Romney Bullied Gay Student in HS and REPEALS Marriage Equality

55 posts

Flag Post

Romney Repaling Marriage Equality: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRN9Y5Nvdqk
Romney Bullied HS Student on Because he was gay: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6nvalk89Uxs

This is just stupid. Why? Because I’m homosexual, and a lot of other people are too. And trust me, no matter who you are, he’ll find a reason to mess up your future. He really ticks me off.

 
Flag Post

Isn’t it a curiosity how Romney was very for gay rights in 1994 but not today? Because there is no way MASSACHUSETTS would get a homophobe into federal office nowadays (or at least not often). So of course, Romney was on that bandwagon in the 1990s.

But today? Today this man is against gay rights on the most part, mostly because he is appealing to conservative audiences. This man uses whatever political position he can to garner votes. He does not have official positions; he does whatever will get him elected.

 
Flag Post

I really don’t see what the big deal is here. If a gay couple want to get married let them. Governments shouldn’t have to say that two people can’t get married. Let the church’s get shunned for not allowing gay marriage

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by basicbasic:

I really don’t see what the big deal is here. If a gay couple want to get married let them. Governments shouldn’t have to say that two people can’t get married. Let the church’s get shunned for not allowing gay marriage

Thank you! Exactly, I thought we were all in charge of our own lives, this is a case where they are deciding things for us and controlling our lives.

 
Flag Post

Gay couple cant have kids and the world is becoming overpopulated…
We should encourage people to be gay!
…Well maybe not but give them full equality

 
Flag Post

We can’t encourage people to be gay. Natural attraction doesn’t work like that.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by vikaTae:

We can’t encourage people to be gay. Natural attraction doesn’t work like that.

After my time at university…I found that some girls given enough alochol and encouragment were more than ‘eager’ to become ‘gay’ for a night.

Bit a of a troll comment, but I had to throw it in.

 
Flag Post

Ethanol overrides natural inhibitions in brain circuitry – as you well know. Get a straight guy drunk enough and the same thing will occur.

It’s when they are sober and in full control of their faculties that matters.

 
Flag Post

:starts dissection: I heard this guy getting trashed on the radio for being ex-gay by another guest. He had this website with lots of ex-gay testimonials.

http://www.voices-of-change.org/

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Beegum:

:starts dissection: I heard this guy getting trashed on the radio for being ex-gay by another guest. He had this website with lots of ex-gay testimonials.

http://www.voices-of-change.org/

Ya’re CONFUSING actual, REAL Gay “behavior” w/ that of straight ppl who behaved as Gays because of: “….they speak for the many Americans and people around the world for whom homosexuality is not naturally inborn. Sadly, the causes of their homosexual feelings were caused by gender identity inferiority, unmet emotional needs, and/or emotional and sexual abuse, usually as very young children.”

THERE IS A HUGE DIFFERENCE.

Besides, who is to say that similar, the same, or other such STRONG “pressures” don’t erroneously “convert” real Gays….many of which acquiesce simply because they are tired of dealing w/ all of the negativity being heaped upon them?

People are able to convince themselves of all manner of things for all manner of reasons. A very few aren’t representative of the vast many. YOUR link proves nothing and certainly is a poor attempt to do so.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by karmakoolkid:
Originally posted by Beegum:

:starts dissection: I heard this guy getting trashed on the radio for being ex-gay by another guest. He had this website with lots of ex-gay testimonials.

http://www.voices-of-change.org/

Ya’re CONFUSING actual, REAL Gay “behavior” w/ that of straight ppl who behaved as Gays because of: “….they speak for the many Americans and people around the world for whom homosexuality is not naturally inborn. Sadly, the causes of their homosexual feelings were caused by gender identity inferiority, unmet emotional needs, and/or emotional and sexual abuse, usually as very young children.”

THERE IS A HUGE DIFFERENCE.


Besides, who is to say that similar, the same, or other such STRONG “pressures” don’t erroneously “convert” real Gays….many of which acquiesce simply because they are tired of dealing w/ all of the negativity being heaped upon them?


People are able to convince themselves of all manner of things for all manner of reasons. A very few aren’t representative of the vast many. YOUR link proves nothing and certainly is a poor attempt to do so.

I can see that you’re angry. I have met many gay marriage advocates that detest the existence of ex-gays who dare to testify to their experience of same sex attraction as a symptom of an emotional deficiency.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Beegum:

I can see that you’re angry.

What the fuck kind of lame-ass defense of a shitty position about Gays is THAT? Do I have to do what I did to jake-o and lecture YOU on the difference between “anger” and CONCERN? Get a grip here. I think most on this thread are here because they have CONCERNS about this issue. The ratinoal ppl having real concerns about how Gays are treated….namely, having their CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS heinously trampled on.

I have met many gay marriage advocates that detest the existence of ex-gays who dare to testify to their experience of same sex attraction as a symptom of an emotional deficiency.

AGAIN, is this “many” of YOURS any significant number that can be anywhere near being notably significant in the whole scheme of Gay Rights?

I certainly don’t “detest” these PARTICULAR “ex-Gays”. I did cite YOUR link as the likely reasons for them being “ex-Gays”.

It appears that what YOU are saying is that ya concede that Gays are born that way, but then can develop//be empowered by therapy some magical ability to “change teams”? What a crock….lol

 
Flag Post

I agree with karma. I have concerns that some people are just stubbornly bigoted.
Does it need to be said again that homosexuality amongst other species has been documented and studied?
Are these animals suffering from emotional defiency? I doubt there are any credible scientists that would agree with that nonsense.
The fact that some ‘homosexuals’ have been able to be turned ‘straight’ says nothing except maybe these ‘homosexuals’ are in the worse kind of denial or were merely experimenting.
At the end of the day, homosexuality has been around since the dawn of man…and it has nothing to do with ‘emotional deficiency’…except for maybe the Spartans lol.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by karmakoolkid:
Originally posted by Beegum:

I can see that you’re angry.

What the fuck kind of lame-ass defense of a shitty position about Gays is THAT? Do I have to do what I did to jake-o and lecture YOU on the difference between “anger” and CONCERN? Get a grip here. I think most on this thread are here because they have CONCERNS about this issue. The ratinoal ppl having real concerns about how Gays are treated….namely, having their CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS heinously trampled on.


I have met many gay marriage advocates that detest the existence of ex-gays who dare to testify to their experience of same sex attraction as a symptom of an emotional deficiency.

AGAIN, is this “many” of YOURS any significant number that can be anywhere near being notably significant in the whole scheme of Gay Rights?

I certainly don’t “detest” these PARTICULAR “ex-Gays”. I did cite YOUR link as the likely reasons for them being “ex-Gays”.


It appears that what YOU are saying is that ya concede that Gays are born that way, but then can develop//be empowered by therapy some magical ability to “change teams”? What a crock….lol

I barely wrote anything, how do you have so many accusations to make already?

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by JaumeBG:

Isn’t it a curiosity how Romney was very for gay rights in 1994 but not today? Because there is no way MASSACHUSETTS would get a homophobe into federal office nowadays (or at least not often). So of course, Romney was on that bandwagon in the 1990s.

But today? Today this man is against gay rights on the most part, mostly because he is appealing to conservative audiences. This man uses whatever political position he can to garner votes. He does not have official positions; he does whatever will get him elected.

So Romney can change his views from 18 years ago and you criticize him, but the President can “evolve” on gay marriage in four years and it’s no big deal? Got it.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by issendorf:
Originally posted by JaumeBG:

Isn’t it a curiosity how Romney was very for gay rights in 1994 but not today? Because there is no way MASSACHUSETTS would get a homophobe into federal office nowadays (or at least not often). So of course, Romney was on that bandwagon in the 1990s.

But today? Today this man is against gay rights on the most part, mostly because he is appealing to conservative audiences. This man uses whatever political position he can to garner votes. He does not have official positions; he does whatever will get him elected.

So Romney can change his views from 18 years ago and you criticize him, but the President can “evolve” on gay marriage in four years and it’s no big deal? Got it.

When his candidate does it, the candidate’s views are evolving. When your candidate does it, he’s flip flopping around.

 
Flag Post

Ohmaigawd is right. More hypocrisy from the left. And JaumeBG, can I say you’re a bigot against religion if you support gay marriage? How does having a different opinion suddenly make you a homophobe. Annoying leftists and their “political correctness.”

 
Flag Post

Okay, Darear….what do YOU call the ideology of someone who espouses the denial of a person’s CONSTITUTIONAL CIVIL RIGHTS?

Tell me…just what is this ideology based upon?
Surely it isn’t all that hard to demonstrate,,,,
after all…it’s all about a very, VERY serious issues.
One would think such an issue would have some serious reasons for opposition?
SO….what—other than being homophobic—could a “sane” person have up their sleeve that is in any way some form of rational for this denial of rights?

C’mon now, it really shouldn’t be all that hard to come up w/ something.
We’ve been hashing out this issue for days on end.
YOU need to quite being the hypocrite YOURSELF and give us a plausible answer.

 
This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator
 
This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator
 
This post has been removed by an administrator or moderator
 
Flag Post
Originally posted by issendorf:
Originally posted by JaumeBG:

Isn’t it a curiosity how Romney was very for gay rights in 1994 but not today? Because there is no way MASSACHUSETTS would get a homophobe into federal office nowadays (or at least not often). So of course, Romney was on that bandwagon in the 1990s.

But today? Today this man is against gay rights on the most part, mostly because he is appealing to conservative audiences. This man uses whatever political position he can to garner votes. He does not have official positions; he does whatever will get him elected.

So Romney can change his views from 18 years ago and you criticize him, but the President can “evolve” on gay marriage in four years and it’s no big deal? Got it.

Might have something to do with the one guy’s views being justifiable, while the other ones aren’t in a political context.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by EPR89:
Originally posted by issendorf:
Originally posted by JaumeBG:

Isn’t it a curiosity how Romney was very for gay rights in 1994 but not today? Because there is no way MASSACHUSETTS would get a homophobe into federal office nowadays (or at least not often). So of course, Romney was on that bandwagon in the 1990s.

But today? Today this man is against gay rights on the most part, mostly because he is appealing to conservative audiences. This man uses whatever political position he can to garner votes. He does not have official positions; he does whatever will get him elected.

So Romney can change his views from 18 years ago and you criticize him, but the President can “evolve” on gay marriage in four years and it’s no big deal? Got it.

Might have something to do with the one guy’s views being justifiable, while the other ones aren’t in a political context.

So if it opposes your personal view, it’s automatically unjustifiable and wrong? So I guess using that logic to me, Obama’s views are unjustifiable and Romney’s views are very justifiable.

“In a political context.” So Obama’s views are okay because he is pandering to gays by “evolving” on the issue of gay marriage to get their votes while Romney’s personal views when he was not running for any office, had changed two decades ago? That doesn’t make much sense.

 
Flag Post

Karma called you out already.
Justify why gay marriage should not be equal to legal marriage between heterosexual partners.
If you don’t see why a position that can not be justified matters in a political context when someone is running for president I have no choice but to question your intelligence.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by EPR89:

Karma called you out already.
Justify why gay marriage should not be equal to legal marriage between heterosexual partners.
If you don’t see why a position that can not be justified matters in a political context when someone is running for president I have no choice but to question your intelligence.

Really EPR89? I thought you were at least above karma’s level. Define what you mean “justified matters in a political context.”

Alright anyway, gay marriage should not be equal to legal marriage between heterosexual partners because marriage is the one institution bonding one man and one woman and has been that way for thousands of years. It’s traditionally and religiously based. Don’t you think at least one holy institution should be protected especially if many people feel that gay marriage goes against their religious beliefs and convictions?

Gays have every right to be together. They also have civil unions which confer the same benefits that married couples have. However the problem is that marriage to many people is still rooted in religious convictions and is a problem of morality and ethics.