Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

The answer to whether or not gay marriage is deleterious to the children a gay couple decide to adopt as presented by Supreme Justice Scalia to the lawyer representing the petitioner in Hollingsworth vs. Perry is that the gay couple don't don't give a sh*t if their civil union is deleterious to the children or not or not.

Gay people happen to be the most selfish, self-centered, dysfunctional people there are, and if their civil union ends up being deleterious or not really doesn't really concern them. It's about *them* not anyone else.

If anyone else ends up being hurt , socially, psychologically, mentally, sexually, so be it.

Don't forget, this gay couple will do anything to have their adopted kids follow the same lifestyle patterns the single gay couples do. Don't you dare tell me that they wouldn't do whatever they could to have their adopted kids choose their won sexuality even if it meant going against their own sexual preferences.

Justice Ginsburg:I'd Prefer the Egyptian or South African Constitution to the US

Judge Ginsburg:Please let me know if the Egyptian Constitution allows for gay couples to adopt.
Usually, I'd advise women traveling in Egypt to have bodyguards accompany them to prevent crime of a sexual nature but that's not any poblem you would ever have to worry about it.

1 posted on 03/26/2013 10:41:47 PM PDT by lbryce
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-24 last
To: lbryce

But the evidence was so overwhelming for global warming that he mandated the EPA be given power to fix it. This guy wouldn’t recognize “science” if he saw it.


34 posted on 03/27/2013 6:29:47 AM PDT by ThePatriotsFlag ( EVERY DIME Obama Spends is given to him by the Republicans in the House.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: lbryce

I’m sorry, but using the term “oral arguments’ when discussing faggots is not exactly kosher IMO.


38 posted on 03/27/2013 7:40:27 AM PDT by zeugma (Those of us who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: lbryce
That is an asinine argument for a SCOTUS judge to make. Either a right exists or it does not. “But what about the children? Won't anyone think of the CHILDREN!” (a la the Ms. Rev. Lovejoy) is not an argument to base where to put the line between government's limited and enumerated powers and the rights of the people.

How about a “scientific answer” (so called, although no actual science applies in either case - social ‘science’ polling is not science) on if guns in the home is harmful to children? How about the effects on the children from a advocate of unpopular opinions exercising his right to free speech?

41 posted on 03/27/2013 8:39:15 AM PDT by allmendream (Tea Party did not send GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: lbryce
What about God's answer?

 
Marriage = One Man and One Woman
Til' Death Do Us Part

44 posted on 03/27/2013 9:40:41 AM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-24 last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson