Not even in Massachusets... - Page 2 - Mercedes-Benz Forum

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #11 of 38 (permalink) Old 07-10-2006, 08:57 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
FeelTheLove's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 83 Astral Silver 280 SL
Location: Planet Houston
Posts: 28,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by QBNCGAR
Don't put words in my mouth, you petulant ass. I'm not sure how not jumping on the "everyone's entitled to everything" bandwagon means I wish to do them harm - I've made no such statement, and you're even further off base than usual.

This isn't about whether or not I personally take issue with the lifestyle - I could care less. However, I absolutely refuse to endorse such an abomination by way of passively approving entitlements (i.e. government-funded and government-mandated benefits) being bestowed upon individuals who have opted to lead such a lifestyle.

You can't mask small-mindedness by being pro-everything. It is possible to both abhorr one's actions yet still respect them as individuals. However, if you think that "live and let live" societies are really victimless, you're remarkably small minded. One's rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are not granted unconditionally - meaning, specifically, you must obey the rules of LAW and you must exercise your rights in such a way that the rights of others are not infringed. The instant that homosexuals are granted a level of recognition by the government that entitles them to ANY right previously enjoyed only by persons married following the laws of nature and scripture (not just Christianity), their rights are infringing on everyone elses. *I* should not be made to bear the encumberance of supporting such lifestyles - the broader majority agrees, so sayeth 45 state legislatures and their supreme courts. That's not "mob rule", it's democracy - just because you find yourself in the minority doesn't mean we don't still have a democracy.

Keep in mind that marriage is primarily a religious institution. The separation of church and state is called for so that America - as a country - neither sponsors or condemns a religion. It very specifically does NOT mean that America - as a country - is devoid of religion.

Pardon me while I stuff your mouth full of words. You wish to deny them the right to have a mate, a person they can share life with, in all it's stages. Ultimately, that is all they are asking. Your insurance arguments are stupid, because someone is going to cover their health costs no matter what, or do you wish to also see them die of AIDS in the streets, on the grounds they are "queer"?

You have no valid reason to deny these people the simple human right of having a life long friend who shares the economic burdens of life under a legal structure. Ultimately, marriage is nothing more than a contract. You seek to deny them the right to enter into a simple contract of survivorship and property definition and distribution, because you simply don't like them. In the end, you are the ulimate un-American - you seek to deny others the rights this country was founded on, the rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, things they wish to enjoy in life in a way that does no harm to others. You, however, are free to do so. It is a clear violation of the 14th Amendment. Absent a constitutional amendment, it is inevitable that the Supreme Court will ultimately legalize it.

Last edited by FeelTheLove; 07-10-2006 at 09:04 PM.
FeelTheLove is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #12 of 38 (permalink) Old 07-10-2006, 09:02 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
FeelTheLove's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 83 Astral Silver 280 SL
Location: Planet Houston
Posts: 28,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Also, this statement of yours:

"The instant that homosexuals are granted a level of recognition by the government that entitles them to ANY right previously enjoyed only by persons married following the laws of nature and scripture (not just Christianity), their rights are infringing on everyone elses"

perhaps you can elaborate on that? It makes no sense to me.
FeelTheLove is offline  
post #13 of 38 (permalink) Old 07-10-2006, 09:06 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
mzsmbs's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 1972 Mercedes 250 (/8) W114/M130
Location: on a high bank of a creek
Posts: 7,296
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
yeah, how are two dudes butt fucking each other infringing on your rights?



in political asylum
mzsmbs is offline  
post #14 of 38 (permalink) Old 07-10-2006, 09:16 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 2014 E250 Bluetec 4-Matic, 1983 240D 4-Speed
Location: USA
Posts: 9,257
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Quoted: 256 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by FeelTheLove
Also, this statement of yours:

"The instant that homosexuals are granted a level of recognition by the government that entitles them to ANY right previously enjoyed only by persons married following the laws of nature and scripture (not just Christianity), their rights are infringing on everyone elses"

perhaps you can elaborate on that? It makes no sense to me.
I staggered over that line too. From someone who elsewhere in their homophobic post of unwavering hatred of the "abomination" better known as homos, tries to suggest they "could care less" and later suggests that letting gays enjoy the tax benefits of heterosexuals goes against nature and infringes on everyone else's rights to those tax benefits.

The man has been allowed to talk long enough to reveal himself as a very small and dirty minded, overwhelmingly greedy and selfish, pig. I think this qualifies him to be known as someone who aspires to become a "pointy headed guideline writer" for establishing that homos can't have the legal and tax benefits of heteros.

Great to know you better. Jim
JimSmith is offline  
post #15 of 38 (permalink) Old 07-10-2006, 09:17 PM
Administratoris Emeritus
 
GeeS's Avatar
 
Date registered: Aug 2002
Vehicle: 2021 SL770
Location: Fountain Hills, AZ
Posts: 44,915
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Quoted: 591 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by QBNCGAR
It's a shame that the phrase "of the people, by the people, for the people" is so seldom present in our minds.
It's a shame "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" is not present in yours. There should be no infringement or curtailment of "the pursuit of happiness" as long as that pursuit doesn't curtail or infringe upon the pursuit of happiness of others. Either make a compelling case that the personal relationships of others impairs your pursuit of happiness, or just get over it.

"If spending money you don't have is the height of stupidity, borrowing money to give it away is the height of insanity." -- anon
GeeS is offline  
post #16 of 38 (permalink) Old 07-10-2006, 09:19 PM
Administratoris Emeritus
 
GeeS's Avatar
 
Date registered: Aug 2002
Vehicle: 2021 SL770
Location: Fountain Hills, AZ
Posts: 44,915
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Quoted: 591 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Botnst
What is Massachewzits gonna do about this if it passes? Maybe they can get together with Kahnittiket and Kahlifoahnia to simplify both marital arrangements and spelling.

B
Merkindicular reasoning if I ever heard it...

"If spending money you don't have is the height of stupidity, borrowing money to give it away is the height of insanity." -- anon
GeeS is offline  
post #17 of 38 (permalink) Old 07-10-2006, 09:20 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 2014 E250 Bluetec 4-Matic, 1983 240D 4-Speed
Location: USA
Posts: 9,257
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Quoted: 256 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by GermanStar
It's a shame "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" is not present in yours. There should be no infringement or curtailment of "the pursuit of happiness" as long as that pursuit doesn't curtail or infringe upon the pursuit of happiness of others. Either make a compelling case that the personal relationships of others impairs your pursuit of happiness, or just get over it.
His point is, knowing queers are happy very seriously curtails his pursuit of happiness, especially since he thinks that is costing him some taxes to pay for their tax breaks. Like I said, nice to know him better. Jim
JimSmith is offline  
post #18 of 38 (permalink) Old 07-10-2006, 09:23 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
FeelTheLove's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 83 Astral Silver 280 SL
Location: Planet Houston
Posts: 28,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
To me all comes down to compelling state interest. If just one of these jokers could give me one valid reason the state has some sort of interest in this, I would change my mind. In the case of polygomy, the state can claim that a man will father more children than he can support, resulting in unfair costs to the taxpayers - a situation that is actually occuring among the illegal Mormon polygimist sects right now. In the case of bestiality, the state can claim a right to prevent the transmission of disease between species that could effect the population as a whole. In the case of close family members, the state has a right to prevent the unnecessary creation of genetically defective children and the resulting cost to the state. But in the case of two consenting adults wishing to enter into a typical marriage contract, I see no reason the state has an interest in preventing it.
FeelTheLove is offline  
post #19 of 38 (permalink) Old 07-10-2006, 09:24 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
FeelTheLove's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 83 Astral Silver 280 SL
Location: Planet Houston
Posts: 28,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by GermanStar
It's a shame "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" is not present in yours. There should be no infringement or curtailment of "the pursuit of happiness" as long as that pursuit doesn't curtail or infringe upon the pursuit of happiness of others. Either make a compelling case that the personal relationships of others impairs your pursuit of happiness, or just get over it.
They can't, hence the moronic abstractions that make up thier arguments.
FeelTheLove is offline  
post #20 of 38 (permalink) Old 07-10-2006, 09:44 PM Thread Starter
Surely A Large Human
 
Qubes's Avatar
 
Date registered: Jun 2006
Vehicle: '08 C219
Location: Between Earth and Mars
Posts: 34,253
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Quoted: 493 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
(Thread Starter)
How testy the left gets when they're faced with a picture of America foreign to them.

Take issue with my beliefs or positions all you'd like. You're still in the minority, and are conveniently overlooking portions of my post that address your rantings.

1) Personally, I condemn homosexuality.

2) Politically, I don't think homosexual couples should be entitled to any rights that would put the government, insurance companies, or health-care providers on the hook for supporting them as a family unit. Not because I want to deny them happiness...it's because heterosexuals (97% of society by the last stat I heard) would need to foot the largest part of this bill over their lifetimes. It amounts to forced consent, and it's unfair.

3) Short of that level of recognition, I don't spent a moment's thought on the plight of the homosexual couple. It doesn't matter to me who porks who - change what you can change, accept what you can't. You are of course welcome to believe this or not, but it's the truth about me.

The only way the homosexual political machine has been able to gain acceptance is by exploiting rabidly liberal courts, who've overstepped their boundaries by turning their judgements into legislative actions. When these efforts have been challenged, especially by real legislation (which demonstrates the belief of the people, not just a judge), they have crumbled. That's not a matter of opinion, and I can see now that it's a significant source of irritation for the bleeding heart contingency.

Still surprised at how little room there is for liberals to acknowledge one having disdain for an action yet respect for an individual.
Qubes is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Mercedes-Benz Forums > Off-Topic

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Mercedes-Benz Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











  • Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
     
    Thread Tools
    Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
    Email this Page Email this Page
    Display Modes
    Linear Mode Linear Mode



    Posting Rules  
    You may post new threads
    You may post replies
    You may not post attachments
    You may not edit your posts

    BB code is On
    Smilies are On
    [IMG] code is On
    HTML code is Off
    Trackbacks are On
    Pingbacks are On
    Refbacks are On

     

    Title goes here

    close
    video goes here
    description goes here. Read Full Story
    For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome