Why are so many Republicans intolerant and hateful?

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: MSUEngineer

Originally posted by: phantom309

Originally posted by: MSUEngineer
Many people are against gay marriage because it would be a sign to the nation that the government considers homosexuality an acceptable lifestyle. Many people (including myself) view homosexuality as a destructive lifestyle. How many people must die of AIDS and other STD's before we realize that it is wrong? How many lives must be destroyed for people to wake up? I'm not saying that homosexuality should be banned, but it definitely should not be promoted by the government as an acceptable lifestyle. If gay marriage is allowed, that is exactly what the government would be doing.

You don't like homosexuals. Please don't embarrass yourself by pretending to care about them.

This is exactly why all marriage should be between homosexuals only. Sexually transmitted diseases can be prevented but women will always die in child birth. We can save all these women from that horrible fate simply by outlawing heterosexual sex and the early abortion of all children.

Nothing pisses me off more than the arrogant assumption of you conservative religious nuts that you're the only ones who can think.
So you would just rather see them continue living a lifestyle that could possibly kill them? Thats really thoughtful. I don't like homosexuality because it KILLS people. Its akin to watching someone play Russian Roullette. Would you allow a friend to put a gun to his head and pull the trigger without at least trying to convince him not to do it?

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: LumbergTech

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: DVK916

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: DVK916

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
How does standing up for the traditional view of marriage make one hateful and intolerant?

Making laws based on christianity is wrong. We are a secular nation and it is time we act like it. To many repubs supporting Christian laws over the rights and humanity.

Hey genius, what do you think almost all of our laws are based off of? Our entire society is influenced greatly by Christianity, including YOU, the self proclaimed theist hater.

In the past this was true. But why should non christians be forced to comply to laws of bible today. There is no reason to even considure the god when making laws.

I know when I hear a repub or someone else quoting the bible mentioning god in support of a law, it makes me cring. Because such laws are also written by biggots for biggots.

I agree that God shouldn't be considered when making laws. However, the society we have today is the result of religion and it's influence on people. Religion gave us the morality that we have today (well most of us, you don't seem to have the same morality -- as evidenced by the thread in which you said you'd let a theist die if you could save them), and our laws are based off our morality.

actually no, it did not give us our morality today, it may have given some people, but many of us simply live a good life because we feel it is right and we dont have to explain it by saying that any superior being commanded it

Here we see the essential identity of the religious nut and the secular nut.

Each is convinced that his or her feelings are the basic foundations of truth. Actually, in both these cases the opinions are bigotry because both are bases in the inexplicably irrational nature of personal belief derived from unconsciously acquired feelings. We are programmed robots who worship our program as God. Truth lies beyond program, that which is when the program dies. Out of that Truth comes real understanding of Justice from whence comes rational Law. Law is an approximation of Justice which is an approximation of Truth which is the spontaneous action of Love.

 

[azazyel]

my favorite response to the gay agenda

http://www.corporatemofo.com/stories/030629gays.htm

 

[coolkatz321]

You can sa ywhat you want, but Republicans HATE gays. Especially George Bush. Try going to a place like the south and look at all the disgusting things that happen there. Is it okay for a man to marry his cousin, or worse yet, his sister? I'm sick of this tradition crap that the religious right keeps pushing. Give me a break! Children would probably be better off with same sex parents, rather than being abused by their own. It's sickening. We should not be able to tell people who they can and can not marry. If Congress wants to propose a law saying that all human beings can marry, then so be it. But we should not tell people who's sexual preference is different than our own that they can't marry; it's just not right. Stop being so hateful and get a grip.

And for those bible huggers- the bible also says you can own slaves, providing that they're from a neighboring country. Once I find enough Mexicans and Canadiens to manage my plantation, mayb I'll be wealthier. Religion is garbage, and it's what the parties of America feed off of.

 

[Pens1566]

Originally posted by: themusgrat
Well, as I have stated previously, I am a conservative, and am against gay marriage. It was intended to be the government's recognition of a family, to keep people together, and enforce some morality. Tha said, I do think that gays are slighted, and that they should have benefits equal to straight couples. But still, they don't have any reason to marry. Gays shouldn't adopt because a chid logically needs a father and a mother. Not a father and a father. It is possible that a child could do all right with 2 parents of the same sex, but research has shown that children thrive best when with their natural parents. And the closer you get to that, the better. So a straight couple is acceptable for adoption, but not a gay couple, since that is unbalanced, and simply wrong, in my opinion. Bush doesn't hate gays, he opposes gay adoption on logical and political reasons.

Where is this research?

Children thrive best when with their natural parents? So any adoption would be bad, right? Since you think kids do best with their mother AND father, maybe you should consider penalizing married couples from divorcing too.

 

[Pens1566]

Originally posted by: MSUEngineer
Many people are against gay marriage because it would be a sign to the nation that the government considers homosexuality an acceptable lifestyle. Many people (including myself) view homosexuality as a destructive lifestyle. How many people must die of AIDS and other STD's before we realize that it is wrong? How many lives must be destroyed for people to wake up? I'm not saying that homosexuality should be banned, but it definitely should not be promoted by the government as an acceptable lifestyle. If gay marriage is allowed, that is exactly what the government would be doing.

News flash genius : heterosexuals get aids too!!!! :roll:

 

[MonkeyK]

Originally posted by: jesusfr3ak4evr
Nice post. As my screen name suggests, I'm what most of you would consider a conservative Republican Christian, while I consider myself a moderate leaning toward the Republican side.

Half of political forums(and that might be an understatement) simply bash the current president, with a few who try to defend him and are placed under strong pressure. I believe a large reason many of the liberal views are not implemented is because of our political system. The Founding Fathers deliberately made political change a slow and incremental process.

My view is, if you so strongly disagree with our nation's views [on gay rights, abortion, and other social issues], move to Canada. The U.S. is the most Christian nation(even though it doesn't seem like it) in the western world; that won't last much longer as contemporary youth are rebelling against the previous generations. And FYI, I'm a senior in public high school under a liberal curriculum, yet I still hold these views.

One person's views, or even 50% of the population's views are not this nation's views. Even if they were leaving the country is hardly the way for change to happen.

And regarding the Christianity of the USA. Off the top of my head, I would guess that most of South America is more Christian than us; and I'm pretty sure that Italy is too.

 

[RightIsWrong]

Originally posted by: MSUEngineer
Many people are against inter-racial marriage because it would be a sign to the nation that the government considers inter-racial couples an acceptable lifestyle. Many people (including myself) view inter-racial dating as a destructive lifestyle. How many people must die of Sickle Cell and other black diseases before we realize that it is wrong? How many lives must be destroyed for people to wake up? I'm not saying that inter-racial relationships should be banned, but they definitely should not be promoted by the government as an alternative to a same-race lifestyle. If inter-racial marriage is allowed, that is exactly what the government would be doing.

I am going to edit your post so that I can give you a different perspective. This is in response to you asking Phantom309 for a debate.

See any similarities to the mindset of America, conservatives in particular, of the 50s-70s? Times change. People change. Roll with it. It doesn't effect you personally, unless you choose to marry someone of the same sex. If your sense of moral righteousness is wounded, too bad. They have every right, under the constitution, to equal protection. Marriage is a right that is granted by the government. That right has to be granted to ALL citizens. Not just the ones that the religious or morally superior deem worthy.

 

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Originally posted by: jesusfr3ak4evr
Nice post. As my screen name suggests, I'm what most of you would consider a conservative Republican Christian, while I consider myself a moderate leaning toward the Republican side.

Half of political forums(and that might be an understatement) simply bash the current president, with a few who try to defend him and are placed under strong pressure. I believe a large reason many of the liberal views are not implemented is because of our political system. The Founding Fathers deliberately made political change a slow and incremental process.

My view is, if you so strongly disagree with our nation's views [on gay rights, abortion, and other social issues], move to Canada. The U.S. is the most Christian nation(even though it doesn't seem like it) in the western world; that won't last much longer as contemporary youth are rebelling against the previous generations. And FYI, I'm a senior in public high school under a liberal curriculum, yet I still hold these views.

The US is the most Christian? No, maybe the US has the most 'Christians'. By no means are we the most Christian in either beliefs or actions. What about Italy or Greece? What about nations like the UK? We, as a nation, were built upon the notion that the church should not and shall not govern the state. This was to get away from theocratic views that were forced upon the population.
I don't want someones definition of their morals thrust on me, and I won't thrust mine on them, morals is a very relative term. Is it moralistic to force your daughter to an arranged marriage in the US? Not even close, however is that acceptable and the norm in other countries? Absolutely.
The fact that dubya and his administration consider themselves as Christians is a blemish on the ideals the church was founded on. Forgiveness and understanding, they have either no concept of this or just don't care. I vote for the latter.

 

[ntdz]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: ntdz
Hey genius, what do you think almost all of our laws are based off of? Our entire society is influenced greatly by Christianity, including YOU, the self proclaimed theist hater.

Uh, it is?

I thought most of the Founding Fathers were deists or even atheists?

The founding fathers are not the founders of our society, they formed our government. Our society's roots go way farther back...

 

[MSUEngineer]

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Originally posted by: MSUEngineer
Many people are against inter-racial marriage because it would be a sign to the nation that the government considers inter-racial couples an acceptable lifestyle. Many people (including myself) view inter-racial dating as a destructive lifestyle. How many people must die of Sickle Cell and other black diseases before we realize that it is wrong? How many lives must be destroyed for people to wake up? I'm not saying that inter-racial relationships should be banned, but they definitely should not be promoted by the government as an alternative to a same-race lifestyle. If inter-racial marriage is allowed, that is exactly what the government would be doing.

I am going to edit your post so that I can give you a different perspective. This is in response to you asking Phantom309 for a debate.

See any similarities to the mindset of America, conservatives in particular, of the 50s-70s? Times change. People change. Roll with it. It doesn't effect you personally, unless you choose to marry someone of the same sex. If your sense of moral righteousness is wounded, too bad. They have every right, under the constitution, to equal protection. Marriage is a right that is granted by the government. That right has to be granted to ALL citizens. Not just the ones that the religious or morally superior deem worthy.

Wow. Just Wow. Comparing inter-racial marriages to homosexuality is like comparing apples and oranges. First off, people who have Sickle Cell and other race related diseases CANNOT help it. They are born with it. AIDS on the other hand, is mostly caused by lifestyle choices with the exception to those who get it from blood transfusions or from a parent who was engaged in risky sexual behavior. Here is my point. If the government chooses to legalize same-sex marriage, it legitamizes homosexuality in general as an acceptable lifestyle choice. The FACTS show that the homosexual lifestyle is a very dangerous lifestyle, and it should not be promoted by the federal government!

And to say it does not affect me? How much of my tax dollars are going into research for a disease that could be eliminated if people would think about the consequences of their actions! How much tax revenues are lost because someone lost 30-40 years of their life due to AIDS? Instead of working and being productive in society, they're now in the ground because they caught an STD.

So since times change, what if murder became acceptable within a society. Would that make it right?

 

[Pens1566]

Where are these "FACTS" you speak of?

 

[MSUEngineer]

Originally posted by: Pens1566
Where are these "FACTS" you speak of?

See my post above where I had a link to the Washington Times article about the CDC report on AIDS.

And to reply to your quote about heterosexuals getting STD's too, if you engage in risky behavior whether your a heterosexual or a homosexual, your going to reap what you sow. My point is the federal government should not promote dangerous lifestyle choices of any kind period.

 

[imported_CowboyNerd]

I usually don't respond to any of these threads because it is like my grandfather taught me years ago...."Don't try to teach a pig to sing, it just frustrates you and ticks off the pig !".... but this thread amused me. The thread starts that Republicans/conservatives are so hateful and backwards in their beliefs but then I see posts from these "enlightened" people in the forum talk about ".. people in the South are stupid, push their religion on others and marry their cousins and/or sisters" . That is a stereotype is so hateful, closed-minded and bigoted that it really shows that some of you who spout this cr*p on this board need to get out of your parents basement and get out and see the world and the people who live here.

Thanks !
CN

 

[RightIsWrong]

Originally posted by: MSUEngineer

Originally posted by: RightIsWrong

Originally posted by: MSUEngineer
Many people are against inter-racial marriage because it would be a sign to the nation that the government considers inter-racial couples an acceptable lifestyle. Many people (including myself) view inter-racial dating as a destructive lifestyle. How many people must die of Sickle Cell and other black diseases before we realize that it is wrong? How many lives must be destroyed for people to wake up? I'm not saying that inter-racial relationships should be banned, but they definitely should not be promoted by the government as an alternative to a same-race lifestyle. If inter-racial marriage is allowed, that is exactly what the government would be doing.

I am going to edit your post so that I can give you a different perspective. This is in response to you asking Phantom309 for a debate.

See any similarities to the mindset of America, conservatives in particular, of the 50s-70s? Times change. People change. Roll with it. It doesn't effect you personally, unless you choose to marry someone of the same sex. If your sense of moral righteousness is wounded, too bad. They have every right, under the constitution, to equal protection. Marriage is a right that is granted by the government. That right has to be granted to ALL citizens. Not just the ones that the religious or morally superior deem worthy.

Wow. Just Wow. Comparing inter-racial marriages to homosexuality is like comparing apples and oranges. First off, people who have Sickle Cell and other race related diseases CANNOT help it. They are born with it. AIDS on the other hand, is mostly caused by lifestyle choices with the exception to those who get it from blood transfusions or from a parent who was engaged in risky sexual behavior. Here is my point. If the government chooses to legalize same-sex marriage, it legitamizes homosexuality in general as an acceptable lifestyle choice. The FACTS show that the homosexual lifestyle is a very dangerous lifestyle, and it should not be promoted by the federal government!

And to say it does not affect me? How much of my tax dollars are going into research for a disease that could be eliminated if people would think about the consequences of their actions! How much tax revenues are lost because someone lost 30-40 years of their life due to AIDS? Instead of working and being productive in society, they're now in the ground because they caught an STD.

So since times change, what if murder became acceptable within a society. Would that make it right?

So many assumptions with so little facts. The comparison between inter-racial marriage and gay marriage is a valid one because the former was chastized in the same manner as the latter and by pretty much the same people I might add.

Secondly, there are people that are BORN WITH AIDS as well. They can't help it....they just are. Homosexuality is an acceptable lifestyle choice. It isn't for me and I am going to go out on a limb and say it isn't for you either, but it is still an acceptable choice. I would like to see your "FACTS" that show it to be a "very dangerous lifestyle". IIRC, there are a ton of heterosexual couples that are killing or beating one another. Of course, they don't have the luxury of living a life filled with love before they are shot or stabbed to death like a lot of homosexuals that are in a monogamous relationship, but that is a minor detail. Thankfully, you and the federal government have deemed these to be "promotable".

Let's see, how much of your tax dollars are going out to pay judge's, police and DA salaries for prosecuting domestic violence between heterosexual couples? What about for enforcement and prosecution of other crimes such as prostitution? And to say that AIDS could be eliminated by homosexuals not engaging in sex is not only ignorant, it is plain stupid. And do you really think that a homosexual or someone else with AIDS cannot be a "productive" part of society?

Magic Johnson Foundation

Right and wrong is a decision that has to come from within.....NOT dictated by society. That is your problem. You think that society can dictate the rules and to whom the rules apply or don't apply instead of realizing that we have free will instilled within us for a reason.

 

[Pens1566]

Originally posted by: MSUEngineer

Originally posted by: Pens1566
Where are these "FACTS" you speak of?

See my post above where I had a link to the Washington Times article about the CDC report on AIDS.

And to reply to your quote about heterosexuals getting STD's too, if you engage in risky behavior whether your a heterosexual or a homosexual, your going to reap what you sow. My point is the federal government should not promote dangerous lifestyle choices of any kind period.

HIV rates are going up in all demographics, not just gay men.

 

[dahunan]

Originally posted by: MSUEngineer

Originally posted by: Pens1566
Where are these "FACTS" you speak of?

See my post above where I had a link to the Washington Times article about the CDC report on AIDS.

And to reply to your quote about heterosexuals getting STD's too, if you engage in risky behavior whether your a heterosexual or a homosexual, your going to reap what you sow. My point is the federal government should not promote dangerous lifestyle choices of any kind period.

Being gay is not always a choice.. we could just pull a Hitler and try to remove the gay genes from the gene pool?

BTW, there is nothing they can do to stop people from being Gay.. that battle is lost.. so now you just treat them like second class citizens and deny them normal status

The Federal Govt shouldn't allow anyone without at least a GED to produce babies or get married either..

 

[azazyel]

n/m

 

[Pens1566]

Originally posted by: dahunan

Originally posted by: MSUEngineer

Originally posted by: Pens1566
Where are these "FACTS" you speak of?

See my post above where I had a link to the Washington Times article about the CDC report on AIDS.

And to reply to your quote about heterosexuals getting STD's too, if you engage in risky behavior whether your a heterosexual or a homosexual, your going to reap what you sow. My point is the federal government should not promote dangerous lifestyle choices of any kind period.

Being gay is not always a choice.. we could just pull a Hitler and try to remove the gay genes from the gene pool?

BTW, there is nothing they can do to stop people from being Gay.. that battle is lost.. so now you just treat them like second class citizens and deny them normal status

The Federal Govt shouldn't allow anyone without at least a GED to produce babies or get married either..

<sarcasm>
No! Everyone chooses to be gay. Come on, look at the perks. Treated like crap by the govt, living in fear of hate crimes, having most of society look at you as less than human. I wonder why everyone doesn't choose to be a homosexual!
</sarcasm>

But of course people like MSUWhatever still think they choose. :roll:

 

[MSUEngineer]

Originally posted by: Pens1566

Originally posted by: dahunan

Originally posted by: MSUEngineer

Originally posted by: Pens1566
Where are these "FACTS" you speak of?

See my post above where I had a link to the Washington Times article about the CDC report on AIDS.

And to reply to your quote about heterosexuals getting STD's too, if you engage in risky behavior whether your a heterosexual or a homosexual, your going to reap what you sow. My point is the federal government should not promote dangerous lifestyle choices of any kind period.

Being gay is not always a choice.. we could just pull a Hitler and try to remove the gay genes from the gene pool?

BTW, there is nothing they can do to stop people from being Gay.. that battle is lost.. so now you just treat them like second class citizens and deny them normal status

The Federal Govt shouldn't allow anyone without at least a GED to produce babies or get married either..

<sarcasm>
No! Everyone chooses to be gay. Come on, look at the perks. Treated like crap by the govt, living in fear of hate crimes, having most of society look at you as less than human. I wonder why everyone doesn't choose to be a homosexual!
</sarcasm>

But of course people like MSUWhatever still think they choose. :roll:

You choose to engage in the risky behavior. No one is forcing you to have sex, unless you think man is an animal and has no free will.

 

[dahunan]

Originally posted by: MSUEngineer

Originally posted by: Pens1566

Originally posted by: dahunan

Originally posted by: MSUEngineer

Originally posted by: Pens1566
Where are these "FACTS" you speak of?

See my post above where I had a link to the Washington Times article about the CDC report on AIDS.

And to reply to your quote about heterosexuals getting STD's too, if you engage in risky behavior whether your a heterosexual or a homosexual, your going to reap what you sow. My point is the federal government should not promote dangerous lifestyle choices of any kind period.

Being gay is not always a choice.. we could just pull a Hitler and try to remove the gay genes from the gene pool?

BTW, there is nothing they can do to stop people from being Gay.. that battle is lost.. so now you just treat them like second class citizens and deny them normal status

The Federal Govt shouldn't allow anyone without at least a GED to produce babies or get married either..

<sarcasm>
No! Everyone chooses to be gay. Come on, look at the perks. Treated like crap by the govt, living in fear of hate crimes, having most of society look at you as less than human. I wonder why everyone doesn't choose to be a homosexual!
</sarcasm>

But of course people like MSUWhatever still think they choose. :roll:

You choose to engage in the risky behavior. No one is forcing you to have sex, unless you think man is an animal and has no free will.

OK then.. would you accept homosexuality if they promised to use condoms :laugh: :laugh:

I still think you should look into that Hitler thing.. cleanse the gene pool of the gays

 

[MSUEngineer]

Originally posted by: dahunan

Originally posted by: MSUEngineer

Originally posted by: Pens1566

Originally posted by: dahunan

Originally posted by: MSUEngineer

Originally posted by: Pens1566
Where are these "FACTS" you speak of?

See my post above where I had a link to the Washington Times article about the CDC report on AIDS.

And to reply to your quote about heterosexuals getting STD's too, if you engage in risky behavior whether your a heterosexual or a homosexual, your going to reap what you sow. My point is the federal government should not promote dangerous lifestyle choices of any kind period.

Being gay is not always a choice.. we could just pull a Hitler and try to remove the gay genes from the gene pool?

BTW, there is nothing they can do to stop people from being Gay.. that battle is lost.. so now you just treat them like second class citizens and deny them normal status

The Federal Govt shouldn't allow anyone without at least a GED to produce babies or get married either..

<sarcasm>
No! Everyone chooses to be gay. Come on, look at the perks. Treated like crap by the govt, living in fear of hate crimes, having most of society look at you as less than human. I wonder why everyone doesn't choose to be a homosexual!
</sarcasm>

But of course people like MSUWhatever still think they choose. :roll:

You choose to engage in the risky behavior. No one is forcing you to have sex, unless you think man is an animal and has no free will.

OK then.. would you accept homosexuality if they promised to use condoms :laugh: :laugh:

I still think you should look into that Hitler thing.. cleanse the gene pool of the gays

Way to twist what I am trying to say. My argument is not about stopping homosexuals from what they do. My argument is about the government promoting the lifestyle which they will do if homosexual marriage is allowed.

 

[dahunan]

Originally posted by: MSUEngineer

Originally posted by: dahunan

Originally posted by: MSUEngineer

Originally posted by: Pens1566

Originally posted by: dahunan

Originally posted by: MSUEngineer

Originally posted by: Pens1566
Where are these "FACTS" you speak of?

See my post above where I had a link to the Washington Times article about the CDC report on AIDS.

And to reply to your quote about heterosexuals getting STD's too, if you engage in risky behavior whether your a heterosexual or a homosexual, your going to reap what you sow. My point is the federal government should not promote dangerous lifestyle choices of any kind period.

Being gay is not always a choice.. we could just pull a Hitler and try to remove the gay genes from the gene pool?

BTW, there is nothing they can do to stop people from being Gay.. that battle is lost.. so now you just treat them like second class citizens and deny them normal status

The Federal Govt shouldn't allow anyone without at least a GED to produce babies or get married either..

<sarcasm>
No! Everyone chooses to be gay. Come on, look at the perks. Treated like crap by the govt, living in fear of hate crimes, having most of society look at you as less than human. I wonder why everyone doesn't choose to be a homosexual!
</sarcasm>

But of course people like MSUWhatever still think they choose. :roll:

You choose to engage in the risky behavior. No one is forcing you to have sex, unless you think man is an animal and has no free will.

OK then.. would you accept homosexuality if they promised to use condoms :laugh: :laugh:

I still think you should look into that Hitler thing.. cleanse the gene pool of the gays

Way to twist what I am trying to say. My argument is not about stopping homosexuals from what they do. My argument is about the government promoting the lifestyle which they will do if homosexual marriage is allowed.

I probably shouldn't use those tactics..

I will just have to agree to disagree.. I lmao when I hear people saying "sanctity of marriage" .. America is so fricken dysfunctional when it comes to marriage and sexual relations

 

[azazyel]

MSUEngineer-

This looks like something you'd support...

http://www.newswatch50.com/entertainmen...d=8D8F4984-70D9-41AD-8872-D0E0AEDC0997

Unmarried Couple Denied Right to Move In

A Missouri couple say they were denied an occupancy permit for their new home because they're not married.

Olivia Shelltrack and Fondray Loving have been together for 13 years and have three children, ages 8, 10 and 15, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports.

The couple are appealing the occupancy permit denial from the Black Jack, Mo., board of adjustment, which requires people living together to have blood, marriage or adoption ties. Loving is not the father of Shelltrack's oldest child.

I was basically told, you can have one child living in your house if you're not married, but more than that, you can't, Shelltrack told the newspaper.

This is about the definition of family, not if they're married or not, Mayor Normal McCourt said. It's what cities do to maintain the housing and to hold down overcrowding.

 

[MSUEngineer]

Originally posted by: azazyel
MSUEngineer-

This looks like something you'd support...

http://www.newswatch50.com/entertainmen...d=8D8F4984-70D9-41AD-8872-D0E0AEDC0997

Unmarried Couple Denied Right to Move In

A Missouri couple say they were denied an occupancy permit for their new home because they're not married.

Olivia Shelltrack and Fondray Loving have been together for 13 years and have three children, ages 8, 10 and 15, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports.

The couple are appealing the occupancy permit denial from the Black Jack, Mo., board of adjustment, which requires people living together to have blood, marriage or adoption ties. Loving is not the father of Shelltrack's oldest child.

I was basically told, you can have one child living in your house if you're not married, but more than that, you can't, Shelltrack told the newspaper.

This is about the definition of family, not if they're married or not, Mayor Normal McCourt said. It's what cities do to maintain the housing and to hold down overcrowding.

No I don't agree with the town. But, you are completely missing what I am arguing. The federal government should not actively promote promiscuous lifestyles. This is what it would be doing if it legalized homosexual marriage. Finally, you're pulling the old trick of putting the other person down in a debate because you do not know how to defend what you believe.