Design flaw!

I notice I put a double negative in my sentence. Damn, that kills my argument.

i posted it in the other thread and showed with that that i could easily say that this was exactly gods plan (if you believe in him)

i wrote there to someone:

"related to gay of the maternal side are more fertile did you know that? i could say maybe this does mean it's a plan from god to have more fertile woman? maybe guys related to lesbians are more fertile as well but i don't know about that... and do you know what this means as well? that, if a woman related to a gay is more fertile, that she isn't normal as well! she is more fertile like other woman because she is related to a gay so that isn't normal! i bet you would never say to your sister that it's not normal that she is so fertile because youruncle or so is gay, would you? no, you would say god was very good to her! i can't imagine you saying to your sister "you just got so many sweet babies because of our uncle"

scientist believe that this could mean the whole mankind will get more kids because of that than if we wouldn't have gay so the related to them wouldn't be as fertile as they are. gays means more kids on this planets crazy ha? wow and all those kids who are born because of that are totally unnatural even when they aren't gay then! maybe you are one of them?"

that was a study from 2004 in italy and if this is true it means that gayness on this planet helps humans to increase in population. and maybe the other creatures as well. maybe it would even help some creatures to stay alive on this planet.

and if you don't believe in god you would have to ask if darwin was wrong. with his logic only "things" which help creatures will stay and creatures will lose what they don't need. so if we believe in the evolutionary theory it makes no sense that there are still gay people on this planet if it doesn't help humans (which the italian study shows)

so i can look at it like i want i don't see that it's not natural taht some percent of creatures will be gay.

ok now we could talk about the appendix or so but gayness sould have never benn in creatures if it wouldn't make sense for them for anything.

and to say it's a lifestyle like using mask having sex is a joke right? to say to gay people that it's just their lifestyle to have sex with other gay people wtf?

Santorum the perfect president for the 14th century!

Even if it is not something you have direct control over, discrimination against people who are gay is still substantially different from discrimination against someone for race ...

We live in a society where people are expected to have control over their sexual predilections, and to only express them in private consensual and legal settings. While a paedophile may argue he has not choice except to be attracted to children, or a rapist may argue he has no control over being compelled to violently assault women, we expect them to have control over these sexual urges and not to express them because there is no legal consensual way they can express these attractions. We expect people to demonstrate restraint in when they express their attractions and with whom they express them; after all we don't have a BSDM pride week, and we wouldn't claim that someone should discuss what it means to be a Furry to young children.

In many ways it is completely fair to discriminate against many homosexuals (as it would be to discriminate against many heterosexuals) because they seem to have no ability to show restraint is when, where and with whom they express their sexuality with.

Being black is not a private portion of your life which you have discression over where you express it, it is something that people know the moment they see you.

In what way is it ridiculous?

Most people feel that they have little control over what they want sexually regardless of whether they're very conventional or if they're into "fucked up fetishes" as you call them. Many of the sexual acts and lifestyle choices we completely accept today (in both heterosexual and homosexual couples) were considered "fucked up fetishes" a couple of generations ago. We accept the notion that people should not be discriminated against regardless of what they do in a private environment between consenting adults, it doesn't matter if you think it is fucked up or not.

paul: "I am totally neutral on the cause of liberty when people want to be married and call it a marriage, it's none of my business"

"i personally think that married to one woman is what is natural and good for me ...but i dont believe that i should set examples... i dont believe in the use of force whether its economic or social...i dont want to force people to accept my values."

interviewer: "if you became president and you were asked directly 'do you personally approve, from a values perspective, gay marriage' what would you say?"

paul: "i would personally say 'to each his own and i approve it because thats the way they want to run their life and i respect their freedoms'"

So it's okay to compare homosexuality with paedophilia and rapists but it's not okay to compare homosexuality with race? First of all there is a big difference between homosexuality and the circumstanes of paedophilia and the acts of sexual assualt.  You are close minded on many social issues. There is a difference between being homosexual and acting out what appears to be homosexual. Any straight person can do something homosexual and that is probably something they have control over. A homosexual man, however, does not have the resistance from loving someone of the same gender. Homosexuality is science backed and is constantly investigated. They are not out killing or abusing anyone! When one crosses that line that is when you can juxtapose these two!

Sigh, when is the medicial system step and get this man declared mentally incompetent and placed in institutional care like he deserves. People in the midst of an active psychotic episode should not be allowed in public, much less running for public office.

I perceive homosexuality and heterosexuality as simple attraction. While bondage, swinging, and things like that are just wacky sexual acts.

Its like saying love and fisting are the same thing.

Understand?

He's #2 in delegate counts and has shot up in the polls as of late, being the "Anti-Romney" candidate.