Rubio is the GOP Flavor of the Week

What the fuck they do BCD should abso-fucking-lutely remain BCD, you "#Grubered", freelance faggot, Odumbo Minion from Arkansas. It's their fascistic demand that the rest of society buy into their propaganda that invites ridicule and repudiation, you "#Grubered", freelance faggot, Odumbo Minion from Arkansas.
Originally Posted by I B Hankering

You should remain behind closed doors you chicken dick golem loving gruberized sodomite cunt.

You should remain behind closed doors you chicken dick golem loving gruberized sodomite cunt. Originally Posted by WombRaider

Why is it you always bring a whiff of hypocritical mendacity into the conversation when you attempt to defend faggots, you "#Grubered", freelance faggot, Odumbo Minion from Arkansas?

You're the stupid fuck on this issue, shammytard. Gays already had the benefit of anti-discrimination laws long before they were allowed to marry.





What's your point, shammydupe? I never said anything about Christians or Christianity. I said a lot of tolerant people object to changing the definition of marriage. Why do you think Congress passed a law about it?

Last time I checked IB was doing fine - as evidenced by the way you libtards keep reverting to the same old hackneyed, knee-jerk, straw-man cliche arguments.

. Originally Posted by lustylad

Theres a lot of meaningless words in your ramble. Let's break it down, shall we?

Last time I checked IB was doing fine - as evidenced by the way you libtards keep reverting to the same old hackneyed, knee-jerk, straw-man cliche arguments. Originally Posted by lustylad

Let's see...

Firstly, who in the fuck ever claimed that everything has to be backed by science in order to be true. There's many things that genetics doesn't explain. Whether homosexuality is genetic or not does not have anything to do with this argument

That's IB's straw man number 1; Pushing an issue onto science even though science might not even have anything to do with it.



Secondly, "not yet determined" does not qualify as proof against it. That's what you could probably learn in biology 101 (which IB obviously never took).

That is his strawman number 2; assuming that just because science hasn't proven it yet means that it is absolutely true otherwise.



So what was that about IB "doing fine"? Yeah keep sucking on his asshole.

I never said anything about Christians or Christianity. I said a lot of tolerant people object to changing the definition of marriage. Originally Posted by lustylad

So then what the FUCK are you saying?? The "definition of marriage"? According to whom? If not Christianity then WHAT THE FUCK are you talking about?
You think you can drop a bunch of chickenshit words and walk out? That ain't gonna happen here you piece of shit.

Why would civil union status make them "feel inferior" - unless for some reason they are ashamed rather than proud of being gay?

Hmmm let's see, my best friends Adam and Eve are married.
Me, Adam, and my partner, Steve, are only "civilly united" because we are not allowed to be married by law.
I totally see your point.

You are a dipshit in lockstep with your racist, bigoted cocksucker IBMoron.

Theres a lot of meaningless words in your ramble. Let's break it down, shall we?

Let's see...

Firstly, who in the fuck ever claimed that everything has to be backed by science in order to be true. There's many things that genetics doesn't explain. Whether homosexuality is genetic or not does not have anything to do with this argument

That's IB's straw man number 1; Pushing an issue onto science even though science might not even have anything to do with it.

Secondly, "not yet determined" does not qualify as proof against it. That's what you could probably learn in biology 101 (which IB obviously never took).

That is his strawman number 2; assuming that just because science hasn't proven it yet means that it is absolutely true otherwise.


So what was that about IB "doing fine"? Yeah keep sucking on his asshole.


So the what the FUCK are you saying?? The "definition of marriage"? According to whom? If not Christianity then WHAT THE FUCK are you talking about?
You think you can drop a bunch of chickenshit words and walk out? That ain't gonna happen here you piece of shit.

Hmmm let's see, my best friends Adam and Eve are married.
Me, Adam, and my partner, Steve, are only "civilly united" because we are not allowed to be married by law. I totally see your point.

You are a dipshit in lockstep with your racist, bigoted cocksucker IBMoron.[/SIZE] Originally Posted by shanm

Yes, U B a Moron, shamman. You came into this forum announcing that you are an atheist and that you do not ~believe~ in anything not founded on science. Yet, when challenged to do so, you cannot produce the incontrovertible science to support your jackass opinion, shamman. That makes you a bit of a hypocrite, because you do base your beliefs on propaganda and not incontrovertible science, shamman. Meanwhile, your "born that way" theory is disputed by the evolutionary fact that faggots cannot reproduce naturally, shamman: and that's another observed and unalterable biological fact that you cannot repudiate, shamman.

Theres a lot of meaningless words in your ramble. Let's break it down, shall we?



Let's see...

Firstly, who in the fuck ever claimed that everything has to be backed by science in order to be true. There's many things that genetics doesn't explain. Whether homosexuality is genetic or not does not have anything to do with this argument

That's IB's straw man number 1; Pushing an issue onto science even though science might not even have anything to do with it.



Secondly, "not yet determined" does not qualify as proof against it. That's what you could probably learn in biology 101 (which IB obviously never took).

That is his strawman number 2; assuming that just because science hasn't proven it yet means that it is absolutely true otherwise.



So what was that about IB "doing fine"? Yeah keep sucking on his asshole.




So the what the FUCK are you saying?? The "definition of marriage"? According to whom? If not Christianity then WHAT THE FUCK are you talking about?
You think you can drop a bunch of chickenshit words and walk out? That ain't gonna happen here you piece of shit.




Hmmm let's see, my best friends Adam and Eve are married.
Me, Adam, and my partner, Steve, are only "civilly united" because we are not allowed to be married by law.
I totally see your point.

You are a dipshit in lockstep with your racist, bigoted cocksucker IBMoron.[/SIZE] Originally Posted by shanm

I'm sure your Mom knew you were gay from day one...

Yes, U B a Moron, shamman. You came into this forum announcing that you are an atheist and that you do not ~believe~ in anything not founded on science. Yet, when challenged to do so, you cannot produce the incontrovertible science to support your jackass opinion, shamman. That makes you a bit of a hypocrite, because you do base your beliefs on propaganda and not incontrovertible science, shamman. Meanwhile, your "born that way" theory is disputed by the evolutionary fact that faggots cannot reproduce naturally, shamman: and that's another observed and unalterable biological fact that you cannot repudiate, shamman. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Homosexual activity has been observed in over 1500 species.

Old-T, Shut the FUCK UP, this is a adult conversation... Originally Posted by IIFFOFRDB

Then why are you posting here?

Guess whose theories were proved wrong by science and which ones science cannot prove, Old-THUMPER. BTW, Old-THUMPER, morality is temporal because it is still determined by the majority in each and every society, and don't try to conflate morality with incontrovertible science, Old-THUMPER. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Total bullshit, as most your posts are.

Morality is not the same as majority opinion. Some things are inherently evil, and the fact that you do not acknowledge it does not refute it.

So tell me, where is your scientific "proof" that two women holding hands in public destroys the moral fiber of the universe?

Where is your "proof" that slavery and subjugation of blacks was right?

Where is your "proof" that you are anything but a hateful racist sexist scumbag?

You have not proven a single thing. You have not disprove anything I actually said (though you keep claiming to disprove many things I never said).

You are by your own definition, deviant. You are by the overwhelming majority of your post a hateful lying bigot.

Rant on IBDeviant. Rage against the wind you closet homosexual. Keep lying while telling yourself you are the Wrath of the Thumping Old Testament God. Won't you be shocked when you finally meet him and he says "I know you not".

Looks like "old Thumper" thumped chicken dick again.............

...every time anyone tries to articulate this viewpoint they get scorned, harassed and shouted down by the LGBT lobby which behaves exactly like old twerp is doing - why, you must be a hate-filled bigot or a closet gay! Originally Posted by lustylad

Wow, lookee how Old Twat just keeps on smoking the same pipe even after I called him out. Poor guy has no imagination. Or maybe he's part of the LGBT lobby?

You are by the overwhelming majority of your post a hateful lying bigot.... Rage against the wind you closet homosexual. Originally Posted by Old-T

Wow, lookee how Old Twat just keeps on smoking the same pipe even after I called him out. Poor guy has no imagination. Or maybe he's part of the LGBT lobby? Originally Posted by lustylad

If there's anyone who knows about smoking pipes, it's you. Or maybe you take it in the ass and like it. Who knows.

Wow, lookee how Old Twat just keeps on smoking the same pipe even after I called him out. Poor guy has no imagination. Or maybe he's part of the LGBT lobby? Originally Posted by lustylad

Since you seem intent on jumping to IBDeviant's aid, please answer the question he ignores:

How do two women walking down the street holding hands hurt you?

I'll keep asking the question until he (or you) can give a cogent answer.

Since you seem intent on jumping to IBDeviant's aid, please answer the question he ignores:

How do two women walking down the street holding hands hurt you?

I'll keep asking the question until he (or you) can give a cogent answer. Originally Posted by Old-T

they're just both mad that they're gay and ugly and no one wants to play with them.

Wow, lookee how Old Twat just keeps on smoking the same pipe even after I called him out. Poor guy has no imagination. Or maybe he's part of the LGBT lobby? Originally Posted by lustylad

Since you seem intent on jumping to IBDeviant's aid, please answer the question he ignores:

How do two women walking down the street holding hands hurt you?

I'll keep asking the question until he (or you) can give a cogent answer.

Since you seem intent on jumping to IBDeviant's aid, please answer the question he ignores:

How do two women walking down the street holding hands hurt you?

I'll keep asking the question until he (or you) can give a cogent answer. Originally Posted by Old-T

It's something he will never have?

Man or woman, no one would want to hold hands with this ugly bastard.