What is so desperately wrong about this? I’m straight, but open-minded enough not to hate someone for something they can’t change or control! Why is it that some people are threatened by these homosexuals getting married…? It doesn’t hurt you, they aren’t attacking and killing straight couples… the way these anti-gay people portray it, you’d think that some gay dude who wants to get married is hell bent on corrupting children, annihilating America, and dissolving the traditional American nuclear family. Not so. All these people want to do is be together legally. There is no disintegrating the matrimonial bonds that America holds so dear, and dancing on the ashes of it, you bible beating retards. Get over yourselves. Unless you have a gay kid, shut the fuck up and realize that as long as there are gays, there will always be straights, (so you’re safe, you insecure fucks… why not try to pry open the lid of that box you’ve confined yourself to and get a big deep breath of reality. But if you do have a gay relative, sibling, or child, my condolences. Yes, it is most certainly embarrassing, and it is unnatural, but it needs to be accepted and tolerated. To quote a great show… “Tolerance doesn’t mean you have to like it, It means you have to put up with it!” There is absolutely nothing a homosexual can do to change the way they are, and they don’t need fatheaded mouth breathers telling them they can’t do what comes naturally and what makes them happy. Some evangelical nutcase down in Arkansas shouldn’t be able to dictate their goddamn lives! What do you think?

-- Umsutfeersme (W.lovesblow@blank.com), September 27, 2004

Answers

I completely agree! I want the country to recognize that gay homosexuals have a right to be married! Being a gay man myself, I find it appalling that me fondling other men is so taboo to American Society! I want to marry my Leroy!

-- Jake (jkeffle@cal.org), September 27, 2004.

HAHAHAHA! Umsutfeerme, are you the disciple of Anti-pussy? HAHAHAHAHA! did you fall off the short bus and hit your head on every step on the way down? Baking with oregano won't help you cook up anything brilliant if you have already fried the main dish.

Are 2 lesbians going to be a functional role model for a young boy?

Are gay marriages going to be in Unions of more then 2? I mean how many gay couples do you know of that don't go to gay bars at night, and pick up boys and men together? While we are rewritting the definition of marriage and mentioning constitutionality, why should their extra playmates be excluded too??

I think coprophiliacs should be allowed to adpot kids as well as their brother fudge packers! I mean they to have this affliction, but does that not mean they can't show kids the way? Who is to say they shall not otherwise set a fine dandy example, or what they do with each other effects anyone else? I know some of their fudge brothers are "behind them" in this. (take it how you wish!)

-- MJ (airhead@NamBlA.org), September 28, 2004.

HAHAHAHA! Umsutfeerme, are you the disciple of Anti-pussy? HAHAHAHAHA! did you fall off the short bus and hit your head on every step on the way down? Baking with oregano won't help you cook up anything brilliant, you need to have the right main dish first. Your room tempature IQ is overheating. Heh heh sike.

Are 2 lesbians going to be the right role model for a young boy? Or is all that talk of absentee fathers just more Conservative hogwash?

Are gay marriages going to be in Unions of more then 2? I mean how many gay couples do you know of that don't go to gay bars at night, and pick up boys and men together? While we are rewritting the definition of marriage and mentioning constitutionality, why should their extra playmates be excluded too??

I think coprophiliacs should be allowed to adpot kids as well as their brother fudge packers! I mean they to have this affliction, but does that not mean they can't show kids the way? Who is to say they shall not otherwise set a fine dandy example, or what they do with each other effects anyone else? I know some of their fudge brothers are "behind them" in this. (take it how you wish, the way you wish!)

-- MJ (airdike@NamBlA.org), September 28, 2004.

Jake, you two-faced hypocrie!!! Posing as Michael Jordan like that, you deserve to get sued!!!

-- Garret Ford (Parallax281457689@Yahoo.com), September 28, 2004.

"Are gay marriages going to be in Unions of more then 2? I mean how many gay couples do you know of that don't go to gay bars at night, and pick up boys and men together?"

I know a few that don't. How many do you know that DO?

-- Anti-bush (Comrade_bleh@hotmail.com), September 28, 2004.

I don't really know any. I just know all those bathouses are really places for boxing not fisting. AND the AIDS epidemic in the gay community is from blood transfusion.

Do they like your fat little ass, or is it just your big mouth?

-- The Gaylick Curse (airdike@nAMbLa.org), September 28, 2004.

Yeah, just keep on lying Jake. You'll soon begin to believe those lies.

-- Garret Ford (Parallax281457689@Yahoo.com), September 29, 2004.

This is one of those issues that's just going to piss everyone off. The Republicans will thump their Bibles and protest outside churches marrying gay couples, screaming about flames and hell, wearing a white T-shirt that says "Jesus Loves" on it. The liberals, until then, will piss and moan that the government has no right to deny ass-slamming, muff-diving rights to queers.

As a third-party (or zero-party), my big question is what this would cost the American taxpayers. Are the American taxpayers paying through the nose for this? Because otherwise, I don't see any big deal. You want to get married? Get married, then do whatever you do before me or my kids have to see it.

-- I Like Pasta (ravioli@spaghetti.com), September 29, 2004.

Probably the most intelligent thing anybody's said in here in a while. Keep up the good work, Pasta.

-- Anti-bush (Comrade_bleh@hotmail.com), September 29, 2004.

...Because otherwise, I don't see any big deal. You want to get married? Get married, then do whatever you do before me or my kids have to see it. Huh that's funny. That feels real smart an answer, you feel like a real middle of the road down to earth unwitty dicksucker to me too. Hey dickhead, do you even read these replies or like other liberals (no middle of the road douchebag, so only the half the douchebag of a democrat) just wait till it's quite to put your one cent in.

You don't think your kids should see it? Don't you think married couples should be allowed to kiss or at least show effection in public? You think that would be disgusting or worse for your kids to see? Well isn't that what newly weds do? How would you like it if they raised your boy, since he was a baby. I don't give a shit what they do either, it's them that is making what they do the issue, to get assuarence for a totally unnatural lifestyle, which is fine when you when to get AIDS or fist each other's insdies if you leave kids out of this. But you just contradicted yourself, and the adoption issue has been my main arguement in this thread. It's only a form of child abuse if your kids are put through witnessing it? Is my logic going over your head, doucheface??

-- AirDike (gofuckyourmother@goodcleanmarriage.cum), September 29, 2004.

Hey dickhead, do you even read these replies or like other liberals just wait till it's quite to put your one cent in.

You mean YOUR replies? Point me to one thing you've said on this topic that's worth my last week's shit. You haven't made a single point on this except to say that dikes would be bad role models for kids, but I'd rather have 2 people that love each other and are successful in life taking care of an orphan abandoned by THEIR BIOLOGICAL STRAIGHT PARENTS then a foul-mouthed, unemployed idiot like you that's going to teach their kids God knows what.

How would you like it if they raised your boy, since he was a baby.

My kid? Well, if I have the choice between 2 dikes that love each other, work, pay their taxes, and teach my kid how to speak like he's got a brain...and YOU...that's not even a choice. Odds are, that kid was put up for adoption or left in a dumpster by some brainless white bitch who was too scared to get an abortion. Now you tell me who the better role model is.

which is fine when you when to get AIDS or fist each other's insdies if you leave kids out of this.

Which is why there should be blood tests first when anybody applies for a marriage license, second when an adoption is applied for.

But you just contradicted yourself

How? By saying that this issue is going to piss everyone off? Look at you, you're clearly upset. You should sit down. Did I contradict myself by asking how much this would contradict the American public?

and the adoption issue has been my main arguement in this thread

What makes you think I've been paying attention to your useless replies?

It's only a form of child abuse if your kids are put through witnessing it?

Child abuse, my friend, is an overwhelmingly STRAIGHT COUPLE phenomenon. I'd rather a kid speculate that his two dads are ramming each other up the ass behind the bedroom door than have a straight couple get liquored up then beat the kid up.

Is my logic going over your head, doucheface??

More like under my nut-sack. I asked what GAY MARRIAGE was costing U.S. taxpayers, I didn't say shit about adoption. Hell, if I find out that it's creating undue strain on taxpayers, then hell yeah, I'm against gay marriage. But if it's not costing me anything, then live your life like you want to. Just keep your fucking gay pride flags out of my face.

-- I Like Pasta (rigatoni@fettucini.org), September 29, 2004.

I said dikes would be a bad disfunctional role model for a boy. The rest was about fags. Do you then think a welfare mama is a bad example, or delibrate single motehr is being unfair to boy, but that is all hunky dorry if she has another girl around?

My kid? Well, if I have the choice between 2 dikes that love each other, work, pay their taxes, and teach my kid how to speak like he's got a brain...and YOU...that's not even a choice. Did I say I gave a shit about your kid? Or that I was the one who wanted to adopt. If I am unemployed as you assume why don't I just go on welfare. If I was a woman I could keep having kids, and the 2 parent issue would not even be a concern. Is taxes all you are concerned with? What concerns so about a simple marriage certificate then.

Odds are, that kid was put up for adoption or left in a dumpster by some brainless white bitch who was too scared to get an abortion. Now you tell me who the better role model is. Oh classy now you have brought race into it. She is brainless she just go on welfare instead and pop and out a few more to increase the quota. And if you are going to make another racial comment like the majority of these ghetto welfare cows milking the government cheese are white. I suggest you look here

Which is why there should be blood tests first when anybody applies for a marriage license, second when an adoption is applied for. I don't see why 2 people with AIDS shouldn't be allowed to get married, I just don't see why they should be allowed to adpot.

How? By saying that this issue is going to piss everyone off? Look at you, you're clearly upset. You should sit down. Did I contradict myself by asking how much this would contradict the American public? I already said how you contradicted yourself. But do I give a shit what upsets you or how you shall react to it?

What makes you think I've been paying attention to your useless replies? Well dumbell that is why I asked. Do you read the replies or just wait to give a speech. You are cleary hot and bothered and replying now.

Child abuse, my friend, is an overwhelmingly STRAIGHT COUPLE phenomenon. I'd rather a kid speculate that his two dads are ramming each other up the ass behind the bedroom door than have a straight couple get liquored up then beat the kid up. I said a form of child abuse not pedophilia. And the unmogomous lifestyle gays share is still overwhelming. You are right hetrosexual people should not be allowed to adopt either, because they are more likely to "get liquored up and beat the kid Hell they should not even be allowed to reproduce. Your logic astionds me.

More like under my nut-sack. I asked what GAY MARRIAGE was costing U.S. taxpayers, I didn't say shit about adoption. Hell, if I find out that it's creating undue strain on taxpayers, then hell yeah, I'm against gay marriage. But if it's not costing me anything, then live your life like you want to. Just keep your fucking gay pride flags out of my face. Aren't gay pride flags what brought this issue to the table? Do you want your kids reading about how Johnny has 2 dads, like Randolph's parents and their special bound? Or is that a seperate issue? They do teach that in Elemtary school you know. What extent should this book cover? Or should they just read the cover of it. That is real clever though how you strictly made this a tax issue.

That's funny because I was about to say, until we get rid of welfare I really don't care about this. That's right, I think it's disgusting but it's not the worst issue. It's just that all these fucked up matters are created by the same party.

If the issue is only taxes, why should groups not be allowed to marry, like a communon? Married unions cannot collect welfare. And hell it's more people around the house to help the kid.

I'm done with this conversation. Just more manuer from the Donkeys. That's the only real problem I see.

-- (airdike@nAMbLa.org), September 29, 2004.

Oh as far as "dumb white bitches" leaving their babies in the dumpster goes Check out this classy lassy. Hey don't worry I am not judging your stupidity or life choices. And I don't think anyone should interfere with your parenting rights, if you like to suck black dick, bitch! I agree just don't let your kid know. As the bruthaz say "keep it on the downlow." Sugar!

-- (dariare+headmike@pumpitup.com), September 29, 2004.

I know I said I would be leaving, but I can't really if I keep putting my foot back in the ring. I am just sure though, I will not get an interesting debate, so I could drop it or fuckall. Well you seem a little open minded, but I have said all I needed to on this matter. Except on the Lesbian issue. I think that a nut cutting leather jacket wearing dike and her fem, or maybe 2. Are a great choice to raising a baby boy. I am I know that single women raising boys has not been a huge success! But maybe 2 women will do the trick instead. Many single mother's in this predictiment become aware the boy needs and wants a man in his life. But maybe he just needs a 2nd woman. Hey it's every man's fantasy to have 2 right. Doubtle if he has 2 mommys. A woman is not excluded from adopting if she is homosexual, she just can't get a certificate for it. It has nothing at all to do with constitutionality because when the Constitution was drafted what fags did with each other was illegal everywhere in this Nation. Do they really need a confermation from the state for their bizarr choices. And for kids to be taught what Johnny's 2 dads do, to feel more straight about themselves?

I know, I know, you have decided this shall be a debate about tax cost, so psychological factors and constitutionality is "inadmissable, inadmissable." Does this mean you are going to take your ball home and not play, if I go outside the scope of your questions? You libertariants sure have all the answers. You may not be as stupid and ridiculous as liberals, but that does not mean you are all that bright or right either.

-- (veryscary@rainbowblow.com), September 30, 2004.

You know, I don't really have an issue with you disagreeing with me. It's the fact that you're making it so easy to destroy your arguments that it's got me bored. Okay, piece by piece. Ready?

Did I say I gave a shit about your kid?

No, but you asked about him...or did you forget?

Or that I was the one who wanted to adopt.

No, but you always have to use the worst thing around as an example.

If I am unemployed as you assume why don't I just go on welfare.

Irrelevant.

Is taxes all you are concerned with?

Yes, on the issue of GAY MARRIAGE, taxes ARE all I'm concerned with.

And if you are going to make another racial comment like the majority of these ghetto welfare cows milking the government cheese are white.

I didn't say anything about welfare. Stop changing the subject.

Oh, and this guy says I'm contradicting myself? I present the following:

I don't see why 2 people with AIDS shouldn't be allowed to get married, I just don't see why they should be allowed to adpot.

the AIDS epidemic in the gay community

Think long and hard about that one, smart boy.

I already said how you contradicted yourself.

No...you really didn't.

Do you read the replies or just wait to give a speech.

Usually, but since yours pertained to the subject of gay adoption and the subject matter pertains to gay MARRIAGE, I disregarded them as spam, and replied to the original topic. I said a form of child abuse not pedophilia.

Do you even know what pedophilia means? Go look the word up. All done? Good. Then you know that 2 gay men having sex behind closed doors isn't pedophilia, neither is getting drunk and beating a kid up. Either way, you lose this point.

And the unmogomous lifestyle gays share is still overwhelming.

Since this topic is and always has been about GAY MARRIAGE, then that's their problem if their fag boyfriend is cheating on them. Otherwise, do you have any statistics on cheating gay men or women in married relationships? I'll bet you don't. However, I'll bet I could dig up some stats on cheating straight couples.

hetrosexual people should not be allowed to adopt either

So you're saying that adoption should be illegal altogether?

Your logic astionds me.

Ditto for your spelling and punctuation.

Aren't gay pride flags what brought this issue to the table?

Actually, you brought this issue to the table. I'm trying to talk about gay MARRIAGE, as the topic suggests.

Do you want your kids reading about how Johnny has 2 dads, like Randolph's parents and their special bound? Or is that a seperate issue?

Actually, yes, it is a seperate issue. I'm glad you're starting to agree with me.

They do teach that in Elemtary school you know. What extent should this book cover? Or should they just read the cover of it.

Stop changing the subject. This topic started with gay MARRIAGE, and you've moved from gay ADOPTION to WELFARE, now about what our kids are reading in school.

That is real clever though how you strictly made this a tax issue.

Thanks. I think it's real clever how you keep changing the subject too. That trick might actually work on somebody that's not paying attention.

That's funny because I was about to say, until we get rid of welfare I really don't care about this. That's right, I think it's disgusting but it's not the worst issue. It's just that all these fucked up matters are created by the same party.

Stop changing the subject.

why should groups not be allowed to marry, like a communon? Married unions cannot collect welfare. And hell it's more people around the house to help the kid.

Stop changing the subject.

I'm done with this conversation.

You were done before you posted your first useless reply. You Republicans are all the same. Rather than looking at any issue from a practical standpoint, you bombard it with hate, fear, and unfunny, irrelevant humor. It's almost as bad as the Democrats who would rather piss and moan about it than step back and examine it. You know you'll reply to this again, stop lying.

-- I Like Pasta (soup@salad.com), September 30, 2004.

Not surprising that Anti-Bush 'knows' some homosexuals. How well does he 'know' them, I wonder? Is that 'know' in the biblical sense?

-- Patriot (antibush@mightbe.gay), September 30, 2004.

Wait, I'm confused. What's the biblical sense of "know"?

-- Anti-bush (Comrade_bleh@hotmail.com), September 30, 2004.

LMAO @ Anti.

Is there a mod in the house? Are Patriot and MJ/Airdike the same person?

-- I Like Pasta (hooray@for_italy.com), September 30, 2004.

Wait, I'm confused. What's the biblical sense of "know"?

I don't know either. You better ask lt. Alexander, he seems to be the "bible thumper" around here.

-- Wes Kinsler (kinsler1@hotmail.com), October 01, 2004.

Taxation has little to do with a boy having to explain to his friends that his 2 daddies are fudge packers.

You seem very up in arms about this "Pasta." Is your mama a chef? Or just a tuna salad tossing tart!

Tell her not to save any of the big pieces of pie for me. They are probably all dried out crusty old crunts by now!

-- Shane McShame (mcshame@yahoo.com), November 10, 2004.

Shane is a fudge packer itself just for posting his nonsensical spam. What are these dumbasses smokin' and is there a law against it??

-- Jason V (ain't telling @ you.com), January 02, 2005.