Saturday, June 25, 2011

Part 3; "NY Gov. Andrew Cuomo Signs State's Marriage Equality Bill"

No article.

That was fast. Must have signed it in his boxer shorts.

Garbage politicians throw the entire electorate overboard for less than 2% of the population for this ridiculous insanity.

*

Burn in hell NY.

*

"So I have a question. If I wanted to marry a male friend ( I’m a male) with no sex involved, I could do it in NY and the other states that have passed similar laws. You don’t have to prove a sexual relationship. There are several reasons why this might make sense to do. Citizenship rights is just one of them. Of course it would be a sham deal, but so what. This is going to lead to a lot of complications."

You are on to something there. Especially as it relates the immigration.

*

I’m anxious for “married” gays to start taking on the responsibilities of married regular people....especially the TAXES that they’ve skirted all these years...

*

So, why couldn’t they put this crap up for a popular vote? Were they afraid the little people would not support this? Aren’t there enough welfare cases in NY to pimp this out? What a pathetic state, roads suck, NYC seems like a third-world country in most parts, too expensive.

*

Next up: Polygamy. Guaranteed within 10 years the islamists will have forced the dems and RINOS to legalize polygamy.

*

The good news is this can be changed but the bad news it will take even more work than in Iowa where I’m certain that we are going to succeed in reversing it there. I’m glad that groups like NOM are getting better and better at going on the offensive the problem is the core of the gay rights fiction and its big govt orwellian goals has to be hit over and over again. Also the idea that someone can be “born gay” has to be destoryed in much the same way the idea of AGW has been destoryed in the minds of everyone but those in the political, media, and academic classes.

The problem with these big fictions under the guise of liberty is granted by govt rather than a function of the absence of govt. Homosexual marriage was not banned in NY. It simply was not licensed in NY by the state govt. There is just so much wrong with the juvenile unreasoned ideas and propaganda that has led to this type of thing.

People think they can hide from or ignore these social issues because it makes them uncomfortable or they want to be hip but it is exactly these issues that will allow the govt to eventually censor even the free exercise of your conscience.

*

I hate my state. On to your commnet - Of freaking course ! This ain't no I now pronounce you chuck and larry scenario. Imagine if my brother is unemployed now and needs a life saving operation and such. why can't I marry him and get him on my insurance plan ? Or better yet, my beautiful St. Bernard Sasha is gonna need an amputation and a lifetime of therapy and drug products. How bout I make her my better half to get her on my plan. This is totally AFU for so many reasons. Not the LEAST of which is the fact that it's just wrong.

*

So now they get to “play house” under the official state recognition. Their legislative and judicial victories amount to nothing in God`s eyes. To Him, they`re just “playing house.”

Those pro-homo “marriage” senators and legislators will have some `splainin` to do someday.

*

I hate NY , too . Even though my mother , 4 sisters , + cousins , nephews and nieces live on Long Island , I haven’t been back ( from Japan ) in 7 years , and have no plans to visit . I did arrange to see my Mom and youngest sister in Hawaii ( Big Island ) 4 years ago , though . NY , CT , MA , VT , ME , NJ....the whole place sucks a big one . Couldn’t pay me to live there again .

*

There is a far better argument from history and religion for polygamy than for homosexuality.

The idea that guys butt-plugging each other needs recognition by society as the equivalent of marriage is stupid. The idea that God will not notice or respond is even more amazing, but then, I tend to think Obama is part of God’s judgment on an increasingly evil America.

*

I fully expect N.A.M.B.L.A. to follow the successful example of the sodomites. And to any liberal that laughs that idea off, no one in the 50’s would ever have taken seriously the notion that two men could openly kiss one another. Suggesting two men marry would more than likely ended in a trip to a Sanitarium.

*

How dare these elitists do this. They can afford to send their children to the best private schools, their children won’t be hit with the truama of being taught lies that it is ok to be perverted in your personal life. My heart cries for the little children in the inner cities who must suffer the cruelty of everyday life, only to be hit with more assualts to their innocent minds that are already under attack, when they attend school and their minds are assualted in this cruel way. I am mad about this. Is anyone thinking about the defenseless amoung us? The children. This is so wrong!

8 comments:

  1. This post is best post.

    I lol'd hard.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Rofl, sorry, I hit post accidentally

    ReplyDelete
  3. Someone actually pulled out the "Think of the children!" cliche. *golf clap*

    Funny how they only make mention of sodomites and butt plugging. They never bother to mention that homosexual females have also gained this right. I guess that image isn't icky enough to cause a lot of outrage.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Ah yes, the old "marry my dog" scenario.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Think of the children!

    I LOLed out loud

    ReplyDelete
  6. Ah yes, the fifties. When men were men and heterosexual, unless they were black. In which case they couldn't vote.

    ReplyDelete
  7. "They never bother to mention that homosexual females have also gained this right. I guess that image isn't icky enough to cause a lot of outrage."

    Lesbians generally ruin their arguments against "deviant homosexuals".

    They contract STDs at a dramatically lower rate.
    They are more committed to monogamy than most other partnerships.
    Hell, I toss this one in for fun. They have less abortions than heterosexual women.

    ReplyDelete