Youtube's Theme Today is #ProudToLove (Homosexual)

[Agritum]

It's very simple. One supports the restrictions of rights. The other supports the expansion of rights.

Being against gay marriage is not restricting anyone's rights.

Except it is, specifically, restricting the rights of someone to marry someone else.

[Divair]

It's very simple. One supports the restrictions of rights. The other supports the expansion of rights.

By your demonization of conservatives you are restricting there rights through fear.

Where did I demonize conservatives? And how does explaining the restriction of rights restrict rights? Do you even understand what restriction of rights is?

[Divair]

It's very simple. One supports the restrictions of rights. The other supports the expansion of rights.

Being against gay marriage is not restricting anyone's rights.

Except for gays, but fuck them, right?

[Disserbia]

Being against gay marriage is not restricting anyone's rights.

Except it is, specifically, restricting the rights of someone to marry someone else.

No, being against gay marriage is not restricting anyone's rights, preventing someone from getting a gay marriage is. Please learn the difference.

[Agritum]

Except it is, specifically, restricting the rights of someone to marry someone else.

No, being against gay marriage is not restricting anyone's rights, preventing someone from getting a gay marriage is. Please learn the difference.

It stilll means supporting the restriction of those rights.

[Disserbia]

Being against gay marriage is not restricting anyone's rights.

Except for gays, but fuck them, right?

Nice strawman and assumption. I expect better of you, div. You know I support SCOTUS' ruling.

[Surfistan]

What if, what if there was no such thing as homo or hetro sexuality and they were only preferences installed by society?
Just a thought.

So deep.

Pass me that spliff Joe, hey, what if like monkeys, are like actually more advanced then humans, but like pretend that they're not. Like woooow, man.

[Divair]

Except for gays, but fuck them, right?

Nice strawman and assumption. I expect better of you, div. You know I support SCOTUS' ruling.

I'm sorry I don't recall every single person's posts. I'm a horrible NSGer.

[Euroslavia]

Nice strawman and assumption. I expect better of you, div. You know I support SCOTUS' ruling.

I'm sorry I don't recall every single person's posts. I'm a horrible NSGer.

50 spankings for you!

[Disserbia]

No, being against gay marriage is not restricting anyone's rights, preventing someone from getting a gay marriage is. Please learn the difference.

It sitll means supporting the restriction of those rights.

Which is not the same as restricting them, so stop with the ridiculous accusations. In addition, it doesn't come from a place of wanting to restrict the rights of gay people it comes from a place of that particular person's morals. Which may be a more nuanced view than you would like to admit.

[Singpu]

Oh, can I be the moderator for once?

WARN.

[Disserbia]

Nice strawman and assumption. I expect better of you, div. You know I support SCOTUS' ruling.

I'm sorry I don't recall every single person's posts. I'm a horrible NSGer.

It's not like I posted it on that very page...

[Singpu]

I'm sorry I don't recall every single person's posts. I'm a horrible NSGer.

50 spankings for you!

Oh, the mod beat me to it.

[Divair]

Oh, can I be the moderator for once?

WARN.

No.

[Hornesia]

No, this is gay propaganda.

Furry propaganda. Different.

And while Gay Propaganda is banned in Russia, I think that's banned everywhere.

Then explain the rainbow flag background.

[Divair]

I'm sorry I don't recall every single person's posts. I'm a horrible NSGer.

It's not like I posted it on that very page...

I'm sorry I missed a post. I'm a horrible NSGer.

[The IASM]

Coolios.

Have the conservatives blown up yet?

That is pretty much my reaction.

[Disserbia]

It's not like I posted it on that very page...

I'm sorry I missed a post. I'm a horrible NSGer.

There is still the issue of the strawman.

[Divair]

There is still the issue of the strawman.

And you'd like what? A third apology? Getting greedy.

[Of the Free Socialist Territories]

Coolios.

Have the conservatives blown up yet?

That is pretty much my reaction.

Didn't you post the same words 2 pages ago?

[Agritum]

It sitll means supporting the restriction of those rights.

Which is not the same as restricting them, so stop with the ridiculous accusations. In addition, it doesn't come from a place of wanting to restrict the rights of gay people it comes from a place of that particular person's morals. Which may be a more nuanced view than you would like to admit.

Except that it is due to people like those that things like Prop 8 get proposed and nearly put in motion. Someone who is against gay marriages would instantly jump on the occasion to prevent them, I would guess.

And regardless of the motives for why one is against them, the end result is still the restriction of the marriage rights of an individual, be it for religious/moral motives or not.

[Regnum Dominae]

It sitll means supporting the restriction of those rights.

Which is not the same as restricting them, so stop with the ridiculous accusations. In addition, it doesn't come from a place of wanting to restrict the rights of gay people it comes from a place of that particular person's morals. Which may be a more nuanced view than you would like to admit.

Yes, a "morality" which states that gays are inferior and must be restricted.

[Disserbia]

Which is not the same as restricting them, so stop with the ridiculous accusations. In addition, it doesn't come from a place of wanting to restrict the rights of gay people it comes from a place of that particular person's morals. Which may be a more nuanced view than you would like to admit.

Except that it is due to people like those that things like Prop 8 get proposed and nearly put in motion. Someone who is against gay marriages would instantly jump on the occasion to prevent them, I would guess.

And regardless of the motives for why one is against them, the end result is still the restriction of thhe marriage rights of an individual, be it for religious motives or not.

Motives definitely matter, if you can't acknowledge that then there is no point in debating any idea in general. Not everyone who is against gay marriage is going to do something like propose prop 8. The only people you can accuse of restricting rights are those that actually try to, and even then you can't accuse them of restricting rights for the sake of restricting rights or because they think gay people don't deserve the same rights as straight people. Stupid assumptions are stupid.

[Disserbia]

Which is not the same as restricting them, so stop with the ridiculous accusations. In addition, it doesn't come from a place of wanting to restrict the rights of gay people it comes from a place of that particular person's morals. Which may be a more nuanced view than you would like to admit.

Yes, a "morality" which states that gays are inferior and must be restricted.

Oh really? Where?

[Disserbia]

There is still the issue of the strawman.

And you'd like what? A third apology? Getting greedy.

No, just for you to admit you had an oversimplified argument.