guy and friends ruin confederate facebook group

[Col. Derontchi]

New mass politics thread

[Ad Bot]

[Jairo]

the south will yiff again

[Ipquarx]

what are you even talking about? this has nothing to do with loveism and you're really stretching the definition here.

I'm talking about loveism, and yes, it is loveism. It's not stretching the definition.
Male + female? Sure thing bucko!
Female + female? No marrying for you!
Male + male? No marrying and STONE THEM! (if they have love)

That's family values, which is a form of loveism.

[Col. Derontchi]

I'm talking about loveism, and yes, it is loveism. It's not stretching the definition.
Male + female? Sure thing bucko!
Female + female? No marrying for you!
Male + male? No marrying and STONE THEM! (if they have love)

That's family values, which is a form of loveism.

I disagree because you're not discriminating against them because they are a man or a woman, you're discriminating against them for who they like.

[·:Taboo:·]

That's family values, which is a form of loveism.

[Yosher]

loveism has to do with gender, not loveuality as far as i know

[Ipquarx]

loveism has to do with gender, not loveuality as far as i know

It is clearly based on gender though. If you're a man and your partner is a man (these are genders) then you cannot marry or have love. The only difference is it takes the genders of 2 people into account, not 1.

[MoltenKitten]

so are you taking back the "gays should all be killed or deported" thing or are you just being dumb again

Option 1

[Col. Derontchi]

It is clearly based on gender though. If you're a man and your partner is a man (these are genders) then you cannot marry or have love. The only difference is it takes the genders of 2 people into account, not 1.

Gender is a factor yes, but not the reason behind it. For instance, a man and a woman are allowed to marry each other, regardless of the fact that they are a man and a woman. However, a man is not allowed to marry another man, and a woman is not allowed to marry another woman. It's not because of their gender, it's because of their loveuality.

[Ipquarx]

Gender is a factor yes, but not the reason behind it. For instance, a man and a woman are allowed to marry each other, regardless of the fact that they are a man and a woman. However, a man is not allowed to marry another man, and a woman is not allowed to marry another woman. It's not because of their gender, it's because of their loveuality.

So two straight dudes are allowed to marry eachother, since it's straight, that's okay?

[Col. Derontchi]

So two straight dudes are allowed to marry eachother, since it's straight, that's okay?

Obviously not, but why would they? A stupid thing to ask.

[Ipquarx]

Obviously not

So then loveuality doesn't matter. Just gender.

Also, ever heard of aloveual? They're not loveually attracted to anybody, and it happens totally naturally. Two aloveual dudes could marry, two aloveual ladies could marry, etc. It's completely possible to want a long-term relationship without love.

[Yosher]

So then loveuality doesn't matter. Just gender.

yeah uh i don't think that's how it works

[Ipquarx]

yeah uh i don't think that's how it works

Q: Can two gay males marry   A: No
Q: Can two straight males marry   A: No
I don't see how loveuality plays any role in the decision.

[MoltenKitten]

If family values is a form of loveism wouldn't that also make homoloveuality loveist? I mean apparently the other love isn't good enough for you.