Gay Marriage declared legal across the USA!

First topic message reminder :

So, the Supreme Court of the United States just legalized same sex marriages across the whole of the USA. They have declared the bans on it as 'unconstitutional'. Great news America! Though was this ever really in doubt longterm?  

Gonna be a fair few weeping conservatives tonight I imagine, might want to be careful they don't cause the Mississippi to flood there  

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/jun/26/gay-marriage-legal-supreme-court

Looks like Fuzz's primitive religionist instincts came to the fore last night

The maps are even more interesting- where gay marriage or homosexuality is more accepted, generally, life if leaps ahead of most the world, Scandinavia, NZ, North America, western Europe etc.

Where it is criminal or least accepted, they are stuck in the mud of poverty, religion or civil war- parts of Africa and the ME, where HF and fun would be right at home- away from progressing civilization.

With the news of the Supreme Court's ruling on marriage equality, people across the country are commemorating this historic day. In fact, people of all ages are taking part in the festivities with friends and family.
Here are nine photos of kids who are celebrating love today:

• 1
  
    Photo By Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call
  
  
• 2
  
  Dayana Morales Gomez/Huffington Post
  
  
• 3
  
  Dayana Morales Gomez/Huffington Post
  
  
• 4
  
  Dayana Morales Gomez/Huffington Post
  
  
• 5
  
  Dayana Morales Gomez/Huffington Post
  
  
• 6
  
  Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images
  
  
• 7
  
  Liliana Soto
  
  
• 8
  
  Ursula Murray Husted
  
  
• 9
  
  Photo By Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call
  

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/26/photos-of-kids-celebrating-marriage-equality-_n_7673352.html?utm_hp_ref=good-news&ir=Good%20News

Ben_Reilly wrote:

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

perhaps they are yet in the closet, misunderstood and afraid, waiting for their chance to have their peados rock parade going down the streets of the cities.. "peado pride" banners flying in the wind....

That you would joke about something as traumatic to children as being sexually assaulted by adults, all because you just want to bash gay people, just shows me what a sick person you really are.

homosexuality was once taboo but now they can marry so it will only be a matter of time before more and more perverted relationships are made legal .

Okay let's talk "perversion" shall we?

Is anal sex perverted?
Is cock sucking perverted?
Is getting your vagina licked out perverted?

Do you and your husband not partake in any of these enjoyable sessions?

They don't make babies and God doesn't mention in the bible "Thou shalt suckle on the cockage of thou husband and thou shalt turn over and be humped in the arse"

Men and women enjoy this pastime every day and have done for years.
These sessions don't make babies.
They're not mentioned in the bible.
God hasn't told you that you can do it.

What say you?

Oh and please don't tel me that one or the other of you have never watched porn!
Don't see gang-banging in the bible?

what's all that got to do with the possible legalization of pedophillia and incesteral marriages ?

Vicar of Dibley wrote:what's all that got to do with the possible legalization of pedophillia and incesteral marriages ?

who knows but i guess once their argument of love and consent falls to pieces they need to deflect and create other excuses...

eddie wrote:Okay let's talk "perversion" shall we?

Is anal sex perverted?
Is cock sucking perverted?
Is getting your vagina licked out perverted?

Do you and your husband not partake in any of these enjoyable sessions?

They don't make babies and God doesn't mention in the bible "Thou shalt suckle on the cockage of thou husband and thou shalt turn over and be humped in the arse"

Men and women enjoy this pastime every day and have done for years.
These sessions don't make babies.
They're not mentioned in the bible.
God hasn't told you that you can do it.

What say you?

what is natural sexual intercourse for the purpose of procreation???

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

Vicar of Dibley wrote:what's all that got to do with the possible legalization of pedophillia and incesteral marriages ?

who knows but i guess once their argument of love and consent falls to pieces they need to deflect and create other excuses...

well now gays can marry it won't be long before mother and son , father and daughter will be able to marry too . After all if they ''love'' each other

Vicar of Dibley wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

That you would joke about something as traumatic to children as being sexually assaulted by adults, all because you just want to bash gay people, just shows me what a sick person you really are.

homosexuality was once taboo but now they can marry so it will only be a matter of time before more and more perverted relationships are made legal .

yep, I'm afraid so we could see mothers marrying sons, we could see peados marry kids, I think american had a man marrying a donkey??

but as long as they love each other I guess it's ok...

Are you dumb? Do you realize what the word 'consent' means?

And are you saying the only sexual you've EVER had was the occasions you conceived your children-nothing else?

Eilzel wrote:Are you dumb? Do you realize what the word 'consent' means?

And are you saying the only sexual you've EVER had was the occasions you conceived your children-nothing else?

so you would legalise incest and allow them to marry??

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

Eilzel wrote:Are you dumb? Do you realize what the word 'consent' means?

And are you saying the only sexual you've EVER had was the occasions you conceived your children-nothing else?

so you would legalise incest and allow them to marry??

Some incest relationships are legal and they can marry like first cousins.
Some incest relationships are not legal.
So it is already part legalized.
The laws vary for each country.

Cuchulain wrote:

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

so you would legalise incest and allow them to marry??

Some incest relationships are legal and they can marry like first cousins.
Some incest relationships are not legal.
So it is already part legalized.
The laws vary for each country.

so it is only a matter of time when mother son father daughter brother sister will be shouting for equality to marry because they ''love'' each other .

Vicar of Dibley wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:


Some incest relationships are legal and they can marry like first cousins.
Some incest relationships are not legal.
So it is already part legalized.
The laws vary for each country.

so it is only a matter of time when mother son father daughter brother sister will be shouting for equality to marry because they ''love'' each other .

In the future I think this will happen.
A recent case in the ECHR ruled in favour of Germany in an appeal made from siblings in love with each other. The courts only reasoning to uphold the allowing incest to be illegal was based only on this:



The German court referred to the potential damage to the structure of family life, and there may be some truth in that. Only, in the Stübing case, the family unit had never existed. The partners met as virtual strangers, and the relationship was one between consenting adults.The constitutional court also said that the prohibition of incest was rooted in "cultural history".


http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/apr/15/law-against-incest



Of course there is the added increased risk if having children together, but I have stated the same before. I see no reason why it should be criminalized, even though I do not approve of such close incest relationships. I do not see any valid reason to criminalize it if two consenting adults are in love. I have gone over many points on this when it was last brought up by your husband before on the forum recently and can see no argument to deny. The only issue would be around procreation, if of course they decide to have kids, which not everyone does.

Cuchulain wrote:

Vicar of Dibley wrote:

so it is only a matter of time when mother son father daughter brother sister will be shouting for equality to marry because they ''love'' each other .

In the future I think this will happen.
A recent case in the ECHR ruled in favour of Germany in an appeal made from siblings in love with each other. The courts only reasoning to uphold the allowing incest to be illegal was based only on this:



The German court referred to the potential damage to the structure of family life, and there may be some truth in that. Only, in the Stübing case, the family unit had never existed. The partners met as virtual strangers, and the relationship was one between consenting adults.The constitutional court also said that the prohibition of incest was rooted in "cultural history".


http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/apr/15/law-against-incest



Of course there is the added increased risk if having children together, but I have stated the same before. I see no reason why it should be criminalized, even though I do not approve of such close incest relationships. I do not see any valid reason to criminalize it if two consenting adults are in love. I have gone over many points on this when it was last brought up by your husband  before on the forum recently and can see no argument to deny. The only issue would be around procreation, if of course they decide to have kids, which not everyone does.

wow what an evolved species we really have become, instead of rising above the animal kingdom we sink into the mire of it's depravities...

so you think the animals are "depraved"?


comming from you thats a bit rich, considering you are so primitive you are only just above an amoeba in intellectual development.

If anything is depraved HF it is you and your foul, evil attitudes...

mentor wrote:so you think the animals are "depraved"?


comming from you thats a bit rich, considering you are so primitive you are only just above an amoeba in intellectual development.

If anything is depraved HF it is you and your foul, evil attitudes...

foul evil attitudes, hmmm i don't think gay marriage is a good idea, neither is it normal or natural, so the evil and foul habits lie at the door of those who partake or support such things...

i guess most of them will be voting in favour of peados marrying and mothers and sons marrying because as long as it is consenting love it's ok...

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

mentor wrote:so you think the animals are "depraved"?


comming from you thats a bit rich, considering you are so primitive you are only just above an amoeba in intellectual development.

If anything is depraved HF it is you and your foul, evil attitudes...

foul evil attitudes, hmmm i don't think gay marriage is a good idea, neither is it normal or natural, so the evil and foul habits lie at the door of those who partake or support such things...

you most certainly dont, you prove it time after time

so what you are really saying is that because you have a tiny dictatorial unitelligent and hateful mind, you seek to stop people doing something....that has no effect on you??
something that cannot , possibly, in any way do you any form of harm, physical or psychological. That you would, by agency of lies, deceit and the ravings of an ancient and past its sell by date book, deny tghose people the right to fully equal treatment under the law of the land.

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:i guess most of them will be voting in favour of peados marrying and mothers and sons marrying because as long as it is consenting love it's ok...

and then you attempt to subvert the debate by posting such utter rubbish that even a child could see through it...

you have a weak nasty and appalingly under eucated mind HF...a pityful creature indeed...
you are fundamentalist and therefor no different in type or mind than those lowlifes that infest run and act for ISIS...
I suspect the only reason you dont bomb and maim is not because you are adverse to such things but rather, in accord with the rest of you despicable psychology, you are a coward of the highest order, and too scared.

mentor wrote:

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:i guess most of them will be voting in favour of peados marrying and mothers and sons marrying because as long as it is consenting love it's ok...

and then you attempt to subvert the debate by posting such utter rubbish that even a child could see through it...

you have a weak nasty and appalingly under eucated mind HF...a pityful creature indeed...
you are fundamentalist and therefor no different in type or mind than those lowlifes that infest run and act for ISIS...
I suspect the only reason you dont bomb and maim is not because you are adverse to such things but rather, in accord with the rest of you despicable psychology, you are a coward of the highest order, and too scared.

the main reasoning behind gay marriage being allowed is that people in love should be allowed to marry it's only fair..

so by the same logoc should marriage of couples considered incest be allowed to marry if they love each other.. the same for peado's..

If the person who wanted the age for gay sex reducing to 12 got his way a gay, peado wedding could be made legal...

a precedent has been set surely..

you are totally, and irredeemably barking mad, you do realise that

your logic, as you call it in the above post, is so utterly flawed and idiotic that it scarcely requires an answer....

time and time again people have said if two people love each other and consent to love each other why shouldn't it be legal, so a mother and son, father and daughter, even gay and a 12 year old could marry..

you are totally, and irredeemably barking mad, you do realise that

mentor wrote:you are totally, and irredeemably barking mad, you do realise that

is that the echo from having your head up your own backside...

no its the echo bouncing round your empty skull

eddie wrote:Okay let's talk "perversion" shall we?

Is anal sex perverted?
Is cock sucking perverted?
Is getting your vagina licked out perverted?

Do you and your husband not partake in any of these enjoyable sessions?

They don't make babies and God doesn't mention in the bible "Thou shalt suckle on the cockage of thou husband and thou shalt turn over and be humped in the arse"

Men and women enjoy this pastime every day and have done for years.
These sessions don't make babies.
They're not mentioned in the bible.
God hasn't told you that you can do it.

What say you?

No one going to answer?

mentor wrote:no its the echo bouncing round your empty skull

odd you said it twice..lol

eddie wrote:

eddie wrote:Okay let's talk "perversion" shall we?

Is anal sex perverted?
Is cock sucking perverted?
Is getting your vagina licked out perverted?

Do you and your husband not partake in any of these enjoyable sessions?

They don't make babies and God doesn't mention in the bible "Thou shalt suckle on the cockage of thou husband and thou shalt turn over and be humped in the arse"

Men and women enjoy this pastime every day and have done for years.
These sessions don't make babies.
They're not mentioned in the bible.
God hasn't told you that you can do it.

What say you?

No one going to answer?

i answered it once.......................

Sorry HF I must have missed it. Where is it?

eddie wrote:Sorry HF I must have missed it. Where is it?

over your head as usual..

Oh well. You obviously didn't want to answer it HF
It's blindingly obvious

it was answered, check it out..

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

mentor wrote:

and then you attempt to subvert the debate by posting such utter rubbish that even a child could see through it...

you have a weak nasty and appalingly under eucated mind HF...a pityful creature indeed...
you are fundamentalist and therefor no different in type or mind than those lowlifes that infest run and act for ISIS...
I suspect the only reason you dont bomb and maim is not because you are adverse to such things but rather, in accord with the rest of you despicable psychology, you are a coward of the highest order, and too scared.

the main reasoning behind gay marriage being allowed is that people in love should be allowed to marry it's only fair..

so by the same logoc should marriage of couples considered incest be allowed to marry if they love each other.. the same for peado's..

If the person who wanted the age for gay sex reducing to 12 got his way a gay, peado wedding could be made legal...

a precedent has been set surely..

The above falls at the first hurdle because it fails to rationalize.
What you fail to understand is we have moved away from Biblical reasoning to rational human thinking.
Through the centuries humanity's understanding has increased from century to century.
Now in the past in England there was no criminal act let alone a law for age of consent. Only in the 16th century did they make it a crime to abuse girls under 10. Boys were not covered There is no age of consent to be found in the the religious books. Which people like you who took a literal  view from the bible that this deity was fine to allow child marriages. The evidence throughout the centuries shows pedophilia was acceptable to many Christians at the time. Also Jews and Muslims as well.

Now under Christianity homosexual acts are deemed as major sin warranting death. So from the start of Christianity, it denied previous equality that homosexuals enjoyed. So we see a pattern here. Christianity from the start allows child brides and takes away all rights for homosexuals. As seen throughout time it has been human reasoning that has seen that child brides are wrong and under age sex. It was reasoning that understood that two adults of a mature again love, is not a crime. They had been wrongly believing a barbaric deity existed in the form of the Abrahamic faiths.

So homosexuals once had equality. Christianity and Islam came along and denied them this. Christianity and Islam also make it acceptable to marry children. Thankfully human rational reasoning , rightly placing the children's needs first unlike the bible which does allow child brides. So unless people have a complete meltdown and turn en mass to a literal belief of one of these faiths, would be the only real possibility of allowing child brides to happen again and pedophilia. Secular thinking understands that a child has not fully developed or matured until they reach 16. So only religion becoming the dominant force would see pedophilia legalized again. It would also end up taking away many peoples rights, based on the beliefs in the books. so homosexuals, women etc, would lose there equal rights and would be treated with discrimination. Slavery could also be reintroduced under religious control.


If you do not believe me?
Look where there is problems of child brides still today and women discriminated against?
In Theocracies

So their is very little chance of religion making a U-turn of followers in the west. So you have nothing to worry about pedophilia being made legal. Only a literal belief in the Abrahamic faiths would bring making child brides legal.

right so the next thing will be to ban religion ?


I'm sure that's what this is aiming to lol

Vicar of Dibley wrote:right so the next thing will be to ban religion ?


I'm sure that's what this is aiming to lol

No need to ban religion. Just that religious people understand that religious belief is a personal belief and should only be a personal belief. It should have no impact in politics or running a nation.

Vicar of Dibley wrote:right so the next thing will be to ban religion ?


I'm sure that's what this is aiming to lol

they will have a hard time banning it but, they could get squads of militant queers to demand small churches marry them in their buildings, and rather than go against what they believe they will shut the buildings rather than marry them..

but before that we will see the legalise marriage of peados and siblings to parents etc...because it is love what could be wrong with that..

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

Vicar of Dibley wrote:right so the next thing will be to ban religion ?


I'm sure that's what this is aiming to lol

they will have a hard time banning it but, they could get squads of militant queers to demand small churches marry them in their buildings, and rather than go against what they believe they will shut the buildings rather than marry them..

but before that we will see the legalise marriage of peados and siblings to parents etc...because it is love what could be wrong with that..

Nobody wants to ban religion.
Such a measure is counter productive and discriminates also against the believes.
It also would not work, as the faiths would just go underground
So stop playing the victim card you two, its boring nobody said religions should be banned.
They should be personal beliefs that have no effect on others.

Cuchulain wrote:

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

they will have a hard time banning it but, they could get squads of militant queers to demand small churches marry them in their buildings, and rather than go against what they believe they will shut the buildings rather than marry them..

but before that we will see the legalise marriage of peados and siblings to parents etc...because it is love what could be wrong with that..

Nobody wants to ban religion.
Such a measure is counter productive and discriminates also against the believes.
It also would not work, as the faiths would just go underground
So stop playing the victim card you two, its boring nobody said religions should be banned.
They should be personal beliefs that have no effect on others.

and suing Christian businesses for living their beliefs is a way of keeping faiths..

bigots and hypocrites...

heavenlyfatheragain wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:



Nobody wants to ban religion.
Such a measure is counter productive and discriminates also against the believes.
It also would not work, as the faiths would just go underground
So stop playing the victim card you two, its boring nobody said religions should be banned.
They should be personal beliefs that have no effect on others.

and suing Christian businesses for living their beliefs is a way of keeping faiths..

bigots and hypocrites...

Absurd again.
There is no reason to discriminate against people.
Discrimination is wrong to do as it denies people equal rights.
Beliefs do not supersede the equal rights of a person.

didge the B&B business and the Christian bakers were targeted on purpose by queerspace so they were forcing their way of life and sexuality on people who dare to believe differently to them .

Would you expect a nazi to walk into a Jewish bakers and demand a cake made with '' jews deserved to be gassed '' ?

Vicar of Dibley wrote:didge the B&B business and the Christian bakers were targeted on purpose by queerspace so they were forcing their way of life and sexuality on people who dare to believe differently to them .

Would you expect a nazi to walk into a Jewish bakers and demand a cake made with '' jews deserved to be gassed '' ?

Again it is irrelevant whether you believe they were targeted.
They still discriminated Dibs, whether set up or not
What is relevant, is that no religious belief system should supersede the equity of others.
That protects your equal rights to from others who's beliefs are in conflict with you. If a homosexual discriminated against a religious cake requested by you. Then the homosexual would be in the wrong. Even if you wrote the Leviticus verse on homosexuality. Its not classed as hate speech being as the bible has phony insurance cover to keep any bad verses from being deemed hate through equality itself again. The book is a religious book and is granted exemption to the bad hateful phrases being classed as hate speech.
So there is equality working for you again, but if you asked for the writing to be just "Kill Gays" that would be deemed as a threat and hate speech, as it is not a religious quoted verse.
Your comparison does not compare, as nobody was claiming any violence to Christians but to decorate a cake with Bert and Ernie, with the rainbow flag.
Hardly a hardship.
Its also bad business sense.

Cuchulain wrote:

Vicar of Dibley wrote:didge the B&B business and the Christian bakers were targeted on purpose by queerspace so they were forcing their way of life and sexuality on people who dare to believe differently to them .

Would you expect a nazi to walk into a Jewish bakers and demand a cake made with '' jews deserved to be gassed '' ?

Again it is irrelevant whether you believe they were targeted.
They still discriminated Dibs, whether set up or not
What is relevant, is that no religious belief system should supersede the equity of others.
That protects your equal rights to from others who's beliefs are in conflict with you. If a homosexual discriminated against a religious cake requested by you. Then the homosexual would be in the wrong. Even if you wrote the Leviticus verse on homosexuality. Its not classed as hate speech being as the bible has phony insurance cover to keep any bad verses from being deemed hate through equality itself again. The book is a religious book and is granted exemption to the bad hateful phrases being classed as hate speech.
So there is equality working for you again, but if you asked for the writing to be just "Kill Gays" that would be deemed as a threat and hate speech, as it is not a religious quoted verse.
Your comparison does not compare, as nobody was claiming any violence to Christians but to decorate a cake with Bert and Ernie, with the rainbow flag.
Hardly a hardship.
Its also bad business sense.

of course they were targeted do you think mitlitant queers randomly went to a b&b and a cake shop that just happened to be Christian businesses...

Missing the point again HF in regards to euality

did one of those who campaigned for gay marriage once say... "not all sex with children is unwanted and abusive"

perhaps his next campaign will be for peado marriages..

Vicar of Dibley wrote:what's all that got to do with the possible legalization of pedophillia and incesteral marriages ?

And what do those issues have to do with gays? Or are we still flat-earthers?

Vicar of Dibley wrote:right so the next thing will be to ban religion ?

I'm sure that's what this is aiming to lol

No, just a substantial fine for false advertising.