" 'Androgen insensitivity syndrome' a person is born with XY chromosomes and testes, but has outward female genitial, though having not internal female reproductive organs. The person's cells are immune to testosterone, during puberty this cause a overproduction of testosterone which the body naturally converts to estrogen. Physically the person develops like an average girl in body measurements and usually has the mental view of being a girl."
I have to post a comment to Paul after THAT post,( and his not answering the simple question that was put to him on what "rights" are homosexuals being denied , and then posting THAT arguement):
Dear Paul C Jesup,
In response to your "post", I strongly encourage YOU to engage in an autonomous act of extreme physical intimacy that some might consider physiologically impossible.
...still would like to hear you answer that simple question posed to you. You sound like Terry McC, unable to answer Sean Hannity's question to him to name ONE piece of legislation that F'n sponsored in his 19 years in the senate.
It's exactly like your answer........(crickets "singing"...)
First, I answered KingNo155 question. He just didn't like the way I answered him.
Second, 'androgen insensitivity syndrome' is an actual PHYSICAL condition and not a physiological condition.
Third, I have recieved multiple replies to single posts in an attempt to wear me out. It is not going to work.
Fourth, I have pointed out various problems and holes that are currently in the arguement for the marriage amendment debate. These issues need to be addressed or they will come back to bite you in the but when the courts, which you loath, are left to interrupt them, which leaves you back to square one.
Fifth, whether you like it not, there are greater threats to our liberty than from the homosexual movement. For example, various government agencies like the IRS and EPA
Sixth, some people here are under the false impression that the marriage amendment will somehow fix the 'judicial tyranny' in this country. It won't. If you want to fix 'judicial tyranny' than support a Constitution Amendment to deal with that.