Dies Irae said:

---

Jeeper79 said:

---

fixer said:

---

Jeeper79 said:

---

fixer said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Where does the human right to have straight sex come from?

---

How does humanity reproduce?

---

Thats a weak argument. Extension of a species is not a requirement for a right to be a right.

---

So if humanity ceases to reproduce, then there is no real reason for human rights.

Got it.

---

Liberty is also a human right, is it not?

---

Liberty does not extend to license.

---

Sure it does - at least up until the point that you're infringing someone else's rights. I'm sure there are exceptions, but they're exceptions.And how are two gay people infringing your rights?

Jeeper79 said:

---

fixer said:

---

Jeeper79 said:

---

fixer said:

---

Jeeper79 said:

---

fixer said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Where does the human right to have straight sex come from?

---

How does humanity reproduce?

---

Thats a weak argument. Extension of a species is not a requirement for a right to be a right.

---

So if humanity ceases to reproduce, then there is no real reason for human rights.

Got it.

---

Liberty is also a human right, is it not?

---

Not if there are no humans.

---

So you think homosexuality is an existential threat? That's pretty wild.

But even if it did, it STILL doesn't negate personal freedom.

---

This is weapons grade insane.

Jeeper79 said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

Jeeper79 said:

---

fixer said:

---

Jeeper79 said:

---

fixer said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Where does the human right to have straight sex come from?

---

How does humanity reproduce?

---

Thats a weak argument. Extension of a species is not a requirement for a right to be a right.

---

So if humanity ceases to reproduce, then there is no real reason for human rights.

Got it.

---

Liberty is also a human right, is it not?

---

Liberty does not extend to license.

---

Sure it does - at least up until the point that you're infringing someone else's rights. I'm sure there are exceptions, but they're exceptions.And how are two gay people infringing your rights?

---

Where does this definition come from? How do we come up with the exceptions?

You can't destroy your society and expect people not to notice.

I am trying to wrap my head around "if X leads to the end of all life as we know it, stopping it is a violation of human rights"

I have to say this entire discourse makes more sense if viewed through that lens

Jeeper79 said:

---

fixer said:

---

Jeeper79 said:

---

fixer said:

---

Jeeper79 said:

---

fixer said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Where does the human right to have straight sex come from?

---

How does humanity reproduce?

---

Thats a weak argument. Extension of a species is not a requirement for a right to be a right.

---

So if humanity ceases to reproduce, then there is no real reason for human rights.

Got it.

---

Liberty is also a human right, is it not?

---

Not if there are no humans.

---

So you think homosexuality is an existential threat? That's pretty wild.

But even if it did, it STILL doesn't negate personal freedom.

---

Strange and torturous way to actually agree with me.

For humans to exist there is a categorical imperative for heterosexuality.

The whole discussion originates from here.

Dies Irae said:

---

Ol_Ag_02 said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

Fightin_Aggie said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

Fightin_Aggie said:

---

Support for Human Rights <> support for LGBTQ mafia

This is a policy every conservative would support even if though our liberal friends will tell you otherwise

LGBTQ does not advocate for human rights, they advocate for totalitarianism and to shut up opposing viewpoints

---

When the hell did the right to have gay sex become a Human Right?

---

Can you pick a side?

The right to life is a human right. The right to not be murdered for what you believe is a human right. Sounds like Cruz is supporting that.

---

That's preposterous, some people believe it's okay to rape women and have sex with children.

---

Even you should be better than equating consensual sexual interactions between same sex adults to rape and pedophilia.

It's a really low bar and you should try harder.

---

That's not the point, he said "the right not to be murdered for what you believe is a human right".

We are inventing human rights out of thing air

---

Does murder violate someone's right to life, liberty, or property?

Does consensual gay sex violate someone's right life, liberty, or property?

This is about a 9/10 level troll.

Crux didn't have to talk about this.

Misstep by him

The death penalty is on the table for pedophilia, and gay sex acts with people with disabilities or involving HIV positive people. It sounds like some of you think they're rounding up the gays and shooting them in the back of the head.

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

Ol_Ag_02 said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

Fightin_Aggie said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

Fightin_Aggie said:

---

Support for Human Rights <> support for LGBTQ mafia

This is a policy every conservative would support even if though our liberal friends will tell you otherwise

LGBTQ does not advocate for human rights, they advocate for totalitarianism and to shut up opposing viewpoints

---

When the hell did the right to have gay sex become a Human Right?

---

Can you pick a side?

The right to life is a human right. The right to not be murdered for what you believe is a human right. Sounds like Cruz is supporting that.

---

That's preposterous, some people believe it's okay to rape women and have sex with children.

---

Even you should be better than equating consensual sexual interactions between same sex adults to rape and pedophilia.

It's a really low bar and you should try harder.

---

That's not the point, he said "the right not to be murdered for what you believe is a human right".

We are inventing human rights out of thing air

---

Does murder violate someone's right to life, liberty, or property?

Does consensual gay sex violate someone's right life, liberty, or property?

---

Do you want my answer or what the founding fathers, Clarence Thomas, Antonin Scalia, and William Rehnquist said when the question was posed to them?

Dies Irae said:

---

I am trying to wrap my head around "if X leads to the end of all life as we know it, stopping it is a violation of human rights"

I have to say this entire discourse makes more sense if viewed through that lens

---

How does two consenting adults doing something in the privacy of their home "end life as we know it"?

You're beyond reasoning with. People need to stop interacting with this guy

I want your answer.

Dies Irae said:

---

I am trying to wrap my head around "if X leads to the end of all life as we know it, stopping it is a violation of human rights"

I have to say this entire discourse makes more sense if viewed through that lens

---

So you will be forced to only have gay sex if it isn't illegal and punished by death?

I mean, I love Lucy Pinder's tits, but it doesn't make me a lesbian.

Have you considered moving to Uganda? It seems like you appreciate the culture they aspire to.

Bexar Ag said:

---

You're beyond reasoning with. People need to stop interacting with this guy

---

Eh, it's kind of fun letting him make clear to everyone that he's just generally a bad person.

Threads like these make F16 the laughing stock of the internet.

People here are conservatives not Nazis.

RebelE Infantry said:

---

Jeeper79 said:

---

fixer said:

---

Jeeper79 said:

---

fixer said:

---

Jeeper79 said:

---

fixer said:

---

Teslag said:

---

Where does the human right to have straight sex come from?

---

How does humanity reproduce?

---

Thats a weak argument. Extension of a species is not a requirement for a right to be a right.

---

So if humanity ceases to reproduce, then there is no real reason for human rights.

Got it.

---

Liberty is also a human right, is it not?

---

Not if there are no humans.

---

So you think homosexuality is an existential threat? That's pretty wild.

But even if it did, it STILL doesn't negate personal freedom.

---

This is weapons grade insane.

---

Self determination includes the right to end yourself. I don't recommend it, but it's true.

MemphisAg1 said:

---

LGBTQ isn't my lifestyle, but I don't want to see them mistreated either. Everybody should be treated with basic respect and dignity, regardless of political affiliation, lifestyle choice, etc. It's what we called "manners" when I was growing up. It's ok to call out evil people and unjust laws. In fact, it's a moral obligation to call them out. Good Ted.

And this is coming from somebody who is madder than hell at the grooming of children, biological males competing against women in sports, Bud Light, Target, and you name it.

---

This

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

I am trying to wrap my head around "if X leads to the end of all life as we know it, stopping it is a violation of human rights"

I have to say this entire discourse makes more sense if viewed through that lens

---

How does two consenting adults doing something in the privacy of their home "end life as we know it"?

---

If it's in the privacy of their homes how do we know about it? And the statement was in response to the poster who said "even if it's an existential threat it still shouldn't be curtailed because liberty "

He's a troll, he's probably from 4chan or some other alt right site

Tanya 93 said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

I am trying to wrap my head around "if X leads to the end of all life as we know it, stopping it is a violation of human rights"

I have to say this entire discourse makes more sense if viewed through that lens

---

So you will be forced to only have gay sex if it isn't illegal and punished by death?

I mean, I love Lucy Pinder's tits, but it doesn't make me a lesbian.

---

You sound somewhat lesbish. If I said "I like Henry Cavill's ass but it doesn't make me gay." I would be gay.

Dies Irae said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

I am trying to wrap my head around "if X leads to the end of all life as we know it, stopping it is a violation of human rights"

I have to say this entire discourse makes more sense if viewed through that lens

---

How does two consenting adults doing something in the privacy of their home "end life as we know it"?

---

If it's in the privacy of their homes how do we know about it? And the statement was in response to the poster who said "even if it's an existential threat it still shouldn't be curtailed because liberty "

---

Why does it need to be illegal and punishable by death if you won't know about it and it has zero impact on anyone besides those two individuals?

Yep, last post he gave himself away, troll

Dies Irae said:

---

Tanya 93 said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

I am trying to wrap my head around "if X leads to the end of all life as we know it, stopping it is a violation of human rights"

I have to say this entire discourse makes more sense if viewed through that lens

---

So you will be forced to only have gay sex if it isn't illegal and punished by death?

I mean, I love Lucy Pinder's tits, but it doesn't make me a lesbian.

---

You sound somewhat lesbish. If I said "I like Henry Cavill's ass but it doesn't make me gay." I would be gay.

---

Well, we know what you are suppressing now.


And his chest is much better than his ass.
Jonathan Rhys Meyers, who he starred with on The Tutors, has a much better ass.

Bexar Ag said:

---

He's a troll, he's probably from 4chan or some other alt right site

---

Long time troll or true believer in Christo-fascism.

Bustup, nuclear scramjet, silian rail, and probably numerous other accounts.

This is his ideal society.

BigRobSA said:

---

Blue Diamond of OPFail.

---

It's a parachute!

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

I want your answer.

---

The right to life, liberty and property are not absolute; there are many laws which deprive people of life, liberty and property depending on the crime. Murder is a loaded term; there are capital punishments for heinous crimes in this country, and in many other countries throughout the world.

There has been no right to gay sex through the vast vast majority of our time as a country; it is not an American value. The people who wrote our constitution punished it just as harshly as Uganda, as being toxic to the societal welfare. As I've mentioned countless times on this thread, one only needs to look at the trajectory our country has taken since we decriminalized gay sex only 20 years ago. We are a shadow of our formal selves and trending worse.

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

J. Walter Weatherman said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

I am trying to wrap my head around "if X leads to the end of all life as we know it, stopping it is a violation of human rights"

I have to say this entire discourse makes more sense if viewed through that lens

---

How does two consenting adults doing something in the privacy of their home "end life as we know it"?

---

If it's in the privacy of their homes how do we know about it? And the statement was in response to the poster who said "even if it's an existential threat it still shouldn't be curtailed because liberty "

---

Why does it need to be illegal and punishable by death if you won't know about it and it has zero impact on anyone besides those two individuals?

---

Doesn't have to be punishable by death. The best laws are the ones that don't need to be enforced. Keeping it illegal keeps it away from public consumption, keeps it out of mainstreet. That's the goal.

This marks a day in history. I actually agree with something Ted Cruz said!

GeorgiAg said:

---

Threads like these make F16 the laughing stock of the internet.

People here are conservatives not Nazis.

---

"A REAL conservative supports gay rights in Uganda! If you don't, then you're a mean old Nazi!"
- Guy who voted for Joe Biden

Ol_Ag_02 said:

---

agent-maroon said:

---

civilaggie2011 said:

---

Alt-right Papists

---

More Protestants in Uganda than Catholics. Still mad?

---

That so?

Quote:

---

The Roman Catholic Church had the largest number of adherents (39.3 percent, down from 41.6 in 2002), followed by the Anglican Church of Uganda (32 percent, down from 35.9 percent). The category of Evangelical/Pentecostal/Born-Again showed the most growth, rising from 4.7% in 2002 to 11.1% in 2018. Adventist and other Protestant churches claimed most of the remaining Christians, although there was also a small Eastern Orthodox community. The next most reported religion of Uganda was Islam, with Muslims representing 13.7 percent of the population, up from 12.1% in 2002.

---

So you're trying to pin this on Protestants, despite being completely wrong about the Ugandan religious majority, instead of focusing on who we're actually focusing on in this thread.

I hope as a Doctor you're a little more thorough in your research and less biased in your diagnoses.

---

Roman Catholic = 39.3%
Anglican + Pentecostal = 32 + 11.1 = 43.1 %

43.1 > 39.3, so therefore there are more Protestants than Catholics in Uganda.

Catholic and physician bash denied.

So thumbs down on someone saying gays should not be killed?

Dies Irae said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

I want your answer.

---

The right to life, liberty and property are not absolute; there are many laws which deprive people of life, liberty and property depending on the crime. Murder is a loaded term; there are capital punishments for heinous crimes in this country, and in many other countries throughout the world.

There has been no right to gay sex through the vast vast majority of our time as a country; it is not an American value. The people who wrote our constitution punished it just as harshly as Uganda, as being toxic to the societal welfare. As I've mentioned countless times on this thread, one only needs to look at the trajectory our country has taken since we decriminalized gay sex only 20 years ago. We are a shadow of our formal selves and trending worse.

---

What the founders wanted doesn't really matter in this instance. Life, liberty, and property rights are generally only limited when it comes to impacting another individuals rights. Gay sex doesn't violate anyone's rights and therefore is perfectly in line with being supported by free people.

Again, well done with your trolling. Top notch.

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

Dies Irae said:

---

Ghost of Andrew Eaton said:

---

I want your answer.

---

The right to life, liberty and property are not absolute; there are many laws which deprive people of life, liberty and property depending on the crime. Murder is a loaded term; there are capital punishments for heinous crimes in this country, and in many other countries throughout the world.

There has been no right to gay sex through the vast vast majority of our time as a country; it is not an American value. The people who wrote our constitution punished it just as harshly as Uganda, as being toxic to the societal welfare. As I've mentioned countless times on this thread, one only needs to look at the trajectory our country has taken since we decriminalized gay sex only 20 years ago. We are a shadow of our formal selves and trending worse.

---

What the founders wanted doesn't really matter in this instance. Life, liberty, and property rights are generally only limited when it comes to impacting another individuals rights. Gay sex doesn't violate anyone's rights and therefore is perfectly in line with being supported by free people.

Again, well done with your trolling. Top notch.

---

I'll ask you again, why should I take your word for it over the word of 3 of the best conservative Justices that this country has ever known?