Frank: “Then why bring it up?”

Hypocrisy. I’m pretty sure we’ve explained that already.

“Transsexuals? Too “icky” for you guys.”

You do know what the T is LGBT represents, right? Their rights are part of the gay rights movement.

“And now, I’ll repeat myself to Clem: I said that most of the commenters want gay rights because they believe it will piss off Christians.”

And you are still wrong. My position on gay rights has nothing to do with Christians. This part of your argument is 100% projection. This is how you think, therefore others must share you flaws.

“Not one of you appears to have the integrity to accept the responsibility for his own actions,”

More projection. You come here looking for a fight and then act like the victim when you get one.

Jesus. The courts will fix what Frank? The courts will fix what? Right now, when straights get divorced and they cannot come to a mutually agreed upon settlement, they go to divorce court to have their case arbitrated. if two gays got married and wanted to divorce they would do the same thing. What on earth would the courts have to fix?

If a hosptial ahs a rule barring everyone but family members from visitation rights, if two gay people are married, then they are family. What ton earth would the courts have to fix? The only thing the courts would have to fix is if the hospital refused to recognize the legal marriage. Now why the fuck would they do that?

There are laws regulating rent control apartments. The same laws would apply to gay marriages as straight marriages. What would the courts have to fix, then exactly?

Insurers who allow spouses to be included on policies would simply have to allow gay spouses to be on the policies. Like the visitation example, why would they refuse to recognize a legal marriage just because the two people were gay? Why? On what grounds? Again, what would the courts have to fix?

If it were made legal nationwide for gays to get married and some companies, hospitals, landlords etc etc refused to recognize gay marriages, they would be breaking the law. What would the courts have to fix? We already have a system in place to deal with people who break the law. Right?

So WTF are you even talking about? You aren’t even thinking now …

You’re just crazy. Stark raving. You just repeat back the last thing anyone says to you and then wing off on some wild, paranoid tangent …

Frank, I don’t see how allowing gay people to marry will cause any kind of new, costly legal problems that allowing straight people to marry causes. It’s still two people getting married. I don’t know what more needs to be said on that score.

There is nothing particularly special or different about gay relationships that would lead to unforeseen, unforetold legal issues.

Again, in your rent control example, there is absolutely nothing in that scenario which would change if you made all the participants straight. Absolutely nothing. And yet you claim there is. Why? What?

At the same time, affirmative action is not the same thing as gay marriage. The government is not setting quotas for gays to marry: so many gay marriages for every straight marriage. The government would not be saying so many gays have to get rent controlled properties or visitation rights or inheritances etc. etc. Hell, none of that happens under affirmative action either.

There is simply no comparison. Yet you seem to think there is. Where? Why?

Just because affirmative action has lead to legal problems, those challenges are aimed at specific aspects of the law. There would be no new special law for gay marriage except in that gays will allowed to get married. If someone wants to challenge that in court they could but on what grounds? Who could claim some kind of personal or class action harm in allowing gays to get married? Whether you live in Moscow idaho or New York, no one will be denied anything as a result of allowing gays to get married.

If you want to suggest that, A ha! The ex-wife in your rent control example could be denied a rent control apartment that makes no sense because she could be denied that apartment if her ex-husband remarried a woman. Is the ex going to sue to end heterosexual marriage on those grounds? No. She couldn’t. Why should she in you r example?

Frank, it’s clear that you haven’t done one iotas worth of thinking on this issue, not even in the example you yourself have put forth here.

Here’s what you’ve stated so far: Gay marriage will cause untold problems, just look at rent control, it’ll be just like affirmative action.

But not one of those things follows from the other. Not one. It’s so patently obvious is defies reason that someone has to point this out to you. But here we are … again.

Now unless you want to come up with something more concrete and logical than what you have so far, i think you should just let it go. You simply don’t know what you’re talking about.

True. But I didn’t mean anything negative either. It’s a label you approve of. As I said before, you brought God into this, and I was speculating as to His feelings on your sexual interest in TS people. I’ll say again, I have no personal stake in your sexual proclivities.

“And the statement, “No one here has said ANYTHING negative to you about your interest in transgendered individuals” is clearly a lie. You can wax litigious until the cows go home, but it was done.”

Uh huh. Where are these negative comments to you, Frank? Or are you just completely full of shit, yet again?

“You made an issue out of this whole pissed – off Christian thing because you went into attack mode about a week ago. Judging by the tone of your comments, it was a fair assessment. All the capital letters indicate to me is that perhaps “thou dost protest too much”.”

No, I went into attack mode because your arguments suck and you’re an idiot. I’ve never said that I support gay rights because it will piss off Christians. All the capital letters should indicate to you the level of my exasperation with you, as that is what it was meant to convey.

“You’re saying it’s the right thing to do? Please direct me to my comment where I say it is not the right thing to do. Bet you can’t find it.”

Um, Frank, I was responding to your charge that the only reason I was supporting gay rights was because it will piss off Christians. You’re wrong. I didn’t say anything about what you thought about the issue personally.

“As long as you persist in blaming me for what you have done, I will defend myself. Not one of you appears to have the integrity to accept the responsibility for his own actions, so I wouldn’t expect an apology in an opium dream.

But I would have no need to defend myself, if I were not attacked. You end it; it ends.”

It’s simple, Frank. You’re attacked because you’re a fucking idiot, as this post, and countless others before it, have incontrovertibly demonstrated. I think you need to look in the mirror when you talk about accepting responsibility for one’s own actions. I wouldn’t dream of apologizing to you for anything I’ve said to you on this thread, because no apology is necessary. Your arguments are terrible, you are mind-bendingly obtuse, you’re a crybaby, and you’re a fucking idiot.

And the statement, “No one here has said ANYTHING negative to you about your interest in transgendered individuals” is clearly a lie. You can wax litigious until the cows go home, but it was done.

You made an issue out of this whole pissed – off Christian thing because you went into attack mode about a week ago. Judging by the tone of your comments, it was a fair assessment. All the capital letters indicate to me is that perhaps “thou dost protest too much”.

You’re saying it’s the right thing to do? Please direct me to my comment where I say it is not the right thing to do. Bet you can’t find it.

As long as you persist in blaming me for what you have done, I will defend myself. Not one of you appears to have the integrity to accept the responsibility for his own actions, so I wouldn’t expect an apology in an opium dream.

But I would have no need to defend myself, if I were not attacked. You end it; it ends.

So, you’re a tranny chaser. No judgment here, Frank. No one here has said ANYTHING negative to you about your interest in transgendered individuals. Try going to FreeRepublic or some similar conservative site and see what kind of reception you get when they know your sexual interests.

“I said that most of the commenters want gay rights because they believe it will piss off Christians.”

Again, you’re an idiot, Frank. I can’t speak for everyone… fuck it, you’re premise is so stupid, yes I can. We support gay rights because IT’S THE RIGHT THING TO DO. The fact that it might piss of Christians, for me, is nothing more than a positive by-product of doing the right thing.

MC23: We played this already, I didn’t choose the label. Wherever the label came from, it is not who I am. It’s like calling me television watcher, or food eater.

Except I know you didn’t mean it as a simple descriptive.
Personally, I couldn’t care less who or what you’re sexually into
Then why bring it up?
All of you?
Over and over, and over and over?
We don’t care that you’re a tranny chaser
We don’t care that you’re a tranny chaser
We don’t care that you’re a tranny chaser

And don’t forget the multiply repeated lie that I labeled myself, so you get to say it again.

I care very much about transgendered individuals, and I have come to see them as the “newest minority on the block”.
Of course, you don’t believe that. You just think I’m a perv, you know, like bad people think gays are.

Not you, though. You’re the tolerant ones, the compassionate ones. The evidence of your tolerance and compassion is all over this thread. Isn’t it?

We’ve got Paul’s panacea: The Courts will fix it.
Clem’s social solution: My friends are OK with it.
MC23′s solution: None, I just know that Frank sucks.
And let me give Zython the recognition he deserves: Nice cutting and pasting, kid. Keep up the good work.

If there was any tolerance or compassion or understanding for ANYONE, including gays, I’d like to know where it was. I was too busy defending myself from attacks which you say didn’t take place, to spot any.

{Cue the “But, Frank, you’re no good” tape}

And that’s why liberals are the most dangerous people on earth. Because they decide who is worthy of their care, and who is not. How many years did it take for you to discover gays had rights? Ever hear of Stonewall? That was 1969.

Transsexuals? Too “icky” for you guys. I guess they’ll have to wait 25 years before you care about them, eh?

And now, I’ll repeat myself to Clem: I said that most of the commenters want gay rights because they believe it will piss off Christians.

I don’t need you to tell me it won’t, nitwit, I already know that.

the person you hate the most is yourself.
Heavy duty, Clem. Why don’t you see when Dr. Phil is taking a vacation.

“I remember, and you’re free to do the research.”

Why bother? You think you are the victim now, you honestly have no idea what the fuck you are doing.

“Without even questioning the data, are you implying they are all your friends? In both countries?”

No I’m not, you fucking idiot.

“I was saying that liberals like you and your cronies favor gay rights, because you believe it will piss off Christians”

And you are wrong, Frank. Since most Christians I know support gay rights, how the hell would supporting gay rights piss off Christians?

It makes no logical sense.

“One only has to track this thread from top to bottom, and look at all the posters who attacked me, and you’ll find the most intolerant assholes that post on this blog.”

The most intolerant asshole on this blog? That’d be you, Frank. You hate everyone so much that you constantly attack the, however, the person you hate the most is yourself.

Frank, you’re nuts. Totally and completely nuts.

Then who wrote it? I took all that time to write about you, and you only write 3 sentences about me? I’m hurt. But somehow, I’ll manage to get by.

Shorter Frank: WRYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY!!!!!!!!!

Why don’t you just call me a nigger or a faggot, or would that be over the top?”

Again, you need to improve your reading comprehension. You’re a self-described tranny-chaser, for one, so I’m not incorrect for using the term in reference to you. You brought up God, and how He’s looking out for humanity by keeping me away from humans. Since you saw fit to bring God into this, I just thought I would mention that IF the Christian God you supposedly worship exists, He is undoubtedly not happy with your interest in transgendered individuals. Personally, I couldn’t care less who or what you’re sexually into… but God does, doesn’t he, Frank?

You idiot.

“The people you name are all dicks. Are they your friends?”

I don’t know if I would call them my friends, Frank. Can people you’ve never met or conversed with directly be “friends”?. I would say that these people have my respect, however, by virtue of their obvious intelligence and rationality.

Well, I can’t. It happened before, but can I guarantee it will happen again? No.

Can you guarantee it won’t happen again? No. But you don’t need to. Why? Because your Paul, and Paul demonstrates nothing, proves nothing, and supports nothing.
He gets his minions to do his work for him.

BTW, MC23, that was some real bragging there. “I’m superior to rats because I have language skills” There are a few other qualities most people look for in humans.

I’m sorry you misunderstood my statement about your contact with humanity, but your response was interesting: The people you name are all dicks. Are they your friends?

But that wasn’t what I meant. I meant that in your work, God protects humanity from you by putting you to work with animals — those critters you resemble except for the language skills.

And the final irony: In a thread where I have been hounded for days over the issue of gay rights, you call me a name. A name that suggests that I am “less than” or different.

Why don’t you just call me a nigger or a faggot, or would that be over the top?

Zython: If you could fly, you’d be a flying asshole.
You’re too mindless to write your own material.
Who the hell rides the train anymore in this country?
I’m lovin’ it!

And, now, your turn, Clem:

Lie #1: No, Frank, you were acting like an asshole (practically) the whole time.
I remember, and you’re free to do the research.

Clem: “Most Christians I know support gay rights”

Frank: “Yeah, all both of them.”

Clem: There are millions upon millions of liberal Christians in Canada, and even more in the States

Without even questioning the data, are you implying they are all your friends? In both countries?

I wasn’t saying that Christians don’t support gay marriage; I was saying that liberals like you and your cronies favor gay rights, because you believe it will piss off Christians — see MC23 above.

One only has to track this thread from top to bottom, and look at all the posters who attacked me, and you’ll find the most intolerant assholes that post on this blog.

Mombo: “Strowbridge, I sincerely hope that your experience, and not mine, is what’s indicative of popular opinion of gay rights. As I said before, most self-professed Christians I’ve known tend to be against gay marriage.”

You must understand, I live in Canada, and Canada is a much more liberal nation, including our Christians.

Strowbridge, I sincerely hope that your experience, and not mine, is what’s indicative of popular opinion of gay rights. As I said before, most self-professed Christians I’ve known tend to be against gay marriage.

“Being Christian doesn’t make you an intolerant asshole.”

But it sometimes helps you in that direction, though…

Frank: “Yeah, all both of them.”

This is important enough to separate from the rest of the post, (all three lines of it).

There are millions upon millions of liberal Christians in Canada, and even more in the States, (although they are a smaller percentage of the population as a whole). These liberal Christians support gay rights, (for the most part), and are a major reason why opposition to same sex marriage has fallen below 50% is some recent polls.

Being Christian doesn’t make you an intolerant asshole.

No, Frank, you were acting like an asshole (practically) the whole time.