Homosexual pedophile. Better? Satisfied now?

Damn thick dishonest people.

(04-20-2015 02:15 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  If Republicans don't shut up about this, they're going to dig a hole too deep to get out of.

As Hambone stated, the GOP isn't going to be allowed to drop the proverbial shovel and sidestep this issue. And a non-answer will be shaped as 'candidate X is clearly a bigot because of his refusal to support gay marriage' by the MSM. This was something Republicans should have been addressing with its base after 2008. But I think far too many folks examined GOP success in various midterms and felt that the social conservative message would carry the day on the national level. I don't know how many Indiana incidents need to occur before the GOP is dissuaded from this notion.

(04-20-2015 12:18 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  I never understood those who thought that homosexuality was a choice? It's like they are arguing that a well made powerpoint presentation could convince them to want to blow a guy.

Sex is a behavior that people CHOOSE to engage in and choose WHO they engage in it with.

Sex is a willing act. Thus it is a choice.

(04-20-2015 02:45 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(04-20-2015 12:18 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  I never understood those who thought that homosexuality was a choice? It's like they are arguing that a well made powerpoint presentation could convince them to want to blow a guy.

Sex is a behavior that people CHOOSE to engage in and choose WHO they engage in it with.

Sex is a willing act. Thus it is a choice.

Homosexuality implies attraction to the same sex, not just the sexual acts. Try again.

(04-20-2015 02:43 PM)Paul M Wrote:  Homosexual pedophile. Better? Satisfied now?

Damn thick dishonest people.

Who's being dishonest? Are you honestly going to act like 'heterosexual' pedophiles are at all categorized as such? Of course not.

(04-20-2015 02:47 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(04-20-2015 02:45 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(04-20-2015 12:18 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  I never understood those who thought that homosexuality was a choice? It's like they are arguing that a well made powerpoint presentation could convince them to want to blow a guy.

Sex is a behavior that people CHOOSE to engage in and choose WHO they engage in it with.

Sex is a willing act. Thus it is a choice.

Homosexuality implies attraction to the same sex, not just the sexual acts. Try again.

Desire and behavior are two different things.

You know this and so do I.

You may not have full control of your desires, but you DO have full control of your actions.

Homosexual sex and lifestyle is a choice.

(04-20-2015 02:45 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(04-20-2015 02:15 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  If Republicans don't shut up about this, they're going to dig a hole too deep to get out of.

As Hambone stated, the GOP isn't going to be allowed to drop the proverbial shovel and sidestep this issue. And a non-answer will be shaped as 'candidate X is clearly a bigot because of his refusal to support gay marriage' by the MSM. This was something Republicans should have been addressing with its base after 2008. But I think far too many folks examined GOP success in various midterms and felt that the social conservative message would carry the day on the national level. I don't know how many Indiana incidents need to occur before the GOP is dissuaded from this notion.

Giving general, nondescript answers like "I think it should be an issue left up to the states" would probably be good enough not to lose too many votes. But they won't do that.

The conversations always go the same way here. Pedophilia comes up. Gay pedophilia enters the discussion. Gays get pissy and accuse others of saying, when no such claim is EVER made that all pedos are gay. Gays claim there are no gay pedos, but somehow still continue talking and mention that most pedos are in fact straight. Heteros say there are straight ones as well as gay ones. Gays continue being dishonest.

As evidence by yet another thread.

(04-20-2015 02:52 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(04-20-2015 02:45 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(04-20-2015 02:15 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  If Republicans don't shut up about this, they're going to dig a hole too deep to get out of.

As Hambone stated, the GOP isn't going to be allowed to drop the proverbial shovel and sidestep this issue. And a non-answer will be shaped as 'candidate X is clearly a bigot because of his refusal to support gay marriage' by the MSM. This was something Republicans should have been addressing with its base after 2008. But I think far too many folks examined GOP success in various midterms and felt that the social conservative message would carry the day on the national level. I don't know how many Indiana incidents need to occur before the GOP is dissuaded from this notion.

Giving general, nondescript answers like "I think it should be an issue left up to the states" would probably be good enough not to lose too many votes. But they won't do that.

That's not even going to cut it IMO. Such a position will be portrayed as being no different than George Wallace, Lester Maddox and the segregationists of the 1960's American South.

(04-20-2015 03:01 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(04-20-2015 02:52 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(04-20-2015 02:45 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(04-20-2015 02:15 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  If Republicans don't shut up about this, they're going to dig a hole too deep to get out of.

As Hambone stated, the GOP isn't going to be allowed to drop the proverbial shovel and sidestep this issue. And a non-answer will be shaped as 'candidate X is clearly a bigot because of his refusal to support gay marriage' by the MSM. This was something Republicans should have been addressing with its base after 2008. But I think far too many folks examined GOP success in various midterms and felt that the social conservative message would carry the day on the national level. I don't know how many Indiana incidents need to occur before the GOP is dissuaded from this notion.

Giving general, nondescript answers like "I think it should be an issue left up to the states" would probably be good enough not to lose too many votes. But they won't do that.

That's not even going to cut it IMO. Such a position will be portrayed as being no different than George Wallace, Lester Maddox and the segregationists of the 1960's American South.

That may be true. But it is likely a better answer than they're giving now.

Republicans don't realize that a huge section of the voters in this country vote based on one or two social issues and nothing else. As stupid and absurd as that is, they need to realize that it is indeed the case.

(04-20-2015 02:52 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(04-20-2015 02:45 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(04-20-2015 02:15 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  If Republicans don't shut up about this, they're going to dig a hole too deep to get out of.

As Hambone stated, the GOP isn't going to be allowed to drop the proverbial shovel and sidestep this issue. And a non-answer will be shaped as 'candidate X is clearly a bigot because of his refusal to support gay marriage' by the MSM. This was something Republicans should have been addressing with its base after 2008. But I think far too many folks examined GOP success in various midterms and felt that the social conservative message would carry the day on the national level. I don't know how many Indiana incidents need to occur before the GOP is dissuaded from this notion.

Giving general, nondescript answers like "I think it should be an issue left up to the states" would probably be good enough not to lose too many votes. But they won't do that.

How about, "I think it is an issue left up to the states, but if the Supreme Court were to make a decision on a national level, I would honor that as the law of the land. Period, end of story.

In the end, the President, whomever that may be, will not be the one making the decision. It will either be state law or the Supreme Court will act on a national level.

There is the out.

Frankly, it the grand scheme of what government should be worried about and focusing on - this falls about number 30 or 40 on the list except for a very small, 5% on a good day, group of people.

Oh yeah, and Democrats - they use it as a wedge issue to try and paint Republicans as homophobes.

(04-20-2015 03:05 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(04-20-2015 03:01 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  That's not even going to cut it IMO. Such a position will be portrayed as being no different than George Wallace, Lester Maddox and the segregationists of the 1960's American South.

That may be true. But it is likely a better answer than they're giving now.

Republicans don't realize that a huge section of the voters in this country vote based on one or two social issues and nothing else. As stupid and absurd as that is, they need to realize that it is indeed the case.

I can't argue with the bolded . And I think the GOP either underestimate the size of the social issue cohort or thinks that they can be won over on fiscal policy alone.

(04-20-2015 03:26 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(04-20-2015 03:05 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(04-20-2015 03:01 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  That's not even going to cut it IMO. Such a position will be portrayed as being no different than George Wallace, Lester Maddox and the segregationists of the 1960's American South.

That may be true. But it is likely a better answer than they're giving now.

Republicans don't realize that a huge section of the voters in this country vote based on one or two social issues and nothing else. As stupid and absurd as that is, they need to realize that it is indeed the case.

I can't argue with the bolded . And I think the GOP either underestimate the size of the social issue cohort or thinks that they can be won over on fiscal policy alone.

They need every vote they can garner in each of the swing states. I think they are foolish to rely of fiscal policy alone, but I would pose it as either the states or the Supreme Court are ultimately going to decide it - not the President in a vacuum anyway.



Unless you're Obama and have a Pen and Phone - ask him. Really, he's not even making the decision. If it were solely up to the President, wouldn't he have already appeased the gays and it be the law of the land in all states?

The issue will be decided this summer by the SCOTUS so it is really a non-issue. They will either legalize it across the board or they will throw it to the states. Either way, the president's view doesn't matter. That is why getting into the weeds doesn't make any sense.

(04-20-2015 02:12 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  Well, he doesn't know so it would be answering the question.

I didn't answer you fully. Yes, it answers the specific question they asked... but that would only lead to another hypo and another hypo and another... and if he keeps saying, I don't know... he looks bad.

There is the question they are asking, like would you attend your gay son's wedding... and the REAL question they are asking, which is where do you come down legislatively on gay marriage. Deflect/ignore the question they are asking, answer the REAL issue in a well rehearsed and vetted manner.

(04-20-2015 02:52 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  Giving general, nondescript answers like "I think it should be an issue left up to the states" would probably be good enough not to lose too many votes. But they won't do that.

They can't. Federal Tax filing status and Federal estate taxes aren't state issues... and then they also come back with the 'personal' question. If your gay son in a state that didn't recognize gay marriage went to a state that did to get married, would you attend? That's not an issue for the states either.

Gay threads ......

(04-20-2015 04:38 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(04-20-2015 02:12 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  Well, he doesn't know so it would be answering the question.

I didn't answer you fully. Yes, it answers the specific question they asked... but that would only lead to another hypo and another hypo and another... and if he keeps saying, I don't know... he looks bad.

There is the question they are asking, like would you attend your gay son's wedding... and the REAL question they are asking, which is where do you come down legislatively on gay marriage. Deflect/ignore the question they are asking, answer the REAL issue in a well rehearsed and vetted manner.

(04-20-2015 02:52 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  Giving general, nondescript answers like "I think it should be an issue left up to the states" would probably be good enough not to lose too many votes. But they won't do that.

They can't. Federal Tax filing status and Federal estate taxes aren't state issues... and then they also come back with the 'personal' question. If your gay son in a state that didn't recognize gay marriage went to a state that did to get married, would you attend? That's not an issue for the states either.

That answer is simple as well. "My son isn't gay."

(04-20-2015 02:59 PM)Paul M Wrote:  The conversations always go the same way here. Pedophilia comes up. Gay pedophilia enters the discussion. Gays get pissy and accuse others of saying, when no such claim is EVER made that all pedos are gay. Gays claim there are no gay pedos, but somehow still continue talking and mention that most pedos are in fact straight. Heteros say there are straight ones as well as gay ones. Gays continue being dishonest.

As evidence by yet another thread.

Pedophilia doesn't just naturally come up as a part of this discussion, it 'comes up' because you intentionally bring it up. Reread the thread, you're the first person to bring it up. Stop throwing your hands up acting like it's beyond you why this happens, your outdated and offensively ignorant statements are why his happens.

(04-20-2015 03:26 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  

(04-20-2015 03:05 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(04-20-2015 03:01 PM)vandiver49 Wrote:  That's not even going to cut it IMO. Such a position will be portrayed as being no different than George Wallace, Lester Maddox and the segregationists of the 1960's American South.

That may be true. But it is likely a better answer than they're giving now.

Republicans don't realize that a huge section of the voters in this country vote based on one or two social issues and nothing else. As stupid and absurd as that is, they need to realize that it is indeed the case.

I can't argue with the bolded . And I think the GOP either underestimate the size of the social issue cohort or thinks that they can be won over on fiscal policy alone.

People in that cohort don't like candidates who dance around this issue because it's so objectively stupid from their perspective. Tap dance around the issue like this and it signals you're still beholden to those archaic views.

Because gay marriage should absolutely be legal.

The whole argument is just further proof that the civil rights era court decisions and legislation are the wrong tools for the gay issue.