Q******* Marriages Passes State Senate

Don't forget the Q word too LH.

an axehead on your head??

You hitchhike with your penis out?

And you call others perverts - snort.

Local_Historian wrote: So, remember that when your kids decide to marry someone older - they must be perverts - both of them. You've oggled young women without knowing their ages - you a pervert too?

You're awfully hung p on this word - pervert. I'm starting to think you protest too much.

I don't have any problems with an older man marrying a younger woman or vice versus. NOTE: Woman not women. You seem to skim by that fact.

LOL - YOU wre the one who made it all about age, darling - not me. Nice try though.

Local_Historian wrote: LOL - YOU wre the one who made it all about age, darling - not me. Nice try though.

Spin baby ....keep spinning...

you and CG...have successfully queered this thread.... hum, maybe there is a connection.

LMAO!! Nice try again!

Let's see - according to you:

You have no problem if your kids were to marry a gay person, but gays are all perverts.

You have no problem if they wanted to marry someone older, even if they were just a teen, yet older guys marrying younger girls are perverts.

You present multiple marriage as an option, but those folks are all perverts.

You state you have no problem with what goes on behind closed doors, yet in almost the same breath, you declare those folks to be perverts.

Ever had sex in anything but the missionary position? Then according to the church, you too are a pervert.

No spin, baby - just putting your own words into a succinct, single post. Didn't change a word or meaning, just condensed it all.

Once again, who has the problem here? And denial issues as well? Ain't me.

residenttroll wrote:

CinnamonGirl wrote: RT, is looking for a ride home.

Sophomoric

Now that's funny.

CinnamonGirl wrote: Believe it or not, I had to really think about gay marriage (not about being gay) there are fiscal implications. And thinking about the history of marriage. But you were not talking about gay marriage as much as you were bringing the words 'queer' and 'not normal' into it and I take huge issue with that.

I can kinda see your issue with 'queer', although The gay and lesbian community do use it to describe themselves as well. It is pretty obvious from the context that RT means to use it in an insulting manner.

But 'not normal'? Really? Homosexuality, when viewed from a human sexuality context is abnormal. I don't mean that in an insulting manner, it's just a fact. It's becoming a more and more acceptable abnormality, but it still isn't normal.

NTM

I have to disagree. Normal is subjective and up to the individual. Cultures have different ways of feeling normal. And normal is how you feel comfortable. A gay person is not going to feel comforatable being hetrosexual so being gay feels normal to them.

Trust me, you talk to anyone (start with JMC) I am not normal. And I am glad. If I was, then your only option in this area would be Pinecam. They believe they are normal and we are not. The USA is successful because, We think outside the box with ideas. Ideas are what make humans and the world what it is today. And that is why I wonder what RT and others propose to do with people who are not normal.

I would also like to go back to this. Why does someone that does not live with another person have to care about what they do with their personal life? Live by the sword and die by the sword. If you feel you have the right to tell others what to do, why are you so upset when others try to change you?

Average is different from normal.

nor·mal   
[nawr-muhl] Show IPA
–adjective
1.
conforming to the standard or the common type; usual; not abnormal; regular; natural.
2.
serving to establish a standard.
3.
Psychology .
a.
approximately average in any psychological trait, as intelligence, personality, or emotional adjustment.
b.
free from any mental disorder; sane.
4.
Biology, Medicine/Medical .
a.
free from any infection or other form of disease or malformation, or from experimental therapy or manipulation.
b.
of natural occurrence.

Gender, religion, race or ethnicity, and sexuality is just a natural freedom and right of the USA. If you don't feel it is then don't complain. In the view of everyone on this forum, you tell me where, specifically they should go or what they should do with their life.Lets go beyond the surface and think ahead. Answer this question- Are you saying the the majority of this country (normal) gets to tell the rest of our country what to do personally with their life? I am surprised that God has not been brought into this but if you feel this is from God. Why would he create a person that was not normal then condemn him/her for not being normal? That just does not make sense.

Once again, you want to talk the implications of same sex marriage (I am making a distinction here between marriage and being gay) there are implications fiscally that should be thought out and we should not make it legal just because. There are legal implications. And I can give you some reasons why same sex marriage may not be a good idea. But the subject of weather gay is normal is just a non subject anymore. It may not feel normal to us but it feels normal to someone. You cannot define normal for others.

RT, I will give you this. You have been honest and talked about this and some others that usually make fun of gender, religion, race or ethnicity, and sexuality are suddenly silent. I have noticed the ones that make fun of others don't seem to want to really talk about it in depth. I admire those who stick to their guns and don't hide behind ridicule.

Nobody that matters wrote:
But 'not normal'? Really? Homosexuality, when viewed from a human sexuality context is abnormal. I don't mean that in an insulting manner, it's just a fact. It's becoming a more and more acceptable abnormality, but it still isn't normal.