Gay Marriage Legalized In France

[Costa Alegria]

You can try to twist my words to allow for you to shame me as you see fit.

You credit me with far too much. Really, I am flattered to think that I am the reason that you are being "shamed".

I don't support domestic violence at all. I merely said that those people who are abused were foolish in the first place for allowing their emotions to get in the way of blatant facts.

Says that someone had the abuse coming = not deserving said abuse. So, is this the logic we're operating on, is it?

If my beliefs don't count, then yours don't either; it's all relative.

One of us has widespread support for our beliefs.

I could really care less about your opinions on my beliefs; they won't change no matter how much shaming you try (matter of fact, they might get worse because of it).

Look, if I really was making a concerted attempt to shame you into silence, I wouldn't be sitting here, letting you spurt whatever other bigoted crap all over this thread.

[Agymnum]

This is going the way of all debates ._.

You're surprised, really?

[New Libertarian States]

This is going the way of all debates ._.

The Social conservatives making shit arguments, while the progressives have facts and reasoning?
This surprises you?

[The Rich Port]

This is going the way of all debates ._.

The anti-gays bringing zero credibility except repeating what they initially said against homosexuality and the pro-gays dignifying their bullshit by responding to it? Yeah...

Anyway, good for France.

Also, vou le vou couchet avec moi, Francais ladies?

[Agymnum]

This is going the way of all debates ._.

The Social conservatives making shit arguments, while the progressives have facts and reasoning?
This surprises you?

Hey, now, let's be fair.

The social conservatives have shitty arguments AND they have shitty accusations about the moral decay of society.

[Thafoo]

This is going the way of all debates ._.

The Social conservatives making shit arguments, while the progressives have facts and reasoning?
This surprises you?

It's much too soon.. Much too soon.


This may be a new record for bullshitting.

[New Libertarian States]

The Social conservatives making shit arguments, while the progressives have facts and reasoning?
This surprises you?

It's much too soon.. Much too soon.


This may be a new record for bullshitting.

IT'S OVER 9000!!!

[Valcouria]

1. You can try to twist my words to allow for you to shame me as you see fit, but I don't support domestic violence at all. I merely said that those people who are abused were foolish in the first place for allowing their emotions to get in the way of blatant facts.
2. If my beliefs don't count, then yours don't either; it's all relative.
5. I could really care less about your opinions on my beliefs; they won't change no matter how much shaming you try (matter of fact, they might get worse because of it).

1 - Bullshit, when you are with someone you HAVE to use emotions. Shit, it seems you have never loved anyone.

2 - Your beliefs are pathetic, and as a fellow Christian I have no reservations telling you so

5 - As a Christian, I also find your close-mindedness completely idiotic. You are the kind of people Jesus was warning people about not becoming. Self-Righteous people don't belong in a society which was primarily founded on love and harmony.

1. I said nothing in opposition to this, but I meant that emotions should not be the only factor, either. And I find love trivial at best and a detriment at worst, which is why they only individual I even contemplate placing it in is God.
2. Frankly, your disregard for traditional institutions is a cause for concern on my end as well. As I have said repeatedly, 'hate the sin, love the sinner.'
5. Ideally, yes, society would be constructed on love and harmony. But pragmatically, this is not the case...and certain ideas need to be maintained and kept to ensure at least some level of decency.

[New Libertarian States]

The Social conservatives making shit arguments, while the progressives have facts and reasoning?
This surprises you?

Hey, now, let's be fair.

The social conservatives have shitty arguments AND they have shitty accusations about the moral decay of society.

I always forget the moral decay argument.

[Aperonia]

Good for France. Stepping up to more equal rights.

[Thafoo]

Good for France. Stepping up to more equal rights.

Joltywoo, get back to your main nation.

[New Libertarian States]

1 - Bullshit, when you are with someone you HAVE to use emotions. Shit, it seems you have never loved anyone.

2 - Your beliefs are pathetic, and as a fellow Christian I have no reservations telling you so

5 - As a Christian, I also find your close-mindedness completely idiotic. You are the kind of people Jesus was warning people about not becoming. Self-Righteous people don't belong in a society which was primarily founded on love and harmony.

1. I said nothing in opposition to this, but I meant that emotions should not be the only factor, either. And I find love trivial at best and a detriment at worst, which is why they only individual I even contemplate placing it in is God.
2. Frankly, your disregard for traditional institutions is a cause for concern on my end as well. As I have said repeatedly, 'hate the sin, love the sinner.'
5. Ideally, yes, society would be constructed on love and harmony. But pragmatically, this is not the case...and certain ideas need to be maintained and kept to ensure at least some level of decency.

1)Which is why your rhetoric is like a broken record player.
2) Slavery and women oppression are traditional in some cultures, care to start that up again?
3)(or 5, I guess)
You have the nerve to talk about decency, when your denying rights to perfectly good people.

[Aperonia]

Good for France. Stepping up to more equal rights.

Joltywoo, get back to your main nation.

Eh... I don't wanna threadjack this. so TGs!

...or TET...

[Soldati Senza Confini]

1 - Bullshit, when you are with someone you HAVE to use emotions. Shit, it seems you have never loved anyone.

2 - Your beliefs are pathetic, and as a fellow Christian I have no reservations telling you so

5 - As a Christian, I also find your close-mindedness completely idiotic. You are the kind of people Jesus was warning people about not becoming. Self-Righteous people don't belong in a society which was primarily founded on love and harmony.

1. I said nothing in opposition to this, but I meant that emotions should not be the only factor, either. And I find love trivial at best and a detriment at worst, which is why they only individual I even contemplate placing it in is God.
2. Frankly, your disregard for traditional institutions is a cause for concern on my end as well. As I have said repeatedly, 'hate the sin, love the sinner.'
5. Ideally, yes, society would be constructed on love and harmony. But pragmatically, this is not the case...and certain ideas need to be maintained and kept to ensure at least some level of decency.

1 - Try to make your posts better

2 - I'm a Christian Existentialist. I suggest you don't put me with your brand of Christianity.

3 - When said ideas are harmful to progress and freedom they should be done away with through education. And decency is relative. What's perfectly acceptable to me is not for you, therefore who are you to tell me what to think? And decency by hypocritical thought is not decency, is being a hypocrite.

[Valcouria]

1. I said nothing in opposition to this, but I meant that emotions should not be the only factor, either. And I find love trivial at best and a detriment at worst, which is why they only individual I even contemplate placing it in is God.
2. Frankly, your disregard for traditional institutions is a cause for concern on my end as well. As I have said repeatedly, 'hate the sin, love the sinner.'
5. Ideally, yes, society would be constructed on love and harmony. But pragmatically, this is not the case...and certain ideas need to be maintained and kept to ensure at least some level of decency.

1)Which is why your rhetoric is like a broken record player.
2) Slavery and women oppression are traditional in some cultures, care to start that up again?
3)(or 5, I guess)
You have the nerve to talk about decency, when your denying rights to perfectly good people.

1. Your opinion, I suppose.
2. As I've already said, I support using convicted criminals for slave labor...they've given up their rights, and they should be put to work for the costs that the rest of society pays to maintain them.
3. I guess it really doesn't sink in...gays already have all the right straight people do, except to marry. Even without that they have their precious civil unions; I've already voiced my opinion that gays should not have access to an institution that is between one man and one woman. It is supporting this longstanding tradition that I defined a sense of decency.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

1)Which is why your rhetoric is like a broken record player.
2) Slavery and women oppression are traditional in some cultures, care to start that up again?
3)(or 5, I guess)
You have the nerve to talk about decency, when your denying rights to perfectly good people.

1. Your opinion, I suppose.
2. As I've already said, I support using convicted criminals for slave labor...they've given up their rights, and they should be put to work for the costs that the rest of society pays to maintain them.
3. I guess it really doesn't sink in...gays already have all the right straight people do, except to marry. Even without that they have their precious civil unions; I've already voiced my opinion that gays should not have access to an institution that is between one man and one woman. It is supporting this longstanding tradition that I defined a sense of decency.

Marriage isn't a "tradition" that is so sanctimonious as to not extend this benefit to homosexual couples.

If anything, the definition of marriage based out of "tradition" has failed everyone.

[Thafoo]

1)Which is why your rhetoric is like a broken record player.
2) Slavery and women oppression are traditional in some cultures, care to start that up again?
3)(or 5, I guess)
You have the nerve to talk about decency, when your denying rights to perfectly good people.

1. Your opinion, I suppose.
2. As I've already said, I support using convicted criminals for slave labor...they've given up their rights, and they should be put to work for the costs that the rest of society pays to maintain them.
3. I guess it really doesn't sink in...gays already have all the right straight people do, except to marry. Even without that they have their precious civil unions; I've already voiced my opinion that gays should not have access to an institution that is between one man and one woman. It is supporting this longstanding tradition that I defined a sense of decency.

What says that marriage is between a man and a woman?

The Bible, plain and simply, is bullshit.

You may argue that it's traditional and has been done for centuries, even millennia. You know what else was done for centuries? Stoning adulterers.

[Costa Alegria]

I guess it really doesn't sink in...gays already have all the right straight people do, except to marry.

Then they don't have the same rights as everyone else.

[Valcouria]

1. I said nothing in opposition to this, but I meant that emotions should not be the only factor, either. And I find love trivial at best and a detriment at worst, which is why they only individual I even contemplate placing it in is God.
2. Frankly, your disregard for traditional institutions is a cause for concern on my end as well. As I have said repeatedly, 'hate the sin, love the sinner.'
5. Ideally, yes, society would be constructed on love and harmony. But pragmatically, this is not the case...and certain ideas need to be maintained and kept to ensure at least some level of decency.

1 - Try to make your posts better

2 - I'm a Christian Existentialist. I suggest you don't put me with your brand of Christianity.

3 - When said ideas are harmful to progress and freedom they should be done away with through education. And decency is relative. What's perfectly acceptable to me is not for you, therefore who are you to tell me what to think? And decency by hypocritical thought is not decency, is being a hypocrite.

1. I think part of the problem is that my posts get taken out of context far too often. That and my points become disjointed and split up over several posts in trying to answer everyone.
2. I'm not familiar with existentialism...it does sound like it is outside the more traditional institutions...but I don't know for sure.
3. This assumes that progress and freedom are universally beneficial...when I feel they are not.

[New Libertarian States]

1)Which is why your rhetoric is like a broken record player.
2) Slavery and women oppression are traditional in some cultures, care to start that up again?
3)(or 5, I guess)
You have the nerve to talk about decency, when your denying rights to perfectly good people.

1. Your opinion, I suppose.
2. As I've already said, I support using convicted criminals for slave labor...they've given up their rights, and they should be put to work for the costs that the rest of society pays to maintain them.
3. I guess it really doesn't sink in...gays already have all the right straight people do, except to marry. Even without that they have their precious civil unions; I've already voiced my opinion that gays should not have access to an institution that is between one man and one woman. It is supporting this longstanding tradition that I defined a sense of decency.

2)So if I'm caught with drugs, lol slavery for you?
Makes all of the sense.
3)Why, source that horrible argument.
Marriage is a civil right, their being denied that.
Therefore, there not equal.
Going to sleep, feel free to respond, but won't answer till 6-7 am tomorrow.

[Valcouria]

1. Your opinion, I suppose.
2. As I've already said, I support using convicted criminals for slave labor...they've given up their rights, and they should be put to work for the costs that the rest of society pays to maintain them.
3. I guess it really doesn't sink in...gays already have all the right straight people do, except to marry. Even without that they have their precious civil unions; I've already voiced my opinion that gays should not have access to an institution that is between one man and one woman. It is supporting this longstanding tradition that I defined a sense of decency.

What says that marriage is between a man and a woman?

The Bible, plain and simply, is bullshit.

You may argue that it's traditional and has been done for centuries, even millennia. You know what else was done for centuries? Stoning adulterers.

You're entitled to your opinion, but there are millions if not billions of people who disagree.
And, to the second point...never quite sure why that went away, to be honest...

[Valcouria]

I guess it really doesn't sink in...gays already have all the right straight people do, except to marry.

Then they don't have the same rights as everyone else.

Marriage is a civil right, their being denied that.
Therefore, there not equal.

Total equality is a farce. The sooner the world recognizes this, the better everything will be.

[The Biased Conservatives]

The fact that France is almost on the way to the gay purge of this once pure yet dirty Earth sickens me. But it won't be passed I mean knowing both the French history and the indisputable laws of god against gays that he sort of didn't mention I know this won't pass.

As a matter of fact, I'll bet France just runs away not soon after this crime against given rights is committed anyhow

[Thafoo]

The fact that France is almost on the way to the gay purge of this once pure yet dirty Earth sickens me. But it won't be passed I mean knowing both the French history and the indisputable laws of god against gays that he sort of didn't mention I know this won't pass.

As a matter of fact, I'll bet France just runs away not soon after this crime against given rights is committed anyhow

I'm going to infect you with homosexuality

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Then they don't have the same rights as everyone else.

Marriage is a civil right, their being denied that.
Therefore, there not equal.

Total equality is a farce. The sooner the world recognizes this, the better everything will be.

Nobody is saying everyone deserves the same outcome, but everyone deserves the same opportunity.