Home Archives Random Quotes Latest Comments Top 100 Submit Quote Search Log In

Quote# 51960

[Does it matter to you whether or not gay people marry or are able to enter into civil unions? Yes or no?]

First, I refuse to accept the abominable perversion of the once-wonderful word, gay. Homosexuality is anything but gay. To the question, yes, it matters, because the queers demand that the definition of marriage that has been the societal norm for thousands of years be corrupted to accommodate sexual deviancy. Marriage is a union between one man and one woman. Anything else is aberrant.

Warping the definition to cater to butt-buddies and dildo-dykes is totally unacceptable.

[Does it matter to gay people whether or not they are able to marry or enter into civil unions? Yes or no?]

Aside from the insatiable fag activists, no, it does not. Read on.

DoctorDoom, FreeConservatives 30 Comments [11/11/2008 4:45:58 PM]
Fundie Index: 3
Submitted By: Jeremy
WTF?! || meh
Username:
Comment:



1 2
Mortok

Yeah, like FreeConservatives know anything about homosexuality. Or anything else, for that matter.

11/11/2008 4:48:27 PM

Mike

Nothing says "love" like Freepers do.

11/11/2008 4:52:14 PM

Doctor Whom

To the question, yes, it matters, because the queers demand that the definition of marriage that has been the societal norm for thousands of years be corrupted to accommodate sexual deviancy.

We mustn't change the time-honored definition of marriage. Marriage is, and must always be, the union of a man and one or more wives, concubines, rape victims, POW sex slaves, and daughters of other men who have fallen on hard times financially, as long as they're all of the same race and religion. Anything else will destroy civilization as we know it.

11/11/2008 4:54:48 PM

GigaGuess

Yeah, next thing you know, they'll wanna change marriage to allow those darkies to marry the white women, too! Oh, and Doc, what was the Dowry for your wife, hmmm?

EDIT: Damn, beaten by Doctor Whom, and far more succinctly.

11/11/2008 4:55:08 PM

Seigi no Mikata

To the question, yes, it matters, because the queers demand that the definition of marriage that has been the societal norm for thousands of years be corrupted to accommodate sexual deviancy.

Gay marriage is an older practice than you think. Several Roman Emperors had gay lovers, and some of them went as far as to even get married with them. Nero (37–68) was the first one to marry, to a man called Sporus, and Elagabalus (c.203–222) married an athlete called Zoticus. So, gay marriage is practically as old as Christian marriage, and people who support gay marriage are just supporting a 2000-year-old tradition.

11/11/2008 5:09:24 PM

Horsefeathers

"Marriage is a union between one man and one woman. Anything else is aberrant."

It wasn't defined that way in Europe until 1566 or so. Until then there was no definition, the church considered it a private matter and you didn't even have to have a priest or witnesses.

Stick that in your pipe and smoke it, asshole.

"Warping the definition to cater to butt-buddies and dildo-dykes is totally unacceptable."

The definition depends both on the time and place. There are still societies today that would find it quite bizarre to only have a single wife. To them, you would be "warping the definition" of marriage.

Now, shut the fuck up and get back in your hole.

11/11/2008 5:09:38 PM



i refuse to believe Doom isnt repressing anything.

11/11/2008 5:14:07 PM



I find it amusing that he's so upset over the change in definition of "gay" but not "queer."

11/11/2008 5:18:38 PM

DildoDyke!!ONEONE!!

I don't think Doomy here realizes just how gay being gay is. Poor Doomy.

11/11/2008 5:20:42 PM

A Friend

Doctor Doom, Butt Buddies, Dildo Dykes? This sounds like an awesome comic book.

11/11/2008 5:47:07 PM

Z

These guys have no flare or imagination. I mean: fag activists? That begs for concatenation: Fagtivism! Dyketivists!

11/11/2008 5:48:04 PM

IanC

butt-buddies? Snerk.

11/11/2008 6:02:07 PM

toothache

Methinks one doth protest too much.

11/11/2008 6:07:40 PM

Brain_In_A_Jar

Yeah, like FreeConservatives know anything about homosexuality.

I dare say they'll have a few people on the inside.

11/11/2008 6:09:34 PM

Zap

So... the change of the word "gay" bothers this guy, but not "queer" or "fag"?

11/11/2008 6:23:50 PM

aaa

Kid, crawl out of the basement.

11/11/2008 7:32:18 PM

WMDKitty

Oh, FFS, come out of the closet, already!

11/11/2008 7:48:05 PM

jaconey

Hmmm I guess there is no gay marrige in Latveria.

11/11/2008 8:05:34 PM

Slayer

It's a good thing the opinions of some guy on FreeConservatives are worth practically nothing. Poor DD. It must suck to see all of these black people and gay people running around free and happy, and being powerless to stop them. If his views weren't so immoral, I might feel sorry for him.

11/11/2008 8:19:10 PM

Old Viking

Oh, these yo-yos.

11/11/2008 8:33:44 PM

KatAutumn

Doctor Doom - proving that inbred hillbilly bedwetters can overcome their adversity and use the interwebs since 2002.

11/11/2008 8:34:29 PM

protowhalepig

First, I refuse to accept the abominable perversion of the once-wonderful word, gay. Homosexuality is anything but gay.

But it's fabulous!

Marriage is a union between one man and one woman. Anything else is aberrant.

Including divorce, which is much favored by fundies!

11/11/2008 8:40:26 PM

tracer

"First, I refuse to accept the abominable perversion of the once-wonderful word, gay. Homosexuality is anything but gay."


You sound as though you're ignorant of the history of how "gay" came to mean "homosexual."

But that's not surprising, because ignorance of history is a prerequisite for being a Fundie. Whether it's believing that Genesis is an accurate account of the history of life on Earth, or believing that the Founding Fathers practiced the same brand of Biblical literalism that you do, or even thinking that "In God We Trust" has always been on American money, actual historical fact is something you guys just don't want to have to mess with.

11/11/2008 9:04:58 PM

LadyJafaria

Seigi no Mikata, let's not go down the road of using Roman emperors as examples of anything but "people who did really fucked up shit because power corrupts and so does lead in the water supply." That being said, I agree with the general concept that if people really looked at what "traditional" marriage was, they wouldn't get "one man and one woman who fell in love," they'd get a variety of different configurations of men and women and cynical political motivations.

11/12/2008 5:23:01 AM

Antichrist

How about we call all secular ceremonies "civil unions" and all church ceremonies "marriages" and give both the same rights under the law. That way marriage would only be for you holy uptight assholes.

Personally I'd be fine with that.

11/14/2008 7:36:11 AM
1 2