Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex marriage

Judged:

8

8

8

lides wrote:

<quoted text>
Thank you. That was long, awkward, and pointless.
Why wouldn't LGBT organizations seeking to disseminate information necessary to help stop the spread of AIDS advertise on a website dedicated to the same topic? You certainly aren't the sharpest knife in the drawer.
Your bush league tactics to attempt to tar all homosexuals with the same brush are the equivalent of saying that all Muslims are like the radical Muslims involved in 9-11. They aren't. Most are peaceful, deeply faithful people, who view the attacks with as much shock and horror as the rest of us.
i have no fear of you ever wielding any real power in this debate, because your generalizations, off topic ramblings, and inflammatory rhetoric expose you for the hack that you really are.

Why wouldn't LGBT organizations seeking to disseminate information necessary to help stop the spread of AIDS advertise on a website dedicated to the same topic? You certainly aren't the sharpest knife in the drawer.

Judged:

8

8

8

Bruno wrote:

I think I saw Dan "the condom man", Lides, Swifter and Sly in the paper as they struted and pranced down the street in the Gay Pride Parade in Frisco Sunday. I wasn't too far off in dicribing your outfit Condom Man ... LMAO
Qustion: how can anyone take you homos seriously when you act the fools and clowns that you really are???? I say NO to SSM, this country doesn't need any more bullshit

Judged:

6

6

6

Prof Marvel wrote:

<quoted text>
Don't take this personally, RN, but I have a rule regarding stupid comments -- I don't respond to them. I mention this because it's now painfully clear you're not very intelligent.
For example, directly above you write what is surely the dumbest comment of the year:
<quoted text>
Now, anyone with an IQ over 50 would immediately see you rebut your own indictment -- My parents signed me in at 17.
DUR ...
You were too stupid to see it. You're too stupid to see most of the holes in your arguments and it's reached the point where I'm no longer willing to waste my precious time showing you these holes.
You're a dumb lesbian without an education, decent job, or willingness to improve yourself. You're also an LGBT ideologue and a shockingly unread one at that.
There's no purpose in discussing anything of consequence with you. Your response to everything is already known because it's scripted.
This being the way things are, forgive me if I start ignoring your dumber comments. As I say, there's nothing either new or interesting in them and much that's so astonishingly stupid I'd lower the bar by responding.

Judged:

6

6

6

Bruno wrote:

<quoted text>
I know a lesbian couple that raised their two children, both kids graduated from Cal Universities at the very top of their class. Today they are troubled, selfish bratts that have forgotten all the sacrifice that was given up to help them along in life. They both have nothing to do with their lesbian parents.

Judged:

7

7

7

RnL2008 wrote:

<quoted text>
Then EVERYONE should ignore you......BECAUSE EVERY POST YOU MAKE IS STUPID OR UNTRUE!!!
That's not what you said and it still had NOTHING to do with my gender or the topic of discussion.....now, did it?
I know.....you don't want to respond to me because I show you the fallacies in your posts.....that's okay.....I understand!!!
I'm more intelligent than you think.......but please.....don't let that stop you from posting your BULL SHIET LIES AND RHETORIC!!!

Judged:

7

7

7

Prof Marvel wrote:

<quoted text>
There's stupid and then there's "retarded," RN.
If I write I was in Nam when I was 17 and you respond I couldn't have been in Nam when I was 17 because a 17 year old requires his parents signature to join the Army, that's not stupid, that's the kind of response a retarted person would give.
And you said it.
And it convinced me you're some kind of SPECIAL EDUCATION ward of the state who logs-in when your care-taker's back is turned.
That's all.

Judged:

6

6

6

Prof Marvel wrote:

<quoted text>
And they were wondering why I call straights who support same-sex marriage morons. Look what this one wrote directly above:
<quoted text>
This unbelievable moron is talking about rent-a-boy's ad which links to a website containing naked boys available for rent. Don't ask me why he calls it "information necessary to help stop the spread of AIDS"; it would probably make me as big a moron as he is if I tried to explain why he thinks an ad for sex with teenage boys does that.
In fact, let's have him explain it.
You have the floor, Lides.
Break it down for us, bro.
http://www.ccaa.org/pump.html

Judged:

7

7

7

lides wrote:

<quoted text>
What's to breakdown? You have no valid case against equal protection of the law for same sex couples so instead you offer witless and irrelevant rhetoric in a childish attempt to inflame the discussion.
Feel free to come up with a relevant and intelligent argument for your position. I don't think you are capable of doing so.

Judged:

7

6

6

RnL2008 wrote:

<quoted text>
I thought you stated you were not going to respond to me any more.....and here ya are......lol!!!
First off....your comment about being in a rifle company in Nam at 17 had NOTHING to do with the discussion.......and if ya had bothered to read my comment......you'd have seen that I stated PARENTAL CONSENT.....which indicates you were a MINOR or CHILD. See, I enlisted in the Navy at 17 years old.....my father signed the papers......what relevance does that have to the discussion....NOT A DAMN THING.....and neither did yours!!!
If your parents NEEDED to sign for you.....THEN you were NOT an adult......and my point was that anyone under the age of 18 is a CHILD OR MINOR!!!
Look stupid.....I served in the Navy, I have degrees at every level of College and my Master thesis is published.......now, KINDLY SHUT YOUR STUPID MOUTH......and either make some comment with regard to the topic or get lost!!!

Judged:

6

6

5

Prof Marvel wrote:

<quoted text>
You, sir, are the poster child for narrow-minded fools.

Judged:

6

6

6

Prof Marvel wrote:

<quoted text>
I think I get your drift.
17 is old enough to be in a combat zone rifle company, but if a gay male has sex with you, he's having sex with a child.
That your point, Brainiac?

Judged:

7

7

7

RnL2008 wrote:

<quoted text>
And your post has what to do with my comment to Marvel? ABSOLUTELY NOT A DAMN THING!!!

Judged:

6

6

6

Prof Marvel wrote:

<quoted text>
Back to the 14th Amendment, huh, Lides?
Good thing that, because the moment you try to ad lib it, you make a complete and utter jackass of yourself.
Of course I knew you were a mental fly-weight all along; I just wanted to draw you out so everyone else could see it.
You didn't disappoint.
The exercise was so simple one of your classmates in your high school Civics class -- of average intelligence -- would have given a rational response. It was the link to the gay-run Cambridge youth agency website showing a link to rent-a-boy website.
This is an outrageous breech of public trust, not to mention supreme stupidity on the part of the yout agency in allowing such an overt show of support to such vile, and exploitative human sex traffickers as the rent-a-boy pimps.
Clicking on the link takes to you page after page of naked teenage boys "for rent."
This was no outreach for sex workers; this was a blatant effort to drive traffic to rent-a-boy.com -- high-tech pimping -- but rather than call it for what it was, Lides, you responded with patented, delusional claptrap about how the ad was there to get help to the naked teens selling their bodies.
Well, exactly how does that work, Lides? How does a link to galavanting, half-nude teens for rent help these teens get out of the hell of male prostitution?
Break it down for us, Lides. Walk us through it.
And now -- after your supreme stupidity has been pointed out to you -- you want to break off all discussion on the matter and return to the 14th Amendment.
Dumb teenagers like you often do that when they're in over their heads, Lides -- break and run like rabbits.

Judged:

6

6

6

Bruno wrote:

<quoted text>
Rose dear, my comment has everything to do with the last line of your rant. Gay / lesbian couples can runin children. They tend to resent that fact that they were brought up by SS couples but I don't think want to admit to it.

Judged:

8

7

7

RnL2008 wrote:

<quoted text>
For someone who keeps insisting he's not responding to me anymore......you sure keep responding......lol!!!
18 years old is old enough to serve your Country, die for your Country......but one can't drink on a Military Base anymore until the age of 21......your point?
You were 17 years old and your parents had to sign for you in order for you to enlist....which means you WERE NOT ABLE TO GIVE CONSENT on your own. That by definition made you a CHILD or a MINOR......and that is the law....always has been UNLESS you became AN EMANCIPATED ADULT through the courts.....then you would be considered an adult before the age of 18!!!
I don't have sex with Gay men or men period.....but let's say for argument sake that if a man had sex with me and I was under the age of 18.....IT WOULD BE CONSIDERED STATUTORY RAPE......even if I gave consent because I would still be considered a MINOR!!!
Got that?

Judged:

8

8

7

lides wrote:

<quoted text>
Face it Prof, you lack a rational basis for your arguments, so you return to irrelevant inflammatory rhetoric. If you had more than a pea brain, you could stay on topic, but instead you are obsessed with rent-a-boy. If you spent any time on their website, you might notice that they are very concerned with disseminating information about preventing the spread of STDs. Every website that you feign shock and rage that they would advertise on has been addressing the same topic.
One wonders why you spend so much time an energy looking at such websites.
As for the 14th Amendment argument, it is still apt, and you have never come close to refuting it. In fact, most often, you don't even try.

Judged:

8

7

7

lides wrote:

<quoted text>
Feel free to back up your BS with some cold hard facts. I don't think you're able to do so.

Judged:

6

6

5

Bruno wrote:

<quoted text>
Rose dear, my comment has everything to do with the last line of your rant. Gay / lesbian couples can runin children. They tend to resent that fact that they were brought up by SS couples but I don't think want to admit to it.

Judged:

6

6

5

Prof Marvel wrote:

<quoted text>
Depends on where you live, genius -- point being below the age of majority and childhood are not the same thing.
The age of majority in Armenia is 14; in Scotland it's 16. Right here in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands it's 14.
In other words -- despite your half dozen Masters Degrees -- you never learned what the term "Age of Majority" means.
It doesn't mean a 17 year old is a child, it merely means in cases of law, the 17 year old is treated as a minor.
Or maybe you think the people of Scotland, Armenia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands and half a dozen other places are all wrong and you right?
Is that it, Einstein?