Bush: "Our nation must defend the sanctity of marriage."

[Pookie]

Let me get this straight. I talk about it (and maintain the same position, might I add, you are the one trying to make it seem as though I changed it) and you flame me. I put you on my ignore list and drop the issue and you still flame me. So what do you want?

So what if I didn't know you're a "chick." So what? There was no way for me to know. It's not as if you specify your gender in your s/n, title or sigline. In any case, that is not the issue and it never has been. You accuse me of avoiding of changing the subject, yet you nitpick me on such a small issue.

No, you never used the word "bigot" but you implied it not so subtly. You have however used the word "idiot," among other insults. What I don't get is if you are still attacking me and insulting me, why you continue to insist that I am the one who is not willing to have civilized, calm discussion about it. I would like to see you respond to me just ocne without insulting me, just to see if you're capable of it.

I would also like to draw attention to the fact that I have not been attacking or insulting you here.

The fact is, I support gay marriage (and I always have, I've never changed my position on that). But you can't seem to accept that for some reason. Is it because you insist on villifying me or because you are not sure about your own stance on the issue?

I'm not arguing about whether you support same-sex marriage now. You were the one who said "I" just wanted to make a point, that I didn't want gay marriage. Then when I responded like you did to me, you got pissy because I dared to question you. Not a sign of maturity, buster. It's a sign of someone who can't or won't stand behind what he says.

I never implied you were a bigot. I just questioned your rationale for initially saying "It's just to make a point". If you took it as me calling you a bigot, then that's your issue, dude.

One more time ... It's a discussion board. If you don't want your opinion discussed, I suggest you not post it. Simple as that.

I flamed you after you said we were all being "emotional". You didn't want to respond to my question. You just wanted to toss us all off with an insult of your own, that we weren't using logic like you supposedly were. I see you can't take what you dish out ... which is just like most immature people.

 

[Bitchslapper]

Again, you fail to make a point and the fact you realize you are in the wrong here is shown by the fact that you isnult me.

When I siad it was political (which I never said was the only reason for pursuing it, and I also never said it was my actual view, I have however said numerous times I was playing Devil's Advocate), I did not refer to you specifically at any time.

If you're not agruing about same sex marriage anymore, then what exactly are you arguing about? Not that I expect you to give me a sensible answer. You haven't yet. Can anyone else tell me what this is about?

What rationale is it that you refer to? If it were my opinion, I wouldn't need to constantly defend the thinking behind it. As I have said numerous times before, an opinion by definition is neither right nor wrong, yet you felt compelled to prove my opinion wrong (desite the fact that it agrees with yours and the opinion of everyone else who has posted in this thread).

I am not the one who continues to whine about the fact that you do not like how I express myself. I don't mind having my opinion discussed, but what I don't like is having it attacked. If you can't understand that by now, then I'm done explaining it to you.

You continue to accuse me of being immature yet you have continually ignored, evaded and twisted my statements and questions, not to mention insulted me in every single response. I think it's quite obvious to everyone who is being childish and unreasonable here (it's you, since you apparently can't understand my most obvious statements).

 

[Pookie]

Again, you fail to make a point and the fact you realize you are in the wrong here is shown by the fact that you isnult me.

When I siad it was political (which I never said was the only reason for pursuing it, and I also never said it was my actual view, I have however said numerous times I was playing Devil's Advocate), I did not refer to you specifically at any time.

Wait. You're now saying that your posted view isn't really your actual view. Why the hell did you post it then? You've said nowhere in this thread that you were playing "Devil's Advocate". Quote me where you said it if you think I'm wrong.

"I did not refer to you specifically at any time." You clearly were replying to me. You're an idiot to think I would believe you weren't. Stand behind your own words just once, dude ... if you've got the backbone.

If you're not agruing about same sex marriage anymore, then what exactly are you arguing about? Not that I expect you to give me a sensible answer. You haven't yet. Can anyone else tell me what this is about?

I'll post your OWN words one more time ...

"it's just to make a point. You really don't want gay marriage, otherwise you'd just get a civil union and save yourself the heart trouble. It's political."

I said this is what I've been responding too numerous times now, along with your giving a fish a drink of water analogy. Do you have a reading comprehension problem? If so, I apologize.

What rationale is it that you refer to? If it were my opinion, I wouldn't need to constantly defend the thinking behind it. As I have said numerous times before, an opinion by definition is neither right nor wrong, yet you felt compelled to prove my opinion wrong (desite the fact that it agrees with yours and the opinion of everyone else who has posted in this thread).

You questioned my opinion. I questioned yours. It's not a one-way street. IT'S A DISCUSSION BOARD!

I am not the one who continues to whine about the fact that you do not like how I express myself. I don't mind having my opinion discussed, but what I don't like is having it attacked. If you can't understand that by now, then I'm done explaining it to you.

I know what you don't like. You don't like being put into a position having to defend the things you say. If you don't want to defend your point of view, fine. You questioned my opinion. I replied, just as anyone would do on a discussion board. Again, if you don't want your opinion discussed, don't post it. Because it WILL get discussed ... as you've seen.

You continue to accuse me of being immature yet you have continually ignored, evaded and twisted my statements and questions, not to mention insulted me in every single response. I think it's quite obvious to everyone who is being childish and unreasonable here (it's you, since you apparently can't understand my most obvious statements).

I haven't twisted one thing you've said. I've quoted your own words, highlighting the ones you seem to forget now. You're a crybaby whenever someone dares question what you say. A number of us replied to your post, and you called us all emotional. That's partly why I see you as immature. You continue to dodge the question I asked you about your very own claim.

But whatever. I see you're whining in other threads now too. Why doesn't that surprise me.

 

[Bitchslapper]

I am not the one whining here. You are the one who has kept this vindictive bullshit going even after I ignored your hypocritical ass.

I have always stood by what I said. I would like YOU to quote where I didn't. Of course I've been the Devil's Advocate. I initially argued against gay marriage on the fucking GLBT BOARD!!! I really can't decide if you are stupid, blind or just fucking with me.

You know what really gets me? You continue to attack and harass me even though it should be clear by now (even to you) that I fucking agreed with you. I am sick and fucking tired of explaining it to you over and over and over again. You obviously refuse to understand, so I'm done with you.

 

[Bitchslapper]

I am not the one whining here. You are the one who has kept this vindictive bullshit going even after I ignored your hypocritical ass.

I have always stood by what I said. I would like YOU to quote where I didn't. Of course I've been the Devil's Advocate. I initially argued against gay marriage on the fucking GLBT BOARD!!! I really can't decide if you are stupid, blind or just fucking with me.

You know what really gets me? You continue to attack and harass me even though it should be clear by now (even to you) that I fucking agreeed with you. I am sicak and fucking tired of explainging it to you oever and over and ovwer again. You obviously refuse to understand, so I'm done with you. I am now putting you on my Ignore list, so don't even try to fuck with me anymore.

 

[Pookie]

I am not the one whining here. You are the one who has kept this vindictive bullshit going even after I ignored your hypocritical ass.

I have always stood by what I said. I would like YOU to quote where I didn't. Of course I've been the Devil's Advocate. I initially argued against gay marriage on the fucking GLBT BOARD!!! I really can't decide if you are stupid, blind or just fucking with me.

You know what really gets me? You continue to attack and harass me even though it should be clear by now (even to you) that I fucking agreeed with you. I am sicak and fucking tired of explainging it to you oever and over and ovwer again. You obviously refuse to understand, so I'm done with you.

If you stand by what you said, then why won't you respond to my question I've asked so many times now, instead of calling everyone emotional? You didn't agree with me. You said I didn't really want gay marriage, that it was just to make a point. I disagreed, pointed out why, and you got all pissy. Yay you!

You claim now to have been playing devil's advocate. Yeah, right. You're an idiot if you think I believe that too. You claimed you said you said this numerous times in this thread. I challenged you to quote where you did state it. Well? Where is it?

But to humor you, here is what you refuse to stand by ...

What reason is that? Why does anyone want to get married? That's my point. Why do it in the first place? Getting married when you don't plan on raising kids with the person is like giving a fish a drink of water.

And if we're talking about discrimination, well that's just full of holes, because no matter what we do, some group will always have an advantage over another. Absolute equality and democracy do not mix.

Like I said, it's just to make a point. You really don't want gay marriage, otherwise you'd just get a civil union and save yourself the heart trouble. It's political. How many homosexuals would rush out to get married once it's legal? A whole bunch I bet. How many of them will stay married? Not any more than straight or bi people, and I can guarantee you that. Gays aren't any more perfect than the rest of humanity, and thier relationships sure as hell aren't automatically more stable either.

Happy now?

NOW ... do you still believe it's like "giving a fish a drink of water"?

 

[Adrenaline]

I guess that group hug is out of the question.

 

[Bitchslapper]

If you stand by what you said, then why won't you respond to my question I've asked so many times now, instead of calling everyone emotional? You didn't agree with me. You said I didn't really want gay marriage, that it was just to make a point. I disagreed, pointed out why, and you got all pissy. Yay you!

You claim now to have been playing devil's advocate. Yeah, right. You're an idiot if you think I believe that too. You claimed you said you said this numerous times in this thread. I challenged you to quote where you did state it. Well? Where is it?

But to humor you, here is what you refuse to stand by ...



Happy now?

NOW ... do you still believe it's like "giving a fish a drink of water"?

Firstly, I would like you to quote where I said that YOU didn't want same-sex marriage. Oh that's right, you can't, because I never said that.

You have yet to explain how you disagree with my stated opinion, yet you insist on arguing with me. Why is that? We apparently have the same opinion, yet you continue.

Now here's another thing that seems odd to me. You say I don't stand by what I say, yet you continually ask "Do you still believe...?" Do you expect me to change my opinion because you insult me and belittle me constantly? Or do you want me to "stand by my words"? Which is it?

 

[Bitchslapper]

I have always stood by what I said. I would like YOU to quote where I didn't. Of course I've been the Devil's Advocate. I initially argued against gay marriage on the fucking GLBT BOARD!!!

Oh look, what's this? Ah yes, something that I said was there, but was ignored by Pookie, leading her to challenge me to quote it. Well, here you go.

Now, I would like you to explain why you accuse me of changing positions even though I've continually said I support gay marriage. TYhe thing that continues to confuse me is you act as though you are angry or disappointed that your arguments didn't seem to be swaying me to your side of the issue, but once I explain that I agreed with you all along, you complain that I'm changing my mind. Why is that?

I think any reasonable person would agree that everyone is entitled to change thier minds once in a while (which I haven't even done)...but then, you're obviously not a reasonable person. Otherwise you would not have continued with your charade.

 

[Pookie]

Firstly, I would like you to quote where I said that YOU didn't want same-sex marriage. Oh that's right, you can't, because I never said that.

You have yet to explain how you disagree with my stated opinion, yet you insist on arguing with me. Why is that? We apparently have the same opinion, yet you continue.

Now here's another thing that seems odd to me. You say I don't stand by what I say, yet you continually ask "Do you still believe...?" Do you expect me to change my opinion because you insult me and belittle me constantly? Or do you want me to "stand by my words"? Which is it?

Oh, you did say it. You said it in reply to my post. Remember? I've quoted it maybe half a dozen times now. Then I replied to your opinion, and you call us all emotional. You can't re-write history, dude. It's there for everyone to read, no matter how bad your reading disability happens to be. Moron.

 

[Pookie]

Oh look, what's this? Ah yes, something that I said was there, but was ignored by Pookie, leading her to challenge me to quote it. Well, here you go.

Do you really think we can't all see that you said it for the FIRST time on THIS page of the thread? Are you that addle minded that you can't keep up with your own posts? Again, you can't re-write this thread the way you want it to read now.

Now, I would like you to explain why you accuse me of changing positions even though I've continually said I support gay marriage. TYhe thing that continues to confuse me is you act as though you are angry or disappointed that your arguments didn't seem to be swaying me to your side of the issue, but once I explain that I agreed with you all along, you complain that I'm changing my mind. Why is that?

I think any reasonable person would agree that everyone is entitled to change thier minds once in a while (which I haven't even done)...but then, you're obviously not a reasonable person. Otherwise you would not have continued with your charade.

You didn't agree with me in your reply to my post early in this thread. You said I didn't really want gay marriage, that it was just to make a point. I disagreed, pointed out why, and you got all pissy. AGAIN! ... here is what I replied to ... that you seem to want to ignore now.

What reason is that? Why does anyone want to get married? That's my point. Why do it in the first place? Getting married when you don't plan on raising kids with the person is like giving a fish a drink of water.

And if we're talking about discrimination, well that's just full of holes, because no matter what we do, some group will always have an advantage over another. Absolute equality and democracy do not mix.

Like I said, it's just to make a point. You really don't want gay marriage, otherwise you'd just get a civil union and save yourself the heart trouble. It's political. How many homosexuals would rush out to get married once it's legal? A whole bunch I bet. How many of them will stay married? Not any more than straight or bi people, and I can guarantee you that. Gays aren't any more perfect than the rest of humanity, and thier relationships sure as hell aren't automatically more stable either.

I'll assume since you refuse to answer my question in my reply to the above that you don't believe anymore that it's like "giving a fish a drink of water".

 

[Bitchslapper]

Yous eem obsessed with that statement. Is it because you have something against fish or is it because that's all you have?

With those two posts you just made you (again) contradict yourself. In the first one, you admit that I had said earlier that I was playing Devil's Advocate, yet in the second post you speak as though you never did.

I am not trying to re-write history. It's quite plain that you are the one who is attempting to change things to suit you. Every time I explain away one of your poor arguments, you come up with something equally or exceedingly ridiculous.

No, I never said YOU didn't want gay marriage. Read it again if you have to. Please wuote where I said what you claim I did. Oh that's right, it's not there, otherwise you would've quoted it already.

And also, please quote where I got "pissy" (by reasonable standards that the rest of us use, not your standards). And calling me a moron isn't emotional? Try explaining that...oh that's right, you can't because it doesn't make sense.

You can assume whatever you want. It's obvious you're trying to trap me into contradicting myself, which frankly would be very difficult because everything I've said has been consistent, though I can't say the same thing for anything you've said. Well, except of course for the fact that you have repeatedly insulted my intelligence. Why is that? Someone once said that insults are the last resort of someone who realizes they're wrong.

Lastly, would like to see if you can drop this once and for all. I obviously have. Are you even capable of that? There's no point in continuing this, because we agree on the actual issue. Most of the time you make some good points and you're very llogical, but this is just a Witch Hunt.

 

[Pookie]

Yous eem obsessed with that statement. Is it because you have something against fish or is it because that's all you have?

With those two posts you just made you (again) contradict yourself. In the first one, you admit that I had said earlier that I was playing Devil's Advocate, yet in the second post you speak as though you never did.

I am not trying to re-write history. It's quite plain that you are the one who is attempting to change things to suit you. Every time I explain away one of your poor arguments, you come up with something equally or exceedingly ridiculous.

No, I never said YOU didn't want gay marriage. Read it again if you have to. Please wuote where I said what you claim I did. Oh that's right, it's not there, otherwise you would've quoted it already.

And also, please quote where I got "pissy" (by reasonable standards that the rest of us use, not your standards). And calling me a moron isn't emotional? Try explaining that...oh that's right, you can't because it doesn't make sense.

You can assume whatever you want. It's obvious you're trying to trap me into contradicting myself, which frankly would be very difficult because everything I've said has been consistent, though I can't say the same thing for anything you've said. Well, except of course for the fact that you have repeatedly insulted my intelligence. Why is that? Someone once said that insults are the last resort of someone who realizes they're wrong.

Lastly, would like to see if you can drop this once and for all. I obviously have. Are you even capable of that? There's no point in continuing this, because we agree on the actual issue. Most of the time you make some good points and you're very llogical, but this is just a Witch Hunt.

First, you didn't say you were playing "devil's advocate" until LONG after I had questioned your reply to my opinion NUMEROUS times. It was LONG after you had called us "emotional" as a way to toss us all off, and not respond to our replies to you. So your attempt to re-write this thread in that regard is making you appear to be a liar now. Your going back and editing your post with "[PLAYING DEVIL'S ADVOCATE]" on Last edited by Bitchslapper on 02-10-2004 at 08:09 PM is definitely trying to re-write what you originally said. Fortunately, I and several others had quoted your reply to me in many of our replies to you. Here are the posts beginning JANUARY 26 and BEFORE you tried to re-write them on FEBRUARY 10.

Here is my post that you replied to ...

Why do gays and lesbians want to get married? For the same reasons that straight couples want to get married. Do homosexuals want to get in on all the "broken-home fun"? No, we want to get in on the 50% that aren't getting divorced. Who knows? We might just cause the divorce rate to lower.

It basically comes down to discrimination. Allowing even one right or privilege to be unconstitutionally denied to us is a horrible precedent to make. If we don't stand up for our own rights/privaleges, who will? If homosexuals were to say it's okay to deny marriage to us, then where does it stop? Who gets to draw the line, and where? Scary.

Here was your ORIGINAL reply to my opinion BEFORE you edited it two days ago. I've added bold and italics to highlight the points I replied to that you've been ignoring ever since ...

What reason is that? Why does anyone want to get married? That's my point. Why do it in the first place? Getting married when you don't plan on raising kids with the person is like giving a fish a drink of water.

And if we're talking about discrimination, well that's just full of holes, because no matter what we do, some group will always have an advantage over another. Absolute equality and democracy do not mix.

Like I said, it's just to make a point. You really don't want gay marriage, otherwise you'd just get a civil union and save yourself the heart trouble. It's political. How many homosexuals would rush out to get married once it's legal? A whole bunch I bet. How many of them will stay married? Not any more than straight or bi people, and I can guarantee you that. Gays aren't any more perfect than the rest of humanity, and thier relationships sure as hell aren't automatically more stable either.

Notice that there's no "PLAYING DEVIL'S ADVOCATE" anywhere in that post. You edited two of your posts on FEBRUARY 10 to make it appear as if you had said it though. Also, notice that YOU said, "You really don't want gay marriage, otherwise you'd just get a civil union and save yourself the heart trouble. It's political." There are your own words BEFORE you edited your post. Your claim NOW that you stated you were playing devil's advocate THEN makes you a liar.

Now, here is my reply to you, stating my opinion along with facts to support it ...

Are you asking why people want to get married? They do for quite a number of reasons. Not all couples plan to have children, but still seek out marriage for their own reasons.

I assume that your point is, "why do it in the first place?" Besides the emotional and symbolic reasons, here is why (info from Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund) ...

On the order of 1,400 legal rights are conferred upon married couples in the U.S. Typically these are composed of about 400 state benefits and over 1,000 federal benefits. Among them are the rights to:
- joint parenting;
- joint adoption;
- joint foster care, custody, and visitation (including non-biological parents);
- status as next-of-kin for hospital visits and medical decisions where one partner is too ill to be competent;
- joint insurance policies for home, auto and health;
- dissolution and divorce protections such as community property and child support;
- immigration and residency for partners from other countries;
- inheritance automatically in the absence of a will;
- joint leases with automatic renewal rights in the event one partner dies or leaves the house or apartment;
- inheritance of jointly-owned real and personal property through the right of survivorship (which avoids the time and expense and taxes in probate);
- benefits such as annuities, pension plans, Social Security, and Medicare;
- spousal exemptions to property tax increases upon the death of one partner who is a co-owner of the home;
- veterans' discounts on medical care, education, and home loans; joint filing of tax returns;
- joint filing of customs claims when traveling;
- wrongful death benefits for a surviving partner and children;
- bereavement or sick leave to care for a partner or child;
- decision-making power with respect to whether a deceased partner will be cremated or not and where to bury him or her;
- crime victims' recovery benefits;
- loss of consortium tort benefits;
- domestic violence protection orders;
- judicial protections and evidentiary immunity;
- and more

Do you still think it's like "giving a fish a drink of water"?

Most of these legal and economic benefits cannot be privately arranged or contracted for. For example, absent a legal (or civil) marriage, there is no guaranteed joint responsibility to the partner and to third parties (including children) in such areas as child support, debts to creditors, taxes, etc. In addition, private employers and institutions often give other economic privileges and other benefits (special rates or memberships) only to married couples. And, of course, when people cannot marry, they are denied all the emotional and social benefits and responsibilities of marriage as well.

"And if we're talking about discrimination, well that's just full of holes, because no matter what we do, some group will always have an advantage over another. Absolute equality and democracy do not mix."

Your argument that homosexuals shouldn't fight for a privilege that is denied to them in violation of the US Constitution because "absolute equality" isn't possible is ludicrous. Interracial couples were denied the privilege to marry with many of the same arguments used against homosexuals. Should they have stopped fighting discrimination against them that violated the US Constitution because "absolute equality" isn't possible? Or because marriage isn't worth it ... in your eyes?

What if homosexuals weren't allowed to drive. Should the Government continue to deny homosexuals the privilege to drive too? Not all drivers will have a perfect safety record. We could just ride bicycles, you know. Allowing homosexuals (especially those without kids) to have a drivers license would be like giving a fish a glass of water ... according to your logic.

I hope you're not as wishy-washy with the other rights and privileges you have, if they're ever threatened. Just because every marriage may not be successful doesn't mean it's not treasured by those for who it is successful.

And here is your reply to myself and many others. Here is how you "debate the issue" ...

Congratulations everyone for completely missing my point and assuming I'm an asinine bigot. I am approaching the issue logically, not emotionally. Unfortunately I cannot say the same for all of you.

In short, I agree with Svenskaflicka (sp?).

Your credibilty in this thread is completely shot. You've attempted to edit your posts weeks later to make them read the way you want them to now. You did make the statements I claimed you made, and they are quoted above again. You did get pissy and call us all "emotional", instead of trying to debate the issue. I've since insulted you because of your own immature approach to debating on this discussion board. You obviously don't want to appear to "lose" this debate, so you've resorted to deflecting away the original claim you made that I and others replied to.

You are an immature, arrogant asshole ... and now a liar as well. The proof of that is quoted above. You're also an idiot to think you can edit your posts weeks later without it being noticed. Consider yourself bitchslapped, dude.

 

[Bitchslapper]

First, you didn't say you were playing "devil's advocate" until LONG after I had questioned your reply to my opinion NUMEROUS times. It was LONG after you had called us "emotional" as a way to toss us all off, and not respond to our replies to you. So your attempt to re-write this thread in that regard is making you appear to be a liar now. Your going back and editing your post with "[PLAYING DEVIL'S ADVOCATE]" on Last edited by Bitchslapper on 02-10-2004 at 08:09 PM is definitely trying to re-write what you originally said. Fortunately, I and several others had quoted your reply to me in many of our replies to you. Here are the posts beginning JANUARY 26 and BEFORE you tried to re-write them on FEBRUARY 10.

Here is my post that you replied to ...




Here was your ORIGINAL reply to my opinion BEFORE you edited it two days ago. I've added bold and italics to highlight the points I replied to that you've been ignoring ever since ...




Notice that there's no "PLAYING DEVIL'S ADVOCATE" anywhere in that post. You edited two of your posts on FEBRUARY 10 to make it appear as if you had said it though. Also, notice that YOU said, "You really don't want gay marriage, otherwise you'd just get a civil union and save yourself the heart trouble. It's political." There are your own words BEFORE you edited your post. Your claim NOW that you stated you were playing devil's advocate THEN makes you a liar.

Now, here is my reply to you, stating my opinion along with facts to support it ...




And here is your reply to myself and many others. Here is how you "debate the issue" ...





Your credibilty in this thread is completely shot. You've attempted to edit your posts weeks later to make them read the way you want them to now. You did make the statements I claimed you made, and they are quoted above again. You did get pissy and call us all "emotional", instead of trying to debate the issue. I've since insulted you because of your own immature approach to debating on this discussion board. You obviously don't want to appear to "lose" this debate, so you've resorted to deflecting away the original claim you made that I and others replied to.

You are an immature, arrogant asshole ... and now a liar as well. The proof of that is quoted above. You're also an idiot to think you can edit your posts weeks later without it being noticed. Consider yourself bitchslapped, dude.

That was a joke. I thought that was obvious. Of course I don't expect people not to notice. IT'S A JOKE, of course I want people to notice. Do you honestly think I was trying to pull something or is this just more grist for your baseless accusation mill? There is no debate, because you are merely insulting me and no one supports you, so you lost when you started.

Are you ever going to let this drop?

 

[Pookie]

That was a joke. I thought that was obvious. Of course I don't expect people not to notice. IT'S A JOKE, of course I want people to notice. Do you honestly think I was trying to pull something or is this just more grist for your baseless accusation mill? There is no debate, because you are merely insulting me and no one supports you, so you lost when you started.

Are you ever going to let this drop?

You can try calling it a joke all you want. But you were the one claiming that you had said "numerous times" that you had said you were playing devil's advocate, when you had not said it at all. That in itself was a lie which you seemed to attempt to coverup by editing your original posts. It further shows your lack of maturity and credibility to NOW claim you were just joking.

You now claim my accusations are "baseless" when I've provided your own statements as hard evidence of your original claims. All you've been doing is accusing me of things you can't even provide evidence for, because you haven't.

Obviously there is no debate. That ended when you insulted us all for daring to question your original claim. You do remember calling us all "emotional", don't ya? You can take the credit for stopping the debate with that one. And now a further display of your immaturity with this most recent post. You never had any intention of debating anything with us, other than to insult us for showing how flawed your original claim was.

Now you make-up another idiotic claim that I'm making baseless accusations, and then ask if I'm gonna let this drop? Fuck off, moron. Keep posting your made-up claims about me, and I'll keep showing them for the lies and bullshit they are ... with your very own "unedited" posts.

 

[69forever]

That was a joke. I thought that was obvious. Of course I don't expect people not to notice. IT'S A JOKE, of course I want people to notice. Do you honestly think I was trying to pull something or is this just more grist for your baseless accusation mill? There is no debate, because you are merely insulting me and no one supports you, so you lost when you started.

Are you ever going to let this drop?

Excuse me, but when you start out a discussion with statements that belittle our expectations of equality, people like me and Pookie are going to take offense and take you to task.

If it was a matter of semantics, as it was with Pookie and I on a few occassions...the issue can be resolved and respect given for differing opinions, or takes on issues, or misunderstandings. That is not the case with your argument. I fully support Pookies' unrelentless taking you to task for trying to say you didn't say what you did. I just don't have the time or inclination to deal with you as long as she is doing just fine with it....

 

[Bitchslapper]

Alright look, I'm sorry for all the rude things I said, the accusations I made, the comment that gay marriage was just political (that was a knee-jerk reaction to the subject, but who hasn't had a knee-jerk reaction on something or other?) and whatever else I did wrong here. As far as the Devil's Advocate thing, I did say that once and I quoted it before I edited in the "code" later. In any case, yes I was back-pedaling, but I get my balls busted for saying something, then when I want to take it back, I get my balls busted for "not sticking by my word"? And I'll even take back the fish statement, because it was stupid anyway. Fish don't drink water, they breathe it. Well, part of it. Their gills filter out the oxygen from the water...

But anyway, I apologize for all that, but I will not change my opinion that traditional marriage is an obsolete concept or that gays should be allowed that priviledge regardless of how much I think it's outlived its usefulness to anyone.

 

[Pookie]

Alright look, I'm sorry for all the rude things I said, the accusations I made, the comment that gay marriage was just political (that was a knee-jerk reaction to the subject, but who hasn't had a knee-jerk reaction on something or other?) and whatever else I did wrong here. As far as the Devil's Advocate thing, I did say that once and I quoted it before I edited in the "code" later. In any case, yes I was back-pedaling, but I get my balls busted for saying something, then when I want to take it back, I get my balls busted for "not sticking by my word"? And I'll even take back the fish statement, because it was stupid anyway. Fish don't drink water, they breathe it. Well, part of it. Their gills filter out the oxygen from the water...

But anyway, I apologize for all that, but I will not change my opinion that traditional marriage is an obsolete concept or that gays should be allowed that priviledge regardless of how much I think it's outlived its usefulness to anyone.

Apology accepted. And I have no problem with the part of your post that I bolded above. That is your opinion, and I respect that view. I don't agree that it's obsolete, but we can agree to disagree on that issue.

 

[Bitchslapper]

I should clarify that. Actually, I don't think it's obsolete entirely. I'm sure it suits many people just fine, but I'd also like to see mainstream acceptance of other forms of marriage, besides what I call "traditional" (one man-one woman...BOOORIIING! lol). This would include any number of consenting, adult humans. That rules out kids and animals. Well, I might make an exception for dolphins...

 

[deezire1900]

I was waiting for this...Pookie broke you, and it was fun to watch. Just my "opinion" and I am not stirring anything up. I just wish I was that good at it.

Deezire

 

[69forever]

Alright look, I'm sorry for all the rude things I said, the accusations I made, the comment that gay marriage was just political (that was a knee-jerk reaction to the subject, but who hasn't had a knee-jerk reaction on something or other?) and whatever else I did wrong here. As far as the Devil's Advocate thing, I did say that once and I quoted it before I edited in the "code" later. In any case, yes I was back-pedaling, but I get my balls busted for saying something, then when I want to take it back, I get my balls busted for "not sticking by my word"? And I'll even take back the fish statement, because it was stupid anyway. Fish don't drink water, they breathe it. Well, part of it. Their gills filter out the oxygen from the water...

But anyway, I apologize for all that, but I will not change my opinion that traditional marriage is an obsolete concept or that gays should be allowed that priviledge regardless of how much I think it's outlived its usefulness to anyone.

Apology accepted in the spirit it was given, sincerely. Having just gotten engaged to be married, I disagree that the concept and ritual significance of it is obsolete. Neither of us is religious, so that part of the institution is meaningless to us. We are very spiritual though, believing in re-incarnation.

Besides the legal, financial and social benefits...we view our union as a public and private comittment and declaration of our love. To us, and this doesn't apply to everyone else...it means declaring our fidelity and intention of it being a lifelong road we walk together.

We probably disagree on the need for this...but it is an honest disagreement of opinions and beliefs. I can respect that.

 

[Bitchslapper]

I was waiting for this...Pookie broke you, and it was fun to watch. Just my "opinion" and I am not stirring anything up. I just wish I was that good at it.

Deezire

She didn't "break" me, I did it of my own volition. If I had done it under coercion it would've been insincere and meaningless.

 

[Bitchslapper]

Apology accepted in the spirit it was given, sincerely. Having just gotten engaged to be married, I disagree that the concept and ritual significance of it is obsolete. Neither of us is religious, so that part of the institution is meaningless to us. We are very spiritual though, believing in re-incarnation.

Besides the legal, financial and social benefits...we view our union as a public and private comittment and declaration of our love. To us, and this doesn't apply to everyone else...it means declaring our fidelity and intention of it being a lifelong road we walk together.

We probably disagree on the need for this...but it is an honest disagreement of opinions and beliefs. I can respect that.

I've already elaborated on that. I explained that it's not my position that traditional marriage is obsolete entirely, just that I don't prefer it personally and I would be pleased to see other forms of marriage accepted.

EDIT: If we were meant to be monogamous, then why weren't we born already married?

 

[Bitchslapper]

I guess that group hug is out of the question.

That depends. If by "hug" you mean "sex," then sure, I'm in. However, if by "hug" you mean "embrace" then...meh. *shrugs* :|

 

[Bitchslapper]

And this would be my fourth post in a row. YAY, my first quadruple post! I've made Bitchslapper message board activity history! YAY!

However, I did not anticipate the anitclimax. Hmm, what's next? Quintuple post? Nah, too predictible. I shall have to give it some thought...