On 11/25/2016 8:21 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, November 24, 2016 at 1:31:17 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:

Do you really think it's settled? Nope! Not by a long shot.

Your boy Trump said so, and for you Trumpets, he can do no wrong.

LOL You really don't have any clue, do you?


--
Maggie

On 11/25/2016 8:31 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, November 24, 2016 at 2:21:29 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/24/2016 9:44 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Wednesday, November 23, 2016 at 6:09:26 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/23/2016 4:56 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 11/23/2016 2:34 PM, Muggles wrote:

"the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense,
founded on the Christian religion."

Article XI, Treaty of Tripoli - 1797

This isn't to say people haven't introduced god(s) into discussion. It
means the Government was not founded upon christianity. It is the law
of the land and the official position of our government.

You're wrong, and I've provided quotes in other posts from our founding
fathers themselves.


You gave some quotes of their personal opinions. They are entitled to
have an opinion and use that as a reason to fight for independence. But
the Constitution does not include religion as a part of its core.

Founding fathers were smart enough to give us freedom to pray and
believe as we wish, or not.

Religion is how people seek or relate to God. Religion isn't required
to acknowledge or even mention God, and God/Creator/Divine
Providence/Supreme Judge of the world IS mentioned in the Constitution,
AND given credit for the inspiration and direction the colonists took to
separate from the King of England.


I think Ed suggested you actually go read the Constitution. If you did,
you'd know that God is not mentioned in it. Neither is god in the Bill
of Rights. Please stop embarrassing yourself.



geesh ...

"Done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the
Seventeenth Day of September *in the Year of our Lord* one thousand
seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independence of the United
States of America the Twelfth In witness whereof We have hereunto
subscribed our Names...."
Article VII

http://www.heritage.org/constitution...station-clause

Which side of the argument you stand on regarding this statement is
probably related to your own personal beliefs regarding the role God
played in the foundation of our country.

Here are 2 interesting arguments:

http://joshblackman.com/blog/2012/08...-constitution/

http://www.apologeticspress.org/apco...=7&article=297



Boy, that's as lame as it gets. They are referring to the year, which as
our dating system goes, is AD, meaning "year of the lord". They could

WRONG - the text says: "year of *our* Lord". There's a difference.

Why would they use "our", and capitalize "Lord" vs. using "the", which
could refer to the generic dating system? Why use the phrase "our Lord"
at all??


just as well have said 1787 AD. That this is all you can come up with
speaks for itself. You really have only scraps to deal with in your
attempt to justify denial of equal rights to all.



--
Maggie

On 11/25/2016 8:36 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, November 24, 2016 at 2:32:06 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/24/2016 9:49 AM, trader_4 wrote:

But of course it's OK to deny two gay people in a committed relationship
the same rights that heterosexual people have. Go figure.

geez ... Nothing can stop anyone from have a "committed relationship",
but gay couples are not equivalent to heterosexual couples. They are
DIFFERENT! They should be acknowledged at being different, just as
people of different races are DIFFERENT.

I see, so people of different races should be treated differently under
our system of laws to, eh?

We already treat people of different races differently under our laws!!
What do you think racial quotas are doing??

[...]
Equality is a farce. We preach equality to the nth degree, but we
aren't equal because we're all DIFFERENT. That's not a bad thing.


I see. You're sounding more and more like a white supremacist every day.

LOL So, what do you call people who preach Black power, or Black lives
matter?? Are THEY black supremacists?? What about the Mexicans who are
out protesting? Are they Mexican supremacists??

Equality under the laws are a slight of hand game. Once you make laws
that favor one race, you're essentially discriminating against another
race. OH, but it's OK to do that as long as the scales are leaning in
one direction or the other??

That's NOT equality.

I can see your attraction to Trump and why people associate Trumpets
with your kind of values. That is your character, your values, but
not mine.


I'd like to see REAL equality - not some smoke and mirrors version of
the current politically correct male bovine droppings!

--
Maggie

On Friday, November 25, 2016 at 11:01:17 AM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/25/2016 7:54 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, November 24, 2016 at 1:11:25 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/23/2016 9:23 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 23 Nov 2016 17:24:16 -0600, Muggles
wrote:

On 11/23/2016 2:05 PM, Uncle Monster wrote:
On Wednesday, November 23, 2016 at 12:27:56 PM UTC-6, Muggles wrote:
On 11/23/2016 6:49 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 11/22/2016 11:48 PM, Muggles wrote:

So I suspect it is the same for homosexuals. They were born homosexual.
They can't/don't want to change either.

We will disagree on this point, too.

Wow. Just incredible. What is your reasoning to disagree?

Babies don't have a sexual orientation. They are born with a gender.

Sexual orientation comes into play when our hormones begin to produce,
and we mature. How can a baby be born homosexual when the hormones that
influence our sexual drives don't begin producing until adolescence?
--
Maggie


There have been some studies done that convinced researchers that homosexuality is actually due to the way the brain is organized and possibly linked to the hormones the fetus is exposed to during its development. There are actually some studies the hint at a genetic component. Humans have weird problems and develop strange abilities due to genetic mutations so why not homosexuality? In my lifetime, I observed the behavior of people I grew up with and knew some of them were different when we were children and sure enough, the guys I thought were effeminate, turned out to be homosexual by the time we reached adulthood. I remember a few were missing from a high school reunion because they died of AIDS. I've friends with both kinds of plumbing who are homosexual and they think differently than heterosexuals. It's obvious that their brains are wired differently. ¯\_(?)_/¯

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journ...EA670C5F380343

http://preview.tinyurl.com/gw9umz8

[8~{} Uncle Convinced Monster


This part I find interesting:

"Findings from family and twin studies support a genetic contribution to
the development of sexual orientation in men. *However*, previous
studies have *yielded conflicting evidence* for linkage to chromosome Xq28.

The study is referencing the development of men solely linked to
conflicting evidence.

I think they're throwing out a hail Mary and coming up short. There is
still no proof anyone is born with a sexual orientation.

Adolescence has to happen first.

There are certain genetic markers for a"predisposition" to
homosexuality. How strong that predisposition is, how much environment
contributes, or how much choise a person has in their sexual
orientation is still open to study, and differs from person to person..

Exactly. Sexual orientation is open to many outside influences from the
time of adolescence 'til adulthood. Babies can't make those decisions..
When gays say they were "born" that way, they imply they had no choice,
which, is a lie that's been repeated over and over again, so sarcasm
obviously it must be true /sarcasm ?

I know some clearly Hetro men who have "experimented with"
homosexuality in their teen years Some stayed with it by choice for
years - and then "went straight.
Some were "influenced" into the gay life by outside forces and when
those influences were removed from their life they "went straight"

Others lived as Hetros for years - then in a "midlife crisis" declared
they were gay.

Some definitely have "no choice" over their sexual orientation - but
clearly for some it is a "chosen lifestyle" and for others an "imposed
lifestyle"

The same with "bisexual" - more of them being a "choice"


It's all about choice. Always has been.



Still waiting for you or one of the other homophobes to tell us about
the process you went through in making your sexual preference decision.

Every time I see that question asked it gives me a chuckle. It's an
attempt to turn the discussion away from the fact that babies aren't
born with a sexual orientation, therefore, it's a moot argument to claim
anyone is born gay.

First you claim it involves hormones. Then you tell us it's just a choice.

What don't you get? It's basic growth of humans... we're born BABIES
having a gender. We have to go through adolescence and at that time our
hormones begin to manifest. At that time we become aware of our
sexuality, AND we make choices based on all the information we're
exposed to. As we mature we become responsible for the choices we make
because the law has set an age of consent and responsibility, which,
doesn't negate the fact that even as children we make choices and are
still responsible for those choices, too.

Our lives are filled with choices and every time we act on anything it's
because we made a choice from our available options.


So, tell us your evaluation process, your thought process, and tell us
all about that glorious day when you decided your sexual preference.
You'd be the first.


What don't you get??

What I don't get is that every gay man I've ever known (and I've
known quite a few) said he knew he was attracted to men long
before adolescence. When I was 8 or 9 years old, pining for
Ilya Kuryakin, so were they.

It doesn't wait for adolescence.

Cindy Hamilton

On 11/25/2016 9:52 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 11/25/2016 9:42 AM, trader_4 wrote:

Any gathering is a combination of people both secular and spiritual.
The government should allow those who are spiritual to express their
beliefs at government gatherings.... Prayer! Thanking God for
blessings
on our country, etc.
--
Maggie

And how are you going to like it when at your local town govt meeting,
muslims show up and after you've gotten through with your prayer, they
insist on rolling out the carpet and praying to their god? And then
the Westboro Baptists demand that they get to lead a prayer, where they
thank their god for dead US soldiers, because it's god punishing us for
gays and AIDS? And then the atheists demand their period of time, to
spout off and deny there is any god at all.
I could give you a hundred more examples, but everyone
else here gets the idea. The simpler solution is for you and everyone
else to keep your religion out of the town govt. Why BTW, is what the
overwhelming majority of govts do in this country anyway.



That won't happen. Remember, Maggie said those people are different and
they don't have equal rights. Only us same people have equal rights so
don't worry about the different ones.

NO! That's not what I've been saying at all.

Equal rights are a slight of hand trick. When you create laws in favor
of one special interest group, you're essentially tipping the scales and
nothing is equal at that point.

--
Maggie

On 11/25/2016 10:18 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
On Friday, November 25, 2016 at 11:01:17 AM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/25/2016 7:54 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, November 24, 2016 at 1:11:25 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/23/2016 9:23 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 23 Nov 2016 17:24:16 -0600, Muggles
wrote:

On 11/23/2016 2:05 PM, Uncle Monster wrote:
On Wednesday, November 23, 2016 at 12:27:56 PM UTC-6, Muggles wrote:
On 11/23/2016 6:49 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 11/22/2016 11:48 PM, Muggles wrote:

So I suspect it is the same for homosexuals. They were born homosexual.
They can't/don't want to change either.

We will disagree on this point, too.

Wow. Just incredible. What is your reasoning to disagree?

Babies don't have a sexual orientation. They are born with a gender.

Sexual orientation comes into play when our hormones begin to produce,
and we mature. How can a baby be born homosexual when the hormones that
influence our sexual drives don't begin producing until adolescence?
--
Maggie


There have been some studies done that convinced researchers that homosexuality is actually due to the way the brain is organized and possibly linked to the hormones the fetus is exposed to during its development. There are actually some studies the hint at a genetic component. Humans have weird problems and develop strange abilities due to genetic mutations so why not homosexuality? In my lifetime, I observed the behavior of people I grew up with and knew some of them were different when we were children and sure enough, the guys I thought were effeminate, turned out to be homosexual by the time we reached adulthood. I remember a few were missing from a high school reunion because they died of AIDS. I've friends with both kinds of plumbing who are homosexual and they think differently than heterosexuals. It's obvious that their brains are wired differently. ¯\_(?)_/¯

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journ...EA670C5F380343

http://preview.tinyurl.com/gw9umz8

[8~{} Uncle Convinced Monster


This part I find interesting:

"Findings from family and twin studies support a genetic contribution to
the development of sexual orientation in men. *However*, previous
studies have *yielded conflicting evidence* for linkage to chromosome Xq28.

The study is referencing the development of men solely linked to
conflicting evidence.

I think they're throwing out a hail Mary and coming up short. There is
still no proof anyone is born with a sexual orientation.

Adolescence has to happen first.

There are certain genetic markers for a"predisposition" to
homosexuality. How strong that predisposition is, how much environment
contributes, or how much choise a person has in their sexual
orientation is still open to study, and differs from person to person.

Exactly. Sexual orientation is open to many outside influences from the
time of adolescence 'til adulthood. Babies can't make those decisions.
When gays say they were "born" that way, they imply they had no choice,
which, is a lie that's been repeated over and over again, so sarcasm
obviously it must be true /sarcasm ?

I know some clearly Hetro men who have "experimented with"
homosexuality in their teen years Some stayed with it by choice for
years - and then "went straight.
Some were "influenced" into the gay life by outside forces and when
those influences were removed from their life they "went straight"

Others lived as Hetros for years - then in a "midlife crisis" declared
they were gay.

Some definitely have "no choice" over their sexual orientation - but
clearly for some it is a "chosen lifestyle" and for others an "imposed
lifestyle"

The same with "bisexual" - more of them being a "choice"


It's all about choice. Always has been.



Still waiting for you or one of the other homophobes to tell us about
the process you went through in making your sexual preference decision.

Every time I see that question asked it gives me a chuckle. It's an
attempt to turn the discussion away from the fact that babies aren't
born with a sexual orientation, therefore, it's a moot argument to claim
anyone is born gay.

First you claim it involves hormones. Then you tell us it's just a choice.

What don't you get? It's basic growth of humans... we're born BABIES
having a gender. We have to go through adolescence and at that time our
hormones begin to manifest. At that time we become aware of our
sexuality, AND we make choices based on all the information we're
exposed to. As we mature we become responsible for the choices we make
because the law has set an age of consent and responsibility, which,
doesn't negate the fact that even as children we make choices and are
still responsible for those choices, too.

Our lives are filled with choices and every time we act on anything it's
because we made a choice from our available options.


So, tell us your evaluation process, your thought process, and tell us
all about that glorious day when you decided your sexual preference.
You'd be the first.


What don't you get??


What I don't get is that every gay man I've ever known (and I've
known quite a few) said he knew he was attracted to men long
before adolescence.

Male children are naturally attracted to other males because they want
to identify with males. Our society has interpreted that as being a
sexual attraction even long before adolescence has happened. If society
is feeding information to children that is biased, how are they going to
make decisions in the future, and what will those decisions be based on?

We all make choices as we grow based on the information available to us
at the time. On top of that, we filter that information through our own
experiences along with what the world is bombarding us with at the same
time.

JUST because people interpret their choices to go one direction or
another as "having NO choice", it doesn't mean they really HAD no
choice. We always have a choice.


When I was 8 or 9 years old, pining for
Ilya Kuryakin, so were they.

It doesn't wait for adolescence.

What was the world telling you about Ilya Kuryakin?

--
Maggie

On 11/25/2016 11:01 AM, Muggles wrote:

First you claim it involves hormones. Then you tell us it's just a choice.

What don't you get? It's basic growth of humans... we're born BABIES
having a gender. We have to go through adolescence and at that time our
hormones begin to manifest. At that time we become aware of our
sexuality, AND we make choices based on all the information we're
exposed to. As we mature we become responsible for the choices we make
because the law has set an age of consent and responsibility, which,
doesn't negate the fact that even as children we make choices and are
still responsible for those choices, too.

Our lives are filled with choices and every time we act on anything it's
because we made a choice from our available options.


Many of those choices are from environmental tips we've seen in life but
you are ignoring heredity and genetics as factors in our growth. The way
our body was formed from the union of egg and sperm affects what we are.
It is more than just choices.


So, tell us your evaluation process, your thought process, and tell us
all about that glorious day when you decided your sexual preference.
You'd be the first.


What don't you get??

No, it is what YOU don't get

On 11/25/2016 12:07 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 11/25/2016 11:01 AM, Muggles wrote:

First you claim it involves hormones. Then you tell us it's just a
choice.

What don't you get? It's basic growth of humans... we're born BABIES
having a gender. We have to go through adolescence and at that time our
hormones begin to manifest. At that time we become aware of our
sexuality, AND we make choices based on all the information we're
exposed to. As we mature we become responsible for the choices we make
because the law has set an age of consent and responsibility, which,
doesn't negate the fact that even as children we make choices and are
still responsible for those choices, too.

Our lives are filled with choices and every time we act on anything it's
because we made a choice from our available options.


Many of those choices are from environmental tips we've seen in life but
you are ignoring heredity and genetics as factors in our growth. The way
our body was formed from the union of egg and sperm affects what we are.
It is more than just choices.

How do you explain heredity and genetics when it comes to siblings
turning out completely different from each other? It's the choices they
make individually.


--
Maggie

After serious thinking Muggles wrote :
On 11/25/2016 8:36 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, November 24, 2016 at 2:32:06 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/24/2016 9:49 AM, trader_4 wrote:

But of course it's OK to deny two gay people in a committed relationship
the same rights that heterosexual people have. Go figure.

geez ... Nothing can stop anyone from have a "committed relationship",
but gay couples are not equivalent to heterosexual couples. They are
DIFFERENT! They should be acknowledged at being different, just as
people of different races are DIFFERENT.

I see, so people of different races should be treated differently under
our system of laws to, eh?

We already treat people of different races differently under our laws!!
What do you think racial quotas are doing??

[...]
Equality is a farce. We preach equality to the nth degree, but we
aren't equal because we're all DIFFERENT. That's not a bad thing.


I see. You're sounding more and more like a white supremacist every day.

LOL So, what do you call people who preach Black power, or Black lives
matter?? Are THEY black supremacists?? What about the Mexicans who are
out protesting? Are they Mexican supremacists??

Equality under the laws are a slight of hand game. Once you make laws
that favor one race, you're essentially discriminating against another
race. OH, but it's OK to do that as long as the scales are leaning in
one direction or the other??

That's NOT equality.

I can see your attraction to Trump and why people associate Trumpets
with your kind of values. That is your character, your values, but
not mine.


I'd like to see REAL equality - not some smoke and mirrors version of
the current politically correct male bovine droppings!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sleight_of_hand

On 11/25/2016 2:20 PM, Muggles wrote:


Our lives are filled with choices and every time we act on anything it's
because we made a choice from our available options.


Many of those choices are from environmental tips we've seen in life but
you are ignoring heredity and genetics as factors in our growth. The way
our body was formed from the union of egg and sperm affects what we are.
It is more than just choices.

How do you explain heredity and genetics when it comes to siblings
turning out completely different from each other? It's the choices they
make individually.


O M G Read an article about genes and how they work.

On 11/25/2016 3:29 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 11/25/2016 2:20 PM, Muggles wrote:


Our lives are filled with choices and every time we act on anything
it's
because we made a choice from our available options.


Many of those choices are from environmental tips we've seen in life but
you are ignoring heredity and genetics as factors in our growth. The way
our body was formed from the union of egg and sperm affects what we are.
It is more than just choices.

How do you explain heredity and genetics when it comes to siblings
turning out completely different from each other? It's the choices they
make individually.


O M G Read an article about genes and how they work.

CHOICES!

--
Maggie

On Friday, November 25, 2016 at 2:20:51 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/25/2016 12:07 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 11/25/2016 11:01 AM, Muggles wrote:

First you claim it involves hormones. Then you tell us it's just a
choice.

What don't you get? It's basic growth of humans... we're born BABIES
having a gender. We have to go through adolescence and at that time our
hormones begin to manifest. At that time we become aware of our
sexuality, AND we make choices based on all the information we're
exposed to. As we mature we become responsible for the choices we make
because the law has set an age of consent and responsibility, which,
doesn't negate the fact that even as children we make choices and are
still responsible for those choices, too.

Our lives are filled with choices and every time we act on anything it's
because we made a choice from our available options.


Many of those choices are from environmental tips we've seen in life but
you are ignoring heredity and genetics as factors in our growth. The way
our body was formed from the union of egg and sperm affects what we are.
It is more than just choices.

How do you explain heredity and genetics when it comes to siblings
turning out completely different from each other? It's the choices they
make individually.

1. Siblings are not genetically identical
2. Epigenetics is a powerful force. You should investigate it.

I don't know why I bother to reply, really. You can't be reasoned
out of a position that you weren't reasoned into.

Cindy Hamilton

On Friday, November 25, 2016 at 10:51:43 AM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/25/2016 7:47 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, November 24, 2016 at 12:55:24 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/23/2016 8:38 PM, wrote:

More Religious claptrap from the hysterical atheistic fringe.
You have the right to believe what you want. You do not have the right
to force it down the throats of others and publicliy denigrate and
chastise those who believe differently than you. YOUR rights to not
"trump" the rights of others just because you "believe" you are right.
The fact you claim to KNOW you are right just proves you may well be
delusional - just like you clain "deists" are.


I totally agree with you!



We don;t want to force you to live by anything other than the constitution,
which says all people are to have equal protection under the law. When you
decide that marriage has to be between a man and woman, because of your
religious beliefs, or for any reason, then it's you folks who are denying
others their rights. The SC ruled and said so.

The SC can overturn it in the future, too, with the addition of
conservative judges on the court.

Even your boy Trump says the issue is irrelevant, "it's done" and he's not
going to get involved.

It's not the job of POTUS to legislate, but it is his job to appoint SC
justices to fill open vacancies. Why do you think one big reason
there's been such a battle over who would become POTUS? Whoever wins
the presidency is going to change the direction of the US for the next
generation, at least, based on who they appoint to the SC.

--
Maggie

Given that Trump now says the issue of gay marriage is "irrelevant"
and "done", why would what a SC nominee is likely to think about
gay marriage matter to Trump? He's already delivered betrayals on
half a dozen major promises, so why not the SC too? Give us some
examples in the last century where the SC reversed one of it's
major decisions, especially in just a decade or two of rendering
that decision. No one on that court is going to be eager to wade
back into this just to please you.

On Friday, November 25, 2016 at 11:01:17 AM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/25/2016 7:54 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, November 24, 2016 at 1:11:25 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/23/2016 9:23 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 23 Nov 2016 17:24:16 -0600, Muggles
wrote:

On 11/23/2016 2:05 PM, Uncle Monster wrote:
On Wednesday, November 23, 2016 at 12:27:56 PM UTC-6, Muggles wrote:
On 11/23/2016 6:49 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 11/22/2016 11:48 PM, Muggles wrote:

So I suspect it is the same for homosexuals. They were born homosexual.
They can't/don't want to change either.

We will disagree on this point, too.

Wow. Just incredible. What is your reasoning to disagree?

Babies don't have a sexual orientation. They are born with a gender.

Sexual orientation comes into play when our hormones begin to produce,
and we mature. How can a baby be born homosexual when the hormones that
influence our sexual drives don't begin producing until adolescence?
--
Maggie


There have been some studies done that convinced researchers that homosexuality is actually due to the way the brain is organized and possibly linked to the hormones the fetus is exposed to during its development. There are actually some studies the hint at a genetic component. Humans have weird problems and develop strange abilities due to genetic mutations so why not homosexuality? In my lifetime, I observed the behavior of people I grew up with and knew some of them were different when we were children and sure enough, the guys I thought were effeminate, turned out to be homosexual by the time we reached adulthood. I remember a few were missing from a high school reunion because they died of AIDS. I've friends with both kinds of plumbing who are homosexual and they think differently than heterosexuals. It's obvious that their brains are wired differently. ¯\_(?)_/¯

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journ...EA670C5F380343

http://preview.tinyurl.com/gw9umz8

[8~{} Uncle Convinced Monster


This part I find interesting:

"Findings from family and twin studies support a genetic contribution to
the development of sexual orientation in men. *However*, previous
studies have *yielded conflicting evidence* for linkage to chromosome Xq28.

The study is referencing the development of men solely linked to
conflicting evidence.

I think they're throwing out a hail Mary and coming up short. There is
still no proof anyone is born with a sexual orientation.

Adolescence has to happen first.

There are certain genetic markers for a"predisposition" to
homosexuality. How strong that predisposition is, how much environment
contributes, or how much choise a person has in their sexual
orientation is still open to study, and differs from person to person..

Exactly. Sexual orientation is open to many outside influences from the
time of adolescence 'til adulthood. Babies can't make those decisions..
When gays say they were "born" that way, they imply they had no choice,
which, is a lie that's been repeated over and over again, so sarcasm
obviously it must be true /sarcasm ?

I know some clearly Hetro men who have "experimented with"
homosexuality in their teen years Some stayed with it by choice for
years - and then "went straight.
Some were "influenced" into the gay life by outside forces and when
those influences were removed from their life they "went straight"

Others lived as Hetros for years - then in a "midlife crisis" declared
they were gay.

Some definitely have "no choice" over their sexual orientation - but
clearly for some it is a "chosen lifestyle" and for others an "imposed
lifestyle"

The same with "bisexual" - more of them being a "choice"


It's all about choice. Always has been.



Still waiting for you or one of the other homophobes to tell us about
the process you went through in making your sexual preference decision.

Every time I see that question asked it gives me a chuckle. It's an
attempt to turn the discussion away from the fact that babies aren't
born with a sexual orientation, therefore, it's a moot argument to claim
anyone is born gay.


In other words, you know you can't answer the simple question about when you
made your choice of sexual preference, so you obfuscate.



First you claim it involves hormones. Then you tell us it's just a choice.

What don't you get? It's basic growth of humans... we're born BABIES
having a gender. We have to go through adolescence and at that time our
hormones begin to manifest. At that time we become aware of our
sexuality,

And obviously for some people when they become aware of their sexuality,
they are become aware that they are attracted to the same sex. It's
not a "decision".


AND we make choices based on all the information we're
exposed to.

So, tell us that thought process, the information you used to decide
that you would be heterosexual and attracted to the opposite sex.



As we mature we become responsible for the choices we make
because the law has set an age of consent and responsibility, which,
doesn't negate the fact that even as children we make choices and are
still responsible for those choices, too.

Our lives are filled with choices and every time we act on anything it's
because we made a choice from our available options.


So tell us about the day you decided to be hetero.




So, tell us your evaluation process, your thought process, and tell us
all about that glorious day when you decided your sexual preference.
You'd be the first.


What don't you get??

--
Maggie

Tell us about that day you decided. We're all waiting. And answer Cindy's
question too, about what great harm comes to you personaly by a
couple entering into a same sex marriage.

On Friday, November 25, 2016 at 11:10:19 AM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/25/2016 8:31 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, November 24, 2016 at 2:21:29 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/24/2016 9:44 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Wednesday, November 23, 2016 at 6:09:26 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/23/2016 4:56 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 11/23/2016 2:34 PM, Muggles wrote:

"the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense,
founded on the Christian religion."

Article XI, Treaty of Tripoli - 1797

This isn't to say people haven't introduced god(s) into discussion. It
means the Government was not founded upon christianity. It is the law
of the land and the official position of our government.

You're wrong, and I've provided quotes in other posts from our founding
fathers themselves.


You gave some quotes of their personal opinions. They are entitled to
have an opinion and use that as a reason to fight for independence. But
the Constitution does not include religion as a part of its core.

Founding fathers were smart enough to give us freedom to pray and
believe as we wish, or not.

Religion is how people seek or relate to God. Religion isn't required
to acknowledge or even mention God, and God/Creator/Divine
Providence/Supreme Judge of the world IS mentioned in the Constitution,
AND given credit for the inspiration and direction the colonists took to
separate from the King of England.


I think Ed suggested you actually go read the Constitution. If you did,
you'd know that God is not mentioned in it. Neither is god in the Bill
of Rights. Please stop embarrassing yourself.



geesh ...

"Done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the
Seventeenth Day of September *in the Year of our Lord* one thousand
seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independence of the United
States of America the Twelfth In witness whereof We have hereunto
subscribed our Names...."
Article VII

http://www.heritage.org/constitution...station-clause

Which side of the argument you stand on regarding this statement is
probably related to your own personal beliefs regarding the role God
played in the foundation of our country.

Here are 2 interesting arguments:

http://joshblackman.com/blog/2012/08...-constitution/

http://www.apologeticspress.org/apco...=7&article=297



Boy, that's as lame as it gets. They are referring to the year, which as
our dating system goes, is AD, meaning "year of the lord". They could

WRONG - the text says: "year of *our* Lord". There's a difference.

How pathetic. Having to try to cling to shreds that aren't even part
of the constitution, but refer to the year. And at the same time, ignoring
what it does clearly say, equal protection under the law for all.



Why would they use "our", and capitalize "Lord" vs. using "the", which
could refer to the generic dating system? Why use the phrase "our Lord"
at all??


If they were so damn intent of making this a christian nation, why the
hell is the only reference that you can come up with is a lame reference
to the year of the lord in the date? Why isn't it just spelled out in]
one of the articles? Why isn't God or religion mentioned anywhere?
The rest of us know the answer.

On Friday, November 25, 2016 at 11:17:24 AM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/25/2016 8:36 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, November 24, 2016 at 2:32:06 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/24/2016 9:49 AM, trader_4 wrote:

But of course it's OK to deny two gay people in a committed relationship
the same rights that heterosexual people have. Go figure.

geez ... Nothing can stop anyone from have a "committed relationship",
but gay couples are not equivalent to heterosexual couples. They are
DIFFERENT! They should be acknowledged at being different, just as
people of different races are DIFFERENT.

I see, so people of different races should be treated differently under
our system of laws to, eh?

We already treat people of different races differently under our laws!!
What do you think racial quotas are doing??


Those racial quotas are wrong and unconstitutional too. Two wrongs
doesn't make a right.




[...]
Equality is a farce. We preach equality to the nth degree, but we
aren't equal because we're all DIFFERENT. That's not a bad thing.


I see. You're sounding more and more like a white supremacist every day.

LOL So, what do you call people who preach Black power, or Black lives
matter?? Are THEY black supremacists?? What about the Mexicans who are
out protesting? Are they Mexican supremacists??

I haven't see them claiming that people of different races have different
rights, only you.



Equality under the laws are a slight of hand game. Once you make laws
that favor one race, you're essentially discriminating against another
race. OH, but it's OK to do that as long as the scales are leaning in
one direction or the other??

That's NOT equality.


And wherever it exists, I will denounce it, not use it as an excuse
to deny rights to gays.



I can see your attraction to Trump and why people associate Trumpets
with your kind of values. That is your character, your values, but
not mine.


I'd like to see REAL equality - not some smoke and mirrors version of
the current politically correct male bovine droppings!

--
Maggie

You just told us that different people should have different rights.
Make up your mind. And if you were really in favor of that, then you
would not be here bitching about gay marriages or civil unions having
different rights. You just make it up as you go.

On Friday, November 25, 2016 at 11:18:32 AM UTC-5, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
On Friday, November 25, 2016 at 11:01:17 AM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/25/2016 7:54 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, November 24, 2016 at 1:11:25 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/23/2016 9:23 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 23 Nov 2016 17:24:16 -0600, Muggles
wrote:

On 11/23/2016 2:05 PM, Uncle Monster wrote:
On Wednesday, November 23, 2016 at 12:27:56 PM UTC-6, Muggles wrote:
On 11/23/2016 6:49 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 11/22/2016 11:48 PM, Muggles wrote:

So I suspect it is the same for homosexuals. They were born homosexual.
They can't/don't want to change either.

We will disagree on this point, too.

Wow. Just incredible. What is your reasoning to disagree?

Babies don't have a sexual orientation. They are born with a gender.

Sexual orientation comes into play when our hormones begin to produce,
and we mature. How can a baby be born homosexual when the hormones that
influence our sexual drives don't begin producing until adolescence?
--
Maggie


There have been some studies done that convinced researchers that homosexuality is actually due to the way the brain is organized and possibly linked to the hormones the fetus is exposed to during its development. There are actually some studies the hint at a genetic component. Humans have weird problems and develop strange abilities due to genetic mutations so why not homosexuality? In my lifetime, I observed the behavior of people I grew up with and knew some of them were different when we were children and sure enough, the guys I thought were effeminate, turned out to be homosexual by the time we reached adulthood. I remember a few were missing from a high school reunion because they died of AIDS. I've friends with both kinds of plumbing who are homosexual and they think differently than heterosexuals.. It's obvious that their brains are wired differently. ¯\_(?)_/¯

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journ...EA670C5F380343

http://preview.tinyurl.com/gw9umz8

[8~{} Uncle Convinced Monster


This part I find interesting:

"Findings from family and twin studies support a genetic contribution to
the development of sexual orientation in men. *However*, previous
studies have *yielded conflicting evidence* for linkage to chromosome Xq28.

The study is referencing the development of men solely linked to
conflicting evidence.

I think they're throwing out a hail Mary and coming up short. There is
still no proof anyone is born with a sexual orientation.

Adolescence has to happen first.

There are certain genetic markers for a"predisposition" to
homosexuality. How strong that predisposition is, how much environment
contributes, or how much choise a person has in their sexual
orientation is still open to study, and differs from person to person.

Exactly. Sexual orientation is open to many outside influences from the
time of adolescence 'til adulthood. Babies can't make those decisions.
When gays say they were "born" that way, they imply they had no choice,
which, is a lie that's been repeated over and over again, so sarcasm
obviously it must be true /sarcasm ?

I know some clearly Hetro men who have "experimented with"
homosexuality in their teen years Some stayed with it by choice for
years - and then "went straight.
Some were "influenced" into the gay life by outside forces and when
those influences were removed from their life they "went straight"

Others lived as Hetros for years - then in a "midlife crisis" declared
they were gay.

Some definitely have "no choice" over their sexual orientation - but
clearly for some it is a "chosen lifestyle" and for others an "imposed
lifestyle"

The same with "bisexual" - more of them being a "choice"


It's all about choice. Always has been.



Still waiting for you or one of the other homophobes to tell us about
the process you went through in making your sexual preference decision.

On 11/26/2016 10:59 AM, trader_4 wrote:

No one on that court is going to be eager to wade
back into this just to please you.


Sure they will. Just send them a transcript of some of her postings
here and they will go back in session. Maybe even sign her up to fill
that empty seat.

On 11/26/2016 7:00 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
On Friday, November 25, 2016 at 2:20:51 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/25/2016 12:07 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 11/25/2016 11:01 AM, Muggles wrote:

First you claim it involves hormones. Then you tell us it's just a
choice.

What don't you get? It's basic growth of humans... we're born BABIES
having a gender. We have to go through adolescence and at that time our
hormones begin to manifest. At that time we become aware of our
sexuality, AND we make choices based on all the information we're
exposed to. As we mature we become responsible for the choices we make
because the law has set an age of consent and responsibility, which,
doesn't negate the fact that even as children we make choices and are
still responsible for those choices, too.

Our lives are filled with choices and every time we act on anything it's
because we made a choice from our available options.

Many of those choices are from environmental tips we've seen in life but
you are ignoring heredity and genetics as factors in our growth. The way
our body was formed from the union of egg and sperm affects what we are.
It is more than just choices.

How do you explain heredity and genetics when it comes to siblings
turning out completely different from each other? It's the choices they
make individually.


1. Siblings are not genetically identical

That was my point. Combine that with the choices people make and you
have no 2 people who are the same for multiple reasons. It still boils
down to people aren't born gay. It's a result of the choices they make.

2. Epigenetics is a powerful force. You should investigate it.

I have.

I don't know why I bother to reply, really. You can't be reasoned
out of a position that you weren't reasoned into.

If the only reason you respond is to try to change my mind, that's the
wrong reason to respond.

I've no goal to change anyone elses mind when I explain my point of view.


--
Maggie

On 11/26/2016 9:59 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Friday, November 25, 2016 at 10:51:43 AM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/25/2016 7:47 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, November 24, 2016 at 12:55:24 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/23/2016 8:38 PM, wrote:

More Religious claptrap from the hysterical atheistic fringe.
You have the right to believe what you want. You do not have the right
to force it down the throats of others and publicliy denigrate and
chastise those who believe differently than you. YOUR rights to not
"trump" the rights of others just because you "believe" you are right.
The fact you claim to KNOW you are right just proves you may well be
delusional - just like you clain "deists" are.


I totally agree with you!



We don;t want to force you to live by anything other than the constitution,
which says all people are to have equal protection under the law. When you
decide that marriage has to be between a man and woman, because of your
religious beliefs, or for any reason, then it's you folks who are denying
others their rights. The SC ruled and said so.

The SC can overturn it in the future, too, with the addition of
conservative judges on the court.

Even your boy Trump says the issue is irrelevant, "it's done" and he's not
going to get involved.

It's not the job of POTUS to legislate, but it is his job to appoint SC
justices to fill open vacancies. Why do you think one big reason
there's been such a battle over who would become POTUS? Whoever wins
the presidency is going to change the direction of the US for the next
generation, at least, based on who they appoint to the SC.


Given that Trump now says the issue of gay marriage is "irrelevant"
and "done", why would what a SC nominee is likely to think about
gay marriage matter to Trump?

You're pretty short sighted, aren't you?


He's already delivered betrayals on
half a dozen major promises, so why not the SC too? Give us some
examples in the last century where the SC reversed one of it's
major decisions, especially in just a decade or two of rendering
that decision. No one on that court is going to be eager to wade
back into this just to please you.



--
Maggie

On 11/26/2016 10:05 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Friday, November 25, 2016 at 11:01:17 AM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/25/2016 7:54 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, November 24, 2016 at 1:11:25 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:

It's all about choice. Always has been.

Still waiting for you or one of the other homophobes to tell us about
the process you went through in making your sexual preference decision.

Every time I see that question asked it gives me a chuckle. It's an
attempt to turn the discussion away from the fact that babies aren't
born with a sexual orientation, therefore, it's a moot argument to claim
anyone is born gay.

In other words, you know you can't answer the simple question about when you
made your choice of sexual preference, so you obfuscate.

Your question is irrelevant. The information, influences, process of
thought, decision making skills, reasons we make our choices, and
numerous outside factors that were available to me as I was growing up
are just as unique as they were to someone else.

None of us are born with sexuality (we're born with a gender), and we
also weren't born with a destiny set in stone. We're a blank slate at
birth and we become defined by all of our experiences, what we learn
from them, and how we choose to respond to them.

We decide what we like, don't like, are influenced by, how we will
respond, etc.

First you claim it involves hormones. Then you tell us it's just a choice.

What don't you get? It's basic growth of humans... we're born BABIES
having a gender. We have to go through adolescence and at that time our
hormones begin to manifest. At that time we become aware of our
sexuality,

And obviously for some people when they become aware of their sexuality,
they are become aware that they are attracted to the same sex. It's
not a "decision".

It IS a decision.

Do you think anyone does ANYTHING in their life without having observed
their choices, thinking about those choices, and then making a decision
to proceed with a particular choice??

What do you see the "process of thought" as being and how it affects us
on a moment by moment basis?

EVERYTHING we do is based on a choice we've made.

--
Maggie

On 11/26/2016 10:09 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Friday, November 25, 2016 at 11:10:19 AM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/25/2016 8:31 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, November 24, 2016 at 2:21:29 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/24/2016 9:44 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Wednesday, November 23, 2016 at 6:09:26 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/23/2016 4:56 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 11/23/2016 2:34 PM, Muggles wrote:

"the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense,
founded on the Christian religion."

Article XI, Treaty of Tripoli - 1797

This isn't to say people haven't introduced god(s) into discussion. It
means the Government was not founded upon christianity. It is the law
of the land and the official position of our government.

You're wrong, and I've provided quotes in other posts from our founding
fathers themselves.


You gave some quotes of their personal opinions. They are entitled to
have an opinion and use that as a reason to fight for independence. But
the Constitution does not include religion as a part of its core.

Founding fathers were smart enough to give us freedom to pray and
believe as we wish, or not.

Religion is how people seek or relate to God. Religion isn't required
to acknowledge or even mention God, and God/Creator/Divine
Providence/Supreme Judge of the world IS mentioned in the Constitution,
AND given credit for the inspiration and direction the colonists took to
separate from the King of England.


I think Ed suggested you actually go read the Constitution. If you did,
you'd know that God is not mentioned in it. Neither is god in the Bill
of Rights. Please stop embarrassing yourself.



geesh ...

"Done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the
Seventeenth Day of September *in the Year of our Lord* one thousand
seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independence of the United
States of America the Twelfth In witness whereof We have hereunto
subscribed our Names...."
Article VII

http://www.heritage.org/constitution...station-clause

Which side of the argument you stand on regarding this statement is
probably related to your own personal beliefs regarding the role God
played in the foundation of our country.

Here are 2 interesting arguments:

http://joshblackman.com/blog/2012/08...-constitution/

http://www.apologeticspress.org/apco...=7&article=297


Boy, that's as lame as it gets. They are referring to the year, which as
our dating system goes, is AD, meaning "year of the lord". They could

WRONG - the text says: "year of *our* Lord". There's a difference.


How pathetic. Having to try to cling to shreds that aren't even part
of the constitution, but refer to the year. And at the same time, ignoring
what it does clearly say, equal protection under the law for all.

What is CLEARLY does say id "year of *our* Lord". The distinction is
important enough for there to be 2 different camps on WHY the word "our"
was used vs. "the".

You don't really delve into analysis, or the "why" of things very often,
do you?


Why would they use "our", and capitalize "Lord" vs. using "the", which
could refer to the generic dating system? Why use the phrase "our Lord"
at all??


If they were so damn intent of making this a christian nation, why the
hell is the only reference that you can come up with is a lame reference
to the year of the lord in the date? Why isn't it just spelled out in]
one of the articles? Why isn't God or religion mentioned anywhere?
The rest of us know the answer.


The founding fathers did NOT want to make this a CHRISTIAN nation with a
national religion. They intended to create a nation based on CHRISTIAN
principles where GOD given freedoms and principles were allowed to thrive.


--
Maggie

On Saturday, November 26, 2016 at 11:32:15 AM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/26/2016 7:00 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
On Friday, November 25, 2016 at 2:20:51 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/25/2016 12:07 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 11/25/2016 11:01 AM, Muggles wrote:

First you claim it involves hormones. Then you tell us it's just a
choice.

What don't you get? It's basic growth of humans... we're born BABIES
having a gender. We have to go through adolescence and at that time our
hormones begin to manifest. At that time we become aware of our
sexuality, AND we make choices based on all the information we're
exposed to. As we mature we become responsible for the choices we make
because the law has set an age of consent and responsibility, which,
doesn't negate the fact that even as children we make choices and are
still responsible for those choices, too.

Our lives are filled with choices and every time we act on anything it's
because we made a choice from our available options.

Many of those choices are from environmental tips we've seen in life but
you are ignoring heredity and genetics as factors in our growth. The way
our body was formed from the union of egg and sperm affects what we are.
It is more than just choices.

How do you explain heredity and genetics when it comes to siblings
turning out completely different from each other? It's the choices they
make individually.


1. Siblings are not genetically identical

That was my point. Combine that with the choices people make and you
have no 2 people who are the same for multiple reasons. It still boils
down to people aren't born gay. It's a result of the choices they make.


Still waiting to hear about your choice process. What decision process
did you go through to decide to be attracted to the opposite sex? Tell
us about that glorious day that you decided to be straight or gay, if
you happen to be a self-hating gay that is.

I suppose you believe in that conversion therapy nonsense, where they
try to turn gay people straight. I guess they just have to badger them
long enough, brain wash them, until they decide to be straight, right?

On Saturday, November 26, 2016 at 11:33:21 AM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/26/2016 9:59 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Friday, November 25, 2016 at 10:51:43 AM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/25/2016 7:47 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, November 24, 2016 at 12:55:24 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/23/2016 8:38 PM, wrote:

More Religious claptrap from the hysterical atheistic fringe.
You have the right to believe what you want. You do not have the right
to force it down the throats of others and publicliy denigrate and
chastise those who believe differently than you. YOUR rights to not
"trump" the rights of others just because you "believe" you are right.
The fact you claim to KNOW you are right just proves you may well be
delusional - just like you clain "deists" are.


I totally agree with you!



We don;t want to force you to live by anything other than the constitution,
which says all people are to have equal protection under the law. When you
decide that marriage has to be between a man and woman, because of your
religious beliefs, or for any reason, then it's you folks who are denying
others their rights. The SC ruled and said so.

The SC can overturn it in the future, too, with the addition of
conservative judges on the court.

Even your boy Trump says the issue is irrelevant, "it's done" and he's not
going to get involved.

It's not the job of POTUS to legislate, but it is his job to appoint SC
justices to fill open vacancies. Why do you think one big reason
there's been such a battle over who would become POTUS? Whoever wins
the presidency is going to change the direction of the US for the next
generation, at least, based on who they appoint to the SC.


Given that Trump now says the issue of gay marriage is "irrelevant"
and "done", why would what a SC nominee is likely to think about
gay marriage matter to Trump?

You're pretty short sighted, aren't you?


No, not at all. I told you for over a year that Trump wasn't going
to live up to much of his BS, that he was lying to you Trumpets to
get your vote. Without the racists, the xenophobes, the ignoramuses
that he lured in with his lies, his smears, he would not have won.




He's already delivered betrayals on
half a dozen major promises, so why not the SC too? Give us some
examples in the last century where the SC reversed one of it's
major decisions, especially in just a decade or two of rendering
that decision. No one on that court is going to be eager to wade
back into this just to please you.



--
Maggie

On 11/26/2016 10:55 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Saturday, November 26, 2016 at 11:32:15 AM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/26/2016 7:00 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
On Friday, November 25, 2016 at 2:20:51 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/25/2016 12:07 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 11/25/2016 11:01 AM, Muggles wrote:

First you claim it involves hormones. Then you tell us it's just a
choice.

What don't you get? It's basic growth of humans... we're born BABIES
having a gender. We have to go through adolescence and at that time our
hormones begin to manifest. At that time we become aware of our
sexuality, AND we make choices based on all the information we're
exposed to. As we mature we become responsible for the choices we make
because the law has set an age of consent and responsibility, which,
doesn't negate the fact that even as children we make choices and are
still responsible for those choices, too.

Our lives are filled with choices and every time we act on anything it's
because we made a choice from our available options.

Many of those choices are from environmental tips we've seen in life but
you are ignoring heredity and genetics as factors in our growth. The way
our body was formed from the union of egg and sperm affects what we are.
It is more than just choices.

How do you explain heredity and genetics when it comes to siblings
turning out completely different from each other? It's the choices they
make individually.


1. Siblings are not genetically identical

That was my point. Combine that with the choices people make and you
have no 2 people who are the same for multiple reasons. It still boils
down to people aren't born gay. It's a result of the choices they make.


Still waiting to hear about your choice process. What decision process
did you go through to decide to be attracted to the opposite sex? Tell
us about that glorious day that you decided to be straight or gay, if
you happen to be a self-hating gay that is.

LOL!!

I suppose you believe in that conversion therapy nonsense, where they
try to turn gay people straight. I guess they just have to badger them
long enough, brain wash them, until they decide to be straight, right?


If you're asking whether or not I believe people can change with
therapy, or counseling, then, YES, I do believe people can change. It's
a choice.

--
Maggie

On 11/26/2016 10:58 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Saturday, November 26, 2016 at 11:33:21 AM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/26/2016 9:59 AM, trader_4 wrote:

Given that Trump now says the issue of gay marriage is "irrelevant"
and "done", why would what a SC nominee is likely to think about
gay marriage matter to Trump?

You're pretty short sighted, aren't you?


No, not at all. I told you for over a year that Trump wasn't going
to live up to much of his BS,

Trump hasn't even taken office yet. How can he not live up to being
president BEFORE he even takes office???


that he was lying to you Trumpets to
get your vote.

You sound like chicken little.


Without the racists, the xenophobes, the ignoramuses
that he lured in with his lies, his smears, he would not have won.

yeah ... chicken little, alright.


--
Maggie

On Saturday, November 26, 2016 at 12:04:59 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:

If you're asking whether or not I believe people can change with
therapy, or counseling, then, YES, I do believe people can change. It's
a choice.

So, with sufficient therapy, you could become homosexual? Nope. I
don't believe it.

Cindy Hamliton

On Saturday, November 26, 2016 at 11:53:51 AM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/26/2016 10:09 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Friday, November 25, 2016 at 11:10:19 AM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/25/2016 8:31 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, November 24, 2016 at 2:21:29 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/24/2016 9:44 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Wednesday, November 23, 2016 at 6:09:26 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/23/2016 4:56 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 11/23/2016 2:34 PM, Muggles wrote:

"the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense,
founded on the Christian religion."

Article XI, Treaty of Tripoli - 1797

This isn't to say people haven't introduced god(s) into discussion. It
means the Government was not founded upon christianity. It is the law
of the land and the official position of our government.

You're wrong, and I've provided quotes in other posts from our founding
fathers themselves.


You gave some quotes of their personal opinions. They are entitled to
have an opinion and use that as a reason to fight for independence. But
the Constitution does not include religion as a part of its core.

Founding fathers were smart enough to give us freedom to pray and
believe as we wish, or not.

Religion is how people seek or relate to God. Religion isn't required
to acknowledge or even mention God, and God/Creator/Divine
Providence/Supreme Judge of the world IS mentioned in the Constitution,
AND given credit for the inspiration and direction the colonists took to
separate from the King of England.


I think Ed suggested you actually go read the Constitution. If you did,
you'd know that God is not mentioned in it. Neither is god in the Bill
of Rights. Please stop embarrassing yourself.



geesh ...

"Done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the
Seventeenth Day of September *in the Year of our Lord* one thousand
seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independence of the United
States of America the Twelfth In witness whereof We have hereunto
subscribed our Names...."
Article VII

http://www.heritage.org/constitution...station-clause

Which side of the argument you stand on regarding this statement is
probably related to your own personal beliefs regarding the role God
played in the foundation of our country.

Here are 2 interesting arguments:

http://joshblackman.com/blog/2012/08...-constitution/

http://www.apologeticspress.org/apco...=7&article=297


Boy, that's as lame as it gets. They are referring to the year, which as
our dating system goes, is AD, meaning "year of the lord". They could

WRONG - the text says: "year of *our* Lord". There's a difference.


How pathetic. Having to try to cling to shreds that aren't even part
of the constitution, but refer to the year. And at the same time, ignoring
what it does clearly say, equal protection under the law for all.

What is CLEARLY does say id "year of *our* Lord". The distinction is
important enough for there to be 2 different camps on WHY the word "our"
was used vs. "the".

You don't really delve into analysis, or the "why" of things very often,
do you?


I don't delve into analysis of one crumb, a reference to god in the date
of signing of a document, while ignoring what the whole document itself
says, no. You have to do that, because it's all
you have. If god was so important, if they wanted religion in govt
meetings, in schools, why isn't it in the constitution or bill of rights?
Why do you have to resort to "year of our lord" 1787, ie 1787 AD as
your sole support? At the same time, you ignore what it clearly
does say, about equal treatment of all. Pathetic.

On 11/26/2016 10:15 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Friday, November 25, 2016 at 11:18:32 AM UTC-5, Cindy Hamilton wrote:

So, tell us your evaluation process, your thought process, and tell us
all about that glorious day when you decided your sexual preference.
You'd be the first.

What don't you get??

What I don't get is that every gay man I've ever known (and I've
known quite a few) said he knew he was attracted to men long
before adolescence. When I was 8 or 9 years old, pining for
Ilya Kuryakin, so were they.

It doesn't wait for adolescence.

And even if it does, so what? That still doesn't mean that one's
sexual attraction is a free choice, made by a decision.

Yes, it does. It also invalidates any claim that anyone is born with a
sexual orientation.

You think just because someone "feels" they're attracted to the same
gender that their only choice is they're obviously gay. They have a
choice in what they will conclude, how they will respond, and which
directly they will take their life.


That's why
M can't explain to us the process, the decision, the day she made
her choice.

You have issues with analysis, and even accepting that there is a
"process of thought", or "decision-making process". You surely wouldn't
be able to GET any detailed explanation of any of those processes.

--
Maggie

On 11/26/2016 11:12 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
On Saturday, November 26, 2016 at 12:04:59 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:

If you're asking whether or not I believe people can change with
therapy, or counseling, then, YES, I do believe people can change. It's
a choice.


So, with sufficient therapy, you could become homosexual? Nope. I
don't believe it.

I'm not easily influenced once I've made a decision, and I made THAT
decision a long time ago.

Many people are easily influenced, though, and some people want to
change while at the same time other people don't want to change for
their own reasons.

Do you really believe people have no choice?

--
Maggie

On 11/26/2016 11:12 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Saturday, November 26, 2016 at 11:53:51 AM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/26/2016 10:09 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Friday, November 25, 2016 at 11:10:19 AM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:

WRONG - the text says: "year of *our* Lord". There's a difference.

How pathetic. Having to try to cling to shreds that aren't even part
of the constitution, but refer to the year. And at the same time, ignoring
what it does clearly say, equal protection under the law for all.

What is CLEARLY does say id "year of *our* Lord". The distinction is
important enough for there to be 2 different camps on WHY the word "our"
was used vs. "the".

You don't really delve into analysis, or the "why" of things very often,
do you?

I don't delve into analysis of one crumb,

Why not? Details like that can affect an outcome or explain an outcome.

Sometimes, analyzing the one crumb will lead to a solution.

a reference to god in the date
of signing of a document, while ignoring what the whole document itself
says, no. You have to do that, because it's all
you have.

No, that's not all I have ... there are plenty of references to God via
the founding fathers and their beliefs in God.

Why even reference "our Lord" at all in the document? Don't you think
all who signed that document saw the reference to "our Lord" when they
signed it? Don't you think they were smart enough to know Jesus was
being referenced? Why would they sign a document referencing Jesus if
it was an issue?

If god was so important, if they wanted religion in govt
meetings, in schools, why isn't it in the constitution or bill of rights?

They wanted FREEDOM of religion, not a government endorsed religion. So,
why not allow such things as prayer in schools or government meetings?
Prayer has been a common thing in many venues up until the last few
years when liberals got control of the courts.

Well, it's time to take back what was taken. We want our freedom of
religion back.

Why do you have to resort to "year of our lord" 1787, ie 1787 AD as
your sole support? At the same time, you ignore what it clearly
does say, about equal treatment of all. Pathetic.


I repeat:
No, that's not all I have ... there are plenty of references to God via
the founding fathers and their beliefs in God.

--
Maggie

On 11/26/2016 11:23 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Saturday, November 26, 2016 at 12:07:36 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/26/2016 10:58 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Saturday, November 26, 2016 at 11:33:21 AM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/26/2016 9:59 AM, trader_4 wrote:

Given that Trump now says the issue of gay marriage is "irrelevant"
and "done", why would what a SC nominee is likely to think about
gay marriage matter to Trump?

You're pretty short sighted, aren't you?


No, not at all. I told you for over a year that Trump wasn't going
to live up to much of his BS,

Trump hasn't even taken office yet. How can he not live up to being
president BEFORE he even takes office???


By telling you right now that:

A - He isn't going to round up 11 mil illegals, US born citizen children
and all and deport them with his "deportation force" that he promised
would be done in a just a year or two. Now he says the criminal ones
will be deported, the rest, well they are good people and we'll have to
treat them fairly, we'll see. That is the Bush, Rubio, Kasich positions
that he vilified those men over.

How do you know what Trump is going to end up doing, or how he will
reach whatever goals he's set? He hasn't even taken office yet, and
there's steps everyone takes to reach any goal. That's basic "goal
setting 101".


--
Maggie

In article ,
says...

How does it feel to be played by the clown?

You should be asking yourself that question right now. Jenn (AKA Muggles)
has been playing you like a fiddle for a long time now. LOL!

--
RonNNN

On 11/26/2016 11:46 AM, Muggles wrote:


EVERYTHING we do is based on a choice we've made.


Choices a steak or chicken sedan or convertible, blue shirt or red
shirt

We are born with and have no choice: natural hair color, sexuality,
number of fingers.

Some people are born with common sense, others not so much.

On Saturday, November 26, 2016 at 10:09:31 AM UTC-6, trader_4 wrote:
On Friday, November 25, 2016 at 11:10:19 AM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/25/2016 8:31 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Thursday, November 24, 2016 at 2:21:29 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/24/2016 9:44 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Wednesday, November 23, 2016 at 6:09:26 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/23/2016 4:56 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 11/23/2016 2:34 PM, Muggles wrote:

"the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense,
founded on the Christian religion."

Article XI, Treaty of Tripoli - 1797

This isn't to say people haven't introduced god(s) into discussion. It
means the Government was not founded upon christianity. It is the law
of the land and the official position of our government.

You're wrong, and I've provided quotes in other posts from our founding
fathers themselves.

You gave some quotes of their personal opinions. They are entitled to
have an opinion and use that as a reason to fight for independence. But
the Constitution does not include religion as a part of its core.

Founding fathers were smart enough to give us freedom to pray and
believe as we wish, or not.

Religion is how people seek or relate to God. Religion isn't required
to acknowledge or even mention God, and God/Creator/Divine
Providence/Supreme Judge of the world IS mentioned in the Constitution,
AND given credit for the inspiration and direction the colonists took to
separate from the King of England.

I think Ed suggested you actually go read the Constitution. If you did,
you'd know that God is not mentioned in it. Neither is god in the Bill
of Rights. Please stop embarrassing yourself.

geesh ...

"Done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the
Seventeenth Day of September *in the Year of our Lord* one thousand
seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independence of the United
States of America the Twelfth In witness whereof We have hereunto
subscribed our Names...."
Article VII
http://www.heritage.org/constitution...station-clause

Which side of the argument you stand on regarding this statement is
probably related to your own personal beliefs regarding the role God
played in the foundation of our country.

Here are 2 interesting arguments:

http://joshblackman.com/blog/2012/08...-constitution/

http://www.apologeticspress.org/apco...=7&article=297

Boy, that's as lame as it gets. They are referring to the year, which as
our dating system goes, is AD, meaning "year of the lord". They could

WRONG - the text says: "year of *our* Lord". There's a difference.

How pathetic. Having to try to cling to shreds that aren't even part
of the constitution, but refer to the year. And at the same time, ignoring
what it does clearly say, equal protection under the law for all.

Why would they use "our", and capitalize "Lord" vs. using "the", which
could refer to the generic dating system? Why use the phrase "our Lord"
at all??

If they were so damn intent of making this a christian nation, why the
hell is the only reference that you can come up with is a lame reference
to the year of the lord in the date? Why isn't it just spelled out in]
one of the articles? Why isn't God or religion mentioned anywhere?
The rest of us know the answer.

The founders weren't just rebelling against the King of England they were rebelling against the tyranny of the Church of England. That's why the Constitution was written the way it was with regards to prohibiting the establishment of an official government religion. We see what happens today with the countries that mix Islam and government. ヽ(à²*_à²*)ノ

[8~{} Uncle Infidel Monster

On 11/26/2016 3:36 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 11/26/2016 11:46 AM, Muggles wrote:


EVERYTHING we do is based on a choice we've made.


Choices a steak or chicken sedan or convertible, blue shirt or red
shirt

Those are things we get to choose.

We are born with and have no choice: natural hair color,

True

sexuality,

We do have a choice with sexuality.

number of fingers.

Some people are born with common sense, others not so much.

Common sense is learned. We aren't born with it.

--
Maggie

On Saturday, November 26, 2016 at 11:32:15 AM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/26/2016 7:00 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
On Friday, November 25, 2016 at 2:20:51 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/25/2016 12:07 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 11/25/2016 11:01 AM, Muggles wrote:

First you claim it involves hormones. Then you tell us it's just a
choice.

What don't you get? It's basic growth of humans... we're born BABIES
having a gender. We have to go through adolescence and at that time our
hormones begin to manifest. At that time we become aware of our
sexuality, AND we make choices based on all the information we're
exposed to. As we mature we become responsible for the choices we make
because the law has set an age of consent and responsibility, which,
doesn't negate the fact that even as children we make choices and are
still responsible for those choices, too.

Our lives are filled with choices and every time we act on anything it's
because we made a choice from our available options.

Many of those choices are from environmental tips we've seen in life but
you are ignoring heredity and genetics as factors in our growth. The way
our body was formed from the union of egg and sperm affects what we are.
It is more than just choices.

How do you explain heredity and genetics when it comes to siblings
turning out completely different from each other? It's the choices they
make individually.


1. Siblings are not genetically identical

That was my point. Combine that with the choices people make and you
have no 2 people who are the same for multiple reasons. It still boils
down to people aren't born gay. It's a result of the choices they make.

2. Epigenetics is a powerful force. You should investigate it.

I have.

I don't know why I bother to reply, really. You can't be reasoned
out of a position that you weren't reasoned into.

If the only reason you respond is to try to change my mind, that's the
wrong reason to respond.

I've no goal to change anyone elses mind when I explain my point of view.

Yet your stated goal is to impose your religion on other people. Forgive
us if we try to dissuade you from that.

Let's do some math. 70.6% of Americans are professed Christian.
29.4% of 318.9 million is... 93.75 million Americans are not Christian.
That's a pretty big number. Too big to allow the majority to ride
roughshod over our rights. Especially given that quite a fair few of
those majority Christians are not opposed to other religions (or to
lack of religion).

Cindy Hamilton

On 11/27/2016 6:38 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
On Saturday, November 26, 2016 at 11:32:15 AM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/26/2016 7:00 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
On Friday, November 25, 2016 at 2:20:51 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 11/25/2016 12:07 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 11/25/2016 11:01 AM, Muggles wrote:

First you claim it involves hormones. Then you tell us it's just a
choice.

What don't you get? It's basic growth of humans... we're born BABIES
having a gender. We have to go through adolescence and at that time our
hormones begin to manifest. At that time we become aware of our
sexuality, AND we make choices based on all the information we're
exposed to. As we mature we become responsible for the choices we make
because the law has set an age of consent and responsibility, which,
doesn't negate the fact that even as children we make choices and are
still responsible for those choices, too.

Our lives are filled with choices and every time we act on anything it's
because we made a choice from our available options.

Many of those choices are from environmental tips we've seen in life but
you are ignoring heredity and genetics as factors in our growth. The way
our body was formed from the union of egg and sperm affects what we are.
It is more than just choices.

How do you explain heredity and genetics when it comes to siblings
turning out completely different from each other? It's the choices they
make individually.


1. Siblings are not genetically identical

That was my point. Combine that with the choices people make and you
have no 2 people who are the same for multiple reasons. It still boils
down to people aren't born gay. It's a result of the choices they make.

2. Epigenetics is a powerful force. You should investigate it.

I have.

I don't know why I bother to reply, really. You can't be reasoned
out of a position that you weren't reasoned into.

If the only reason you respond is to try to change my mind, that's the
wrong reason to respond.

I've no goal to change anyone elses mind when I explain my point of view.


Yet your stated goal is to impose your religion on other people. Forgive
us if we try to dissuade you from that.

You misunderstand. My goal is to take back our religious freedoms. We
want to be ALLOWED to pray in public - that's just one right I want
restored.

Let's do some math. 70.6% of Americans are professed Christian.
29.4% of 318.9 million is... 93.75 million Americans are not Christian.
That's a pretty big number. Too big to allow the majority to ride
roughshod over our rights.

We live in a Constitutional Republic, and our Constitution guarantees
freedom of religion, in addition to, our country was founded on
Christian principles, to which, had been recognized since this countries
birth. It's only been the last decade +/- that liberals have done
everything they can to take our religious freedoms away. We're going to
take them back.

If anyone doesn't like the expression of someone's Christian faith, they
can look away. No one is forcing them to participate.


Especially given that quite a fair few of
those majority Christians are not opposed to other religions (or to
lack of religion).

Our country was based on Christian principles and part of those
principles include freedom of religion.

--
Maggie

Muggles has brought this to us :

You misunderstand. My goal is to take back our religious freedoms. We
want to be ALLOWED to pray in public - that's just one right I want
restored.


Your falsehoods are unending. No one is preventing you from praying in
public. Even in public schools, no one is stopping you from praying.
Likewise, if you choose to pray aloud in public, no one is prevented
from ridiculing you.



Let's do some math. 70.6% of Americans are professed Christian.
29.4% of 318.9 million is... 93.75 million Americans are not Christian.
That's a pretty big number. Too big to allow the majority to ride
roughshod over our rights.

We live in a Constitutional Republic, and our Constitution guarantees
freedom of religion, in addition to, our country was founded on
Christian principles, to which, had been recognized since this countries
birth. It's only been the last decade +/- that liberals have done
everything they can to take our religious freedoms away. We're going to
take them back.

Just how has anyone taken away any of your religious freedoms?
Possibly you are confusing freedoms with special privileges and you are
trying to justify those special privileges with your above revisionist
history.


If anyone doesn't like the expression of someone's Christian faith, they
can look away. No one is forcing them to participate.

Look away? Why can't or shouldn't we openly ridicule you for talking
to your invisible friends? Would you be equally OK with muslims, jews,
wiccans and satanists openly expressing their faith, in the same public
places and at the same time as the christians?



Especially given that quite a fair few of
those majority Christians are not opposed to other religions (or to
lack of religion).

Our country was based on Christian principles and part of those
principles include freedom of religion.


argumentum ad nauseam

(also known as: argument from nagging, proof by assertion)

Description: Repeating an argument or a premise over and over again in
place of better supporting evidence.

On 11/27/2016 11:14 AM, Muggles wrote:


Our country was based on Christian principles and part of those
principles include freedom of religion.


It also implies freedom from religion as we are not forced to join a
church or to worship.