> > the beastie boys will start pressuring the GLBT community to allow
>> >> >> >> > "marriage" to their favorite female German shepherd or whoever
>> >they hook
>> >> >> >> > up with and a new battle over equal rights for Everybody will take
>> >> >place.
>> >> >> >> > .
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> When did German shepherds gain the ability to give legal informed
>> >> >place.
>> >> >> >> > .
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> consent?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >• Doggie consent can be determined by a canine psychologist.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> In fact, consent can be assumed from the absence of a refusal of
>> >> >> consent.
>> >> >
>> >> >• In the case in South Oxnard, the Oxnard police determined that the dog
>> >> >> In fact, consent can be assumed from the absence of a refusal of
>> >> >> consent.
>> >> >
>> >> >enjoyed time spent with her owner and that if the neighbors did not like
>> >> >what they saw, they should stop standing on boxes to see over the fence.
>> >>
>> >> Exactly so. Self-inflicted.
>> >
>> >• Good Christians need to keep close tabs on anything they consider immoral.
>> >> >what they saw, they should stop standing on boxes to see over the fence.
>> >>
>> >> Exactly so. Self-inflicted.
>> >
>>
>> You can't condemn what you don't see!
>
>• Good Christians somehow manage to.
Based on hearsay?
The Revd
Mar 29, 2013, 9:07:50 PM3/29/13
to
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 17:12:53 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com>
wrote:
>The Revd wrote:
>> On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 16:09:18 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Well, for one thing, atheists have larger vocabularies than Jews, so we
>>> are able to express ourselves without resorting to language that would
>>> offend the Ineffable.
>>
>> Well, for another thing, I'm not a jew. This is an 'anti-semitic'®™
>> newsgroup. And you still have no morality to discuss.
>>
>
>I see. Nazis go to Jewish newsgroups,
SCI is not a jew newsgroup. It hasn't been a jew newsgroup for a
*long* time.
>Fundies go to atheist newsgroups.
So you're a fundy?
> I suppose the underlying motive of trolls crosses all boundaries.
Never mind all that. As an atheist, what's your basis (if any) for
your morality (if any)?
wrote:
>The Revd wrote:
>> On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 16:09:18 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Well, for one thing, atheists have larger vocabularies than Jews, so we
>>> are able to express ourselves without resorting to language that would
>>> offend the Ineffable.
>>
>> Well, for another thing, I'm not a jew. This is an 'anti-semitic'®™
>> newsgroup. And you still have no morality to discuss.
>>
>
>I see. Nazis go to Jewish newsgroups,
SCI is not a jew newsgroup. It hasn't been a jew newsgroup for a
*long* time.
>Fundies go to atheist newsgroups.
So you're a fundy?
> I suppose the underlying motive of trolls crosses all boundaries.
Never mind all that. As an atheist, what's your basis (if any) for
your morality (if any)?
The Revd
Mar 29, 2013, 9:08:57 PM3/29/13
to
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 17:41:31 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
<hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>In article <3d0bl81646hagbhlb...@4ax.com>,
> The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 19:47:13 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
>> <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <jdg9l817nb2q95mqs...@4ax.com>,
>> > The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
>> >> On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 15:03:54 -0700 (PDT), sully <suls...@yahoo.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >> >If you have no problem with the relationship, then
>> >> >I assume you have no problem with the morality
>> >> >of their relationship.
>> >>
>> >> There *isn't* any.
>> >
>> >Why do you say that?
>>
>> Homosexual relationships are *defined* by their absence of morality.
>
>Defined by whom?
Defined by their very nature: it's a sexual disorientation.
>In article <3d0bl81646hagbhlb...@4ax.com>,
> The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 19:47:13 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
>> <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <jdg9l817nb2q95mqs...@4ax.com>,
>> > The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
>> >> On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 15:03:54 -0700 (PDT), sully <suls...@yahoo.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >> >If you have no problem with the relationship, then
>> >> >I assume you have no problem with the morality
>> >> >of their relationship.
>> >>
>> >> There *isn't* any.
>> >
>> >Why do you say that?
>>
>> Homosexual relationships are *defined* by their absence of morality.
>
>Defined by whom?
The Revd
Mar 29, 2013, 9:10:56 PM3/29/13
to
The Revd
Mar 29, 2013, 9:15:54 PM3/29/13
to
for nothing. They voted overwhelmingly against Prop 8.
The Revd
Mar 29, 2013, 9:17:23 PM3/29/13
to
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 17:37:27 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
No, it won't. The rationale has nothing to do with whether it's
constitutional or not.
constitutional or not.
The Revd
Mar 29, 2013, 9:18:20 PM3/29/13
to
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 18:45:57 -0500, Mitchell Holman
<nomailverizon.net> wrote:
>The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote in
>news:ti4cl8dribtb23467...@4ax.com:
>
>> On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 16:50:50 -0500, Mitchell Holman
>> <nomailverizon.net> wrote:
>>
>>>The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote in
>>>news:svnbl8pcufl77acbu...@4ax.com:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 12:31:21 -0300, John Manning
>>>> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On 3/29/2013 11:31 AM, •RLMeasures wrote:
>>>>>> In article <MKOdnZ0Y24HgZsnM...@giganews.com>, John
>>>>>> Manning <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>@z6g2000pbd.googlegroups.com>,
>>>>>>>> sully <suls...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Mar 27, 1:53=A0pm, logan.sac...@gmail.com (Logan Sacket)
>>
>> Being morally equivalent.
>
>
> Why would anyone want to be equivalent
>to your morals?
Why would anyone want to be equivalent to the lack of yours?
<nomailverizon.net> wrote:
>The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote in
>news:ti4cl8dribtb23467...@4ax.com:
>
>> On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 16:50:50 -0500, Mitchell Holman
>> <nomailverizon.net> wrote:
>>
>>>The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote in
>>>news:svnbl8pcufl77acbu...@4ax.com:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 12:31:21 -0300, John Manning
>>>> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On 3/29/2013 11:31 AM, •RLMeasures wrote:
>>>>>> In article <MKOdnZ0Y24HgZsnM...@giganews.com>, John
>>>>>> Manning <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 3/28/2013 10:35 PM, •RLMeasures wrote:
>>>>>>>> In article
>>>>>>>> <ad1869e1-1ab3-4b0d-bee7-ec4a09cef238
>>>>>>> On 3/28/2013 10:35 PM, •RLMeasures wrote:
>>>>>>>> In article
>@z6g2000pbd.googlegroups.com>,
>>>>>>>> sully <suls...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Mar 27, 1:53=A0pm, logan.sac...@gmail.com (Logan Sacket)
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 15:48:28 -0300, John Manning
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> snip
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Ha, I saw that one coming.
>>>>>>>>>> If you have a response that Manning can't answer, you get
>>>>>>>>>> plonked.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Do you have any gay men as friends?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 15:48:28 -0300, John Manning
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> snip
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Ha, I saw that one coming.
>>>>>>>>>> If you have a response that Manning can't answer, you get
>>>>>>>>>> plonked.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Do you have any gay men as friends?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I have some very good friends that are gay. That they
>>>>>>>>> want to have the same committed relationships and
>>>>>>>>> family as I do is certainly not absurd.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Do you think it absurd that they would want that?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> want to have the same committed relationships and
>>>>>>>>> family as I do is certainly not absurd.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Do you think it absurd that they would want that?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Not all my gay friends want such things, just
>>>>>>>>> like not all my hetero friends want such things.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> JRM has less patience than I do with confirmed
>>>>>>>>> bigots - maybe because I used to be one.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> like not all my hetero friends want such things.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> JRM has less patience than I do with confirmed
>>>>>>>>> bigots - maybe because I used to be one.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> • JRM does not tolerate other opinions.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There's a big difference between a mere opinion and
>>>>>>> open unabashed bigotry.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *** Are heterosexual unions exactly equal to homosexual unions?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>They are legally in 15 countries, including in nine states in the
>USA.
>>>>>
>>>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage#Legal_recognition
>>>>
>>>> Legal equivalence is not the same as moral equivalence. In fact,
>>>> there is no moral equivalence in any of the 15 countries or 9 states.
>>>
>>>
>>> What is "moral equivalence"?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There's a big difference between a mere opinion and
>>>>>>> open unabashed bigotry.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *** Are heterosexual unions exactly equal to homosexual unions?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>They are legally in 15 countries, including in nine states in the
>USA.
>>>>>
>>>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage#Legal_recognition
>>>>
>>>> Legal equivalence is not the same as moral equivalence. In fact,
>>>> there is no moral equivalence in any of the 15 countries or 9 states.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Being morally equivalent.
>
>
> Why would anyone want to be equivalent
>to your morals?
Why would anyone want to be equivalent to the lack of yours?
The Revd
Mar 29, 2013, 9:19:13 PM3/29/13
to
amoral by definiton. Is that what you're saying?
The Revd
Mar 29, 2013, 9:19:59 PM3/29/13
to
The Revd
Mar 29, 2013, 9:20:44 PM3/29/13
to
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 17:37:04 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
Why is separate but equal not equal?
The Revd
Mar 29, 2013, 9:21:43 PM3/29/13
to
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 17:36:45 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
Homosexual 'parents'.
Mitchell Holman
Mar 29, 2013, 9:42:07 PM3/29/13
to
The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote in
news:4bfcl81edb3sbdml3...@4ax.com:
>
> If morality were strictly a religious concept, atheists would be
> amoral by definiton.
current ones imposed on you by your
religion?
Mitchell Holman
Mar 29, 2013, 9:43:43 PM3/29/13
to
The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote in
news:shnbl895ttfnkcvpv...@4ax.com:
> On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 12:38:02 -0300, John Manning
> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>
>>
>>The blubber isn't the issue. It's yours and Duke's low-life,
>>ignorant redneck bigotry.
>
> Actually it's your limp-wristed, bigoted heterophobia
Where do you think gay people come from,
if not from straight people?
Free Lunch
Mar 29, 2013, 9:45:41 PM3/29/13
to
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 22:04:51 GMT, logan....@gmail.com (Logan Sacket)
wrote in alt.atheism:
>On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 17:26:00 -0500, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>
>wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 22:11:59 GMT, logan....@gmail.com (Logan Sacket)
>>wrote in alt.atheism:
>>
>>>On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 12:47:13 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
>>>
>>>>In article
>>>><hlwdjsd2-29F99D...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>, Jeanne
>>>>Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In article <r-2703131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures)
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> > In article <qNadnXiZVu8xnM7M...@giganews.com>, John Manning
>>>>> > <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> > > On 3/27/2013 11:17 AM, The Revd wrote:
>>>>> > > > On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 07:04:33 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
>>>>> > > >
>>>>> > > >> In article
>>>>> > > >> <hlwdjsd2-D249D8...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
>>>>> > > >> Jeanne
>>>>> > Jeanne
>>>>> > Manning
>>>>> > > >>>>>> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> sully
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Lunch
>>>allowed people that owned property or a business to vote.
>>
>>Another bigoted fool heard from.
>>
>>Why do so many low-information voters think that reactionary hatred is a
>>good idea?
>
>Are just a fool who rambles without understanding what they are
>saying?
>I have no bigotry against women as you claim.
>
>Are you calling people bigots because you want to be as popular as
>Manning?
You have already shown us that you are a bigot. Just because you refuse
to acknowledge that you are, even though your posts reek of bigotry does
not mean that anyone will believe you when you deny that you are a
bigot.
wrote in alt.atheism:
>On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 17:26:00 -0500, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>
>wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 22:11:59 GMT, logan....@gmail.com (Logan Sacket)
>>wrote in alt.atheism:
>>
>>>On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 12:47:13 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
>>>
>>>>In article
>>>><hlwdjsd2-29F99D...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>, Jeanne
>>>>Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In article <r-2703131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures)
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> > In article <qNadnXiZVu8xnM7M...@giganews.com>, John Manning
>>>>> > <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> > > On 3/27/2013 11:17 AM, The Revd wrote:
>>>>> > > > On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 07:04:33 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote:
>>>>> > > >
>>>>> > > >> In article
>>>>> > > >> <hlwdjsd2-D249D8...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
>>>>> > > >> Jeanne
>>>>> > > >> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> > > >>
>>>>> > > >>> In article <r-2603130...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures)
>>>>> > > >>> wrote:
>>>>> > > >>>
>>>>> > > >>>> In article
>>>>> > > >>>> <hlwdjsd2-9D35EE...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
>>>>> > > >>
>>>>> > > >>> In article <r-2603130...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures)
>>>>> > > >>> wrote:
>>>>> > > >>>
>>>>> > > >>>> In article
>>>>> > Jeanne
>>>>> > > >>>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> > > >>>>
>>>>> > > >>>>> In article <r-2403131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures)
>>>>> > > >>>>> wrote:
>>>>> > > >>>>>
>>>>> > > >>>>>> In article <-bSdneDiqtZZy9PM...@giganews.com>, John
>>>>> > > >>>>
>>>>> > > >>>>> In article <r-2403131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures)
>>>>> > > >>>>> wrote:
>>>>> > > >>>>>
>>>>> > Manning
>>>>> > > >>>>>> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>>>>> > > >>>>>>
>>>>> > > >>>>>>> On 3/23/2013 8:50 PM, •RLMeasures wrote:
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> In article
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>
>>>>> > > >>>> <a2419356-915a-4681...@f5g2000yqp.googlegroups.com>,
>>>>> > > >>>>>>> On 3/23/2013 8:50 PM, •RLMeasures wrote:
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> In article
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>
>>>>> > > >>>> sully
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> <suls...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> On Mar 22, 8:06=A0pm, r...@somis.org ( RLMeasures) wrote:
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> In article
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> > > >> <6f3b5a7c-2070-4110-9aac-4930e4bc3...@m9g2000pby.googlegroups.com>,
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> <suls...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> On Mar 22, 8:06=A0pm, r...@somis.org ( RLMeasures) wrote:
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> In article
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> sully
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 22, 10:52=3DA0am, r...@somis.org ( RLMeasures) wrote:
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> In article <cg2pk8h5uj5or0vgfjg9ct807sd22ss...@4ax.com>, Free
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 22, 10:52=3DA0am, r...@somis.org ( RLMeasures) wrote:
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Lunch
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>>> marriage is a good foundation for procreation.
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> It is so because of the promise and demonstration of
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> commitment.
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Gays already demonstrate that commitment to each
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> other and have for centuries.
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> It's anti-American to deny them equal rights.
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> *** =A0Does a special interest group have the right to hijack
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> words?
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> I've demonstrated that the usage has been broad since the the
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> time it was first uttered in Latin. You ignore facts like a
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> TBM.
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> That you are eager to use the term to describe two
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> cards in a card game and deny it to human couples
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> demonstrates the depth of your pathetic bigotry
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> on this manner.
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> JRM has resorted to simply namecalling you on this
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> topic, I can see his point.
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> • Manning can not tolerate those who have differing
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> It is so because of the promise and demonstration of
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> commitment.
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> Gays already demonstrate that commitment to each
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> other and have for centuries.
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>> It's anti-American to deny them equal rights.
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> *** =A0Does a special interest group have the right to hijack
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>> words?
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> I've demonstrated that the usage has been broad since the the
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> time it was first uttered in Latin. You ignore facts like a
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> TBM.
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> That you are eager to use the term to describe two
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> cards in a card game and deny it to human couples
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> demonstrates the depth of your pathetic bigotry
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> on this manner.
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>>
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> JRM has resorted to simply namecalling you on this
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> topic, I can see his point.
>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>
>>>>> > > > Indeed. Once you start redefining marriage, who knows where it will
>>>>> > > > end?
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > That's what they said about freeing the slaves, giving women the
>>>>> > > right to vote,
>>>>> >
>>>>> > � An extremely egregious mistake.
>>>>>
>>>>> Which one? Or both?
>>>>
>>>>� women voting of course.
>>>
>>>Seems the founding fathers knew what they were doing when they only
>>>>> > > > end?
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > >
>>>>> > > That's what they said about freeing the slaves, giving women the
>>>>> > > right to vote,
>>>>> >
>>>>> > � An extremely egregious mistake.
>>>>>
>>>>> Which one? Or both?
>>>>
>>>>� women voting of course.
>>>
>>>allowed people that owned property or a business to vote.
>>
>>Another bigoted fool heard from.
>>
>>Why do so many low-information voters think that reactionary hatred is a
>>good idea?
>
>Are just a fool who rambles without understanding what they are
>saying?
>I have no bigotry against women as you claim.
>
>Are you calling people bigots because you want to be as popular as
>Manning?
You have already shown us that you are a bigot. Just because you refuse
to acknowledge that you are, even though your posts reek of bigotry does
not mean that anyone will believe you when you deny that you are a
bigot.
Free Lunch
Mar 29, 2013, 9:47:20 PM3/29/13
to
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 04:52:19 -0700, The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks>
wrote in alt.atheism:
>On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 19:50:11 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
><hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
>>In article <r-2803131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures)
be poor and weak again.
wrote in alt.atheism:
>On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 19:50:11 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
><hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
>>In article <r-2803131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures)
>>Okay. Explain to me why that was "an extremely egregious mistake"?
>
>Look what's happened since.
Our country grew and prospered. I can see why reactionaries want us to
>
>Look what's happened since.
be poor and weak again.
Mitchell Holman
Mar 29, 2013, 9:49:23 PM3/29/13
to
The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote in
news:fnecl8lgsvda399bc...@4ax.com:
disorientation stems from what, again?
Free Lunch
Mar 29, 2013, 9:53:20 PM3/29/13
to
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 22:08:54 GMT, logan....@gmail.com (Logan Sacket)
wrote in alt.atheism:
>On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 17:43:12 -0500, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>
>wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 21:58:47 GMT, logan....@gmail.com (Logan Sacket)
>>wrote in alt.atheism:
>>
>>>On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 18:35:10 -0500, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 07:19:18 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote in
>>>>alt.atheism:
>>>>
>>>>>In article
>>>>><hlwdjsd2-C233BD...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>, Jeanne
>>>>>Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>...
>>>>>> Of course not.
>>>>>
>>>>>? then name an unequal one.
>>>>
>>>>Under DOMA a legally-married person is not treated as married for
>>>>federal purposes. The taxes in the case today show us that same sex
>>>>marriages are not equal.
>>>
>>>But the big advantage is that gays that don't marry don't need to sign
>>>a prenep and don't have to give 1/2 their life savings to the domestic
>>>partner when they split.
>>
>>Nonsense. States that allow same sex marriage have the same laws for
>>divorce for all married couples.
>
>There you go again, not understanding the context.
>
>I specifically said, "gays that don't marry".
Neither do heteros that don't marry. The context was marriage and DOMA
which forbid the federal government from acknowledging same sex
marriage.
You have earned your reputation as a bigot.
wrote in alt.atheism:
>On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 17:43:12 -0500, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>
>wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 21:58:47 GMT, logan....@gmail.com (Logan Sacket)
>>wrote in alt.atheism:
>>
>>>On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 18:35:10 -0500, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 07:19:18 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote in
>>>>alt.atheism:
>>>>
>>>>>In article
>>>>><hlwdjsd2-C233BD...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>, Jeanne
>>>>>Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>...
>>>>>> Of course not.
>>>>>
>>>>>? then name an unequal one.
>>>>
>>>>Under DOMA a legally-married person is not treated as married for
>>>>federal purposes. The taxes in the case today show us that same sex
>>>>marriages are not equal.
>>>
>>>But the big advantage is that gays that don't marry don't need to sign
>>>a prenep and don't have to give 1/2 their life savings to the domestic
>>>partner when they split.
>>
>>Nonsense. States that allow same sex marriage have the same laws for
>>divorce for all married couples.
>
>There you go again, not understanding the context.
>
>I specifically said, "gays that don't marry".
Neither do heteros that don't marry. The context was marriage and DOMA
which forbid the federal government from acknowledging same sex
marriage.
You have earned your reputation as a bigot.
Free Lunch
Mar 29, 2013, 9:57:46 PM3/29/13
to
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 05:05:40 -0700, The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks>
wrote in alt.atheism:
>On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 21:09:25 -0500, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>
>wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 17:13:11 -0700, The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks>
>>wrote in alt.atheism:
>>
>>>On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 17:51:20 -0500, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 12:19:34 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote in
>>>>alt.atheism:
>>>>
>>>>>In article <ga17l8hjrsf0bbnn4...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch
>>>>><lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 07:28:32 -0700, r...@somis.org (?LMeasures) wrote in
>>>>>> alt.atheism:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >In article <qp94l8le740ak5ria...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch
>
>I have.
>
>>We already know that many opposite sex couples cannot
>>procreate. If this is about procreation, then it is only fair to limit
>>marriage to fertile couples.
>
>Even if it were *just* about procreation, you can't *force* fertile
>couples to procreate.
No, but if it were about procreation, we would not allow couples who
cannot have children to marry and we would force divorces on those who
do not have children once they are not able to have them.
The procreation argument is a pathetic last gasp of the anti-gay bigots.
It is an empty argument that is nothing but a joke.
wrote in alt.atheism:
>On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 21:09:25 -0500, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>
>wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 17:13:11 -0700, The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks>
>>wrote in alt.atheism:
>>
>>>On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 17:51:20 -0500, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 12:19:34 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote in
>>>>alt.atheism:
>>>>
>>>>>In article <ga17l8hjrsf0bbnn4...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch
>>>>><lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 07:28:32 -0700, r...@somis.org (?LMeasures) wrote in
>>>>>> alt.atheism:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >In article <qp94l8le740ak5ria...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch
>>>>>> ><lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>>>>...
>>>>>> >> Will we force all couples over 55 who have never had children to
>>>>>> >> divorce?
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >? Who proposed this?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> IT is the natural and necessary conclusion to the argument that marriage
>>>>>> is only for procreation.
>>>>>
>>>>>*** I did not argue that.
>>>>
>>>>Then procreation is off the table as an excuse for discriminating
>>>>against same sex couples.
>>>
>>>No, it's not. Opposite sex couples may procreate, same sex couples
>>>can't.
>>
>>Make up your mind.
>>>>...
>>>>>> >> Will we force all couples over 55 who have never had children to
>>>>>> >> divorce?
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >? Who proposed this?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> IT is the natural and necessary conclusion to the argument that marriage
>>>>>> is only for procreation.
>>>>>
>>>>>*** I did not argue that.
>>>>
>>>>Then procreation is off the table as an excuse for discriminating
>>>>against same sex couples.
>>>
>>>No, it's not. Opposite sex couples may procreate, same sex couples
>>>can't.
>>
>
>I have.
>
>>We already know that many opposite sex couples cannot
>>procreate. If this is about procreation, then it is only fair to limit
>>marriage to fertile couples.
>
>Even if it were *just* about procreation, you can't *force* fertile
>couples to procreate.
No, but if it were about procreation, we would not allow couples who
cannot have children to marry and we would force divorces on those who
do not have children once they are not able to have them.
The procreation argument is a pathetic last gasp of the anti-gay bigots.
It is an empty argument that is nothing but a joke.
Free Lunch
Mar 29, 2013, 9:58:46 PM3/29/13
to
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 05:07:43 -0700, The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks>
wrote in alt.atheism:
>On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 19:56:22 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
><hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
>>In article <r3n9l8hme4n5poij4...@4ax.com>,
nothing else, nothing but bigotry, nothing but hatred, nothing but a
mockery of Jesus.
wrote in alt.atheism:
>On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 19:56:22 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
><hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>
>>In article <r3n9l8hme4n5poij4...@4ax.com>,
>> The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 17:51:20 -0500, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> >On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 12:19:34 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote in
>>> >alt.atheism:
>>> >
>>> >>In article <ga17l8hjrsf0bbnn4...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch
>>> >><lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>> On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 07:28:32 -0700, r...@somis.org (?LMeasures) wrote in
>>> >>> alt.atheism:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> >In article <qp94l8le740ak5ria...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch
>>> >>> ><lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>>> >...
>>> >>> >> Will we force all couples over 55 who have never had children to
>>> >>> >> divorce?
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> >? Who proposed this?
>>> >>>
>>> >>> IT is the natural and necessary conclusion to the argument that marriage
>>> >>> is only for procreation.
>>> >>
>>> >>*** I did not argue that.
>>> >
>>> >Then procreation is off the table as an excuse for discriminating
>>> >against same sex couples.
>>>
>>> No, it's not. Opposite sex couples may procreate, same sex couples
>>> can't.
>>
>>
>>> On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 17:51:20 -0500, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> >On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 12:19:34 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote in
>>> >alt.atheism:
>>> >
>>> >>In article <ga17l8hjrsf0bbnn4...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch
>>> >><lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>> On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 07:28:32 -0700, r...@somis.org (?LMeasures) wrote in
>>> >>> alt.atheism:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> >In article <qp94l8le740ak5ria...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch
>>> >>> ><lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>>> >...
>>> >>> >> Will we force all couples over 55 who have never had children to
>>> >>> >> divorce?
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> >? Who proposed this?
>>> >>>
>>> >>> IT is the natural and necessary conclusion to the argument that marriage
>>> >>> is only for procreation.
>>> >>
>>> >>*** I did not argue that.
>>> >
>>> >Then procreation is off the table as an excuse for discriminating
>>> >against same sex couples.
>>>
>>> No, it's not. Opposite sex couples may procreate, same sex couples
>>> can't.
>>
>>Elderly opposite sex couples cannot procreate so they can't be allowed
>>to marry, either.
>
>It's not *just* about procreation. They can always adopt if they
>choose to. And the child will then have proper parents, not a couple
>of sexual degenerates.
So you are back to your vile bigotry as your real reason. You have
>>to marry, either.
>
>It's not *just* about procreation. They can always adopt if they
>choose to. And the child will then have proper parents, not a couple
>of sexual degenerates.
nothing else, nothing but bigotry, nothing but hatred, nothing but a
mockery of Jesus.
Free Lunch
Mar 29, 2013, 9:59:34 PM3/29/13
to
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 18:21:43 -0700, The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks>
wrote in alt.atheism:
So you allege, but you haven't made any effort to actually show us.
Please provide something other than your hate-filled bigotry as an
argument.
wrote in alt.atheism:
Please provide something other than your hate-filled bigotry as an
argument.
Free Lunch
Mar 29, 2013, 10:00:19 PM3/29/13
to
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 07:38:32 -0700, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures) wrote in
alt.atheism:
>In article <1MGdnSzuhNJFYMnM...@giganews.com>, John Manning
><jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>
>> On 3/28/2013 11:06 PM, •RLMeasures wrote:
>> > In article <l9i9l89nu8u3f8r7c...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch
>> >
>>
>>
>> Yet you've brought it up numerous times in one way or another.
>
>*** the issue has always been word misappropriation.
Nope. It is a perfectly rational extension of the use of the word and
the concept that the word describes.
alt.atheism:
>In article <1MGdnSzuhNJFYMnM...@giganews.com>, John Manning
><jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>
>> On 3/28/2013 11:06 PM, •RLMeasures wrote:
>> > In article <l9i9l89nu8u3f8r7c...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch
>> > <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 12:19:34 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote in
>> >> alt.atheism:
>> >>
>> >>> In article <ga17l8hjrsf0bbnn4...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch
>> >>> <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 07:28:32 -0700, r...@somis.org (?LMeasures) wrote in
>> >>>> alt.atheism:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> In article <qp94l8le740ak5ria...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch
>> >>>>> <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>> >> ...
>> >>>>>> Will we force all couples over 55 who have never had children to
>> >>>>>> divorce?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> ? Who proposed this?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> IT is the natural and necessary conclusion to the argument that marriage
>> >>>> is only for procreation.
>> >>>
>> >>> *** I did not argue that.
>> >>
>> >> Then procreation is off the table as an excuse for discriminating
>> >> against same sex couples.
>> >
>> > • it was never on my table.
>> >
>> >> On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 12:19:34 -0700, r...@somis.org (•RLMeasures) wrote in
>> >> alt.atheism:
>> >>
>> >>> In article <ga17l8hjrsf0bbnn4...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch
>> >>> <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 07:28:32 -0700, r...@somis.org (?LMeasures) wrote in
>> >>>> alt.atheism:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> In article <qp94l8le740ak5ria...@4ax.com>, Free Lunch
>> >>>>> <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>> >> ...
>> >>>>>> Will we force all couples over 55 who have never had children to
>> >>>>>> divorce?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> ? Who proposed this?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> IT is the natural and necessary conclusion to the argument that marriage
>> >>>> is only for procreation.
>> >>>
>> >>> *** I did not argue that.
>> >>
>> >> Then procreation is off the table as an excuse for discriminating
>> >> against same sex couples.
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> Yet you've brought it up numerous times in one way or another.
>
>*** the issue has always been word misappropriation.
Nope. It is a perfectly rational extension of the use of the word and
the concept that the word describes.
Free Lunch
Mar 29, 2013, 10:02:02 PM3/29/13
to
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 05:09:19 -0700, The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks>
wrote in alt.atheism:
>On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 21:10:05 -0500, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>
>wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 17:13:51 -0700, The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks>
>>wrote in alt.atheism:
>>
>>>On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 17:52:55 -0500, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 18:13:01 -0700, The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Grik>
>>>>wrote in alt.atheism:
>>>>
>>>>>On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 21:13:59 -0300, John Manning
>>>>><jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On 3/27/2013 8:54 PM, Free Lunch wrote:
>>>>>>> On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 20:30:07 -0300, John Manning <jrob...@terra.com.br>
>>>>>>> wrote in alt.atheism:
>>>>...
>>>>>>>> Weren't you originally from the Bible-Belt, Rich?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hating Jesus' teachings is a core doctrine of Bible-belt Christians.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>It's astonishing how extremely unlike the Biblical Jesus that
>>>>>>Bible-Belt [American Taliban] bigoted bunch really is.
>>>>>
>>>>>What the fuck do you know about the "Biblical Jesus", asshole?
>>>>
>>>>Quite a lot. Clearly more than you do.
>>>
>>>You know jack shit, asshole.
>>
>>Proving that I know far more than you.
>
>Anything but.
>
>>>>What religion are you a revd at? You have made it absolutely clear that
>>>>it cannot possibly be any religion that follows Jesus.
>>>
>>>WE aks the questions, asshole.
>>
>>Why would you ever bother to ask questions? You never want the answer.
>
>I don't want *your* answers, sunshine. You're a heterophobic�� bigot.
Of course you don't want my answers, I keep pointing out that you are an
evil, disgusting bigot. You are shameless in your hatred. For someone
who calls himself the Revd, you have made it abundantly clear that you
refuse to follow Jesus.
wrote in alt.atheism:
>On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 21:10:05 -0500, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>
>wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 17:13:51 -0700, The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks>
>>wrote in alt.atheism:
>>
>>>On Thu, 28 Mar 2013 17:52:55 -0500, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 18:13:01 -0700, The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Grik>
>>>>wrote in alt.atheism:
>>>>
>>>>>On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 21:13:59 -0300, John Manning
>>>>><jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On 3/27/2013 8:54 PM, Free Lunch wrote:
>>>>>>> On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 20:30:07 -0300, John Manning <jrob...@terra.com.br>
>>>>>>> wrote in alt.atheism:
>>>>...
>>>>>>>> Weren't you originally from the Bible-Belt, Rich?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hating Jesus' teachings is a core doctrine of Bible-belt Christians.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>It's astonishing how extremely unlike the Biblical Jesus that
>>>>>>Bible-Belt [American Taliban] bigoted bunch really is.
>>>>>
>>>>>What the fuck do you know about the "Biblical Jesus", asshole?
>>>>
>>>>Quite a lot. Clearly more than you do.
>>>
>>>You know jack shit, asshole.
>>
>>Proving that I know far more than you.
>
>Anything but.
>
>>>>What religion are you a revd at? You have made it absolutely clear that
>>>>it cannot possibly be any religion that follows Jesus.
>>>
>>>WE aks the questions, asshole.
>>
>>Why would you ever bother to ask questions? You never want the answer.
>
>I don't want *your* answers, sunshine. You're a heterophobic�� bigot.
Of course you don't want my answers, I keep pointing out that you are an
evil, disgusting bigot. You are shameless in your hatred. For someone
who calls himself the Revd, you have made it abundantly clear that you
refuse to follow Jesus.
The Revd
Mar 29, 2013, 10:27:24 PM3/29/13
to
The Revd
Mar 29, 2013, 10:30:57 PM3/29/13
to
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 20:45:41 -0500, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>
Anybody who opposes your heterophobic�� agenda is a bigot? That makes
YOU a bigot, sunshine.
YOU a bigot, sunshine.
The Revd
Mar 29, 2013, 10:32:20 PM3/29/13
to
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 20:47:20 -0500, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>
wrote:
>>>> > > > >>>>>>>> • Manning can not tolerate those who have differing
Not morally.
> I can see why reactionaries want us to
>be poor and weak again.
I can see why liberals applaud the drop in moral standards.
wrote:
> I can see why reactionaries want us to
>be poor and weak again.
Mitchell Holman
Mar 29, 2013, 10:33:02 PM3/29/13
to
The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote in
news:nbjcl8do1je6sgja8...@4ax.com:
The Revd
Mar 29, 2013, 10:33:45 PM3/29/13
to
orientation from a sexual disorientation?
The Revd
Mar 29, 2013, 10:34:35 PM3/29/13
to
The Revd
Mar 29, 2013, 10:38:27 PM3/29/13
to
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 20:57:46 -0500, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>
But since it's not just about procreation, that's irrelevant.
>The procreation argument is a pathetic last gasp of the anti-gay bigots.
>It is an empty argument that is nothing but a joke.
No, it's not. Trying to suggest that procreation is irrelevant is the
pathetic last gasp of the pro-'gay' heterophobes®™.
>The procreation argument is a pathetic last gasp of the anti-gay bigots.
>It is an empty argument that is nothing but a joke.
pathetic last gasp of the pro-'gay' heterophobes®™.
The Revd
Mar 29, 2013, 10:41:24 PM3/29/13
to
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 20:59:34 -0500, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>
What do you want to see exactly? Since homosexuality is, by its very
nature, degenerate, homosexual 'parents' are degenerates.
>Please provide something other than your hate-filled bigotry as an
>argument.
There is no "hate-filled bigotry", as you put it...except from your
side.
nature, degenerate, homosexual 'parents' are degenerates.
>Please provide something other than your hate-filled bigotry as an
>argument.
side.
The Revd
Mar 29, 2013, 10:43:20 PM3/29/13
to
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 20:58:46 -0500, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>
Your pro-'gay' heterophobia�� is coming through loud and clear. You
are opposed to anything traditional and/or moral. That's the real
vile bigotry and hatred here.
are opposed to anything traditional and/or moral. That's the real
vile bigotry and hatred here.
The Revd
Mar 29, 2013, 10:43:57 PM3/29/13
to
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 21:00:19 -0500, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>
Nope. Not until we finish redefining it.
The Revd
Mar 29, 2013, 10:46:24 PM3/29/13
to
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 21:02:02 -0500, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>
And I keep pointing out that you are a vile heterophobe��. And, no
doubt, a degenerate yourself.
>You are shameless in your hatred.
Not nearly as much as you are.
>or someone
>who calls himself the Revd, you have made it abundantly clear that you
>refuse to follow Jesus.
Fuck you, sunshine. You're obviously so full of shit that a dozen
enemas wouldn't help you.
doubt, a degenerate yourself.
>You are shameless in your hatred.
>or someone
>who calls himself the Revd, you have made it abundantly clear that you
>refuse to follow Jesus.
enemas wouldn't help you.
Dakota
Mar 29, 2013, 10:52:58 PM3/29/13
to
On 3/29/2013 6:51 PM, John Manning wrote:
> On 3/29/2013 8:39 PM, •RLMeasures wrote:
>> In article <U9KdnaVduKOHIcjM...@giganews.com>, John
>> Manning
>> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In article <r-2803131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
>>>>> (•RLMeasures)
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In article
>>>>>> <hlwdjsd2-D3823D...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
>>>>>> Jeanne
>>>>>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In article <r-2703131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
>>>>>>> (•RLMeasures)
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In article <2PSdnVFxQtiCYM_M...@giganews.com>,
>>>>>>>> John Manning
>>>>>>>> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 3/27/2013 10:28 AM, •RLMeasures wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> In article
>>>>>>>>>> <hlwdjsd2-EA3651...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Jeanne
>>>>>>>>>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> In article <r-2603130...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
>>>>>>>>>>> (•RLMeasures)
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> In article
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> <hlwdjsd2-55EBA1...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Jeanne
>>>>>>>>>>>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <r-2503131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (•RLMeasures)
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article
>>>> <StCdnbiGvaBs8tLM...@giganews.com>, John
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Manning
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/24/2013 6:25 PM, •RLMeasures wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <FtqdnR0iocvjwNPM...@giganews.com>,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> John
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Manning
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/23/2013 8:56 PM,
>> •RLMeasures wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> <4a39d9ac-6ae7-4817...@9g2000yqy.googlegroups.com>,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sully
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, that is an objection to the argument that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> marriage
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>> of posts
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> expressing his bigotry, finally turns the page!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *** I'm still opposed to word hijacking by a small
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> special
>>>>>>>>>> interest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> group
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that is okay with using violence to advance their agenda.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Call for citation that there's any organized violence
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by gays
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to advance their equal rights.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *** Act Up is one such group.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> What organized violence did they commit?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> • They unabashedly threw condoms inside St. Patrick's
>>>> Cathedral
>>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>>> NYC
>>>>>>>>>>>> when the Archbishop was speaking. This could easily have
>>>>>>>>>>>> caused
>>>>>>>>>>>> heart
>>>>>>>>>>>> attacks and deaths among TBRCs.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> How is that violence?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> • Tossing condoms in the direction of a Cardinal
>>>>>>>>>> inside a
>>>> Catholic
>>>>>>>>>> church
>>>>>>>>>> is clearly an act of war as well as a cardinal sin. It's
>>>>>>>>>> obvious
>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>> are not a devout Catholic Jeanne.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Since he's badly lost all his bigoted arguments, Mr Measures
>>>>>>>>> is resorting to childishness, misdirection and distraction.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> • Act Up did toss condoms inside St Patricks.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And we're all still waiting for you to explain how that's an
>>>>>>> act of
>>>>>>> violence.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> • I did.
>>>>>
>>>>> You didn't. You did not.
>>>>
>>>> • To a Cardinal, tossing 100s of condoms around inside God's
>>>> Holy Church
>>>> is an act of over the top violence.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Nonsense. Measures grasps at straws.
>>
>> *** I saw a videotape of the incident. The Cardinal was tight jawed.
>>
>
>
> It wasn't violence, Rich.
>
Sounds like the tight-jawed Cardinal might have been close to using
violence against the Act Up protesters.
> On 3/29/2013 8:39 PM, •RLMeasures wrote:
>> In article <U9KdnaVduKOHIcjM...@giganews.com>, John
>> Manning
>> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>>
>>> On 3/29/2013 11:43 AM, •RLMeasures wrote:
>>>> In article
>>>> <hlwdjsd2-998C46...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>, Jeanne
>>> On 3/29/2013 11:43 AM, •RLMeasures wrote:
>>>> In article
>>>>
>>>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In article <r-2803131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
>>>>> (•RLMeasures)
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In article
>>>>>> <hlwdjsd2-D3823D...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
>>>>>> Jeanne
>>>>>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In article <r-2703131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
>>>>>>> (•RLMeasures)
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In article <2PSdnVFxQtiCYM_M...@giganews.com>,
>>>>>>>> John Manning
>>>>>>>> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 3/27/2013 10:28 AM, •RLMeasures wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> In article
>>>>>>>>>> <hlwdjsd2-EA3651...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Jeanne
>>>>>>>>>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> In article <r-2603130...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
>>>>>>>>>>> (•RLMeasures)
>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> In article
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> <hlwdjsd2-55EBA1...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Jeanne
>>>>>>>>>>>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <r-2503131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>> (•RLMeasures)
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article
>>>> <StCdnbiGvaBs8tLM...@giganews.com>, John
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Manning
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/24/2013 6:25 PM, •RLMeasures wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <FtqdnR0iocvjwNPM...@giganews.com>,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> John
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Manning
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/23/2013 8:56 PM,
>> •RLMeasures wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> <4a39d9ac-6ae7-4817...@9g2000yqy.googlegroups.com>,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sully
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <suls...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 22, 8:11=A0pm, r...@somis.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (=95RLMeasures) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> <b0f735a3-32ee-4146-a505-21696be9a...@kw7g2000pbb.googlegroups.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sull=
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> y
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 22, 8:11=A0pm, r...@somis.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (=95RLMeasures) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> <b0f735a3-32ee-4146-a505-21696be9a...@kw7g2000pbb.googlegroups.com
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sull=
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> y
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 22, 10:52=3DA0am, r...@somis.org (
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> RLMeasures)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <cg2pk8h5uj5or0vgfjg9ct807sd22ss...@4ax.com>,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Free Lunch
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Mar 22, 10:52=3DA0am, r...@somis.org (
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> RLMeasures)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <cg2pk8h5uj5or0vgfjg9ct807sd22ss...@4ax.com>,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> marriage
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (only)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fo=
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> r
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> procreation.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> =3DA0I did not say marriage was for procreation
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only.
>>>>>>>>>>>> =3DA0However,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> h=
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> etero
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fo=
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> r
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> procreation.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> =3DA0I did not say marriage was for procreation
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> only.
>>>>>>>>>>>> =3DA0However,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> h=
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> etero
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> snip
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lie. =A0You claim that gays cannot be married
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they cannot have children.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *** =A0Not true. =A0I said that hetero couples are
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> different
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because they
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> produce children.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Many do not or unable.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If you are backing off that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> particular argument, say so rather than pretend you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *** =A0then quote me.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Right above, this is how irrational you are.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> My uncle and aunt couldn't have children. They
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> adopted.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> They get to be "married" in spite of your myopic
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bigotry.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *** I have never said that marriage should be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> denied to
>>>>>> gays who
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> want
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> such,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hell freezes over! Mr Measures, after likely hundreds
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lie. =A0You claim that gays cannot be married
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they cannot have children.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *** =A0Not true. =A0I said that hetero couples are
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> different
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> because they
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> produce children.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Many do not or unable.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If you are backing off that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> particular argument, say so rather than pretend you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> didn't.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *** =A0then quote me.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Right above, this is how irrational you are.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> My uncle and aunt couldn't have children. They
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> adopted.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> They get to be "married" in spite of your myopic
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bigotry.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *** I have never said that marriage should be
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> denied to
>>>>>> gays who
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> want
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> such,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>> of posts
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> expressing his bigotry, finally turns the page!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *** I'm still opposed to word hijacking by a small
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> special
>>>>>>>>>> interest
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> group
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that is okay with using violence to advance their agenda.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Call for citation that there's any organized violence
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by gays
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to advance their equal rights.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *** Act Up is one such group.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> What organized violence did they commit?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> • They unabashedly threw condoms inside St. Patrick's
>>>> Cathedral
>>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>>> NYC
>>>>>>>>>>>> when the Archbishop was speaking. This could easily have
>>>>>>>>>>>> caused
>>>>>>>>>>>> heart
>>>>>>>>>>>> attacks and deaths among TBRCs.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> How is that violence?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> • Tossing condoms in the direction of a Cardinal
>>>>>>>>>> inside a
>>>> Catholic
>>>>>>>>>> church
>>>>>>>>>> is clearly an act of war as well as a cardinal sin. It's
>>>>>>>>>> obvious
>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>> are not a devout Catholic Jeanne.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Since he's badly lost all his bigoted arguments, Mr Measures
>>>>>>>>> is resorting to childishness, misdirection and distraction.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> • Act Up did toss condoms inside St Patricks.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And we're all still waiting for you to explain how that's an
>>>>>>> act of
>>>>>>> violence.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> • I did.
>>>>>
>>>>> You didn't. You did not.
>>>>
>>>> • To a Cardinal, tossing 100s of condoms around inside God's
>>>> Holy Church
>>>> is an act of over the top violence.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Nonsense. Measures grasps at straws.
>>
>> *** I saw a videotape of the incident. The Cardinal was tight jawed.
>>
>
>
> It wasn't violence, Rich.
>
Sounds like the tight-jawed Cardinal might have been close to using
violence against the Act Up protesters.
The Revd
Mar 29, 2013, 10:52:59 PM3/29/13
to
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 21:33:02 -0500, Mitchell Holman
<nomailverizon.net> wrote:
>The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote in
>news:nbjcl8do1je6sgja8...@4ax.com:
>
>> On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 20:43:43 -0500, Mitchell Holman
>> <nomailverizon.net> wrote:
>>
>>>The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote in
>>>news:shnbl895ttfnkcvpv...@4ax.com:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 12:38:02 -0300, John Manning
>>>> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>The blubber isn't the issue. It's yours and Duke's low-life,
>>>>>ignorant redneck bigotry.
>>>>
>>>> Actually it's your limp-wristed, bigoted heterophobia
>>>
>>>
>>> Where do you think gay people come from,
>>>if not from straight people?
>>
>> Same as any other genetic defect.
>
>
> Such as the one you are suffering from?
Fucking asshole. Is you black?
>The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote in
>news:nbjcl8do1je6sgja8...@4ax.com:
>
>> On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 20:43:43 -0500, Mitchell Holman
>> <nomailverizon.net> wrote:
>>
>>>The Revd <pee...@degenerate.Griks> wrote in
>>>news:shnbl895ttfnkcvpv...@4ax.com:
>>>
>>>> On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 12:38:02 -0300, John Manning
>>>> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>The blubber isn't the issue. It's yours and Duke's low-life,
>>>>>ignorant redneck bigotry.
>>>>
>>>> Actually it's your limp-wristed, bigoted heterophobia
>>>
>>>
>>> Where do you think gay people come from,
>>>if not from straight people?
>>
>> Same as any other genetic defect.
>
>
> Such as the one you are suffering from?
The Revd
Mar 29, 2013, 10:57:01 PM3/29/13
to
On Fri, 29 Mar 2013 21:52:58 -0500, Dakota <ma...@NOSPAMmail.com>
wrote:
>On 3/29/2013 6:51 PM, John Manning wrote:
>> On 3/29/2013 8:39 PM, �RLMeasures wrote:
>>> In article <U9KdnaVduKOHIcjM...@giganews.com>, John
>>> Manning
>>> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 3/29/2013 11:43 AM, •RLMeasures wrote:
>>>>> In article
>>>>> <hlwdjsd2-998C46...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>, Jeanne
>>>>>
>>>>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In article <r-2803131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>> • They unabashedly threw condoms inside St. Patrick's
wrote:
>On 3/29/2013 6:51 PM, John Manning wrote:
>> On 3/29/2013 8:39 PM, �RLMeasures wrote:
>>> In article <U9KdnaVduKOHIcjM...@giganews.com>, John
>>> Manning
>>> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 3/29/2013 11:43 AM, •RLMeasures wrote:
>>>>> In article
>>>>> <hlwdjsd2-998C46...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>, Jeanne
>>>>>
>>>>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In article <r-2803131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
>>>>>> (•RLMeasures)
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In article
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In article
>>>>>>> <hlwdjsd2-D3823D...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
>>>>>>> Jeanne
>>>>>>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In article <r-2703131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
>>>>>>> Jeanne
>>>>>>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In article <r-2703131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
>>>>>>>> (•RLMeasures)
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In article <2PSdnVFxQtiCYM_M...@giganews.com>,
>>>>>>>>> John Manning
>>>>>>>>> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 3/27/2013 10:28 AM, •RLMeasures wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> In article
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> In article <2PSdnVFxQtiCYM_M...@giganews.com>,
>>>>>>>>> John Manning
>>>>>>>>> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 3/27/2013 10:28 AM, •RLMeasures wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> In article
>>>>>>>>>>> <hlwdjsd2-EA3651...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Jeanne
>>>>>>>>>>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <r-2603130...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Jeanne
>>>>>>>>>>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <r-2603130...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
>>>>>>>>>>>> (•RLMeasures)
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> <hlwdjsd2-55EBA1...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jeanne
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <r-2503131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jeanne
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Douglas <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <r-2503131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (•RLMeasures)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article
>>>>> <StCdnbiGvaBs8tLM...@giganews.com>, John
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Manning
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/24/2013 6:25 PM, •RLMeasures wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Manning
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/24/2013 6:25 PM, •RLMeasures wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <FtqdnR0iocvjwNPM...@giganews.com>,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> John
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Manning
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/23/2013 8:56 PM,
>>> •RLMeasures wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> John
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Manning
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 3/23/2013 8:56 PM,
>>> •RLMeasures wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In article
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> Cathedral
>>>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> NYC
>>>>>>>>>>>>> when the Archbishop was speaking. This could easily have
>>>>>>>>>>>>> caused
>>>>>>>>>>>>> heart
>>>>>>>>>>>>> attacks and deaths among TBRCs.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> How is that violence?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> • Tossing condoms in the direction of a Cardinal
>>>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> NYC
>>>>>>>>>>>>> when the Archbishop was speaking. This could easily have
>>>>>>>>>>>>> caused
>>>>>>>>>>>>> heart
>>>>>>>>>>>>> attacks and deaths among TBRCs.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> How is that violence?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> inside a
>>>>> Catholic
>>>>>>>>>>> church
>>>>>>>>>>> is clearly an act of war as well as a cardinal sin. It's
>>>>>>>>>>> obvious
>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>> are not a devout Catholic Jeanne.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Since he's badly lost all his bigoted arguments, Mr Measures
>>>>>>>>>> is resorting to childishness, misdirection and distraction.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> • Act Up did toss condoms inside St Patricks.
>>>>> Catholic
>>>>>>>>>>> church
>>>>>>>>>>> is clearly an act of war as well as a cardinal sin. It's
>>>>>>>>>>> obvious
>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>> are not a devout Catholic Jeanne.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Since he's badly lost all his bigoted arguments, Mr Measures
>>>>>>>>>> is resorting to childishness, misdirection and distraction.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And we're all still waiting for you to explain how that's an
>>>>>>>> act of
>>>>>>>> violence.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> • I did.
>>>>>>>> And we're all still waiting for you to explain how that's an
>>>>>>>> act of
>>>>>>>> violence.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You didn't. You did not.
>>>>>
>>>>> • To a Cardinal, tossing 100s of condoms around inside God's
>>>>>> You didn't. You did not.
>>>>>
>>>>> Holy Church
>>>>> is an act of over the top violence.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Nonsense. Measures grasps at straws.
>>>
>>> *** I saw a videotape of the incident. The Cardinal was tight jawed.
>>>
>>
>>
>> It wasn't violence, Rich.
>>
>Sounds like the tight-jawed Cardinal might have been close to using
>violence against the Act Up protesters.
It would have been justified. Sacrilege isn't taken lightly.
>>>>> is an act of over the top violence.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Nonsense. Measures grasps at straws.
>>>
>>> *** I saw a videotape of the incident. The Cardinal was tight jawed.
>>>
>>
>>
>> It wasn't violence, Rich.
>>
>Sounds like the tight-jawed Cardinal might have been close to using
>violence against the Act Up protesters.
Jeanne Douglas
Mar 29, 2013, 11:17:30 PM3/29/13
to
In article <2ghcl8l48vcovrtse...@4ax.com>,
I can't believe they actually tried this crap on the Supreme Court.
It was great to see them get slapped down for it.
--
JD
"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden
It was great to see them get slapped down for it.
--
JD
"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden
Jeanne Douglas
Mar 29, 2013, 11:20:03 PM3/29/13
to
In article <r-2903131...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org (�RLMeasures)
wrote:
> In article
> <d827b31d-881e-4327...@oz4g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>, sully
> <suls...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > <hlwdjsd2-CF6D25.19485728032...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>, Jeann=
> > e
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > > > In article <r-2803131250060...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org ( RLMeasures)
> > > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > > In article
> > > > > <hlwdjsd2-FEFF21.22354027032...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>, J=
> > eanne
> > > > > Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > In article <r-2703131602120...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org ( RLMeasur=
> > es)
> > > > > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > > In article <1qv5l8lkjmvoh1tkgkrnvnn1go2hteh...@4ax.com>, The Revd
> > > > > > > <peel...@degenerate.Grik> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > > > On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 07:04:33 -0700, r...@somis.org ( RLMeasures=
> > ) wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > > > >In article
> > > > > > > > ><hlwdjsd2-D249D8.14353026032...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.=
> > edu>,
> > > > > Jeanne
> > > > > > > > >Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> In article <r-2603130739300...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> > > Jeanne
> > > > > > > > >> > Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > In article <r-2403131406270...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> > > > > ( RLMeasures)
> > > > > > > > >> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > In article <-bSdneDiqtZZy9PMnZ2dnUVZ_i2dn...@giganews.=
> > com>,
> > > > > > > John Manning
> > > > > > > > >> > > > <jrobe...@terra.com.br> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > On 3/23/2013 8:50 PM, =95RLMeasures wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > In article
> > >
> > > <a2419356-915a-4681-ba90-aef8c7c21...@f5g2000yqp.googlegroups.com>,
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > sully
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> On Mar 22, 8:06=3DA0pm, r...@somis.org ( RLMeasur=
> > es)
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>> In article
> > >
> > > > > > > > ><6f3b5a7c-2070-4110-9aac-4930e4bc3...@m9g2000pby.googlegroups.=
> > com>,
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>> sully
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>> <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> On Mar 22, 10:52=3D3DA0am, r...@somis.org ( RLM=
> > easures)
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> In article
> > > > > > > <cg2pk8h5uj5or0vgfjg9ct807sd22ss...@4ax.com>, Free
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> Lunch
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>> On Fri, 22 Mar 2013 09:29:44 -0700, r...@somi=
> > s.org (
> > > > > > > > >> > RLMeasures) wr=3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> ote =3D3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> as p=3D3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> ."
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>> <gudl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>> "?LMeasures" <r...@somis.org> skrev i medde=
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> thom=3D3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> ps.c=3D3D
> > > heterosexual
> > > > > > > unions
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> and=3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> =A0 anoth=3D3D
> > e same
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> legally.
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> ? 2 penises is not even close to 1 vagina =
> > and 1
> > > > > penis.
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> snip
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> *** =3D3DA0children figure in heterosexu=
> > al
> > > unions.
> > > > > > > > >=3D3DA0That
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> =3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> makes th=3D3D
> > > > > marriage is
> > > > > > > > >> > (only) fo=3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> r
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>> procreation.
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> =3D3DA0I did not say marriage was for procreat=
> > ion
> > > only.
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> =3D3DA0However,
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> h=3D
> > on of
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> commitment.
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> Gays already demonstrate that commitment to eac=
> > right to
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>> hijack
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>> words?
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> I've demonstrated that the usage has been broad s=
> > ince
> > > > > the the
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> time it was first uttered in Latin. =A0 You ignor=
> > allot
> > > > > again.
> > >
> > > > > > > > > =A0maybe but there are a number of heteros who think the GLBT
> > > > > > > > >community
> > > > > > > > >has gone over the top. =A0If I were the decider I would gladly=
> > choose
> > > > > to let
> > > > > > > > >non-heteros own the word "marriage", and use the term "domesti=
> > c
> > > > > > > > >partnership" for hetero couples. =A0However, in time it seems =
> > likely
> > > > > > > > >that
> > > > > > > > >the beastie boys will start pressuring the GLBT community to a=
> > llow
> > > > > > > > >"marriage" to their favorite female German shepherd or whoever=
> > they
> > > > > > > > >hook
> > > > > > > > >up with and a new battle over equal rights for Everybody will =
> > take
> > > > > place.
> > > > > > > > >.
> > >
> > > > > > > > Indeed. =A0Once you start redefining marriage, who knows where =
> > it will
> > > > > > > > end?
> > >
> > > > > > > =A0Another worry is where will it end? =A0If marriage to German s=
> > hepherds
> > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > okayed, what next chihuahuas? =A0rabbits? =A0chickens?
> > >
> > > > > > When did any of them become able to give legal informed consent?
> > >
> > > > > =A0there is no law that requires consent for beastial relationships.
> > >
> > > > Sex when one of the partners does not consent is rape. And rape is
> > > > generally considered a Bad Thing.
> > >
> > > =A0For one of my exes rape brought happiness - as long as it was done the
> > > way she liked.
> >
> > consensual rape. I broke up w/ a gf like that. Too confusing.
>
> ** Did she like to be spanked? The thing that got to me is she liked to
> have her clothes ripped off but she did not know how to operate a sewing
> machine.
> >
> > But you know that is not what Jeanne meant and you are doing
> > a mo-mo linguistic gymnastic.
>
> ** If Jeanne did not say what she meant I have no clue as to what she was
> thinking.
Bullshit.
wrote:
> In article
> <d827b31d-881e-4327...@oz4g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>, sully
> <suls...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > <hlwdjsd2-CF6D25.19485728032...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>, Jeann=
> > e
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > > > In article <r-2803131250060...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org ( RLMeasures)
> > > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > > In article
> > > > > <hlwdjsd2-FEFF21.22354027032...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>, J=
> > eanne
> > > > > Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > In article <r-2703131602120...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org ( RLMeasur=
> > es)
> > > > > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > > In article <1qv5l8lkjmvoh1tkgkrnvnn1go2hteh...@4ax.com>, The Revd
> > > > > > > <peel...@degenerate.Grik> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > > > On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 07:04:33 -0700, r...@somis.org ( RLMeasures=
> > ) wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > > > >In article
> > > > > > > > ><hlwdjsd2-D249D8.14353026032...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.=
> > edu>,
> > > > > Jeanne
> > > > > > > > >Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> In article <r-2603130739300...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> > > ( RLMeasures)
> > > > > > > > >> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > In article
> > >
> > > <hlwdjsd2-9D35EE.16452824032...@c-131-121-196-216.gonavy.usna.edu>,> > > =
> > > > > > > > >> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > In article
> > >
> > > Jeanne
> > > > > > > > >> > Douglas <hlwdj...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > In article <r-2403131406270...@10.0.1.3>, r...@somis.org
> > > > > ( RLMeasures)
> > > > > > > > >> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > In article <-bSdneDiqtZZy9PMnZ2dnUVZ_i2dn...@giganews.=
> > com>,
> > > > > > > John Manning
> > > > > > > > >> > > > <jrobe...@terra.com.br> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > On 3/23/2013 8:50 PM, =95RLMeasures wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > In article
> > >
> > > <a2419356-915a-4681-ba90-aef8c7c21...@f5g2000yqp.googlegroups.com>,
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > sully
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> On Mar 22, 8:06=3DA0pm, r...@somis.org ( RLMeasur=
> > es)
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>> In article
> > >
> > > > > > > > ><6f3b5a7c-2070-4110-9aac-4930e4bc3...@m9g2000pby.googlegroups.=
> > com>,
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>> sully
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>> <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> On Mar 22, 10:52=3D3DA0am, r...@somis.org ( RLM=
> > easures)
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> In article
> > > > > > > <cg2pk8h5uj5or0vgfjg9ct807sd22ss...@4ax.com>, Free
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> Lunch
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>> On Fri, 22 Mar 2013 09:29:44 -0700, r...@somi=
> > s.org (
> > > > > > > > >> > RLMeasures) wr=3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> ote =3D3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> in
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>> alt.atheism:
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>> In article
> > > > > > > <514c13c8$0$56780$edfad...@dtext02.news.tele.dk>,
> > > > > > > > >> > "thom=3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>> alt.atheism:
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>> In article
> > > > > > > <514c13c8$0$56780$edfad...@dtext02.news.tele.dk>,
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> as p=3D3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> ."
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>> <gudl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>> "?LMeasures" <r...@somis.org> skrev i medde=
> > lelsen
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>news:r-2103130...@10.0.1.3...
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> In article
> > > > > > > > ><514a2c5e$0$56795$edfad...@dtext02.news.tele.dk>,
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> "=3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>news:r-2103130...@10.0.1.3...
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> In article
> > > > > > > > ><514a2c5e$0$56795$edfad...@dtext02.news.tele.dk>,
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> thom=3D3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> as p."
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> <gudl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> "?LMeasures" <r...@somis.org> skrev i
> > > meddelelsen
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>news:r-2003130...@10.0.1.3...
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> In article
> > >
> > > > > > > > ><98b3b834-37c8-45d0-96a4-ffa0f2757...@h1g2000pbg.googlegrou=3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> <gudl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> "?LMeasures" <r...@somis.org> skrev i
> > > meddelelsen
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>news:r-2003130...@10.0.1.3...
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> In article
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> ps.c=3D3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> om>,
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> sully
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> snip
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> *** =3D3DA0There should be a word for
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> sully
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> <sulsn...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> snip
> > >
> > > heterosexual
> > > > > > > unions
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> and=3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> =A0 anoth=3D3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> er word
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> for
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> homosexual unions.
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Nonsense. =3D3DA0They are both exactly th=
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> for
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> homosexual unions.
> > >
> > e same
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> legally.
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> ? 2 penises is not even close to 1 vagina =
> > and 1
> > > > > penis.
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> snip
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> *** =3D3DA0children figure in heterosexu=
> > al
> > > unions.
> > > > > > > > >=3D3DA0That
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> =3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> makes th=3D3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> em
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> different.
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> So if there are no children and no
> > > possibility of
> > > > > > > children
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> ar=3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> different.
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> So if there are no children and no
> > > possibility of
> > > > > > > children
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> e
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> heterosexuals
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> able to marry?
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> ? enter the strawman.
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>> Where?
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>> ? "So if there are no children and no
> > > possibility of
> > > > > > > children
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>> are
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>> heterosexuals able to marry?"
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>> No, that is an objection to the argument that
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> heterosexuals
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> able to marry?
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>>> ? enter the strawman.
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>>> Where?
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>> ? "So if there are no children and no
> > > possibility of
> > > > > > > children
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>> are
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>>> heterosexuals able to marry?"
> > >
> > > > > marriage is
> > > > > > > > >> > (only) fo=3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> r
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>>> procreation.
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> =3D3DA0I did not say marriage was for procreat=
> > ion
> > > only.
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> =3D3DA0However,
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> h=3D
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> etero
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> marriage is a good foundation for procreation.
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> It is so because of the promise and demonstrati=
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>>> marriage is a good foundation for procreation.
> > >
> > on of
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> commitment.
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> Gays already demonstrate that commitment to eac=
> > h
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> other and have for centuries.
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> It's anti-American to deny them equal rights.
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>> *** =3DA0Does a special interest group have the =
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> other and have for centuries.
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>>> It's anti-American to deny them equal rights.
> > >
> > right to
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>> hijack
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >>> words?
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> I've demonstrated that the usage has been broad s=
> > ince
> > > > > the the
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> time it was first uttered in Latin. =A0 You ignor=
> > e facts
> > > > > > > like a TBM.
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> That you are eager to use the term to describe tw=
> > > > > > > like a TBM.
> > >
> > o
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> cards in a card game and deny it to human couples
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> demonstrates the depth of your pathetic bigotry
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> on this manner.
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> JRM has resorted to simply namecalling you on thi=
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> cards in a card game and deny it to human couples
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> demonstrates the depth of your pathetic bigotry
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> on this manner.
> > >
> > s
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> topic, I can see his point.
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > =95 =A0Manning can not tolerate those who have dif=
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > >> topic, I can see his point.
> > >
> > fering
> > > > > > > > >opinions that
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > he
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > can
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > not change.
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > Anyone who tolerates your kind of bigotry can only
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > be a bigot him[her]self.
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > **** =A0Prop 8 may eventually be overturned by the Sup=
> > > > > > > > >opinions that
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > he
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > can
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > not change.
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > Anyone who tolerates your kind of bigotry can only
> > > > > > > > >> > > > > be a bigot him[her]self.
> > >
> > remes but
> > > > > > > it passed
> > > > > > > > >> > > > easily.
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > It would pass even more easily if on the ballot today.
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > =A0Why would it pass more easily today if support for same=
> > > > > > > it passed
> > > > > > > > >> > > > easily.
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > It would pass even more easily if on the ballot today.
> > >
> > -sex
> > > > > > > > >> > marriage
> > > > > > > > >> > has incresed?
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> Oooops. You caught me. Let me rephrase.
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> It would be roundly defeated in a landslide vote if on the b=
> > > > > > > > >> > marriage
> > > > > > > > >> > has incresed?
> > >
> > > > > > > > >> Oooops. You caught me. Let me rephrase.
> > >
> > allot
> > > > > again.
> > >
> > > > > > > > > =A0maybe but there are a number of heteros who think the GLBT
> > > > > > > > >community
> > > > > > > > >has gone over the top. =A0If I were the decider I would gladly=
> > choose
> > > > > to let
> > > > > > > > >non-heteros own the word "marriage", and use the term "domesti=
> > c
> > > > > > > > >partnership" for hetero couples. =A0However, in time it seems =
> > likely
> > > > > > > > >that
> > > > > > > > >the beastie boys will start pressuring the GLBT community to a=
> > llow
> > > > > > > > >"marriage" to their favorite female German shepherd or whoever=
> > they
> > > > > > > > >hook
> > > > > > > > >up with and a new battle over equal rights for Everybody will =
> > take
> > > > > place.
> > > > > > > > >.
> > >
> > > > > > > > Indeed. =A0Once you start redefining marriage, who knows where =
> > it will
> > > > > > > > end?
> > >
> > > > > > > =A0Another worry is where will it end? =A0If marriage to German s=
> > hepherds
> > > > > > > is
> > > > > > > okayed, what next chihuahuas? =A0rabbits? =A0chickens?
> > >
> > > > > > When did any of them become able to give legal informed consent?
> > >
> > > > > =A0there is no law that requires consent for beastial relationships.
> > >
> > > > Sex when one of the partners does not consent is rape. And rape is
> > > > generally considered a Bad Thing.
> > >
> > > =A0For one of my exes rape brought happiness - as long as it was done the
> > > way she liked.
> >
> > consensual rape. I broke up w/ a gf like that. Too confusing.
>
> ** Did she like to be spanked? The thing that got to me is she liked to
> have her clothes ripped off but she did not know how to operate a sewing
> machine.
> >
> > But you know that is not what Jeanne meant and you are doing
> > a mo-mo linguistic gymnastic.
>
> ** If Jeanne did not say what she meant I have no clue as to what she was
> thinking.
Bullshit.
Jeanne Douglas
Mar 29, 2013, 11:21:44 PM3/29/13
to
> In article <BO6dnen-V-hVLsjM...@giganews.com>, John Manning
> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>
> > On 3/29/2013 11:31 AM, •RLMeasures wrote:
> > > In article <MKOdnZ0Y24HgZsnM...@giganews.com>, John Manning
> > >>> sully
> > >>> <suls...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> On Mar 27, 1:53=A0pm, logan.sac...@gmail.com (Logan Sacket) wrote:
> > >>>>> On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 15:48:28 -0300, John Manning
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> snip
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Ha, I saw that one coming.
> > >>>>> If you have a response that Manning can't answer, you get plonked.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Do you have any gay men as friends?
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I have some very good friends that are gay. That they
> > >>>> want to have the same committed relationships and
> > >>>> family as I do is certainly not absurd.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Do you think it absurd that they would want that?
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Not all my gay friends want such things, just
> > >>>> like not all my hetero friends want such things.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> JRM has less patience than I do with confirmed
> > >>>> bigots - maybe because I used to be one.
> > >>>
> > >>> • JRM does not tolerate other opinions.
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> There's a big difference between a mere opinion and
> > >> open unabashed bigotry.
> > >
> > > *** Are heterosexual unions exactly equal to homosexual unions?
> > >
> >
> >
> > They are legally in 15 countries, including in nine states in the USA.
>
> *** Not legally speaking but in terms of what goes where they are not equal.
Of course, they're exactly the same.
> <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
>
> > On 3/29/2013 11:31 AM, •RLMeasures wrote:
> > > In article <MKOdnZ0Y24HgZsnM...@giganews.com>, John Manning
> > > <jrob...@terra.com.br> wrote:
> > >
> > >> On 3/28/2013 10:35 PM, •RLMeasures wrote:
> > >>> In article
> > >>> <ad1869e1-1ab3-4b0d...@z6g2000pbd.googlegroups.com>,
> > >
> > >> On 3/28/2013 10:35 PM, •RLMeasures wrote:
> > >>> In article
> > >>> sully
> > >>> <suls...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> On Mar 27, 1:53=A0pm, logan.sac...@gmail.com (Logan Sacket) wrote:
> > >>>>> On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 15:48:28 -0300, John Manning
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> snip
> > >>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Ha, I saw that one coming.
> > >>>>> If you have a response that Manning can't answer, you get plonked.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Do you have any gay men as friends?
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I have some very good friends that are gay. That they
> > >>>> want to have the same committed relationships and
> > >>>> family as I do is certainly not absurd.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Do you think it absurd that they would want that?
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Not all my gay friends want such things, just
> > >>>> like not all my hetero friends want such things.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> JRM has less patience than I do with confirmed
> > >>>> bigots - maybe because I used to be one.
> > >>>
> > >>> • JRM does not tolerate other opinions.
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> There's a big difference between a mere opinion and
> > >> open unabashed bigotry.
> > >
> > > *** Are heterosexual unions exactly equal to homosexual unions?
> > >
> >
> >
> > They are legally in 15 countries, including in nine states in the USA.
>
> *** Not legally speaking but in terms of what goes where they are not equal.
Of course, they're exactly the same.
The Revd
Mar 29, 2013, 11:41:17 PM3/29/13
to
is bad enough but a homosexual 'marriage' is a total absurdity. Are
you people so fucked up that you can't even see that???
The Revd
Mar 29, 2013, 11:43:18 PM3/29/13
to
Court would be anti-procreation.
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages