On average, queers and their apologists rubbish Christianity and protect Islam from we nasty right-wingers. They overlook the fact that Christian countries got around to decriminalizing unnatural sexual practices, and some now permit gay 'marriage', while others, like Australia, are considering allowing it. The more immoral the West becomes. The weaker the will of the West to fight against Islam becomes (Obama has almost stopped action against ISIS) the more likely is that we will be overrun by Islam. Our friends had better learn to fly, or live wherever there are no tall buildings, because we all know what Islamists think of, and do to, queer folk.

Phanto,
My use of the words you refer to is what is known as "satire". It's an art form that's been around for a while now. If you look it up I'm sure you'll find lots of references.

Now, on another note, you seem terribly concerned that heterosexual people will masquerade as homosexual people and marry each other. At least, I think that's what you're concerned about; I could be wrong.

Whatever your reasons are, you are certainly very concerned about the possibility that someone might claim to be homosexual when they're not.

I'll tell you what, you go first: prove you're really heterosexual. After all, how do we know you're not just a homosexual person trying to make heteros look bad by making nonsensical comments?

Hmmm, this is really deep: you might be a really smart straight person pretending to be a gay person pretending to be a really stupid straight person to throw us off the scent!

Where will it all end?

“My use of the words you refer to is what is known as "satire".”

Well there is no need to explain yourself if you haven’t done anything wrong.

‘Now, on another note, you seem terribly concerned that heterosexual people will masquerade as homosexual people and marry each other. At least, I think that's what you're concerned about; I could be wrong.’

Why would I be concerned about that? Homosexual people who are married might be concerned since they would be indistinguishable from heterosexual same-sex couples. Since they seem to want everyone to know that they are both married and homosexual it would weaken the impact they hope to achieve.

“prove you're really heterosexual”

Why should I have to prove anything since I am making no claims of being discriminated against? Don’t you agree that if a person goes before a court claiming that they have been discriminated against that they should have to prove the fundamental fact that they have a homosexual orientation? Don’t you agree that people could and maybe already have abused this major flaw in the discrimination laws? Do you not think that justice should be based on facts and if facts cannot be proven that a person is innocent until proven guilty or do think that these rules and values should not apply to homosexual people which would be a form of discrimination itself?

Phanto, you are getting a bit silly now.

How on earth would someone 'prove they are homosexual'? I can't think of many heterosexual men who would stand up in court to say they are actually homosexual.

Should they need photographic proof?
Would that take the form of stereotypical 'gay' clothing, voice or mannerisms?
Or should they provide the ultimate proof and drop to the floor and show everyone a gay sex act, just to be sure?

Just a thought. Are there any real live actual homosexuals arguing here for something they want or are most of proponents just the usual suspects who like to argue the opposite to the majority no matter what?

If there are no such people here, , the whole back an forth would seem to be a complete waste of time.

The reason that proponents of same-sex marriage resort to calling their opponents bigots is to cover up for the lack of logic in the argument for the creation of same-sex marriage.

This whole campaign has been a fascinating exercise in linguistic distortion and dishonesty that ought to be studied by anyone who ever wants to change anything. We have seen something created out of nothing, be rightly regarded as an absurdity and reach the brink of success inside 20 years.

Same-sex marriage is not illegal, any more than carnivorous vegetarianism is illegal. It is non-existent. Gays already have the right to marry; i.e., to form a union with one person of the opposite sex. Understandably they don’t want to marry. Instead they want to form a union with a person of the same sex. This too they may do, but it is not a marriage, so we have this extraordinary campaign to steal a word to denote as marriage something that is not a marriage. Thus, opinion polls ask, “Should gays be allowed to marry?”, even though they already can, thus implying they are being discriminated against, when they should ask, “Should the union of one man and one woman have a word exclusive to it?”. Because the whole thing is so illogical, the campaigners misname their campaign as for marriage “equality” when it has nothing to do with equality, and condemn their logical opponents as “homophobic bigots”, which is as absurd as claiming that the opponents of carnivorous vegetarianism are vegephobic bigots.

Marriage has had the same meaning since it entered the English language from the French. Marriage is the union of a man and a woman. That is the power that was given to the federal parliament in the Constitution. Nobody involved in the development of the Constitution ever thought it meant anything different. It did not need defining in the Constitution because it already had a common law meaning.