‘DEHUMANIZING’ GAYS? JUSTICE SCALIA DEFENDS HIS VIEWS ON BANNING GAY MARRIAGE DURING PRINCETON SPEECH

The term "liberal" means "free" "licentious" "unrestrained", etc., whereas the term "libertarian" springs from the word "liberty" (something true patriots claim to hold dear). I would say the liberal is free in a moral sense, while the libertarian aspires to liberty in an intellectual and societal sense. Just because the two words share the same first three letters does not mean that they are in any way the same.

Scalia is a fascist in the strictist Mussilinian sense. His philosophy comes from the school of Goebbels; any reference to "morals" from this man is an obfuscation and heresy employed to run circles around scared little fundies like Susie. Its so depressing to see how easily he succeeds.

Susie, you should know by now that Christ's "morals" are but simply described in Luke 10:27:Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself.


Please attempt to live up to your screen name.

It boils down to this. It is an evil agenda to destroy the family unit and the destruction of the moral fabric of the country. TPTB do not care what you diddle. It is the destruction of the country they are looking for so they can take over... And you perverted fools fall for it hook, line and sinker.

Do you not think that after they get what they want, they will not get rid of you noisome people? You are just useless eaters getting them closer to their agenda.

Scalia is an insufferable self-admiring blowhard known well for his mindless arrogant aggression effects the very suit he wears as an animated unwilling oppressed rage-filled hostage.

A implies B, therefore 7? Your logic roughly fits this construct.

Ill give you the PTB have an agenda, and destroying community, family and productive citizens (ie middle class) are most probably a large part of the means thereof. What in your favourite deity's name does letting gay couples pledge themselves to "honour and cherish" each other (and support and maintain each other so you and I dont have to) do to further that agenda?

Those are Commandments..

GOD's Morals has not changed.....

What about discernment? Is it ok with you if I discern that somebody might be trying to mislead me? Would it alright with you if I don't want to hang with anyone who might harm me? How am I to know if I'm in danger if I don't weigh all the circumstances surrounding me?

Right-o, whittle away at separation of church and state while taking open possession of state affairs involving human behavior that is sure-fire polarized fodder for zealots.

You people are so blind to what's really going on and you'll be first on the menu.

Scalia's opinions on state matters is not in his job description. Fat man is out of line. You would do well to separate what laws protect state sovereignty before you're eaten alive. You're cooperating with your own undoing and not by the mechanisms you think you are.

This sh*t makes me furious.

Sums it all up.

So. You support let it all hang out and scrub all laws which tried to make a civilized society out of savages? This is where the agenda is going. lawlessness...

Sums it all up.

Not making a judgment call means the ego is not concerned with sin, there isn't an moral compass within self and decay and/or disaster sets in ones life. There are consequences for good and bad judgment.

The proper guideline for judgment and decisions is, "do unto others as you would have them do unto you".
If more people practiced this, our world would be a much better place with a lot less hardship.

Damn corrupted ego's won't allow that key to unlock the world from misery and its moral decay.

Last Edited by goldielucks on 12/12/2012 01:32 AM

"Judge righteous judgement"

What?, Lesbians have sperm and have anal sex with penis's ?????

I dont think they are lesbian at all!

this issue does nothing to further any agendas it is a sleight of hand move plain and simple, it is selatious so it keeps people occupied...people will still be screaming about it when they start conscripting us

In addition how do you even begin to teach Kids about the Morality of *Homosexuality*????

There is a set of Standards attached to *heterosexuality*

You can teach your Kids

Save yourself for marriage remain a virgin

If you refrain from sexual relations before you get married you will not risk an un-planned pregnancy or a STD.

You can teach a daughter that if she remains a virgin on her wedding night when she has sexual relations the breaking of her hymen will mean she is no longer a virgin and has made a covenant with her husband..

Point being there is a Set of Moral Standards attached to Heterosexuality and Marriage


In Homosexuality there is NONE because it has always been from day 1.... IMMORAL.

No one is trying to ban you fudge packers from sticking your Johnson inside of a feces caked rectum


Seriously.....are all of you Libtards brains rotten?....can you not use logic and common sense


You prob patted yourself on the back after writing this post ...thinking that you had just made this awesome point


I'm a Christian and I think homosexuality is a sin ... But I believe you have the right to engage in mentally disturbed activity like anal sex

Got it? ..... You think you so smart and you are dumber then a rock

I seriously can't wait until I've passed and I don't have to deal with you imbeciles running the planet now

Gods gonna burn this place down ...I can't wait

And what percentage of women who get married are still virgins? I would be willing to bet under 25%. Add in the divorce rate between hetro couples and screaming about morality is pretty lame.

The government intrudes into our personal lives to much already. They have no business saying who can marry who. That should be up to each church to decide.

Fuck off with the gay shit. Everyone is Dehumanized in some way. Its called life. These gay people should grow a pair. Why should i give them more attention then the average joe.

Last Edited by Dapurps on 12/12/2012 01:51 AM

Marriage is not a *Right*

Just like a Driver's License is not a *Right*

The States have a set of Standards for Marriage that is why:
Polygamous
Incestous
Child
Marraiges are all illegal.

The reason the Gov't is involved IMO is that Men and Women will make a commitment to one another and take care of their own children, instead of leaving children to the state to care for....

It behooves the Gov't for Men and Women to stay married and take care of their kids....

Although many people think marriage is a right, it is in fact a license limited to those who meet the qualifications.

A primary qualification of marriage is that the two parties are of the opposite sex. There are other qualifications, such as not allowing brothers and sisters to get married.

The state has an interest in making sure those who seek licenses actually qualify.

Otherwise, I could declare that I am a lawyer or a doctor or a licensed plumber.

Excellent Point!

Good Points!-

The only Living Document part of the Constitution is that part of the Constitution that allows for the Amending of that self same Constitution by the process of Constitutional Amendments properly and fully ratified by either the People or the State Legislatures. And that part that allows for the ratification of International Treaties that Congress has approved, such Treaties do in face become a part of the Law of the Land, an effective addition to the US Constitution.

In that sense only is the US Constitution not 'dead, dead, dead...' as Scalia seems to be stating.

But Scalia,imho, is right on the money about the "Reduction to the Absurd level".. dehumanize murder, rape, theft..

or perhaps even laws against such things need not be 'dehumanizing' as HUMANS tend to break laws and by that process dehumanize themselves in their own eyes.

Since it is Human to do these things (break whatever laws) it could be argued that such as commit these acts are not being dehumanized, but rather further confirmation of the fact they are all too human.

However, most liberals are gay.

So when exactly did this place become Christ-tard central?

Comparing the moral value of laws against sodomy to laws against murder demonstrates just how clueless Scalia is to principles of non-aggression and self-determination. Scalia and his intellectually impaired followers here are as un-American as Barry O himself.

Homosexuals are mentally ill. This does not excuse their behavior, however it is the reason for their anti-nature acts. Instead of promoting homosexuality as normal we should be working to cure all homosexuals. Factual information on homosexuality as a mental disorder is being suppressed. Instead, you will be told by idiotic psychologists that there is nothing wrong with homosexuality and that it should be accepted.

Why then currently is Adultery not seen as illegal in a court of most States nor in the Federal Courts?

The One vs the Other vs the Few vs the Many vs the All. To often only cast as the One vs the All.

I have said for a long time that Morals are only those sets of Laws the God, Gods and or Goddesses impose upon Mankind individually and collectively simply because such are vastly more powerful that all of mankind collectively, even if mankind grows in numbers to be the sand of the Universe in numbers, teh Higher Powers will always be able to Dedicate to Mankind and Enforce their own wills upon mankind.

Laws are what man make among themselves.

Morals are totally a Religious, faith, spiritual issue.


Mankind pretends as if The Rule of Law were a God.

Homosexuality was removed from the DSM (standard book on mental disorders) by political pressure, intimidation, and Evelyn Hooker's poorly done study (not worth the paper it was printed on, bad methodology). Homosexuality is still a mental illness (conscious and/or subconscious phobia towards intimacy with the opposite sex). Don't believe the mainstream academic/media/psychologist dingbats who claim homosexuality is normal. Every argument for homosexuality being a normal, natural, healthy alternative to heterosexuality has been soundly refuted elsewhere.

AS AN OBJECTIVIST (a libertarian with a brain ) I think its fine if gays want to get married, but not legally.
Don't think its something society should subsidize, is all.
And thats the rub, gays want the money, they want the benefits that marrieds derive from the work involved in
marriage.
As a lifetime single I don't have a problem with a
tradidtional married couple getting more than me, they earn it.
Gays should be patient, show that they can create stable unions before getting the benefits.
Thats not the case now.
Every society on earth beleives marriage is a certain thing, an institution that creates children and estates.
The world is what it is

Gay people can't maintain monogamous relationships. Even long-time partners allow for sex outside of their relationship.