California Proposition 8

[Mare Tranquillity]

This is the kind of thing fostered by the mindset of the Sihouette's of the world, people get killed for nothing. Transgendered people aren't necessarily gay, we have the same approximate percentage of gay/straight people as the general population.


GREELEY, Colo. — A man who claimed he snapped before killing a transgender woman was swiftly convicted of first-degree murder and a hate crime Tuesday for savagely beating the woman with a fire extinguisher.

Andrade's attorney didn't deny that Andrade had killed Zapata but said had just learned Zapata's identity after spending hours with her and lashed out without thinking.

Prosecutors played recorded jail conversations where Andrade referred to Zapata as "it" and said it wasn't as if he "killed a straight, law-abiding citizen."

"His own statements in the jail call betray the way he values Angie's life, the way he thought of her as less than, less than us because of who she was," Chief Deputy District Attorney Robb Miller told jurors.

"Everyone deserves equal protection under the law and no one deserves to die like this," Miller said.

Defense attorney Annette Kundelius said Andrade had no time to react or think about his actions when he discovered Zapata was biologically male.

http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-national/20090422/US.Transgender.Slaying/

 

[ASPCA4EVER]

Originally Posted by Sihouette
Here's ASPCA's comments about the lesbian telling girls in the 8th grade routinely deriding the girls for normal interest in boys, patting them the butts and openly lusting after one of the girls, [comments ASPCA just read and responded to]. See if you can see how "the tribe" forcefully makes something "normal" that patently isn't..from two pages ago:
Bear in mind that ASPCA presumably doesn't even know me or the woman I reported, she only read my accounts of what the woman was doing...

Certifiable 'NUT JOB'...make up a 'story' and expect one and all to believe in it (word for word) and when some of us better thinking humans post an optional theory...slap happy incorporated selectively clips and snips the post to further obfuscate the topic.

Those deviant voices in her head must become a roaring gang of very frighten fraidy cats...oh, the tribe of bi-curious/lesbians are out to get her...why they can smell your girl child's virginity on the wind...LMAO

 

[Sihouette]

Your third-hand account is no more believable than your degree in biology or your town being made up of 2/3 gay people. Having deviant sex with animals for money every day tends to degrade your credibility.~Mare
__________________

Is misquoting purposeful with you or some brain defect?

I live in a community where I encounter gay and lesbian couples on a daily basis. In one town nearby where I shop a lot, I'd say about 1/3 of the populace there is gay, lesbian, or bi in nature~Sil, page 72

Also, as you know and I reiterated here, I said I TOOK biology in college, not "have a degree in it".

Your current tack borders on ad hominem. Correct yourself.

Meanwhile back to the subject your lying hopes to divert..

We aren't talking about killing gays. I'm not advocating that their civil unions stop either, nor am I saying they should be mistreated. What I am saying is that normalizing their unfortunate situation in marriage has potential to affect future generations negatively.

And I've given substantive argument thusly.

All I hear from the opposition here is ranting, lying, diversions, accusations and ad hominems with very little substantive rebuttal.

Please also correct that situation or risk being seen for fools..

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

Is misquoting purposeful with you or some brain defect?
Also, as you know and I reiterated here, I said I TOOK biology in college, not "have a degree in it".

Your current tack borders on ad hominem. Correct yourself.

Meanwhile back to the subject your lying hopes to divert..

We aren't talking about killing gays. I'm not advocating that their civil unions stop either, nor am I saying they should be mistreated. What I am saying is that normalizing their unfortunate situation in marriage has potential to affect future generations negatively.

And I've given substantive argument thusly.

All I hear from the opposition here is ranting, lying, diversions, accusations and ad hominems with very little substantive rebuttal.

Please also correct that situation or risk being seen for fools..

I stand corrected, only 1/3, but that's not believable either. Got proof, give us the name of the town please.

You did claim to have degree in biology early on.

Denying people equal rights because you are afraid that something MIGHT happen in the future is nonsense. No place where gay marriage is legal has shown any of the social degredation that you talk about. Nor have any of the cultures where gay and trans people are accepted ever shown such degredation.

Your fear is based on the sexual abuse of domestic animals for which you get paid--hardly a recommendation of your veracity.

 

[Sihouette]

You will have to quote where I said I had a degree in biology. Or I will alert as to ad hominem.

Here's another correction for you: I am not afraid of an increase in homosexuals in a given population from the social-contagion factor in human behavior, I am certain it will happen.

As you will note from reading my previous posts, I have said that some people are in favor of this and some aren't. And that I contended that those who are in favor of it are people who ergo must be promoting homosexuality over hetero.

There's no getting around it. Humans look to social constructs to form their identity. They look to what is tolerated as norms to model their own behavior on. Those are facts: not products of a fearful mind.

Given those facts and the facts that the AI industry has found that mammalian sexuality is malleable, and that comparative psychology allows us to extrapolate to our own mammalian species: homo sapiens, we have no other choice but to conclude that the combined factors of social-contagion in childhood development [are you going to debate that children develop behaviors from birth to adulthood that become fixated?] and malleable sexuality will lead to an increase in homosexuals over time in any given population.

Some want to legislate this end.

Some don't.

So naturally we should put it to a vote.

One thing is for sure, homosexuals aren't a minority group. An adopted post-natal behavior does not a minority make. Ergo, saying "we were born this way, don't punish us" isn't good to make the descrimination argument. You are fixated, that's for sure. But so are those with OCD and a host of other acquired personality disorders. Should we seek to make OCD a mainstream trait by modeling it for children as "normal"? Or should we educate people to understand it's genesis and foster compassion for those that suffer from it?

Yes, homosexuality is an acquired disorder of the natural sexual drive to be attracted to the opposite gender for sexual experiences. If my stallion can be trained or frustrated into mounting other males or a dummy object to find sexual release via Pavlov's conditioning, then so can people.

Welcome to reality, sans "fear"..

 

[top gun]

It's difficult to say how many children are actually molested. For those who are reticent to come forward by an opposite-sexed offender..and the perceived reception that would have and feared-repercussions the victim may harbor, I can only imagine that they might be even more reticent to report same-sexed abuses...having that taboo broken might be even more difficult to come to terms with and seek help for.

You ought to read up on the psychology of sexual victims, the Stockholm syndrome and connect the dots between them. Just for fun, factor in a homosexual element as further impetus to remain silent..

OH PLEEEEEEEEASE!

Are you seriously still pushing this BS??? The wife and I went on a nice weeks vacation to Jamaica and I get back to see you are still floundering around building strawman arguments and projecting homophobic "bitter over losing a past lover to the gay community" misinformation.

It is so very well documented that everything you smear out there on this subject is just unfounded tripe.

Children are not adversely affected by having same sex parents. In almost all (like 99. something cases) gays are not gay because of some sort of trauma or molestation. And the mental wiring that creates a gay human being has no connection to humans being able to trick animals into gay behavior.

You'd be much better off just to tell the truth. You find gay sex creepy and are paranoid by the previous loss of a lover to the gay community and fear this will happen on a greater scale if gays continue to win their Constitutional equality and marry.

All of this is BS too... but at least I could respect the honesty of your situation.

And as a very interesting and topical side note: There was a group from Iowa staying at our resort in Montego Bay... 4 straight married couples. They were absolutely proud that their state's Supreme Court recently granted the opportunity for marriage to gay couples.

Even in Conservative IOWA rational people that are secure in their own sexuality think this shouldn't even be a debate... because it's obvious it hurts no one.

Good for them...

 

[ASPCA4EVER]

Sihoutte said: Well, you thought I was a screaming liberal...but here is proof that I'm definietly not. That independants and many many democrats are not swayed by the deafening hordes of "do as I do or else!".. POST #1

The original paragraph that started this 75 page diatribe...and this should be self explanatory for "screaming liberal...but here is proof that I'm definietly not" {I'll leave in the incorrect spelling so that her quote is in tack and completely hers}.
Misguided, misinformed, paranoia, fearful citizens create their own worst enemy/nightmares...self inflicted stupidity and the continual rantings of a "don't call me a screaming liberal...but here is the proof that I've definitely got a problem and I'm not going to change my mind about any of this lesbian-child stalker, child-molester mindset that I've created"...GOOD GRIEF.

What if she stepped out of her door and ran straight into a 'Martian/UFO/Alien' would she greet them with open arms??? ROTFLMAO...just don't go outside and mingle with the locals and you'll be OK!!!

I'm newly arrived and I really enjoyed you post, TopGun...you've captured the entire nut job diatribe in one post! LMAO

 

[chestnut]

Poor kids, same sex parents. What kind of life are they supposed to lead.
Let's see, the males under an all female marriage would have no role models.

And the same for females under a all male marriage. How is that good for the child?

You bet your bottom dollar that kids from a hetrosexual set of parents would do much better in society than those of homosexual parents.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

You will have to quote where I said I had a degree in biology. Or I will alert as to ad hominem.Here's another correction for you: I am not afraid of an increase in homosexuals in a given population from the social-contagion factor in human behavior, I am certain it will happen.As you will note from reading my previous posts, I have said that some people are in favor of this and some aren't. And that I contended that those who are in favor of it are people who ergo must be promoting homosexuality over hetero.
There's no getting around it. Humans look to social constructs to form their identity. They look to what is tolerated as norms to model their own behavior on. Those are facts: not products of a fearful mind. Given those facts and the facts that the AI industry has found that mammalian sexuality is malleable, and that comparative psychology allows us to extrapolate to our own mammalian species: homo sapiens, we have no other choice but to include that the combined factors of social-contagion in childhood development [are you going to debate that children develop behaviors from birth to adulthood that become fixated?] and malleable sexuality will lead to an increase in homosexuals over time in any given population.Some want to legislate this end.Some don't.So naturally we should put it to a vote.One thing is for sure, homosexuals aren't a minority group. An adopted post-natal behavior does not a minority make. Ergo, saying "we were born this way, don't punish us" isn't good to make the descrimination argument. You are fixated, that's for sure. But so are those with OCD and a host of other acquired personality disorders. Should we seek to make OCD a mainstream trait by modeling it for children as "normal"? Or should we educate people to understand it's genesis and foster compassion for those that suffer from it?
Yes, homosexuality is an acquired disorder of the natural sexual drive to be attracted to the opposite gender for sexual experiences. If my stallion can be trained or frustrated into mounting other males or a dummy object to find sexual release via Pavlov's conditioning, then so can people.Welcome to reality, sans "fear"..

What twaddle! This is basically what you started with all those posts ago, no science, no proof, not anything to shore up your fearful imaginings but third hand stories and baseless inflated stats.

You have continually refused to examine real scientific evidence presented to you while you rely on fallacious reasoning drawn from your personal experiences making animals have deviant sex--which you do for money. Sex for money... hmmm, doesn't that make a kind of *****?

Anyway, if it was so easy to twist people into what you want them to be, then the military would have succeeded long before now in making conscience-less soldiers (something they have sought--and failed--to do for decades with drugs and conditioning).

The plain fact is that science has discovered much evidence to show that sexual orientation is an innate quality, something that you don't want to have to deal with because of your fear. Sorry for you, Siho, like Nums, you are a victim of your own invincible ignorance and no one can help you with that.

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

Poor kids, same sex parents. What kind of life are they supposed to lead.
Let's see, the males under an all female marriage would have no role models.

And the same for females under a all male marriage. How is that good for the child?

You bet your bottom dollar that kids from a hetrosexual set of parents would do much better in society than those of homosexual parents.

There have been enough children raised by gay parents to make a statistical universe and research has shown no particular differences between gay and straight parented children.

The idea that without both genders of parents in the house that there will be no role models of the missing gender is a fallacy. Children are not raised in a vacuum, there are all kinds of role models available. This has been proven over and over again since there is such a huge preponderance of single parent families due to divorce.

Your fears, like Siho's, are baseless. Experience does not bear out the damages that you and she predict. It would be good for both of you to remember that almost all gay children are raised in two-parent, heterosexual families and have been all down through history. Besides which, none of the cultures that have accepted gay and trans people has ever shown the cultural degredation that nay-sayers like you and Siho predict.

 

[top gun]

The original paragraph that started this 75 page diatribe...and this should be self explanatory for "screaming liberal...but here is proof that I'm definietly not" {I'll leave in the incorrect spelling so that her quote is in tack and completely hers}.
Misguided, misinformed, paranoia, fearful citizens create their own worst enemy/nightmares...self inflicted stupidity and the continual rantings of a "don't call me a screaming liberal...but here is the proof that I've definitely got a problem and I'm not going to change my mind about any of this lesbian-child stalker, child-molester mindset that I've created"...GOOD GRIEF.

What if she stepped out of her door and ran straight into a 'Martian/UFO/Alien' would she greet them with open arms??? ROTFLMAO...just don't go outside and mingle with the locals and you'll be OK!!!

I'm newly arrived and I really enjoyed you post, TopGun...you've captured the entire nut job diatribe in one post! LMAO

This is a good place to get a feel for various mindsets I guess. Some just seem more shockingly prejudice than others.

Hang in there... keep reading & keep posting.

 

[top gun]

Poor kids, same sex parents. What kind of life are they supposed to lead.
Let's see, the males under an all female marriage would have no role models.

And the same for females under a all male marriage. How is that good for the child?

You bet your bottom dollar that kids from a hetrosexual set of parents would do much better in society than those of homosexual parents.

Interesting but lacking in overall understanding of the true & entire reality of families in America.

It's not and never will be about "perfect". It's about simply good & safe. It's lacking in understanding and depth of thought to point at gay parents and say... not perfect.

Single heterosexual parent homes aren't... perfect.

Kids raised by other family members other than mom & dad aren't... perfect.

Heterosexual mom and/or dads that exhibit even small amounts of child abuse or neglect or have substance abuse issues or are living in extreme poverty aren't... perfect.

And foster homes and orphanages certainly aren't... perfect.

Kids don't required perfect. They require a safe, caring, loving environment along with good healthcare and good nutrition.

Can we really not agree on this?

I mean Dick Cheney's daughter is gay as the day is long and both her parents are far Right Wing, married heterosexual, Conservative idealogs (what you would call "perfect").

Do we need possibly to set up a telethon for her because her ultra straight & Conservative married heterosexual parents somehow abused her because she came out of that home environment... gay?

Of course not... come on...

 

[Sihouette]

You have continually refused to examine real scientific evidence presented to you while you rely on fallacious reasoning drawn from your personal experiences making animals have deviant sex--which you do for money. Sex for money... hmmm, doesn't that make a kind of *****?~Mare

We recognize in the ag business that sex for procreation makes sense. Keeping numerous male animals poses real housing issues on smaller farms setup for production females...hence the birth of the AI industry. The AI industry also serves to cull inferior studs and make sure that superior animals genetics make it to the largest population of females availible to him. One good stud can service females worldwide. Obviously with shipping issues, disease-spreading and other concerns of logisitics in transporting the actual male animal, instead of just his semen in a handy little box weighing mere ounces, come into play.

Chances are, like I said, you are eating or have eaten today a product of this industry's factual banking knowledge born of decades of research that mammalian sexuality is malleable at puberty. So the irony is that as you're typing you "silhouette is full of BS" posts, while you are energizing your fingers by munching on the very proof of my posts sitting on a plate next to your PC....be it the meat in your sandwich or the cheese inside or the milk or cream you poured in your latte' this morning..lol...ah the irony...


The malleability of sexuality is what is of major concern when we're discussing both the overt and covert messages society sends to its youth. We can expect the numbers of the homosexuals in a given population to rise therefore.

Some feel euphoric about this prediction you can hang your hat on. I would call them covert predators.

Some dont' feel that way, I would call them "conservatives". Not all conservative ideas are bad or based from fear. Some are based from common sense and a longstanding phenomenon of understanding that the basis of sex is for reproduction and the knowledge of the pandora's-box syndrome. Once we say to our youth, via granting homosexual marriage, "hey, you can step outside the body's normal functions any time it gives you pleasure...even if it results in tissue damage that enhances the spread of diseases like AIDS", we've pretty much shot the "hey, don't smoke, your lungs are for breathing!" argument right in the head. And various other lectures we give to our kids about "just say no" to behaviors that harm the body and the human condition in general...

 

[Mare Tranquillity]

We recognize in the ag business that sex for procreation makes sense. Keeping numerous male animals poses real housing issues on smaller farms setup for production females...hence the birth of the AI industry. The AI industry also serves to cull inferior studs and make sure that superior animals genetics make it to the largest population of females availible to him. One good stud can service females worldwide. Obviously with shipping issues, disease-spreading and other concerns of logisitics in transporting the actual male animal, instead of just his semen in a handy little box weighing mere ounces, come into play.

Chances are, like I said, you are eating or have eaten today a product of this industry's factual banking knowledge born of decades of research that mammalian sexuality is malleable at puberty. So the irony is that as you're typing you "silhouette is full of BS" posts, while you are energizing your fingers by munching on the very proof of my posts sitting on a plate next to your PC....be it the meat in your sandwich or the cheese inside or the milk or cream you poured in your latte' this morning..lol...ah the irony...


The malleability of sexuality is what is of major concern when we're discussing both the overt and covert messages society sends to its youth. We can expect the numbers of the homosexuals in a given population to rise therefore.

Some feel euphoric about this prediction you can hang your hat on. I would call them covert predators.

Some dont' feel that way, I would call them "conservatives". Not all conservative ideas are bad or based from fear. Some are based from common sense and a longstanding phenomenon of understanding that the basis of sex is for reproduction and the knowledge of the pandora's-box syndrome. Once we say to our youth, via granting homosexual marriage, "hey, you can step outside the body's normal functions any time it gives you pleasure...even if it results in tissue damage that enhances the spread of diseases like AIDS", we've pretty much shot the "hey, don't smoke, your lungs are for breathing!" argument right in the head. And various other lectures we give to our kids about "just say no" to behaviors that harm the body and the human condition in general...

What twaddle! None of the sickness-produced products of your deviant-sex for money lifestyle graces my table, I have been a vegan for more than 30 years.

Your argument is not supported by science or human experience, if your fears were valid we would see wild swings in the number of gay people down through history from culture to culture, but such is not the case. Gay people have represented a small percentage of the population in every culture for which we have records--a consistently small percentage. Your twisted adventures with animals not withstanding, your argument is baseless.

 

[BigRob]

Are you seriously still pushing this BS??? The wife and I went on a nice weeks vacation to Jamaica

What part of Jamaica did you go to TopGun? I am heading down there myself in a few weeks.