If You Believe Homosexual Acts Are Immoral, Why Are You Labeled a "homophobe"?

So the court directly states

And you want me to prove they arent just making it up?????

You believe what you want. No amount of reality can alter your perceptions as they are wholly based upon ideology

 

Marriage between men and women has existed for thousands of years. Gay marriage never existed in the US until 2004. It is a new invention.

 

No "gay marriage" is a figment of your imagination.

Simply including couples of the same sex didn't change anything. It's still thousands of years old and it's still marriage.

 

It changed the fundamental attribute of marriage, husbands and wives becoming mothers and fathers to their children

 

once again, that is your opinion.

wouldn't be any different with a sane sex couple.

 

No the court did not directly state that YOU did.

- Post #593

so yes you did make it up, I asked you for the actual citation from the actual court where it states that the definition of marriage used was from Meriam Webster .. you failed on all levels to do that, instead content to evade the actual items asked for.

No I want you to prove what I have asked for from the very start, that your assertion and assumption that they used the Meriam's Webster definition of marriage is correct by producing the documents from the court that state it.

That is just so bloody funny coming from someone who cannot answer a simple question or provide a single piece of evidence to back up your assumption.

It is more of a case of you trying to find outdated definitions to suite your ideology and agenda, such as using the Black's Law dictionary Edition 4 when there have been FIVE new releases since then .. pathetic is what that is.

 

BC Roman law

"Mater semper certa est" ("The mother is always certain")
"pater semper incertus est" ("The father is always uncertain")
"pater est, quem nuptiae demonstrant" ("father is to whom marriage points")...

Just as it is today

160.204. PRESUMPTION OF PATERNITY. (a) A man is
presumed to be the father of a child if:
(1) he is married to the mother of the child and the
child is born during the marriage;

Neither having any relevance to two people of the same sex. Only women give birth and only men are responsible for them doing so.

- - - Updated - - -

Actually thats what I just did and you are still trapped in your delusion.

 

Oh Good an Appeal to Tradition fallacy, they always make such compelling arguments

Which has absolutely nothing at all to do with marriage laws.

Where?

Please do point me to the posts where you link to the actual court decision that states the Meriam Webster definition was used .. I'll wait.

 

Im beginning to wonder if the stupid act, isnt an act.

 

I missed the bloody link at the bottom of your post, so please accept my apologies.

Though I note that this case was heard in 1973 .. quite a few things have changed since then including the definition used.

mar·riage
noun \ˈmer-ij, ˈma-rij\

: the relationship that exists between a husband and a wife

: a similar relationship between people of the same sex

: a ceremony in which two people are married to each other

Full Definition of MARRIAGE
1
a (1) : the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2) : the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage <same-sex marriage>


http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/marriage?show=0&t=1399041506

so in that respect, no problem with using the FULL Meriam Webster definition of marriage, and guess what it includes same-sex marriages.

 

A minor detail has been altered, happens all the time. Language evolves.

 

Certainly to homosexuals it is a minor detail

 

It's minor to everyone. It isn't even a marriage law, it's a paternity law and doesn't apply to all opposite sex couples. Using it as an argument against same sex couples continues to be both hilarious and retarded

 

Actually, it is originally from the Uniform Marriage Act, and the Uniform Parentage act, adopted in similiar form in all 50 states.

 

And is a paternity law not a marriage law.

Hilarious and retarded you still pull this long debunked argument out m

 

Well that proves it's an opinion than.

 

reported.

 

Its the same old, same old by him, repeat, lather, rinse, repeat, lather, rinse ... etc.

Funniest thing is I (*)(*)(*)(*)ed up with my posts, didn't see the link he provided and as I do have integrity I apologised, and look at the response I got .. this guy has some very serious anger issues laced with a severe phobia (one wonders if it is an attempt to cover up his/her own true feelings)

 

wow, I have nerve seen him do that before. I figured that was out of character for him.

 

I am convinced that this is an obsession of people that don't get enough sex.

 

I just find it so, so funny

 

Any anger is directed towards people without a shred integrity

 

Dated law books, dated definitions. Why do you need to resort to dishonesty in order to make your point?

 

Really, I apologised for not seeing the link you offered, if you are not man enough to accept an apology and must resort to disgusting language then you are the one who not only lacks integrity but also manners and creditability.

you seem to think that your usage of dated definitions and outdated court decisions somehow gives you credence .. it doesn't and neither do you have any.

 

Lol, you (*)(*)(*)(*)ing quoted him owning his mistake.