Why they lost in pictures.

Why can't anyone get this answer right!!!!

Its going to depend on the strength of the argument the state provides as justification for why it needs to .. If the reasons are different, then likely the quality of those reasons will be as least a little different one way or another. There is no logic to think the answer has to be the same, because the test questions are the same

 

oooohhhhh, so it's not really about equality.... it's about power, it's about popularity, and it's about $$..... Gotcha

and there are people that think gays raising children should be illegal because of crap like this

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/gay-conn-couple-accused-rape-face-trial-article-1.1310010

"you must be one of them there, closet homosexuals" herpaderp

nope, you just said what I've known all along.... it's really not about actual equality.... it's about power, control and money and incest is too taboo for you.

I wonder what Harvey Milk would think of you saying "gay is too taboo, it's political suicide to support him" back in the 70s. You'lll only support an agenda when it's socially acceptable enough. Way to lead from the rear.... how's the view?


Well, Harvey milk was more interested in stat-raping kids to worry about incest marriages too.

 

Your arguments are stupid. But worse than that, they have been regurgitated for decades now by the same people. And no one listens to you. Which is obvious by the amount of states with legalized same sex marriage. So why even bother? You bored?

 

ignoring because you have no answer /= not hearing

 

How the hell do you go from "politicians need to be strategic about what they say" to "gay people are evil"?

And you've yet to actually argue against SSM. You just sit there coming up with new ways to announce your hatred and mistrust of gay people.

 

so equality is only about being politically correct? you aren't concerned with true equality or you'd be fighting for the polygomists, the incestuous, no matter if it was taboo or not....



Very telling of your morals that they are based on what other people think of you. Very pious...


"yay for equality.... (that is if I can safely gauge that people will agree with me about the issue first)"

 

got love the way people try to tell others what they are thinking and what they stand for .. why not actually try to formulate an argument against SSM that is not off topic and blatantly nothing more than an attempt to degrade people who you fear.

 

How absolutely typical .. care to post links to heterosexual couples who rape their children, or is it, as usual, nothing more than a pathetic attempt to generalize against a whole group of people based on a minority of incidents .. how really, really honest of you

 

*sigh* what kids did Harvey milk stat rape? Who accused him? What evidence do you have to support your allegation?

 

Are you even actually reading what I'm saying? Reality doesn't work the way you think it does. Polyamorists will have to fight their own battle. Would you have criticized MLK for not fighting for gay acceptance? No, because you need to be pragmatic and you don't actually care about equality. You're facetiously arguing for the poly amorous because your inability to understand how politics works is the only crutch that upholds your sense of self righteousness. I will no longer engage in conversation with you until you demonstrate the ability to argue like a civil and sensible human being, though I have no doubt that you will interpret that as a cowardly surrender.