Funny how the homosexual groupies all share the same habit of editing posts that contradict their argument.

So I'll repost it here #114:
Strange how you want to impose the concept of "consent" on bestialists but not on pet owners or meat eaters?

How convenient.

It's also intriguing that you claim the right to decide morality for others when they are bestialists, but reject any attempt to impose morality on you!

As for legality - homosexuality was illegal until quite recently. Laws can change, including laws about bestiality (which is not illegal in some US states).

Has anybody else noticed that the subject has shifted from "gay marriages" to "homosexuality," thanks mostly to garysher and fxashun's refusal to admit that there is no comparison between gay couples and the perversions they are also fixated on.

Marriage is a legally binding contract - in the United States, animals and corpses (nor children, for that matter) are not able to legally enter into a binding contract.

That is why any comparsion between gays having the right to marry and the other subjects that get garysher and fxashun all quivery and shivery is asinine and off point.

That's fine with me. If she too is bisexual, I would expect your sex life to be rather interesting. Of course, you're certainly not inclined to share any of that here.

Well in that case, neither has sex with children and animals been "proven deviant" using the criteria used by homosexuals. Since sex doesn't have to be procreative, waiting for sexual maturity doesn't matter. And since we don't have to worry about physiological compatibility, why not "screw the pooch" too. I'm not launching from the assumption that a "desire to have sex with a man" bullshit, I'm basing it on the fact that any reason that supports homosexuality also can clearly translate to pedo and zoofie. And until you can find a reason that a person will be born with an unnatural desire such as that, I don't see any other logical approach to this issue. "Consent" is not gonna cut it as it is doesn't matter. Homosexual desires are deviant for the same reasons that the other sexual desires are.

And if there were any proof that humans, mammals, complex life forms were supposed to be born gay, you would have no problem giving that reason. Instead you are left with the bullshit, "no it's not" that you gave above.

I use "deviant" because it more respectful to the community here than "fucked up" "freakish" "dysfunctional" "broke" etc.

Well I would also have to prove it for zoophilia and pedo. Especially zoofie since it's legal in many places. And again, when viewed in the context of all of the other urges that people are born with, sexual deviant desires seem to be alone in not being provided for by our bodies. We have entire systems to make use of oxygen. We have an entire digestive system to make use of available resources. And we have sensory systems to be able to perceive the environment around us. Even our sexual systems compliment male/female to a tee. If you look at our bodies and how under heterosexuality they compliment each other, then compare that to homosexuals, pedophiles, and zoophiles, I don't see how you can't come to the conclusion that a person born that way is NOT dysfunctional. And if you disagree, explain to me how you come to the conclusion that you aren't. I'm not asking you to "prove" anything. Just show the extreme rationality that it takes to get comfortable living gay and thinking you aren't deviant.

Yeah, and part of that digestive system produces shit.

Has anyone notice Tristan whining again instead of just talking about what the topic currently is. Strange a man that can throw fucking bitch" around with such abandon should complain about anything. What a fucking bitch.

The children part of that is a very fluid concept. Ga for example is still fiddling with their laws on the subject. And again children as young as 7 at one time could marry in this country. In the name of "rights", anything is possible. We abort/kill/murder what we all know is a perspective human being in the name of "rights". In the name of "rights" anything is possible and can be rationalized.

Not really. The laws vary by state.
Marriage Laws in the US by Age
Just a cursory look shows that NH has laws as young as 13 and many say "younger than "x"". So again, you might need to do a little research before you show you don't know what the fuck you are talking about.

And as someone who has been called a rectum, I can say with authority that I don't appreciate people confusing my use. Although I am full of shit, so what do I know. LOL.

Oh, we noticed.

But what are you expecting them to do? Stop talking? Please!

We know that when they find themselves defeated on the actual thread topic, as they have here once again, it NEVER stops them from talking.

http://www.defendingthetruth.com/gay...tml#post162877 (NJ State Commission: Civil Unions Fail Gay Couples)

They just change the subject to their favorite fixations.

That's generally when I tune out and wait for the next thread to start.
See you there.

Even more enlightening than your link to post #50, is to find the first post that started talking about the individuals posting rather than the topic at hand.
Why don't you complain about the gay people that can't seem to discuss this topic in a debate forum without talking about the individual people?

But then again, your usage of the word fixation probably wasn't coincidental.

How do you get "defeated" on this thread topic? NJ and Vermont are doing the same thing. Allowing civil unions as a stepping stone to "gay marriage". This doesn't to anything but validate those states that allow nothing.