Oh, poor baby! I'm so sorry! Well, maybe I'll let you have the last word this time. Or maybe not. No promises now, so don't go getting your heart all set on it again.
Not set on anything, E. It was just readily apparent to me that you were lying and so I told you straight up that you indeed did not have to go anywhere. And I was correct - as usual.
If there are changes, they won't be false changes. And I don't believe that because you are all hung up on other people's "penises and rectums," unemployment and real estate laws should reflect your negative interest in this aspect of other citizens' lives.
Since all humans are biologically defined by heterosexuality and since no human on earth is biologically defined by homosexuality, it is quite rational to conclude that no one has a right to force anyone else to support homosexuality. No one has any right to force anyone else to support a sexual scheme that does not comprise any human's essential biology.
But I like to hear from you, so I think that although I've been remiss in attempting to force you to support sodomic filth, I must try to think of a way to do this in my spare time.
And as long as you prefer to hear from me, and as long as I wish you to hear, you will hear.
Most homosexual females and some homosexual males engage in oral but not anal sex. Are you willing to let them marry whom they want to if they promise not to do that thing you just can't stand to think about and think about and think about and think about? Can non-rectal gay couples marry?
They may literally kill each other and I would not care at all. The issue concerns one's forcing my support. Since no human is essentially identified by homosexuality, whether male or female homosexuality, no one has a right to force public support of it. That is the issue - and it is most valid whether or not you will accept it. You are destroying human rights to a most profound degree.
Hey, how about this--Should hetero couples who engage in anal sex have their marriages annulled by the state? Their insurance revoked? Not be able to file taxes jointly?
They are hetero couples, E. That they engage in various means of play is immaterial to my position. They are hetero, reflecting the most basic biological identity of every single human on the planet. One woman, and exactly one woman's genetic identity is in each of your cells. One man, and exactly one man's genetic identity is married there along with her. You are literally biological marriage itself. All humans are biological marriages. Homosexuality has absolutely no part of this objective definition. Marriage is biological humanity, it is ALWAYS heterosexual, never homosexual. Homosexuality is a corruption of this identity. It is false and no one has a right to force it on anyone else as you are attempting to do. You commit a great evil against humanity here.
Yes, it is false. They aren't claiming anything about "the penis and rectum" being "worthy of support." They're talking about their choice of life-partners being up to them, not up to you,
I do not care who they "partner" with. They may literally kill each other and I would not care. Let them have freedom to do anything to themselves they wish and I would not care. So the issue has nothing to do with my interfering with the choices they make.
and that they have the rights other citizens do in this regard.
They only have valid rights that accrue to them as a result of their being human individuals. They have not one valid human right accruing to them as a result of homosexuality because homosexuality is itself not human. It is deeply flawed and utterly false to force rights by law on the basis of a corruption of humanity.
You are the only person I've ever heard talking so fixately about penises and rectums. I told you to stop that at once, too, naughty boy.
I speak of it because it reveals the pure stupidity of forcing rights on the basis of so disgusting a human corruption. You may lie to yourself that I am some closet Sodomite because I so greatly detest this evil. The fact is, I detest it because I clearly see the destruction of human rights and identity it causes by definition. No one has the right to force anyone else to support the corruption of what they are. You commit a grave atrocity against human nature here.
You didn't specify my crime, and I can't figure it out.
Your crime is that you, by forcing humans to support what they most fundamentally are not, deny humans the liberty to fully express what they, not a corruption of them, but what they are. That liberty is their natural possession and you are stealing it from them, precisely as you steal the natural possession of life from countless millions of unborn humans. You are forcing humans to acknowledge and uphold what they most essentially are not.
Which statute is it i've violated? It sure isn't the First Amendment.
You are violating the Declaration of Independence.
Wow. You aren't an extremist after all (except about what others do with their penises). There are those non pacifist, death penalty advocating forced-gestationists who do actually believe the morning after pill is murder
I have not seen or read anyone who believes this. It is just a pill. But to use it to kill an innocent human entity is the purest form of murder possible. You have no right to intentionally take the natural right of any human.
I swear to you, I will never force you to do anything sexually you don't want to....
You don't have to do this, E. You merely need to force Sodomite law on me, law that is manifestly false by nature.
An interesting thing in that post of yours is your conviction that citizens should not have to pay taxes in support of services or actions or even simply institutions of which they morally disapprove.
That is not at all my point. My point is much more fundamental than this. Citizens ought not be forced to support and accept as part of their society a fundamental biological identity that does not comprise society and that is not responsible for a single entity comprising society.
Is this exemption a right you would accord also to me, and others who hold other institutions or actions to be immoral?
Morality is subjective. My position is objective. You are not a biological homo. No one is. No one has ever been, nor will ever be. Mom and Dad are both married in you, in me and in every single human anywhere. Marriage is always heterosexual - and it is us. All else on this level is objectively foreign to our identity. That is objectively true.
how you will craft a rationalization for you getting to decide what policies unwilling tax dollars shouldn't support and what they should so that it turns out you support what you approve but i support, well, what you approve, too.
We have a system of government that gives each person therein the right to fight for his/her point-of-view. But the victor is not completely free to execute his view, contrary to now popular belief. The point of our government is to secure the innate and self-evident rights of individuals, chief among which is the right to Life and Liberty to self-actualize as fully as nature allows. What you have done and aim further to do is craft a government wherein your political victories automatically deny me and countless millions of others this fundamental human right. You no longer care about our shared identity. Indeed you are completely unaware of it. So, you run roughshod over what we both are to force support of pure murder, all manner of evil, even the plainly evident perversity of human nature that is homosexuality.
The fact is, whenever any government becomes destructive of fundamental human rights, it is the natural right of the people to change or outright abolish it to institute a new Government. But Americans are ignorant of themselves. That is why they suffer divorce, crushing debt, depression, obesity and general godlessness. It is also why people like you so easily steal their human rights without suffering for it. |
