lawman8 - a pro-gay marriage, obama-voting "conservative"
| boyish location | 09/26/17 | | exhilarant church building famous landscape painting | 09/26/17 | | boyish location | 09/26/17 | | exhilarant church building famous landscape painting | 09/26/17 | | boyish location | 09/26/17 | | exhilarant church building famous landscape painting | 09/26/17 | | Razzle Nursing Home | 09/26/17 | | exhilarant church building famous landscape painting | 09/26/17 | | Razzle Nursing Home | 09/26/17 | | exhilarant church building famous landscape painting | 09/26/17 | | Razzle Nursing Home | 09/26/17 | | boyish location | 09/26/17 | | exhilarant church building famous landscape painting | 09/26/17 | | comical clown rigor | 09/26/17 | | exhilarant church building famous landscape painting | 09/26/17 | | Razzle Nursing Home | 09/26/17 | | exhilarant church building famous landscape painting | 09/26/17 | | comical clown rigor | 09/26/17 | | boyish location | 09/26/17 | | exhilarant church building famous landscape painting | 09/26/17 | | comical clown rigor | 09/27/17 | | comical clown rigor | 09/26/17 | | Razzle Nursing Home | 09/26/17 | | laughsome costumed stag film gaping | 09/26/17 | | Razzle Nursing Home | 09/26/17 | | stimulating box office | 09/26/17 | | Milky travel guidebook | 09/26/17 | | exhilarant church building famous landscape painting | 09/26/17 | | boyish location | 09/26/17 | | exhilarant church building famous landscape painting | 09/26/17 | | mauve trust fund boltzmann | 09/26/17 | | boyish location | 09/26/17 | | Razzle Nursing Home | 09/26/17 | | boyish location | 09/26/17 | | exhilarant church building famous landscape painting | 09/26/17 | | boyish location | 09/26/17 | | exhilarant church building famous landscape painting | 09/26/17 | | boyish location | 09/26/17 | | Topaz Station Jew | 09/27/17 | | Electric Library Alpha | 09/28/17 | | Razzle-dazzle corner | 09/26/17 | | boyish location | 09/26/17 | | Razzle-dazzle corner | 09/26/17 | | boyish location | 09/26/17 | | exhilarant church building famous landscape painting | 09/26/17 | | Razzle Nursing Home | 09/26/17 | | exhilarant church building famous landscape painting | 09/26/17 | | Razzle Nursing Home | 09/26/17 | | Razzle-dazzle corner | 09/26/17 | | exhilarant church building famous landscape painting | 09/26/17 | | Razzle Nursing Home | 09/26/17 | | exhilarant church building famous landscape painting | 09/26/17 | | Razzle Nursing Home | 09/26/17 | | exhilarant church building famous landscape painting | 09/26/17 | | Razzle Nursing Home | 09/26/17 | | exhilarant church building famous landscape painting | 09/26/17 | | Electric Library Alpha | 09/27/17 | | exhilarant church building famous landscape painting | 09/27/17 | | exhilarant church building famous landscape painting | 09/26/17 | | Razzle Nursing Home | 09/27/17 | | Emerald resort giraffe | 09/26/17 | | Electric Library Alpha | 09/27/17 | | exhilarant church building famous landscape painting | 09/27/17 | | boyish location | 09/27/17 | | exhilarant church building famous landscape painting | 09/27/17 | | Electric Library Alpha | 09/27/17 | | Razzle Nursing Home | 09/27/17 | | laughsome costumed stag film gaping | 09/27/17 | | exhilarant church building famous landscape painting | 09/27/17 | | Galvanic crawly kitty cat | 09/27/17 | | exhilarant church building famous landscape painting | 09/27/17 | | Galvanic crawly kitty cat | 09/27/17 | | laughsome costumed stag film gaping | 09/27/17 | | Galvanic crawly kitty cat | 09/27/17 | | Electric Library Alpha | 09/27/17 | | exhilarant church building famous landscape painting | 09/27/17 | | bespoke orange theater partner | 09/28/17 | | Razzle Nursing Home | 09/27/17 | | comical clown rigor | 09/27/17 | | Galvanic crawly kitty cat | 09/27/17 | | exhilarant church building famous landscape painting | 09/27/17 | | comical clown rigor | 09/27/17 | | Razzle Nursing Home | 09/27/17 | | comical clown rigor | 09/27/17 | | exhilarant church building famous landscape painting | 09/27/17 | | Electric Library Alpha | 09/27/17 | | exhilarant church building famous landscape painting | 09/27/17 | | comical clown rigor | 09/27/17 | | Electric Library Alpha | 09/27/17 | | comical clown rigor | 09/27/17 | | Electric Library Alpha | 09/27/17 | | comical clown rigor | 09/27/17 | | exhilarant church building famous landscape painting | 09/27/17 | | comical clown rigor | 09/27/17 | | Electric Library Alpha | 09/27/17 | | comical clown rigor | 09/27/17 | | exhilarant church building famous landscape painting | 09/27/17 | | exhilarant church building famous landscape painting | 09/27/17 | | exhilarant church building famous landscape painting | 09/27/17 | | comical clown rigor | 09/27/17 | | exhilarant church building famous landscape painting | 09/27/17 | | Electric Library Alpha | 09/27/17 | | exhilarant church building famous landscape painting | 09/27/17 | | Electric Library Alpha | 09/27/17 | | sticky black dopamine | 08/14/19 |
Poast new message in this thread
Date: September 26th, 2017 11:14 PM Author: exhilarant church building famous landscape painting
I don't claim to be a conservative, dumb dumb.
If anything I'm a paleocon without the gay hating. I voted Libertarian in 2012.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3745217&forum_id=2#34305447) |
|
Date: September 26th, 2017 11:15 PM Author: boyish location
> presumes being anti-gay marriage = gay hating
sounds awfully lib of you.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3745217&forum_id=2#34305457) |
|
Date: September 26th, 2017 11:21 PM Author: exhilarant church building famous landscape painting
I evaluate things on a case by case basis.
You are claiming that gay marriage was a slippery slope, and I think you are right. I take the rational approach, which is that I don't really care about the first issue ("marriage," although as I said I'd overturn the SCOTUS decision) while vehemently opposing the further descent.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3745217&forum_id=2#34305525)
|
Date: September 26th, 2017 11:26 PM Author: exhilarant church building famous landscape painting
Personally, I don't see the difference between leaving it up to the states or banning the entire concept of gay marriage and replacing it with a civil union with equal benefits.
I think gays should be treated equally. If it makes some of you happy, I'd say that the SCOTUS decision should be overturned, the concept of gay marriage should outlawed, and instead it should be replaced by a civil union concept with equal tax benefits.
I don't see any practical difference between the position I said earlier and this one, but if this makes you happy, so be it.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3745217&forum_id=2#34305599) |
|
Date: September 26th, 2017 11:30 PM Author: exhilarant church building famous landscape painting
Ok, well as I said, I see little practical distinction between the two.
I'm completely fine supporting gay civil unions and outlawing gay marriage. So, what of your OP?
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3745217&forum_id=2#34305646)
|
|
Date: September 26th, 2017 11:29 PM Author: Razzle-dazzle corner
the counter is twofold:
1 - rampant public homosexuality has only been associated historically with cultures in deep decline. it should be fought tooth and nail on that basis.
2 - it's pretty arbitrary to take a stance on a mid-2000s issue as the line at which to stop liberalism. lawrence auster, who i respected a lot, tried to draw the line just as arbitrarily in the 1950s, and it didn't work there either.
the other posters are correct about drawing a line possibly at hardcore evangelical christianity, but i think christianity is fundamentally flawed with the core of "turn the other cheek" being too ingrained to successfully fend off a violent, aggressive religion like islam. also christianity has given birth to shitliberalism.
hence, spandrell's wonderful post about how we need a new religion:
https://bloodyshovel.wordpress.com/2016/05/15/we-need-a-new-religion-4/
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3745217&forum_id=2#34305641) |
|
Date: September 26th, 2017 11:37 PM Author: exhilarant church building famous landscape painting
I'm not sure I understand the counter. Are you saying there is in fact a big distinction between (1) leave it to the states and (2) gay marriage is outlawed, with civil unions ok?
Or are you saying that even civil unions should be outlawed?
If the latter (based on your first point), that's fine, but we disagree. I am not using the civil union concept as a line in the sand at which to stop liberalism. I am using my common sense and saying they should be treated equally. That doesn't mean they are actually married, but it means they should receive equal treatment regarding tax benefits and the like.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3745217&forum_id=2#34305729) |
|
Date: September 26th, 2017 11:44 PM Author: exhilarant church building famous landscape painting
That may be. But then the OP should be changed, no?
We aren't accusing me of supporting gay marriage, because I don't care if it's outlawed and replaced with civil unions. We are saying that I engage in "gay acceptance," and am therefore a heretic on those grounds.
As long as we properly frame the issue, I'm fine with the input. I'm sure you are right about the historical basis part, and maybe I have seen too much propaganda, but apart from the flamboyant faggots, I have seen some normal gays and do accept them as being entitled to enter into a union where they receive tax benefits like a real marriage.
As I responded above, I think kids are a different story.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3745217&forum_id=2#34305797) |
Date: September 27th, 2017 12:01 AM Author: exhilarant church building famous landscape painting
I will sum up my poasts here:
1. Fine with outlawing gay marriage and replacing it with civil unions that ensure equal benefit treatment.
2. Think that children should have a mother and a father and on that basis, gays should not be allowed to adopt kids.
If you really think that's so shitlib or extreme, have at it. I think OP's crazy.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3745217&forum_id=2#34305989) |
|
Date: September 27th, 2017 9:59 AM Author: exhilarant church building famous landscape painting
I don't see any reason why normalish people shouldn't enjoy the same tax benefits as a straight couple.
If you think that makes me a shitlib, so be it.
And nice edit to delete most of your poast.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3745217&forum_id=2#34307833) |
|
Date: September 27th, 2017 10:14 AM Author: exhilarant church building famous landscape painting
I'm about equal treatment, not equality.
Big difference.
Equality is a core tenet of shitliberalism and essentially is the lie that we are all identical, of equal abilities.
Equal treatment means that if some receive government benefits, so should others who engage in the same conduct (form a monogamous relationship that is supposed to be permanent). Since liberals have been dying for marriage to be a thing, because (I agree with the others) they used it as a launching pad to attack the institution of the nuclear family, I'm fine with outlawing gay marriage.
But I believe in equal treatment and that's why I support gay civil unions. Like I said, if you think that makes me a shitlib, so be it. I don't think any of them would see it that way.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3745217&forum_id=2#34307918) |
|
Date: September 27th, 2017 10:28 AM Author: comical clown rigor
Dramatically higher divorce rates and the partners in the union incapable of making children with each other cries out for EQUAL TREATMENT to you?
Govt should issue fraud licenses it expects to quickly revoke with fundamentally flawed premises and realities whenever tried?
If you can't possibly use your organs to reproduce together, the govt shouldn't bind you to a union which is about producing nuclear families
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3745217&forum_id=2#34308035) |
|
Date: September 27th, 2017 10:37 AM Author: exhilarant church building famous landscape painting
If the criteria for qualifying for government benefits was "producing nuclear families," then I'd agree with you.
But it's not. I agree that the purpose of marriage is generally to have children, but that simply isn't the criteria for what qualifies for tax and other benefits.
So as I said, I'm for equal treatment under the law. If the government denied tax benefits to marriages where one party was impotent, or where they did not have children, then things would be different. But that's not the case.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3745217&forum_id=2#34308098) |
|
Date: September 27th, 2017 10:39 AM Author: exhilarant church building famous landscape painting
Equal treatment meaning two people enter into what is supposed to be a permanent monogamous relationship so they receive the same tax benefits.
As I said above, having kids is not the criteria to receive marriage tax benefits. That's just an artifice you are employing.
Also, although it's a red herring I'm interested in the link that proves "most young gays identify [as] heterosexual by 40."
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3745217&forum_id=2#34308113) |
|
Date: September 27th, 2017 10:55 AM Author: comical clown rigor
monogomy is no longer enforced as a fundamental component of marriage (cheatmos not harmed in divorce in most places).
The purpose of marriage is not in order to extend the tax benefits that have been created for it. The reason for the establishment of marriages (and the premise upon it is worth maintaining) is making of conditions cr for child-having.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3745217&forum_id=2#34308227)
|
|
Date: September 27th, 2017 11:03 AM Author: exhilarant church building famous landscape painting
Yes, in an absolute sense.
That's not what we are talking about. We are talking about equal treatment under the government's laws.
The government does not condition its award of benefits on marriages producing children. As such, I see no reason why kidless marriages should result in government benefits and gay unions not to.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3745217&forum_id=2#34308275) |
|
Date: September 27th, 2017 11:08 AM Author: exhilarant church building famous landscape painting
So what? You said marriages were about producing kids, not the mere possibility of them.
As I already explained to you, if the government conditioned its issuance of marriage benefits on the actual production of children, then I would agree with you.
But this is not the case, so I do not agree with you.
(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3745217&forum_id=2#34308310) |
|
|