Aren’t you confusing “pansexual” with “genderqueer”?
The discussion about who is what to whom reminded me of the Life Of Brian where the People's Front for the Liberation of Judea were comparing other fronts of a similar name to themselves. It was so ridiculous it was funny.I never realised there were so many options out there that needed the govt to recognise them as equal to every other option. Where or will a line be drawn that no one should cross? I suspect it will be Christianity that gets banned before anything else because its so danagerous and disrespectful of individual sexual preferences.3:16
Oh, yes: "Are you the Pansexuals?""Fuck off! We're the Genderqueers. Pansexuals - pfft."
I have a question for you psycho, what is more important fag marriage or addressing our appalling child abuse statistics?Priority mate. Kids first, fags last.
Priority? Well, let's see: one of them is a minor problem easily fixed by a quick legislative change, and the other is a major problem with varied and vehement disagreement about both the causes and the potential solutions, and the consequent political paralysis when it comes to doing anything about it. So, in effect you're asking whether doing "something" is more important than doing "nothing" - I'll go with "something."A question for you now: what do you mean by the term "addressing" our appalling child abuse statistics? In this context, "address" is a meaningless term - what concrete actions to reduce the incidence of abuse do you want to see happen?
Well psycho homosexual adoption is child abuse. Next step after fag marriage eh queers?Maybe the maori pay no tax party could adddress their problem and stop worrying about fag packets.Roll up and kick a fag wacko's.We need a REAL leader who must stop this SICK AGENDA!
Post a Comment