Even if it was explained to you, You wouldn't understand it anyway. I'll do it anyway, here goes. Gay marriage is an child-trafficking operation. It is also unnatural.
Also unnecessary. They already had all the "rights" before "gay marriage" happened...also, gays by and large don't want to get married anyway. It was all a sham to demoralize (as well as de-moralize) and push toxic ideology.
define rights? also quote me on this one. but in certain states it was legal to either fire or not allow gay people employment. and before this, in 2016 gays legit could not get married in certain states. while yes if you wanna get technical getting married isn't a big deal. i'm bi, but i wanna marry a woman. and i can see the inherent pit falls of marriage... especially for men. so i'm rather on the fence on that.
however. other people, gays included should have the right to get married. regardless of how many of them actually get married. also we all know if 60-70% of gays got married. you'd just move the goal post in that time line to making them all pedos. the small amount that wanna get married is just an excuse you assholes pull to justify taking rights away from other people. also what toxic ideology? and how does that effect straight marriages? with the high fucking divorce rates. and cheating. why are you guys judging gay people so much. when most straight people don't have their! shit together.
Two paragraphs of your low-IQ drivel is at least a paragraph too much. I'm not subjecting my loyal braincells to this so early in the day.
also we all know if 60-70% of gays got married.
I will laugh at this though. HAHAHAHA.
"Gay rights," as with a lot of other communist nonsense, is simply another revenge scheme against normal functioning humans by people who hate us. It's not about compassion, it's about getting one over on us, and plenty of them will tell you as much openly.
i don't understand. by which i mean more straight couples fuck more kids then gay couples do. no gay marriage needed for that. just sounds like homophobic bullshit to me. but feel free to make posts i don't agree with. and i'll keep commenting underneath them, great use of my time.
so the per capita argument you dick heads always bring up magically makes all the groups of people you don't like inherently the bad guys. including non-whites, gays, and women... i'm not gonna be a retard and say per-capita means nothing. but it sure seems like per-capita is largely used for things that align with bigots. again i still have yet to figure out how it works. but i'm just saying.
but it sure seems like per-capita is largely used for things that align with bigots. again i still have yet to figure out how it works. but i'm just saying.
What you call bigotry, other people call actually being able to fucking read and understand basic concepts.
If ten people eat ten cheeseburgers, that's ten people having lunch. Per capita, per person, one person eats one cheeseburger. If a different group has five people eat ten cheeseburgers, that's five people having a large lunch. Per capita, per person, one person eats TWO cheeseburgers in that second group.
If you have those two cheeseburger-eater groups, and you're planning on making a lunch for them... Is it going to be more expensive for you to make that lunch if you plan to invite more people from the first group, who eat one cheeseburger per person, or the second group, who eat two cheeseburgers per person, if they're otherwise perfectly identical groups?
Put to a real-world example, if you had to be in a densely packed group of ten people, and all you know is that of the two choices of groups to be packed in with, one group was shown with ten people to arbitrarily kill one person, that is, they have 0.1 murders per capita, 0.1 people killed per person in the group, and the OTHER group you checked had one million people in it, and had 100 murders, that is, 0.0001 murders per capita, 0.0001 people killed per person in the group, which group would you trust more, if all other factors were the same?
Of course, that is assessing and pre-judging someone based on objective provable statistics. Which some people disagree with. Some people say if you see someone coughing and wheezing while yelling "I have COVID!", that they really just need a hug and french kiss, that we shouldn't pre-judge that person for their traits that they are exhibiting to us and treat them like they're sick. Others say that, per capita, a really, really high % of people who show those traits might have COVID, and you probably want at least a mask and some hand sanitizer.
Even if it was explained to you, You wouldn't understand it anyway. I'll do it anyway, here goes. Gay marriage is an child-trafficking operation. It is also unnatural.
Also unnecessary. They already had all the "rights" before "gay marriage" happened...also, gays by and large don't want to get married anyway. It was all a sham to demoralize (as well as de-moralize) and push toxic ideology.
define rights? also quote me on this one. but in certain states it was legal to either fire or not allow gay people employment. and before this, in 2016 gays legit could not get married in certain states. while yes if you wanna get technical getting married isn't a big deal. i'm bi, but i wanna marry a woman. and i can see the inherent pit falls of marriage... especially for men. so i'm rather on the fence on that.
however. other people, gays included should have the right to get married. regardless of how many of them actually get married. also we all know if 60-70% of gays got married. you'd just move the goal post in that time line to making them all pedos. the small amount that wanna get married is just an excuse you assholes pull to justify taking rights away from other people. also what toxic ideology? and how does that effect straight marriages? with the high fucking divorce rates. and cheating. why are you guys judging gay people so much. when most straight people don't have their! shit together.
Two paragraphs of your low-IQ drivel is at least a paragraph too much. I'm not subjecting my loyal braincells to this so early in the day.
I will laugh at this though. HAHAHAHA.
"Gay rights," as with a lot of other communist nonsense, is simply another revenge scheme against normal functioning humans by people who hate us. It's not about compassion, it's about getting one over on us, and plenty of them will tell you as much openly.
i don't understand. by which i mean more straight couples fuck more kids then gay couples do. no gay marriage needed for that. just sounds like homophobic bullshit to me. but feel free to make posts i don't agree with. and i'll keep commenting underneath them, great use of my time.
I'd tell you to look up 'per capita' a few hundred more times, but you still wouldn't get it.
Oh, and your ceiling bird says you're retarded.
so the per capita argument you dick heads always bring up magically makes all the groups of people you don't like inherently the bad guys. including non-whites, gays, and women... i'm not gonna be a retard and say per-capita means nothing. but it sure seems like per-capita is largely used for things that align with bigots. again i still have yet to figure out how it works. but i'm just saying.
What you call bigotry, other people call actually being able to fucking read and understand basic concepts.
Do better.
God you're a fucking retard.
"Per-capita" means "per person".
If ten people eat ten cheeseburgers, that's ten people having lunch. Per capita, per person, one person eats one cheeseburger. If a different group has five people eat ten cheeseburgers, that's five people having a large lunch. Per capita, per person, one person eats TWO cheeseburgers in that second group.
If you have those two cheeseburger-eater groups, and you're planning on making a lunch for them... Is it going to be more expensive for you to make that lunch if you plan to invite more people from the first group, who eat one cheeseburger per person, or the second group, who eat two cheeseburgers per person, if they're otherwise perfectly identical groups?
Put to a real-world example, if you had to be in a densely packed group of ten people, and all you know is that of the two choices of groups to be packed in with, one group was shown with ten people to arbitrarily kill one person, that is, they have 0.1 murders per capita, 0.1 people killed per person in the group, and the OTHER group you checked had one million people in it, and had 100 murders, that is, 0.0001 murders per capita, 0.0001 people killed per person in the group, which group would you trust more, if all other factors were the same?
Of course, that is assessing and pre-judging someone based on objective provable statistics. Which some people disagree with. Some people say if you see someone coughing and wheezing while yelling "I have COVID!", that they really just need a hug and french kiss, that we shouldn't pre-judge that person for their traits that they are exhibiting to us and treat them like they're sick. Others say that, per capita, a really, really high % of people who show those traits might have COVID, and you probably want at least a mask and some hand sanitizer.
Go back to preddit.
i will use both this and reddit. i can walk and read at the same time ya know.