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.
Well Paul, you sure skimmed over MY post.
"First, I answered KingNo155 question. He just didn't like the way I answered him."
Well I didn't like the way you answered him (AND others)either.
"Second, 'androgen insensitivity syndrome' is an actual PHYSICAL condition and not a physiological condition.
I NEVER said 'androgen insensitivity syndrome' was a "physiological" condition. My reply to YOU, was my "review" of ALL of your posts up until my post to you. Since you "skimmed" it last time, here it is AGAIN:
"I strongly urge YOU to engage in an autonomous act of extreme physical intimacy, that some might consider physiologically impossible."
TRANSLATION:In other words, what Dick Cheney said to Patrick Leahy. If Cheney had used my LONGER version, it would have went right over HIS head , just like it did yours.
"Third, I have recieved multiple replies to single posts in an attempt to wear me out. It is not going to work."
Well, since MY reply and "request" to you will NOT wear you out, you should have a VERY interesting remainder to your evening.
....and have a NICE day.....
It's a good point, but actually the constitution already has a mechanism for dealing with "judicial incompetency".
The Homosexual Mafia will not be content until it rules. Their marriage challenge is NOT about "equal rights"; It is about gaining access to children.
The homosexual movement, by its abnormal nature, is dependent on the recruitment of young people.
Ask yourself this: why do homosexual participants, as a group, statistically have virtually no "members" without disabilities such as spina bifida, lifelong obesity and facial or physical deformities? Obviously, because they are not "recruitment material".
Homosexuals are more attractive physically, because participation in these activities is a choice, and are not innate. All consenting adults have equal access to marriage with someone of the opposite sex.
Obviously, because they are not "recruitment material".
True enough. Those agencies ARE a threat to liberty and therefore a threat to society. However, Acceptance of homosexuality is a threat to our Judeo-Christian ethos and is also a threat to society. Any culture that has embraced homosexuality has then gone on to shrivel up and disappear. Rightly so. A freer country that accepts homosexuality as normal would not be worth defending or even living in.