David Jeffrey Spetch
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2015
- Messages
- 69
USA Supreme Court Of Mockery / Marriage
Love the video because it loves you
Lively series. Destruction of LGBT global project.
Historical Defining Moment: Restoring Marriage To A Respectable State Globally And Permanently
Before we dive right into the very foundation of the factual evidence proving the meaning of marriage beyond any shadow of doubt, keep in mind the fact that artificial insemination does not describe a sexual orientation.
Before I continue on I'd also like to point out that leaving marriage in the respectable state that it was created for and in honour of for thousands of years since marriage was created wasn't hurting anyone, but homosexual activists went ahead and made this soon to be short lived mockery of marriage anyway with their every lie and deception when they could have very well accepted the fact that homosexual unions do not equal heterosexual unions and made the wise decision to opt for civil unions in the first place thus saving allot of unneeded headaches and tax dollars.
The factual evidence which proves that homosexual unions do not equal heterosexual unions is quite simply the fact that thanks to heterosexual unions each and every one of us even exists as opposed to the fact that if it were up to homosexual unions to sustain the human race, we would have died off thousands of years ago for weakly being a race of sexually defective. A very distinct significance in difference obviously proving beyond any shadow of doubt that homosexual unions do not even come close to equal heterosexual unions and are quite obviously not even in the same ball park. That homosexual unions are relationships that are among consenting adults, as are heterosexual unions among consenting adults, obviously doesn't detract from the factual evidence proving that homosexual unions do not equal heterosexual unions as clearly demonstrated within this very paragraph.
As I have shared on many previous occasions, thousands of years of only heterosexual unions being honoured with marriage proves beyond any shadow of doubt that marriage is about honouring the significance of the one sexual unity to which we all owe our very existence and as long as we, the human race exists, that significance stands alone by honouring heterosexual unions with what we call marriage because again to make myself very clear it is "exclusively" thanks to heterosexual unions that each and every one of us even exists which is quite obviously a significance worthy of honouring with the distinction of what we call marriage above that of any other kind of sexual unity. Even test tube babies and artificial inseminations wouldn't exist without heterosexual unions existing to sustain the human race with what we call procreation in the first place.
By making this soon to be short lived mockery of marriage, homosexuals and homosexual activists are attempting to degrade the meaning of marriage by trying to obviously make it be about including honouring that if it were up to homosexual unions to sustain the human race we would have died of thousands of years ago for weakly being a race of sexually defective. Even though that homosexuals may have attempted to make a mockery of marriage here and there throughout history, by referring to their relationship of same sex couples as a marriage it was always short lived, snuffed out and discontinued because again marriage was never about honouring homosexual unions. In some instances the homosexual couples were beheaded or murdered in some other way for making such false claims.
Homosexual activist deliberate ignorance towards the meaning of marriage is both insulting and infuriating and it is all because homosexual activists refuse to accept homosexuals for what homosexuals are as well obviously refuse to accept heterosexuals for what heterosexuals are and proof of this is that here homosexuals and homosexual activists are attempting to proclaim that heterosexual unions are no more significant than homosexual unions yet that we exist factually proves otherwise.
As humans in a democratic society, we are all equal and marriage is fair for everyone. Everyone has the right to marry a person born with the opposite sex genital that they themselves are born with because that is what marriage was created for and in honour of. There is only discrimination or inequality when it comes to marriage if someone is being denied the right to marry someone BORN with the opposite sex genital that the individual being denied is BORN with. To be clear, when I say opposite sex genital, I mean a penis is the opposite of a vagina.
As I have shared previously, when it comes to tradition:
It is traditional, since it was once thought that the world was flat (as opposed to before the creation of marriage) and discovered that the world is round (as opposed to marriage being created) it is traditional to refer to the world as round. If someone wants to start calling the world square and claiming that it must be put to a vote because traditions have been known to change, it is obviously a demonstration of refusing to accept the fact that the world is round (as opposed to refusing to accept the fact that marriage is about honouring the unity of the one sexual orientation to which we all owe our very existence) and expecting that everyone should have to call it square if they win the vote even though it is all based upon an obvious lie to begin with because the world is not square just because someone refuses to accept the fact that the world is round. This is what I call abusing the democratic voting system with invalid claims based upon deliberate ignorance towards what fact already reveals.
I have noticed that homosexual activists abused the Supreme Court of Justice in the USA by attempting to make irrelevance to do with tradition the issue by claiming that marriage was once about trading goods or live stalk for wives but that eventually changed because women were being treated as property instead of equal human beings which was an obviously lie and I will explain how that is not anything more than a homosexual activist lie in this very paragraph. It is no lie that at one time goods and live stalk were being exchanged for wives but that was never what marriage was about because the fact remains that before and after goods and live stalk were being traded for wives, marriage was always about honouring the unity of the one sexual orientation to which we owe our very existence. Even when goods were being traded for wives, the marriage itself was always about honouring the unity of heterosexual couples as it always has been for thousands of years since marriage was created.
continued ...
Love the video because it loves you
Lively series. Destruction of LGBT global project.
Historical Defining Moment: Restoring Marriage To A Respectable State Globally And Permanently
Before we dive right into the very foundation of the factual evidence proving the meaning of marriage beyond any shadow of doubt, keep in mind the fact that artificial insemination does not describe a sexual orientation.
Before I continue on I'd also like to point out that leaving marriage in the respectable state that it was created for and in honour of for thousands of years since marriage was created wasn't hurting anyone, but homosexual activists went ahead and made this soon to be short lived mockery of marriage anyway with their every lie and deception when they could have very well accepted the fact that homosexual unions do not equal heterosexual unions and made the wise decision to opt for civil unions in the first place thus saving allot of unneeded headaches and tax dollars.
The factual evidence which proves that homosexual unions do not equal heterosexual unions is quite simply the fact that thanks to heterosexual unions each and every one of us even exists as opposed to the fact that if it were up to homosexual unions to sustain the human race, we would have died off thousands of years ago for weakly being a race of sexually defective. A very distinct significance in difference obviously proving beyond any shadow of doubt that homosexual unions do not even come close to equal heterosexual unions and are quite obviously not even in the same ball park. That homosexual unions are relationships that are among consenting adults, as are heterosexual unions among consenting adults, obviously doesn't detract from the factual evidence proving that homosexual unions do not equal heterosexual unions as clearly demonstrated within this very paragraph.
As I have shared on many previous occasions, thousands of years of only heterosexual unions being honoured with marriage proves beyond any shadow of doubt that marriage is about honouring the significance of the one sexual unity to which we all owe our very existence and as long as we, the human race exists, that significance stands alone by honouring heterosexual unions with what we call marriage because again to make myself very clear it is "exclusively" thanks to heterosexual unions that each and every one of us even exists which is quite obviously a significance worthy of honouring with the distinction of what we call marriage above that of any other kind of sexual unity. Even test tube babies and artificial inseminations wouldn't exist without heterosexual unions existing to sustain the human race with what we call procreation in the first place.
By making this soon to be short lived mockery of marriage, homosexuals and homosexual activists are attempting to degrade the meaning of marriage by trying to obviously make it be about including honouring that if it were up to homosexual unions to sustain the human race we would have died of thousands of years ago for weakly being a race of sexually defective. Even though that homosexuals may have attempted to make a mockery of marriage here and there throughout history, by referring to their relationship of same sex couples as a marriage it was always short lived, snuffed out and discontinued because again marriage was never about honouring homosexual unions. In some instances the homosexual couples were beheaded or murdered in some other way for making such false claims.
Homosexual activist deliberate ignorance towards the meaning of marriage is both insulting and infuriating and it is all because homosexual activists refuse to accept homosexuals for what homosexuals are as well obviously refuse to accept heterosexuals for what heterosexuals are and proof of this is that here homosexuals and homosexual activists are attempting to proclaim that heterosexual unions are no more significant than homosexual unions yet that we exist factually proves otherwise.
As humans in a democratic society, we are all equal and marriage is fair for everyone. Everyone has the right to marry a person born with the opposite sex genital that they themselves are born with because that is what marriage was created for and in honour of. There is only discrimination or inequality when it comes to marriage if someone is being denied the right to marry someone BORN with the opposite sex genital that the individual being denied is BORN with. To be clear, when I say opposite sex genital, I mean a penis is the opposite of a vagina.
As I have shared previously, when it comes to tradition:
It is traditional, since it was once thought that the world was flat (as opposed to before the creation of marriage) and discovered that the world is round (as opposed to marriage being created) it is traditional to refer to the world as round. If someone wants to start calling the world square and claiming that it must be put to a vote because traditions have been known to change, it is obviously a demonstration of refusing to accept the fact that the world is round (as opposed to refusing to accept the fact that marriage is about honouring the unity of the one sexual orientation to which we all owe our very existence) and expecting that everyone should have to call it square if they win the vote even though it is all based upon an obvious lie to begin with because the world is not square just because someone refuses to accept the fact that the world is round. This is what I call abusing the democratic voting system with invalid claims based upon deliberate ignorance towards what fact already reveals.
I have noticed that homosexual activists abused the Supreme Court of Justice in the USA by attempting to make irrelevance to do with tradition the issue by claiming that marriage was once about trading goods or live stalk for wives but that eventually changed because women were being treated as property instead of equal human beings which was an obviously lie and I will explain how that is not anything more than a homosexual activist lie in this very paragraph. It is no lie that at one time goods and live stalk were being exchanged for wives but that was never what marriage was about because the fact remains that before and after goods and live stalk were being traded for wives, marriage was always about honouring the unity of the one sexual orientation to which we owe our very existence. Even when goods were being traded for wives, the marriage itself was always about honouring the unity of heterosexual couples as it always has been for thousands of years since marriage was created.
continued ...
