Skip to Next Poll »
16
Calling all Libtards - Party Like It's 1899
Hello, Lib-tards. As usual, politics continue to change almost daily, so here's our spot to discuss, debate, and often vent. I don't have a lot of time, so I'll keep this short and just say what I want to say in the thread when I get a chance. No question either, so here's a numerical input. If you want, put a numerical prediction for something, the Republican primary, Obama's general election vote percentage, number of Senators the Dems will have after the 2012 election, and explain it in the comments. Or just put 69. It's all good.

Please remember that all opinions are welcome, but this poll is geared towards the liberals here. So it can and often gets heated, so if you can't take the heat stay out of the poll. And let's all remember the CoC. Basically, don't be like our politicians, but disagree without being disagreeable.

*bangs gavel*
| Closed on 03/21/12 at 08:00PM
FanIQ Pts? No | Locker Room, Politics | Numeric Input Opinion Poll
22 Fans
Question
222.0911. Calling all Libtards - Party Like It's 1899

 &nbp;
TOP COMMENT * * * * * * * * * * * *
#2 | 919 days ago

I'm just going to type a few things. 

1. I'm sooo happy that men are joining hands....forming panels in order to discuss my ...well not just mine, but every woman's vagina. So thoughtful of you men....especially the ones that have never seen one. 

2. So Santorum (ha....his name always makes me giggle) will home school his kids and he doesn't like our public school system. I have my issues with the system as well, however, wasn't he the one who charged tax payers for homeschooling his own kids years ago?

3. Speaking of Santorum, and this is what keeps me from being very religious-----the hypocrisy and holier than thou crud that gets repeated--------why are  Obama's religious beliefs always being questioned? It irritates me. Santorum does know that if he became president he'd be representing those that don't believe the things he does right? Us heathens are pretty large in numbers. Someone should tell him. 

4. Abortion----how many of you just knew this would get into the mix sooner of later? Next up......gay marriage (Christie is a jerkhole). This is the weaponry Repubes use and it annoys and makes me want to kick things. Whatever your opinion on abortion is.............you have to see the hypocrisy of being against it and then NOT supporting any programs that are set up to help the kids you wanted to "save". Are they only save-worthy when they are in utero? I never got this way of thinking. Where are all the Pro Lifers when kids are going to school hungry, being neglected. Seems to me the priorities of some are a little skewed. 

Just a couple of my thoughts for tonight....
13  
  
374 Comments | Sorted by Most Recent First | Red = You Disagreed
Vote for your favorite comments. Fans decide the Top Comment (3+ votes) and also hide poor quality comments (4+ votes).
#1 | 919 days ago
John_Daly (+)

crusty-hippy.jpg
#2 | 919 days ago

I'm just going to type a few things. 

1. I'm sooo happy that men are joining hands....forming panels in order to discuss my ...well not just mine, but every woman's vagina. So thoughtful of you men....especially the ones that have never seen one. 

2. So Santorum (ha....his name always makes me giggle) will home school his kids and he doesn't like our public school system. I have my issues with the system as well, however, wasn't he the one who charged tax payers for homeschooling his own kids years ago?

3. Speaking of Santorum, and this is what keeps me from being very religious-----the hypocrisy and holier than thou crud that gets repeated--------why are  Obama's religious beliefs always being questioned? It irritates me. Santorum does know that if he became president he'd be representing those that don't believe the things he does right? Us heathens are pretty large in numbers. Someone should tell him. 

4. Abortion----how many of you just knew this would get into the mix sooner of later? Next up......gay marriage (Christie is a jerkhole). This is the weaponry Repubes use and it annoys and makes me want to kick things. Whatever your opinion on abortion is.............you have to see the hypocrisy of being against it and then NOT supporting any programs that are set up to help the kids you wanted to "save". Are they only save-worthy when they are in utero? I never got this way of thinking. Where are all the Pro Lifers when kids are going to school hungry, being neglected. Seems to me the priorities of some are a little skewed. 

Just a couple of my thoughts for tonight....
13  
#3 | 919 days ago

http://www.hulu.com/watch/331282/saturday-night-live-really-with-seth-and-amy-birth-control

Just to get things started.
500  
#4 | 919 days ago

2012  
#5 | 919 days ago
cubsgirl2 (+)

All I know is the republicans are at war with their selves. The tea party has separated them as well as their own nominees. Of course it will come down to  Santorum will either run for President but most likely vice president. And everything that he has disagreed with Romney will be all good.  

  I for the first time have a feeling that President Obama will be re-elected. And for this I am happy, but I really want him to grow a pair and quit caving to a congress and senate that has done nothing but disrespect him for the last two years. 


  Dude, you're the President make a fuc***g stand!
69  
#6 | 919 days ago
cubsgirl2 (+)

(Edited by cubsgirl2)
ohwell_ wrote: That was hilarious. And yet in this day and age some ignorant man will still say, put an aspirin between your knees.  I think the republicans would love a no birth control state. How else are they ever going to multiply? 
69  
#7 | 918 days ago

kteacher wrote:
I'm just going to type a few things. 

1. I'm sooo happy that men are joining hands....forming panels in order to discuss my ...well not just mine, but every woman's vagina. So thoughtful of you men....especially the ones that have never seen one. 

2. So Santorum (ha....his name always makes me giggle) will home school his kids and he doesn't like our public school system. I have my issues with the system as well, however, wasn't he the one who charged tax payers for homeschooling his own kids years ago?

3. Speaking of Santorum, and this is what keeps me from being very religious-----the hypocrisy and holier than thou crud that gets repeated--------why are  Obama's religious beliefs always being questioned? It irritates me. Santorum does know that if he became president he'd be representing those that don't believe the things he does right? Us heathens are pretty large in numbers. Someone should tell him. 

4. Abortion----how many of you just knew this would get into the mix sooner of later? Next up......gay marriage (Christie is a jerkhole). This is the weaponry Repubes use and it annoys and makes me want to kick things. Whatever your opinion on abortion is.............you have to see the hypocrisy of being against it and then NOT supporting any programs that are set up to help the kids you wanted to "save". Are they only save-worthy when they are in utero? I never got this way of thinking. Where are all the Pro Lifers when kids are going to school hungry, being neglected. Seems to me the priorities of some are a little skewed. 

Just a couple of my thoughts for tonight....
Exactly.
Why is it that all the people who complain about government having too big a role in the peoples' lives are the same ones who insist on having the government tell people how to live, what to do, what they CAN do or CAN'T do, what restrictions there are for certain people and groups, etc.?
#8 | 918 days ago

kteacher wrote:
I'm just going to type a few things. 

1. I'm sooo happy that men are joining hands....forming panels in order to discuss my ...well not just mine, but every woman's vagina. So thoughtful of you men....especially the ones that have never seen one. 

2. So Santorum (ha....his name always makes me giggle) will home school his kids and he doesn't like our public school system. I have my issues with the system as well, however, wasn't he the one who charged tax payers for homeschooling his own kids years ago?

3. Speaking of Santorum, and this is what keeps me from being very religious-----the hypocrisy and holier than thou crud that gets repeated--------why are  Obama's religious beliefs always being questioned? It irritates me. Santorum does know that if he became president he'd be representing those that don't believe the things he does right? Us heathens are pretty large in numbers. Someone should tell him. 

4. Abortion----how many of you just knew this would get into the mix sooner of later? Next up......gay marriage (Christie is a jerkhole). This is the weaponry Repubes use and it annoys and makes me want to kick things. Whatever your opinion on abortion is.............you have to see the hypocrisy of being against it and then NOT supporting any programs that are set up to help the kids you wanted to "save". Are they only save-worthy when they are in utero? I never got this way of thinking. Where are all the Pro Lifers when kids are going to school hungry, being neglected. Seems to me the priorities of some are a little skewed. 

Just a couple of my thoughts for tonight....
1.  I agree that women should be represented on any panel dealing with womens rights.

2. Whats the difference in santorum home schooling and most of the DC uppity ups sending their children to private school?  Does Obummers kids go to public school?  I really dont know.  As often as they are pulled for "vacation", I doubt they would be.

3.  Why does it bother you that he has religious convictions?  Would it be better if he hid them?  The old, what ya dont know thing?  I think that people who live their convictions are admirable.  I disagree with some of them but still he's putting it out there for yours and my judgement.  If he doesnt get elected because of them, then so be it.  
 
4.  You are a teacher and work with children all day--now, take your absolute favorite student and imagine not ever knowing him/her because the mother decided she just couldnt afford them.  How many millions of scientists, teachers, engineers or even presidents have had the life sucked out of them due to being inconvenient.  Im not completely against abortion in certain circumstances (rape, incest...), but the old adage of "dont do the crime if ya cant do the time" should apply.  We try our best to teach our children that there are consequences to their actions but then turn around and tell them its all right to just "dump it" if they cant handle it.  Children are the only social programs that I think should be funded---ensure the children have a roof, food and access to an education.  When they become adults, get your arse in gear or get run over.

Heathens?  Why do you just call out repubs?  I was raised a southern democrat and I know a ton of democrats that disagree with you on most things.  From my travels, I think this country is more divided down the line of rural/city than it is repub/democrat.  The problem is that city people carry more votes than rural people.  Conservatives will lose any social argument on the national stage and should stay out of them.  When 51% of the country is on the dole from the govenment in one form or another, its not going to go our way.  I subscribe to the famous quote---

“When the people find that they can vote themselves money,
that will herald the end of the republic.” --Ben Franklin

Thats where we are now.  We cant get people to vote against recieving their govenment handout.  Conservatives have to fight the fiscal argument.  We have got to push to get the US out of this massive debt that will eventually end our role on the world stage.

My 2 cents, worth the same as your 2 cents.
 
#9 | 918 days ago
unopescatore (+)

(Edited by Jess)
John_Daly wrote:
crusty-hippy.jpg
LOL....dude you beat me to it....g**damn Freaken Hippies.
#10 | 918 days ago
unopescatore (+)

kteacher wrote:
I'm just going to type a few things. 

1. I'm sooo happy that men are joining hands....forming panels in order to discuss my ...well not just mine, but every woman's vagina. So thoughtful of you men....especially the ones that have never seen one. 

2. So Santorum (ha....his name always makes me giggle) will home school his kids and he doesn't like our public school system. I have my issues with the system as well, however, wasn't he the one who charged tax payers for homeschooling his own kids years ago?

3. Speaking of Santorum, and this is what keeps me from being very religious-----the hypocrisy and holier than thou crud that gets repeated--------why are  Obama's religious beliefs always being questioned? It irritates me. Santorum does know that if he became president he'd be representing those that don't believe the things he does right? Us heathens are pretty large in numbers. Someone should tell him. 

4. Abortion----how many of you just knew this would get into the mix sooner of later? Next up......gay marriage (Christie is a jerkhole). This is the weaponry Repubes use and it annoys and makes me want to kick things. Whatever your opinion on abortion is.............you have to see the hypocrisy of being against it and then NOT supporting any programs that are set up to help the kids you wanted to "save". Are they only save-worthy when they are in utero? I never got this way of thinking. Where are all the Pro Lifers when kids are going to school hungry, being neglected. Seems to me the priorities of some are a little skewed. 

Just a couple of my thoughts for tonight....
worry about your own state please....I love our NJ jerkhole....this liberal communist state will allow the moho's to marry at some point.

sh-t....I think I just pissed in the wind. sad
#11 | 918 days ago
cubsgirl2 (+)

(Edited by cubsgirl2)
Hilblee wrote:
1.  I agree that women should be represented on any panel dealing with womens rights.

2. Whats the difference in santorum home schooling and most of the DC uppity ups sending their children to private school?  Does Obummers kids go to public school?  I really dont know.  As often as they are pulled for "vacation", I doubt they would be.

3.  Why does it bother you that he has religious convictions?  Would it be better if he hid them?  The old, what ya dont know thing?  I think that people who live their convictions are admirable.  I disagree with some of them but still he's putting it out there for yours and my judgement.  If he doesnt get elected because of them, then so be it.  
 
4.  You are a teacher and work with children all day--now, take your absolute favorite student and imagine not ever knowing him/her because the mother decided she just couldnt afford them.  How many millions of scientists, teachers, engineers or even presidents have had the life sucked out of them due to being inconvenient.  Im not completely against abortion in certain circumstances (rape, incest...), but the old adage of "dont do the crime if ya cant do the time" should apply.  We try our best to teach our children that there are consequences to their actions but then turn around and tell them its all right to just "dump it" if they cant handle it.  Children are the only social programs that I think should be funded---ensure the children have a roof, food and access to an education.  When they become adults, get your arse in gear or get run over.

Heathens?  Why do you just call out repubs?  I was raised a southern democrat and I know a ton of democrats that disagree with you on most things.  From my travels, I think this country is more divided down the line of rural/city than it is repub/democrat.  The problem is that city people carry more votes than rural people.  Conservatives will lose any social argument on the national stage and should stay out of them.  When 51% of the country is on the dole from the govenment in one form or another, its not going to go our way.  I subscribe to the famous quote---

“When the people find that they can vote themselves money,
that will herald the end of the republic.” --Ben Franklin

Thats where we are now.  We cant get people to vote against recieving their govenment handout.  Conservatives have to fight the fiscal argument.  We have got to push to get the US out of this massive debt that will eventually end our role on the world stage.

My 2 cents, worth the same as your 2 cents.
 
You know a TON of southern democrats?  Seriously?  Well like the song says, you ought to get a rich man to vote like that. And where I live we are few and far between, we just talk louder that way we can find each other through all the republicans. 


And as far as President Obamas vacations, I'm pretty sure that when it comes to vacations, that's the one thing George W. did better than any other president ever. 

  Don't throw stones when they may hit a republicans house. 
69  
#12 | 918 days ago

Hilblee wrote:
1.  I agree that women should be represented on any panel dealing with womens rights.

2. Whats the difference in santorum home schooling and most of the DC uppity ups sending their children to private school?  Does Obummers kids go to public school?  I really dont know.  As often as they are pulled for "vacation", I doubt they would be.

3.  Why does it bother you that he has religious convictions?  Would it be better if he hid them?  The old, what ya dont know thing?  I think that people who live their convictions are admirable.  I disagree with some of them but still he's putting it out there for yours and my judgement.  If he doesnt get elected because of them, then so be it.  
 
4.  You are a teacher and work with children all day--now, take your absolute favorite student and imagine not ever knowing him/her because the mother decided she just couldnt afford them.  How many millions of scientists, teachers, engineers or even presidents have had the life sucked out of them due to being inconvenient.  Im not completely against abortion in certain circumstances (rape, incest...), but the old adage of "dont do the crime if ya cant do the time" should apply.  We try our best to teach our children that there are consequences to their actions but then turn around and tell them its all right to just "dump it" if they cant handle it.  Children are the only social programs that I think should be funded---ensure the children have a roof, food and access to an education.  When they become adults, get your arse in gear or get run over.

Heathens?  Why do you just call out repubs?  I was raised a southern democrat and I know a ton of democrats that disagree with you on most things.  From my travels, I think this country is more divided down the line of rural/city than it is repub/democrat.  The problem is that city people carry more votes than rural people.  Conservatives will lose any social argument on the national stage and should stay out of them.  When 51% of the country is on the dole from the govenment in one form or another, its not going to go our way.  I subscribe to the famous quote---

“When the people find that they can vote themselves money,
that will herald the end of the republic.” --Ben Franklin

Thats where we are now.  We cant get people to vote against recieving their govenment handout.  Conservatives have to fight the fiscal argument.  We have got to push to get the US out of this massive debt that will eventually end our role on the world stage.

My 2 cents, worth the same as your 2 cents.
 
1. smart
2. Santorum's whole education platform bugs me. Home school your kids if you want, but understand that NOT all parents are able to do that and have a plan. (Is it really necessary to name call when having a discussion? I could have done the same for Santorum.....and boy, everyone knows how many spoofs can be made from his name. )
3. Religious convictions don't bug me. Have them, just understand others rights to believe the way they do. NOt a fan of the "he's not really Christian" or "I'm more Christian than you are" card. 
4. I think you misunderstood what I typed. Based on your comment ,"Children are the only social programs that I think should be funded. I agree minus the word "only. My point is that many who want to save the unborn, could give a damn about the kids born. If you are ProLife, you should be pro--all life. (in my opinion)

**Heathens-----I was referring to me and others who feel like I do. Why do I call out repubes?----it's a "Libtard" poll. It's pretty much in the rules. There are democrats that disagree with me? NO WAY. I kid. I sure hope there are. I don't think I want to get into the whole city vs. rural people thing. 
13  
#13 | 918 days ago

unopescatore wrote:
worry about your own state please....I love our NJ jerkhole....this liberal communist state will allow the moho's to marry at some point.

sh-t....I think I just pissed in the wind. sad
I do what I want (sort of like your governor).blush

And you did. How did it feel? 
13  
#14 | 918 days ago
unopescatore (+)

kteacher wrote:
I do what I want (sort of like your governor).blush

And you did. How did it feel? 
no burning sensation as of yet....I have a feeling it'll start to hurt if I continue talking about moho's however. :)
#15 | 918 days ago
cubsgirl2 (+)

unopescatore wrote:
no burning sensation as of yet....I have a feeling it'll start to hurt if I continue talking about moho's however. :)
Naw, Janet has a way of numbing you before she starts her feeding frenzy. smiley
69  
#16 | 918 days ago

(Edited by MIKELIN8)
cubsgirl2 wrote:
All I know is the republicans are at war with their selves. The tea party has separated them as well as their own nominees. Of course it will come down to  Santorum will either run for President but most likely vice president. And everything that he has disagreed with Romney will be all good.  

  I for the first time have a feeling that President Obama will be re-elected. And for this I am happy, but I really want him to grow a pair and quit caving to a congress and senate that has done nothing but disrespect him for the last two years. 


  Dude, you're the President make a fuc***g stand!
Glenda, to put it in a sports perspective...think of President Obama as the Jackie Robinson of Presidents. I, too, have been unhappy that the President has caved so often, but I think he feels a great weight on his shoulders that he can not be the man who makes it impossible, for others like him, to follow...just like Jackie did.

I am hoping that his second term will be much different. Without the  ned to worry about re-election, and perhaps, a friendlier Congress...less repugs and 'blue dogs' (whom I call "Dinos"). But that is up to the American electorate. I have, many times, told this crowd how much distrust I have of the American electorate...how many people, who have nothing, can vote for a party which caters to those who have much, is STILL beyond me.

And, you know, when I saw '1899' in the title of this thread, I immediately thought of Rick Santorum...because I think that is a year he would fit nicely into. Sanctimonious Santorum, we call him here in PA. It is funny that the media is treating him as a viable candidate, when every time he has had to produce a large number of voters, he has failed.  

Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to finish eating my pancakes.   
8  
#17 | 918 days ago

cubsgirl2 wrote:
You know a TON of southern democrats?  Seriously?  Well like the song says, you ought to get a rich man to vote like that. And where I live we are few and far between, we just talk louder that way we can find each other through all the republicans. 


And as far as President Obamas vacations, I'm pretty sure that when it comes to vacations, that's the one thing George W. did better than any other president ever. 

  Don't throw stones when they may hit a republicans house. 
This argument has been fought before---You have to see the factcheck to determine the costs of spending time in Crawford and traveling the world for the finest lodging and fare. 

Bush's crawford trips were mostly working trips--almost every world leader met at crawford, most actually requested it because they wanted to avoid the DC hubub. 

The Obumma's escapades are just that, escapades on the taxpayers dollar. 2 weeks after a 17 day hawaiian vacation, michelle and the girls are in vale for some skiing.  

 
#18 | 918 days ago
cubsgirl2 (+)

MIKELIN8 wrote:
Glenda, to put it in a sports perspective...think of President Obama as the Jackie Robinson of Presidents. I, too, have been unhappy that the President has caved so often, but I think he feels a great weight on his shoulders that he can not be the man who makes it impossible, for others like him, to follow...just like Jackie did.

I am hoping that his second term will be much different. Without the  ned to worry about re-election, and perhaps, a friendlier Congress...less repugs and 'blue dogs' (whom I call "Dinos"). But that is up to the American electorate. I have, many times, told this crowd how much distrust I have of the American electorate...how many people, who have nothing, can vote for a party which caters to those who have much, is STILL beyond me.

And, you know, when I saw '1899' in the title of this thread, I immediately thought of Rick Santorum...because I think that is a year he would fit nicely into. Sanctimonious Santorum, we call him here in PA. It is funny that the media is treating him as a viable candidate, when every time he has had to produce a large number of voters, he has failed.  

Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to finish eating my pancakes.   
Nicely said.  yes


And can I have some? smiley
69  
#19 | 918 days ago
NorseHeathen (+)

kteacher wrote:
I'm just going to type a few things. 

1. I'm sooo happy that men are joining hands....forming panels in order to discuss my ...well not just mine, but every woman's vagina. So thoughtful of you men....especially the ones that have never seen one. 

2. So Santorum (ha....his name always makes me giggle) will home school his kids and he doesn't like our public school system. I have my issues with the system as well, however, wasn't he the one who charged tax payers for homeschooling his own kids years ago?

3. Speaking of Santorum, and this is what keeps me from being very religious-----the hypocrisy and holier than thou crud that gets repeated--------why are  Obama's religious beliefs always being questioned? It irritates me. Santorum does know that if he became president he'd be representing those that don't believe the things he does right? Us heathens are pretty large in numbers. Someone should tell him. 

4. Abortion----how many of you just knew this would get into the mix sooner of later? Next up......gay marriage (Christie is a jerkhole). This is the weaponry Repubes use and it annoys and makes me want to kick things. Whatever your opinion on abortion is.............you have to see the hypocrisy of being against it and then NOT supporting any programs that are set up to help the kids you wanted to "save". Are they only save-worthy when they are in utero? I never got this way of thinking. Where are all the Pro Lifers when kids are going to school hungry, being neglected. Seems to me the priorities of some are a little skewed. 

Just a couple of my thoughts for tonight....
Very well said Becky, and from an educators perspective it definitely carries more weight.

As for Santorum, he's not interested in his religious liberty, nor that of the others with his level of convictions; his interest is in forcing, through law, his convictions upon others.

As for abortion, if Christians had a reputation for extending an open had to help instead of trying it initiate force through legislation (which is abundantly clear since the 2010 congress--and the current discussion in the Republican primaries), I believe people would be FAR more willing to seek the council of religious bodies with regard to such a situation.  Of the three people (3 of 3 that sought such council), they confided in me a distraught, angered, and persecuted experience in seeking help from such organizations--amongst other feelings and sentiments.  Granted, that's only 3 perspectives of which I am personally privy too, but out of 3 total it is definitely relevant.  My personal experience, combined with the multitude of similar affirmations I have read is the exact reason why there is such an aversion towards religion and religious institutions in our present society--which is saddest testaments in a country established first and foremost under the dedications to freedom and liberty, of which religion is one specifically named.

The "catch 22" of freedom and liberty is that one not only has the opportunity to exercise such, but must also respect another's right to exercise theirs with equal respect.
#20 | 918 days ago
cubsgirl2 (+)

Hilblee wrote:
This argument has been fought before---You have to see the factcheck to determine the costs of spending time in Crawford and traveling the world for the finest lodging and fare. 

Bush's crawford trips were mostly working trips--almost every world leader met at crawford, most actually requested it because they wanted to avoid the DC hubub. 

The Obumma's escapades are just that, escapades on the taxpayers dollar. 2 weeks after a 17 day hawaiian vacation, michelle and the girls are in vale for some skiing.  

 
I'm sure he was working in Crawford. Making oil deals with the Saudis to make himself, his family, and the Cheneys even richer. 

I have no doubt that's what he was doing "working"
69  
#21 | 918 days ago

unopescatore wrote:
no burning sensation as of yet....I have a feeling it'll start to hurt if I continue talking about moho's however. :)
I live nearby.  I will be there with the entire cast of Cirque du Soleil, protesting on your front lawn.  You will be BEGGING the big, fat, stupid, obnoxious, bullying, gross, worthless governor to pass gay marriage before we're done with you.
#22 | 918 days ago

NorseHeathen wrote:
Very well said Becky, and from an educators perspective it definitely carries more weight.

As for Santorum, he's not interested in his religious liberty, nor that of the others with his level of convictions; his interest is in forcing, through law, his convictions upon others.

As for abortion, if Christians had a reputation for extending an open had to help instead of trying it initiate force through legislation (which is abundantly clear since the 2010 congress--and the current discussion in the Republican primaries), I believe people would be FAR more willing to seek the council of religious bodies with regard to such a situation.  Of the three people (3 of 3 that sought such council), they confided in me a distraught, angered, and persecuted experience in seeking help from such organizations--amongst other feelings and sentiments.  Granted, that's only 3 perspectives of which I am personally privy too, but out of 3 total it is definitely relevant.  My personal experience, combined with the multitude of similar affirmations I have read is the exact reason why there is such an aversion towards religion and religious institutions in our present society--which is saddest testaments in a country established first and foremost under the dedications to freedom and liberty, of which religion is one specifically named.

The "catch 22" of freedom and liberty is that one not only has the opportunity to exercise such, but must also respect another's right to exercise theirs with equal respect.
Force thru legislation?  maybe, but no more than any other organization that thinks they are right but the law doesnt agree.  Look at the homosexual agenda---california voters voted against them so they found a homosexual judge to fight it.  This is all too common now.  Anytime a group disagrees with the law they just find a judge partial to their agenda and go to court.  Not how I think it should be done here.  If we dont like a law, get the votes and repeal it.

Not arguing constitutional vs non-constitutional----Half the crap thats been ruled on over the last 100 yrs I cant find reference too anywhere in the constitution.  I have a copy sitting here on my desk. 
#23 | 918 days ago
unopescatore (+)

janet011685 wrote:
I live nearby.  I will be there with the entire cast of Cirque du Soleil, protesting on your front lawn.  You will be BEGGING the big, fat, stupid, obnoxious, bullying, gross, worthless governor to pass gay marriage before we're done with you.
please don't come between 3pm-5pm...it's my daughters nap time....unless they can perform some tricks & I don't mean the moho kind. laugh

it'll pass eventually....don't u worry about it.  If they wanna get married then do it, just do it in Mass for now. cheeky
#24 | 918 days ago

The president doesnt have to be in the oval office in order to work---I will even give that much to Obuma.  Im sure he is taking care of our business while he is traveling around on his fund raising blitz.  (I think thats what they called it on ABC)
#25 | 918 days ago

unopescatore wrote:
please don't come between 3pm-5pm...it's my daughters nap time....unless they can perform some tricks & I don't mean the moho kind. laugh

it'll pass eventually....don't u worry about it.  If they wanna get married then do it, just do it in Mass for now. cheeky
YOU do it in Mass, what a stupid thing to say to me.

(No, but really, I know it'll pass eventually.  I just hate Fat-Face McGee and everything he laboriously stands for (Hehe, that was a fat joke ... get it?  Ahhhhh.  I f**king hate him.).
#26 | 918 days ago
unopescatore (+)

janet011685 wrote:
YOU do it in Mass, what a stupid thing to say to me.

(No, but really, I know it'll pass eventually.  I just hate Fat-Face McGee and everything he laboriously stands for (Hehe, that was a fat joke ... get it?  Ahhhhh.  I f**king hate him.).
you're down with the moho's but you're taking shots at lard arses.....I dunno Janet....that's not very diverse.  

I know you loathe the fat slob, but he's better then the other douchebag....then again that's just my opinion.  IMO if ya start passing some of this non-sense....then you're on a slippery slope.
#27 | 918 days ago

unopescatore wrote:
you're down with the moho's but you're taking shots at lard arses.....I dunno Janet....that's not very diverse.  

I know you loathe the fat slob, but he's better then the other douchebag....then again that's just my opinion.  IMO if ya start passing some of this non-sense....then you're on a slippery slope.
Gay marriage = nonsense?  
Tread lightly, my friend.  Like rat traps all over the floor, walking on eggshells and broken glass, trying not to wake a room full of sleeping babies kinda lightly.
#28 | 918 days ago
cubsgirl2 (+)

janet011685 wrote:
Gay marriage = nonsense?  
Tread lightly, my friend.  Like rat traps all over the floor, walking on eggshells and broken glass, trying not to wake a room full of sleeping babies kinda lightly.
I changed my mind, do not numb him before you go in for the kill. smiley
69  
#29 | 918 days ago
unopescatore (+)

janet011685 wrote:
Gay marriage = nonsense?  
Tread lightly, my friend.  Like rat traps all over the floor, walking on eggshells and broken glass, trying not to wake a room full of sleeping babies kinda lightly.
I understand...it's a touchy subject...there's no need for anyone to get salty on the subject matter though.  My views aren't based on religion, I just don't agree with it....I understand that part of it passing is for finacial reasons.

it's gonna pass....no worries.  First time I see 2 dudes get married on a Jersey beach while I'm fishing....I'll throw up. :)  Maryland....here I come!!!!
#30 | 918 days ago

(Edited by Jess)
I usually refuse to comment in these types of polls and forums because I don't usually educate myself on political issues (nor do I care to) enough to form intelligent opinions and responses. However, the whole anti-gay marriage thing irks me to the core, as do some of the women's issues.

As far as gay marriage is concerned - who is it hurting to just pass it? Why make anybody feel like second-class citizens because of who they love? If gay marriage is passed nation-wide are people afraid straight marriage will be outlawed? It just seems like it should be a non-issue all around. It ticks me off that it seems to be a pretty big part of politics right now.
34  
#31 | 918 days ago
unopescatore (+)

cubsgirl2 wrote:
I changed my mind, do not numb him before you go in for the kill. smiley
stop instigating, I'm doing it on my own.....cubs suck. cheeky
#32 | 918 days ago
cubsgirl2 (+)

unopescatore wrote:
I understand...it's a touchy subject...there's no need for anyone to get salty on the subject matter though.  My views aren't based on religion, I just don't agree with it....I understand that part of it passing is for finacial reasons.

it's gonna pass....no worries.  First time I see 2 dudes get married on a Jersey beach while I'm fishing....I'll throw up. :)  Maryland....here I come!!!!
Why will you throw up? Penis envy? 
69  
#33 | 918 days ago

Jess wrote:
I usually refuse to comment in these types of polls and forums because I don't usually educate myself on political issues (nor do I care to) enough to form intelligent opinions and responses. However, the whole anti-gay marriage thing irks me to the core, as do some of the women's issues.

As far as gay marriage is concerned - who is it hurting to just pass it? Why make anybody feel like second-class citizens because of who they love? If gay marriage is passed nation-wide are people afraid straight marriage will be outlawed? It just seems like it should be a non-issue all around. It ticks me off that it seems to be a pretty big part of politics right now.
#34 | 918 days ago
unopescatore (+)

cubsgirl2 wrote:
Why will you throw up? Penis envy? 
I dunno...maybe I'll hold it together.  Unless they're getting married on the Sandyhook Nude beach, then I aint seeing their packages.

I know Janet knows all about that beach. ;)
#35 | 918 days ago
cubsgirl2 (+)

unopescatore wrote:
stop instigating, I'm doing it on my own.....cubs suck. cheeky
you suck, but i still talk to you. and besides i'm having way to much fun to stop now. 
69  
#36 | 918 days ago

Jess wrote:
I usually refuse to comment in these types of polls and forums because I don't usually educate myself on political issues (nor do I care to) enough to form intelligent opinions and responses. However, the whole anti-gay marriage thing irks me to the core, as do some of the women's issues.

As far as gay marriage is concerned - who is it hurting to just pass it? Why make anybody feel like second-class citizens because of who they love? If gay marriage is passed nation-wide are people afraid straight marriage will be outlawed? It just seems like it should be a non-issue all around. It ticks me off that it seems to be a pretty big part of politics right now.
I agree 100%. I don't get what the big deal is.
#37 | 918 days ago

Jess wrote:
I usually refuse to comment in these types of polls and forums because I don't usually educate myself on political issues (nor do I care to) enough to form intelligent opinions and responses. However, the whole anti-gay marriage thing irks me to the core, as do some of the women's issues.

As far as gay marriage is concerned - who is it hurting to just pass it? Why make anybody feel like second-class citizens because of who they love? If gay marriage is passed nation-wide are people afraid straight marriage will be outlawed? It just seems like it should be a non-issue all around. It ticks me off that it seems to be a pretty big part of politics right now.
I personally dont care.  I dont use religious arguments against it, but do think is against nature.  The fight is financial in my opinion.  they want all the financial benefits of marriage but the state is thinking its a can of worms that will destroy their budgets.    On the religious side, it will be that they are afraid they will be sued if they dont perform the ceremonies.  Its already happened.  Should a church be forced to perform a marriage they dont beleive in?

I dont think anyone beleives straight marriage will be outlawed or anything.  Its just the matter of where does it end.
#38 | 918 days ago
unopescatore (+)

Jess wrote:
I usually refuse to comment in these types of polls and forums because I don't usually educate myself on political issues (nor do I care to) enough to form intelligent opinions and responses. However, the whole anti-gay marriage thing irks me to the core, as do some of the women's issues.

As far as gay marriage is concerned - who is it hurting to just pass it? Why make anybody feel like second-class citizens because of who they love? If gay marriage is passed nation-wide are people afraid straight marriage will be outlawed? It just seems like it should be a non-issue all around. It ticks me off that it seems to be a pretty big part of politics right now.
who is it hurting?  I could be durty....but I won't.  Nobody is the answer.

I should've never commented on this subject either....but what the hay....it's not like I hate on moho's, it's just the way I feel prob cause of the way I raised. 

Why in hell would they want to get married....everyone says (to guys) don't get married....nobody listens....but they're right!!!!! surprise
#39 | 918 days ago

unopescatore wrote:
I understand...it's a touchy subject...there's no need for anyone to get salty on the subject matter though.  My views aren't based on religion, I just don't agree with it....I understand that part of it passing is for finacial reasons.

it's gonna pass....no worries.  First time I see 2 dudes get married on a Jersey beach while I'm fishing....I'll throw up. :)  Maryland....here I come!!!!
Aw hell, we're in this now...
So if your reasons aren't at all religious, what ARE your reasons?  
Logically.  
Not some silly "two dudes together gross me out", because let's be for real.  I see a LOT of straight people who gross me out, but uggos are still allowed to get married.  
Plus, I'm sure you get all fap-tastic to girl on girl porn, and while most lesbians look more like two sea mammals flopping around together than the s**t you see in porn, dudes still like seeing THAT.  And trust me, for as much as they may deny it, chicks think seeing two dudes go at it is hot.  Especially gay dudes because they are genetically predisposed to being way hotter than straight guys.  That's just science.
So it's ok for straight folk to enjoy how hot gay/lesbian sex is, it's ok for us to laugh at The Ellen Show or Will & Grace or Modern Family or Glee or anything on Bravo (that's the gayest of them ALL), or love how sassy and funny our hairdressers are, but not ok to treat them as actual human beings and Americans.  It's like pre-Civil Rights movement when white people were dancing the night away to black artists, and that was grand, but umm, please don't drink from that fountain.  
To those racist and/or homophobic folk, I give a loud, resounding ... F**K YOU.  laugh 
#40 | 918 days ago
unopescatore (+)

cubsgirl2 wrote:
you suck, but i still talk to you. and besides i'm having way to much fun to stop now. 
yea I know....I'll own it though. laugh  at least you don't get all mean about it. wink
#41 | 918 days ago
cubsgirl2 (+)

unopescatore wrote:
yea I know....I'll own it though. laugh  at least you don't get all mean about it. wink
Oh I get plenty mean about it. See angry

yep, now go live in fear of me.   smiley


It sucks, no one here is afraid of me. crying
69  
#42 | 918 days ago
unopescatore (+)

Hilblee wrote:
I personally dont care.  I dont use religious arguments against it, but do think is against nature.  The fight is financial in my opinion.  they want all the financial benefits of marriage but the state is thinking its a can of worms that will destroy their budgets.    On the religious side, it will be that they are afraid they will be sued if they dont perform the ceremonies.  Its already happened.  Should a church be forced to perform a marriage they dont beleive in?

I dont think anyone beleives straight marriage will be outlawed or anything.  Its just the matter of where does it end.
u said it a lot more eloquently then I could.


sh-t....I don't think I ever used the word eloquently before. laugh
#43 | 918 days ago

unopescatore wrote:
I dunno...maybe I'll hold it together.  Unless they're getting married on the Sandyhook Nude beach, then I aint seeing their packages.

I know Janet knows all about that beach. ;)
How dare you.  I have no desire to hit up Sandy Hook.  Not because of the nudity, but mostly because of the syringes in the sand and greenish/black water.  

(Plus, I don't have the balls to be naked in front of that many folk.)
#44 | 918 days ago

janet011685 wrote:
Aw hell, we're in this now...
So if your reasons aren't at all religious, what ARE your reasons?  
Logically.  
Not some silly "two dudes together gross me out", because let's be for real.  I see a LOT of straight people who gross me out, but uggos are still allowed to get married.  
Plus, I'm sure you get all fap-tastic to girl on girl porn, and while most lesbians look more like two sea mammals flopping around together than the s**t you see in porn, dudes still like seeing THAT.  And trust me, for as much as they may deny it, chicks think seeing two dudes go at it is hot.  Especially gay dudes because they are genetically predisposed to being way hotter than straight guys.  That's just science.
So it's ok for straight folk to enjoy how hot gay/lesbian sex is, it's ok for us to laugh at The Ellen Show or Will & Grace or Modern Family or Glee or anything on Bravo (that's the gayest of them ALL), or love how sassy and funny our hairdressers are, but not ok to treat them as actual human beings and Americans.  It's like pre-Civil Rights movement when white people were dancing the night away to black artists, and that was grand, but umm, please don't drink from that fountain.  
To those racist and/or homophobic folk, I give a loud, resounding ... F**K YOU.  laugh 
Someone is............................................................ LIVID!
87  
#45 | 918 days ago

This upcoming election is the first time in my life that I've actually thought about voting.  I never registered because they used to draw from registered  voters for jury duty, and I can't stand our court system.  However, the uber-right wing, self-richeous bible-thumping a$$hole republicans scare the sh!t out of me.  Obviously they skipped the day in law school where they talked about the seperation of church and state, and don't get that it's a very good thing to leave religion out of politics.

Gay marriage, all for it, why shouldn't they get the same tax breaks as a married couple?  And what makes people so arrogant that they have the right to tell two women (or men) they can't be together?  It's not like we have a huge problem with gays killing people.  And straight people will never be over-ran by gays because THEY CAN'T F**KING CONCIEVE CHILDREN!!!

Birth Control, I'm a HUGE fan of it.  It's 2012 people, technology is awesome and there are already too many people on this planet.  I would think that Repub's would be all about it so they could escentially out-breed the liberals.  And what makes people so arrogant that they think they can tell me how to f**k my girlfriend?

Abbortion... see the above answer.

And as for religion, I'm totally cool with it until it's forced upon me.  Organized religion is the worst thing to happen to all of mankind.... PERIOD.  Nothing has started more wars or killed more people than the 'brand' of god that they worship.  There is no worse place for religion than in politics.  If I wanted to be told how to live my life and how and when to worship I'd move to Iran.  Is that what the Repubs want, to build an extremist Christian society?  No f**king thanks!!!
#46 | 918 days ago

Hilblee wrote:
I personally dont care.  I dont use religious arguments against it, but do think is against nature.  The fight is financial in my opinion.  they want all the financial benefits of marriage but the state is thinking its a can of worms that will destroy their budgets.    On the religious side, it will be that they are afraid they will be sued if they dont perform the ceremonies.  Its already happened.  Should a church be forced to perform a marriage they dont beleive in?

I dont think anyone beleives straight marriage will be outlawed or anything.  Its just the matter of where does it end.
I don't know why I'm either bothering to respond, but here goes...

Churches generally hold pre-wedding counseling session to decide whether or not they want to marry two people, and they can decide not to perform the ceremony for whatever reasoning they choose - they're not bound by law to perform a ceremony, whether gay, straight, or religious. As a matter of fact, they can absolutely use religious beliefs to deny a marriage, legally, whether the couple is straight or gay. In cases such as those, if  couple really wants to get married, there are many ordained ministers out there; the question is primarily about the law, not the church...which is why it's ridiculous it's even a question. 

As for "where does it end" - I'm pretty sure it ends with two consenting adult human beings, but hey that's just me.
34  
#47 | 918 days ago

kobe_lova wrote:
Someone is............................................................ LIVID!
Oh yeah, he's stomping his foot repeatedly, too.  In my head.  

We may now proceed.  
#48 | 918 days ago
unopescatore (+)

janet011685 wrote:
Aw hell, we're in this now...
So if your reasons aren't at all religious, what ARE your reasons?  
Logically.  
Not some silly "two dudes together gross me out", because let's be for real.  I see a LOT of straight people who gross me out, but uggos are still allowed to get married.  
Plus, I'm sure you get all fap-tastic to girl on girl porn, and while most lesbians look more like two sea mammals flopping around together than the s**t you see in porn, dudes still like seeing THAT.  And trust me, for as much as they may deny it, chicks think seeing two dudes go at it is hot.  Especially gay dudes because they are genetically predisposed to being way hotter than straight guys.  That's just science.
So it's ok for straight folk to enjoy how hot gay/lesbian sex is, it's ok for us to laugh at The Ellen Show or Will & Grace or Modern Family or Glee or anything on Bravo (that's the gayest of them ALL), or love how sassy and funny our hairdressers are, but not ok to treat them as actual human beings and Americans.  It's like pre-Civil Rights movement when white people were dancing the night away to black artists, and that was grand, but umm, please don't drink from that fountain.  
To those racist and/or homophobic folk, I give a loud, resounding ... F**K YOU.  laugh 
sh-t Janet...I'm half step from an atheist so it's not religious reasons. :)  I dunno...it's not natural, I think it should be reserved for a man / women.  If 2 dudes or girls wanna bang each other or hip slap then by all means....have at it....I just don't agree with we gotta pass a law saying they can get married.  Even though I know some of it is for financial reaons. 

& no...lesbo's do nothing for me...they don't like the sausage....gabagool. laugh
#49 | 918 days ago

unopescatore wrote:
I understand...it's a touchy subject...there's no need for anyone to get salty on the subject matter though.  My views aren't based on religion, I just don't agree with it....I understand that part of it passing is for finacial reasons.

it's gonna pass....no worries.  First time I see 2 dudes get married on a Jersey beach while I'm fishing....I'll throw up. :)  Maryland....here I come!!!!
Don't bother coming to Maryland. Governor O'Malley has gay marriage as his top priority instead of worrying about the unemployment rate or amount of crime in Baltimore. Personally I don't care if they marry or not, Love is love...gender shouldn't factor in. My venting is about how so many more important things are being placed on hold while other stuff hitting Top News Stories.  And don't mention that fat a$$ Michelle Obama to me. Just because she want's to lose weight she's hitting up every  major candy manufacturer to sign the Healthy America bill, stopping companies from selling candy bars that exceed 250 calories. Americans should have the right to purchase whatever size candy item they want.  When will this country get it's priorities in order and get something done instead of  the same old crap every 4 years. #1 BRING ALL OUR BOYS HOME and let the other counties take care of themselves. #2 CHARITY BEGINS AT HOME , stop giving all our money to other countries. #3 FOCUS ON MAKING JOBS IN THE USA. , reduce unemployment and preserve Social Security. #4 FIND OUR OWN SOURCE OF FUEL , so we don't have to depend on the other countries....  I'm done now... bye..
55  
#50 | 918 days ago

Jess wrote:
I don't know why I'm either bothering to respond, but here goes...

Churches generally hold pre-wedding counseling session to decide whether or not they want to marry two people, and they can decide not to perform the ceremony for whatever reasoning they choose - they're not bound by law to perform a ceremony, whether gay, straight, or religious. As a matter of fact, they can absolutely use religious beliefs to deny a marriage, legally, whether the couple is straight or gay. In cases such as those, if  couple really wants to get married, there are many ordained ministers out there; the question is primarily about the law, not the church...which is why it's ridiculous it's even a question. 

As for "where does it end" - I'm pretty sure it ends with two consenting adult human beings, but hey that's just me.
Yeah, until they start marrying dogs and goats.  That's obviously the rational next step.
#51 | 918 days ago
unopescatore (+)

cubsgirl2 wrote:
Oh I get plenty mean about it. See angry

yep, now go live in fear of me.   smiley


It sucks, no one here is afraid of me. crying
there isn't a mean bone in your body.
#52 | 918 days ago
cubsgirl2 (+)

unopescatore wrote:
sh-t Janet...I'm half step from an atheist so it's not religious reasons. :)  I dunno...it's not natural, I think it should be reserved for a man / women.  If 2 dudes or girls wanna bang each other or hip slap then by all means....have at it....I just don't agree with we gotta pass a law saying they can get married.  Even though I know some of it is for financial reaons. 

& no...lesbo's do nothing for me...they don't like the sausage....gabagool. laugh
Why is it that, in this country all men are created equal and gays are still fighting for rights? This is not a church thing, this is a constitution of the united states of america thing. Maybe look at it like that and you will understand why all anybody wants are the same rights that you have been handed. 
69  
#53 | 918 days ago
unopescatore (+)

janet011685 wrote:
How dare you.  I have no desire to hit up Sandy Hook.  Not because of the nudity, but mostly because of the syringes in the sand and greenish/black water.  

(Plus, I don't have the balls to be naked in front of that many folk.)
yea but the fluking & striper fishing is to die for.
#54 | 918 days ago

beerstudk wrote:
This upcoming election is the first time in my life that I've actually thought about voting.  I never registered because they used to draw from registered  voters for jury duty, and I can't stand our court system.  However, the uber-right wing, self-richeous bible-thumping a$$hole republicans scare the sh!t out of me.  Obviously they skipped the day in law school where they talked about the seperation of church and state, and don't get that it's a very good thing to leave religion out of politics.

Gay marriage, all for it, why shouldn't they get the same tax breaks as a married couple?  And what makes people so arrogant that they have the right to tell two women (or men) they can't be together?  It's not like we have a huge problem with gays killing people.  And straight people will never be over-ran by gays because THEY CAN'T F**KING CONCIEVE CHILDREN!!!

Birth Control, I'm a HUGE fan of it.  It's 2012 people, technology is awesome and there are already too many people on this planet.  I would think that Repub's would be all about it so they could escentially out-breed the liberals.  And what makes people so arrogant that they think they can tell me how to f**k my girlfriend?

Abbortion... see the above answer.

And as for religion, I'm totally cool with it until it's forced upon me.  Organized religion is the worst thing to happen to all of mankind.... PERIOD.  Nothing has started more wars or killed more people than the 'brand' of god that they worship.  There is no worse place for religion than in politics.  If I wanted to be told how to live my life and how and when to worship I'd move to Iran.  Is that what the Repubs want, to build an extremist Christian society?  No f**king thanks!!!
Seperation of Church and State--Amendment 1.  "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"---(Meaning that there will not be an official government sponsored religion.  Like the one they left in England).  What most ignore is the second part of that statement which says "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof".  I feel most atheist arguments are doing exactly that!

It is good to leave religion out of politics.  I agree with you there.

Info you, you may not have to move to Iran, Iran may very well be coming to you. 
#55 | 918 days ago

unopescatore wrote:
yea but the fluking & striper fishing is to die for.
Until you eat it and then the next three generations in your family line have arms growing out of their foreheads.  Don't say I didn't warn you.
#56 | 918 days ago
unopescatore (+)

cubsgirl2 wrote:
Why is it that, in this country all men are created equal and gays are still fighting for rights? This is not a church thing, this is a constitution of the united states of america thing. Maybe look at it like that and you will understand why all anybody wants are the same rights that you have been handed. 
maybe you can sway me.  I didn't know it's a right to get married....ignorance can be bliss.

it's just my opinion...I don't get a chance to vote on it....at this point I'd vote against it however, I believe I'd be in the minority in Jersey,  that's all.
#57 | 918 days ago
unopescatore (+)

DallasFan55 wrote:
Don't bother coming to Maryland. Governor O'Malley has gay marriage as his top priority instead of worrying about the unemployment rate or amount of crime in Baltimore. Personally I don't care if they marry or not, Love is love...gender shouldn't factor in. My venting is about how so many more important things are being placed on hold while other stuff hitting Top News Stories.  And don't mention that fat a$$ Michelle Obama to me. Just because she want's to lose weight she's hitting up every  major candy manufacturer to sign the Healthy America bill, stopping companies from selling candy bars that exceed 250 calories. Americans should have the right to purchase whatever size candy item they want.  When will this country get it's priorities in order and get something done instead of  the same old crap every 4 years. #1 BRING ALL OUR BOYS HOME and let the other counties take care of themselves. #2 CHARITY BEGINS AT HOME , stop giving all our money to other countries. #3 FOCUS ON MAKING JOBS IN THE USA. , reduce unemployment and preserve Social Security. #4 FIND OUR OWN SOURCE OF FUEL , so we don't have to depend on the other countries....  I'm done now... bye..
really....freaken Maryland.  kidding


I agree there are much more pressing issues.....then again I aint gay. surprise
#58 | 918 days ago
cubsgirl2 (+)

unopescatore wrote:
maybe you can sway me.  I didn't know it's a right to get married....ignorance can be bliss.

it's just my opinion...I don't get a chance to vote on it....at this point I'd vote against it however, I believe I'd be in the minority in Jersey,  that's all.
It is a right to choose whom you marry. We were granted the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  And that all men are created equal. I know the constitution defines marriage as a union between man and woman. But hell the constitution needs to be amended to include what the pre amble to it said. And that's simply all men are created equal. You know we go to war with other countries to give freedom and rights to those that are being held down. It is time that we a s a nation make sure we all have the same rights here as well. 
69  
#59 | 918 days ago

unopescatore wrote:
maybe you can sway me.  I didn't know it's a right to get married....ignorance can be bliss.

it's just my opinion...I don't get a chance to vote on it....at this point I'd vote against it however, I believe I'd be in the minority in Jersey,  that's all.
Marriage comes with certain rights and privileges from the local, state, federal government.  Not just tax benefits, but also end-of-life issues, hospitalization issues, children/adoption issues, etc.  Certain politicians *ahemRepublicansahem* would have you believe that "civil unions" or "domestic partnerships" are the same thing under a different name, but that's not true.  

In fact, it's so not true that under most states' civil union laws (for the ones that have such laws), gay couples are NOT given about 1800 (not a typo ... one thousand, eight hundred) rights/privileges/benefits that are afforded straight, married couples.
#60 | 918 days ago
unopescatore (+)

cubsgirl2 wrote:
It is a right to choose whom you marry. We were granted the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  And that all men are created equal. I know the constitution defines marriage as a union between man and woman. But hell the constitution needs to be amended to include what the pre amble to it said. And that's simply all men are created equal. You know we go to war with other countries to give freedom and rights to those that are being held down. It is time that we a s a nation make sure we all have the same rights here as well. 
that's a great arguement.....I'll think about it.  I'll still wanna throw up if & when I see 2 dudes hook up....that will never change.
#61 | 918 days ago

unopescatore wrote:
really....freaken Maryland.  kidding


I agree there are much more pressing issues.....then again I aint gay. surprise
Well obviously I'm not gay either...But I would think the gays can see the importance of fixing the serious issues too. I mean seriously, If we don't increase jobs too keep the social security money coming in, this will indeed affect my grown children but even more important there may not be any more social security funds when my grandkids are at retiring age. It's not just social security that's at risk. This affects the monies needed to give medicare benefits to the elderly as well. Your only 2 years younger then my oldest daughter so your probably gonna be safe but we have to lookout for our future generations. They will need those benefits just as much as my grandparents needed it.
55  
#62 | 918 days ago
unopescatore (+)

janet011685 wrote:
Marriage comes with certain rights and privileges from the local, state, federal government.  Not just tax benefits, but also end-of-life issues, hospitalization issues, children/adoption issues, etc.  Certain politicians *ahemRepublicansahem* would have you believe that "civil unions" or "domestic partnerships" are the same thing under a different name, but that's not true.  

In fact, it's so not true that under most states' civil union laws (for the ones that have such laws), gay couples are NOT given about 1800 (not a typo ... one thousand, eight hundred) rights/privileges/benefits that are afforded straight, married couples.
now there is some factual comments right there....good stuff.

I gotta go....peace out....thanks for not getting TOO salty.....you held it together. ;)
#63 | 918 days ago

the amazing thing is how most people who are so vocally opposed to gay marriage are either divorced or secretly going glory hole hunting off route 124 in the middle of the night..
If people want to pretend that marriage is such a sacred thing according to that magic book of fables, then let's make divorce illegal
#64 | 918 days ago
cubsgirl2 (+)

unopescatore wrote:
that's a great arguement.....I'll think about it.  I'll still wanna throw up if & when I see 2 dudes hook up....that will never change.
And that's ok. i knew gay men who want to throw up when they see a straight couple kiss. All that means is, you were born straight and they were born gay. Thats all. But because you were born straight does that mean you should have more rights than those born gay? 

 I really don't think you believe that. 
69  
#65 | 918 days ago
cubsgirl2 (+)

DallasFan55 wrote:
Well obviously I'm not gay either...But I would think the gays can see the importance of fixing the serious issues too. I mean seriously, If we don't increase jobs too keep the social security money coming in, this will indeed affect my grown children but even more important there may not be any more social security funds when my grandkids are at retiring age. It's not just social security that's at risk. This affects the monies needed to give medicare benefits to the elderly as well. Your only 2 years younger then my oldest daughter so your probably gonna be safe but we have to lookout for our future generations. They will need those benefits just as much as my grandparents needed it.
Tell you what, why don't you lose some of your rights, then let's see how important it is for you to get them back. 
69  
#66 | 918 days ago

(Edited by Jess)
DallasFan55 wrote:
Well obviously I'm not gay either...But I would think the gays can see the importance of fixing the serious issues too. I mean seriously, If we don't increase jobs too keep the social security money coming in, this will indeed affect my grown children but even more important there may not be any more social security funds when my grandkids are at retiring age. It's not just social security that's at risk. This affects the monies needed to give medicare benefits to the elderly as well. Your only 2 years younger then my oldest daughter so your probably gonna be safe but we have to lookout for our future generations. They will need those benefits just as much as my grandparents needed it.
I completely understand your argument as far as priorities, and I agree with the stuff you listed above being important; but how to decide what outranks what in order of importance? Fortunately as long as it's all being addressed, it doesn't matter - because let's not forget - more than one thing can be addressed at a time, and usually that's how it works. Just because something is hot in the media doesn't mean other stuff isn't being discussed and proposals being made.
34  
#67 | 918 days ago

#68 | 918 days ago
cubsgirl2 (+)

Lobotomy Jones wrote:
Nice. yes
69  
#69 | 918 days ago

Jess wrote:
I completely understand your argument as far as priorities, and I agree with the stuff you listed above being important; but how to decide what outranks what in order of importance? Fortunately as long as it's all being addressed, it doesn't matter - because let's not forget - more than one thing can be addressed at a time, and usually that's how it works. Just because something is hot in the media doesn't mean other stuff isn't being discussed and proposals being made.
Your right Jess, there is no way to place a value on the order it should be handled. I numbered them for the purpose of showing that even a moron such as myself can see X amount of problems, which tells me that there are so many more problems that I'm not aware of. All I know is that every 4 years we are promised a lot of wonderful things and 90% of it never gets accomplished and is carried over till the following 4 years ect. ect. I'm not placing blame on any president or political party. But seriously they have to get together and work for the same things that will fix the issues and stop arguing among themselves. The main goal is the USA!
55  
#70 | 918 days ago

DallasFan55 wrote:
Your right Jess, there is no way to place a value on the order it should be handled. I numbered them for the purpose of showing that even a moron such as myself can see X amount of problems, which tells me that there are so many more problems that I'm not aware of. All I know is that every 4 years we are promised a lot of wonderful things and 90% of it never gets accomplished and is carried over till the following 4 years ect. ect. I'm not placing blame on any president or political party. But seriously they have to get together and work for the same things that will fix the issues and stop arguing among themselves. The main goal is the USA!
they all act like kids fighting over a candy bar to me thats my opinion anyway
#71 | 918 days ago

irmacourt wrote:
they all act like kids fighting over a candy bar to me thats my opinion anyway
(whispers in Irma's ear...)

It's because they are ALL f**king thieves and liars!
#72 | 918 days ago

I vote to outlaw all marriages with anyone, anytime, anyhow, anywhere, but I'm slightly jaded these days. Plus, I kinda like the way Amsterdam rolls.
2012  
#73 | 918 days ago

(Edited by Cactus_Jack)
Oh crap....stop the presses.

All of this bi-partisan bickering is pointless now.  We are all done for.  The Evil Iranian Empire has struck upon the most diabolical plot of all time.  Female Ninjas.  We are f**ked.



Our only hope now is to clone Chuck Norris before its too late.
#74 | 918 days ago

Hilblee wrote:
Seperation of Church and State--Amendment 1.  "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"---(Meaning that there will not be an official government sponsored religion.  Like the one they left in England).  What most ignore is the second part of that statement which says "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof".  I feel most atheist arguments are doing exactly that!

It is good to leave religion out of politics.  I agree with you there.

Info you, you may not have to move to Iran, Iran may very well be coming to you. 
First off, you made me laugh my a$$ off with the Iran statement.  Their navy consists of Battleships and Cruisers which have been obsolete since a BI-PLANE sank the Bismark in WWII (In fact, I think we may have sold them our old, obsolete ships).  Carriers and Subs are the  thing in today's naval combat. Their air fleet consists of old ass russian and chinese MiG's. If anything, we'll take the fight to them.

Secondly,  again, I have no problem with people practicing whatever religion they want (within reason of course no human sacrifices or cerimonial rapings), just keep it out of politics. The bible is about 2000 years old and is based on the Torrah which is something like 4000 years old.... things have changed a lot since then. People know better than to f**k their sister. Pork is a good meat to eat if cooked to 145F. Morals and values have changed since then and most religions don't reflect that.  We don't need to have 12 kids like they did back then.  Out of 12, only 3 or 4 would live long enough to reproduce themselves. Today in the US its something like 999 out of 1000 will live long enough to reproduce, so we need population control more so than 1000 years ago.  People don't go around from village to village raping and pillaging, so sex doesn't need to be demonized.  And with Birth Control, people can acctually enjoy it.

There's no perfect solution to any social problem, but looking for answers in a book that was used more to control stupid people that couldn't think for themselves that is vastly outdated is about as wrong as you can get in my opinion.
#75 | 918 days ago

John_Daly wrote:
crusty-hippy.jpg
Reminds me of my home town....
#76 | 918 days ago

First...  I think Democrats and their fans ought to hope and pray (same thing perhaps?) that the Republicans never change their anti-choice stance on abortion.  I think if they ever did that they will rule the nation and/or the world.

Next...  With the trenches dug so deep regarding gay marriage it seems to me that the best solution (one that would make no one happy I think) is to just take the state out of marriage.  All joinings will be civil unions as far as the government is concerned for legal and tax purposes.  If people involved want to call what they have a marriage, great.  The State wont care what they call their Civil Union.

ML's 2 cents.
#77 | 918 days ago
NorseHeathen (+)

Hilblee wrote:
Force thru legislation?  maybe, but no more than any other organization that thinks they are right but the law doesnt agree.  Look at the homosexual agenda---california voters voted against them so they found a homosexual judge to fight it.  This is all too common now.  Anytime a group disagrees with the law they just find a judge partial to their agenda and go to court.  Not how I think it should be done here.  If we dont like a law, get the votes and repeal it.

Not arguing constitutional vs non-constitutional----Half the crap thats been ruled on over the last 100 yrs I cant find reference too anywhere in the constitution.  I have a copy sitting here on my desk. 
I have to respectfully disagree with you on that one.  The philosophical pretenses are there and can be applied in most cases.  The one that gets me is people that argue that "privacy" isn't listed anywhere in the Constitution; well, riding a horse isn't listed in the Constitution either....

In a nutshell the most basic principle of the American Constitution, based upon my studies, I define as:  Liberty and freedom granted under the principles of the Constitution are absolute, so long as such actions do not infringe upon the individual sovereign rights of another or others.
#78 | 918 days ago

Hilblee wrote:
1.  I agree that women should be represented on any panel dealing with womens rights.

2. Whats the difference in santorum home schooling and most of the DC uppity ups sending their children to private school?  Does Obummers kids go to public school?  I really dont know.  As often as they are pulled for "vacation", I doubt they would be.

3.  Why does it bother you that he has religious convictions?  Would it be better if he hid them?  The old, what ya dont know thing?  I think that people who live their convictions are admirable.  I disagree with some of them but still he's putting it out there for yours and my judgement.  If he doesnt get elected because of them, then so be it.  
 
4.  You are a teacher and work with children all day--now, take your absolute favorite student and imagine not ever knowing him/her because the mother decided she just couldnt afford them.  How many millions of scientists, teachers, engineers or even presidents have had the life sucked out of them due to being inconvenient.  Im not completely against abortion in certain circumstances (rape, incest...), but the old adage of "dont do the crime if ya cant do the time" should apply.  We try our best to teach our children that there are consequences to their actions but then turn around and tell them its all right to just "dump it" if they cant handle it.  Children are the only social programs that I think should be funded---ensure the children have a roof, food and access to an education.  When they become adults, get your arse in gear or get run over.

Heathens?  Why do you just call out repubs?  I was raised a southern democrat and I know a ton of democrats that disagree with you on most things.  From my travels, I think this country is more divided down the line of rural/city than it is repub/democrat.  The problem is that city people carry more votes than rural people.  Conservatives will lose any social argument on the national stage and should stay out of them.  When 51% of the country is on the dole from the govenment in one form or another, its not going to go our way.  I subscribe to the famous quote---

“When the people find that they can vote themselves money,
that will herald the end of the republic.” --Ben Franklin

Thats where we are now.  We cant get people to vote against recieving their govenment handout.  Conservatives have to fight the fiscal argument.  We have got to push to get the US out of this massive debt that will eventually end our role on the world stage.

My 2 cents, worth the same as your 2 cents.
 
I'm going to address your #2 here.  It's not a problem where he decides to send his kids to school.  However, where he sent his kids to school and the stunt he pulled is one of the reasons Bob Casey Jr. won PA's Senate seat over Santorum back in 2006.  People were already getting fed up with the Republican jargon and Bush's tactics to begin with.  But couple that with the news that Santorum was using his address in the eastern Pittsburgh suburbs so that his kids could go to an online charter school IN THE PITTSBURGH AREA while they were down in DC living with him, and we the taxpayers had to foot the bill, and you have a recipe for a landslide defeat, which is exactly what happened.

He actually thinks he can win Pennsylvania.  We all still remember how he made us pay for his kids to go to a Pittsburgh area school when they didn't even live here.  We all know he's a lying scumbag in this state, and we've already kicked him to the curb once before.  I guess he needs another big wake-up call.
69  
#79 | 918 days ago
NorseHeathen (+)

kramer wrote:
I'm going to address your #2 here.  It's not a problem where he decides to send his kids to school.  However, where he sent his kids to school and the stunt he pulled is one of the reasons Bob Casey Jr. won PA's Senate seat over Santorum back in 2006.  People were already getting fed up with the Republican jargon and Bush's tactics to begin with.  But couple that with the news that Santorum was using his address in the eastern Pittsburgh suburbs so that his kids could go to an online charter school IN THE PITTSBURGH AREA while they were down in DC living with him, and we the taxpayers had to foot the bill, and you have a recipe for a landslide defeat, which is exactly what happened.

He actually thinks he can win Pennsylvania.  We all still remember how he made us pay for his kids to go to a Pittsburgh area school when they didn't even live here.  We all know he's a lying scumbag in this state, and we've already kicked him to the curb once before.  I guess he needs another big wake-up call.
OOR, but interesting post.  Question: what is going on with PA's redistricting.  Aside from the boundaries, I heard on the news that PA is trying to change the manner upon which the delegates are rendered; are they really going to divide the delegates according to district instead of the state as a whole?
#80 | 918 days ago

indecision Well then, I did not expect this.

I had some thoughts about other things I was going to say to start things off, but clearly I can hold off a bit.

One thing I will point out right now is that if the national debate is turning back to the culture wars, then the economy must be improving. That was supposed to be the focus of the Republican opposition this election, and at least for now, they've taken their eye off that ball.

More later once my dinner is finished/I'm done eating/I'm done studying for the night (one of those).
#81 | 918 days ago

NorseHeathen wrote:
OOR, but interesting post.  Question: what is going on with PA's redistricting.  Aside from the boundaries, I heard on the news that PA is trying to change the manner upon which the delegates are rendered; are they really going to divide the delegates according to district instead of the state as a whole?
Last I heard the redistricting plan got tossed out with the trash.
69  
#82 | 918 days ago

I will just sit back and wait for the "Truth Teams" to come tell me what to believe.
#83 | 918 days ago
NorseHeathen (+)

kramer wrote:
Last I heard the redistricting plan got tossed out with the trash.
Very cool......man, was that ever a potential disaster in the making!
#84 | 918 days ago

beerstudk wrote:
First off, you made me laugh my a$$ off with the Iran statement.  Their navy consists of Battleships and Cruisers which have been obsolete since a BI-PLANE sank the Bismark in WWII (In fact, I think we may have sold them our old, obsolete ships).  Carriers and Subs are the  thing in today's naval combat. Their air fleet consists of old ass russian and chinese MiG's. If anything, we'll take the fight to them.

Secondly,  again, I have no problem with people practicing whatever religion they want (within reason of course no human sacrifices or cerimonial rapings), just keep it out of politics. The bible is about 2000 years old and is based on the Torrah which is something like 4000 years old.... things have changed a lot since then. People know better than to f**k their sister. Pork is a good meat to eat if cooked to 145F. Morals and values have changed since then and most religions don't reflect that.  We don't need to have 12 kids like they did back then.  Out of 12, only 3 or 4 would live long enough to reproduce themselves. Today in the US its something like 999 out of 1000 will live long enough to reproduce, so we need population control more so than 1000 years ago.  People don't go around from village to village raping and pillaging, so sex doesn't need to be demonized.  And with Birth Control, people can acctually enjoy it.

There's no perfect solution to any social problem, but looking for answers in a book that was used more to control stupid people that couldn't think for themselves that is vastly outdated is about as wrong as you can get in my opinion.
I'm not talking militarily.  I'm talking philosophically.   The radical muslim agenda is spreading across europe as we speak.  It wont be long before we start to feel it here.  They will use our rights and freedoms against us so that we cant stop the onslaught.  Good people will stand by and think it wont happen.  If we say anything, its bigotry and racist. 

If muslim is such a peaceful religion, why dont those peaceful muslims stand up and trounce the radicals?  We have a few teenage marines piss on a dead muslim and its the end of the world---yet they behead a marine and oooooh dam.
#85 | 918 days ago
cubsgirl2 (+)

ML31 wrote:
First...  I think Democrats and their fans ought to hope and pray (same thing perhaps?) that the Republicans never change their anti-choice stance on abortion.  I think if they ever did that they will rule the nation and/or the world.

Next...  With the trenches dug so deep regarding gay marriage it seems to me that the best solution (one that would make no one happy I think) is to just take the state out of marriage.  All joinings will be civil unions as far as the government is concerned for legal and tax purposes.  If people involved want to call what they have a marriage, great.  The State wont care what they call their Civil Union.

ML's 2 cents.
no, then we will just call them democrats. smiley
69  
#86 | 918 days ago
NorseHeathen (+)

Hilblee wrote:
I'm not talking militarily.  I'm talking philosophically.   The radical muslim agenda is spreading across europe as we speak.  It wont be long before we start to feel it here.  They will use our rights and freedoms against us so that we cant stop the onslaught.  Good people will stand by and think it wont happen.  If we say anything, its bigotry and racist. 

If muslim is such a peaceful religion, why dont those peaceful muslims stand up and trounce the radicals?  We have a few teenage marines piss on a dead muslim and its the end of the world---yet they behead a marine and oooooh dam.
I definitely see your points here, and I must agree that such observations are very relevant.

I can attribute such to both the demographic and historical factors.  Without going into a boorish ramble-fest, the history of the Middle east is soaked in blood, and is the result of thousands of years of tyrannical rule.  The fact that technology surpassed the social evolution of Muslim nations that still operate upon such tyranny (the first break-through of which was the treaty between Egypt and Israel) and first setback being the 1979 revolution of Iran (which re-established a theocratic dictatorship), the most widespread areas of the Muslim faith is in under-developed countries that are oft times wrought with war or regional conflicts or other socio-economic hardships.

Nothing is that simple, but that is a relevant general analysis.

Another point you brought up was that of the Marines that got in trouble for urinating upon the corpses opposing combatants is directly attributed to the differences in the societies involved.  Again, as not to ramble too much, I will just say that it is a lot less shocking to Middle Eastern society to see the beheading of people on television than it is for certain parts of our civilization to excuse the urinating incident.  In American culture, the most blood any individual has probably seen beyond a scraped knee, or the fake blood of movies--no matter from a horror film or action movie.  Compare that with various societies where children have seen their friends or family blown to pieces in front of them--where real violence is a part of their culture.  Aside from the political use of the incident (of which those same tyrannical governments that maim, torture, and kill their own people for various seemingly insignificant reasons) will use such to generate divisiveness or at least a diversion from more legitimate issues.  Again, there's no way to approach such an issue in a simple post.  However, I have read psychology papers dealing with regard to actions that can occur which accompany extreme situations whereas the acts committed would never be done by the individuals in question outside of the situations the were unfortunate enough to find themselves within.  A simple example would be someone from law enforcement coming to your home and letting you know a loved one was killed in an auto accident whereas by hearing the news you pick up something and smash it in grief.  It is for the above, that we need to really contain our urges to pass quick judgment in lieu of taking the necessary time to try and achieve an understanding of the present situation.

This my sound prejudice to some and/or insulting to others, and for any that may perceive it as such I apologize; it is, however, something to which I am approaching with astute attention to remaining analytical, without any personal judgment or bias with regard to the issues being discussed.  I do so as I know the topics at hand are very fragile.

Now, does achieving an understanding make such actions justifiable?  Absolutely not.....but the Arab spring last year and people demanding representative governments and freedoms is made that much more inspiring when one considers the magnitude of such uprisings.  I just wish everything wasn't so political, the people in Syria are fighting for freedom from tyranny, they need our help.
#87 | 918 days ago

A few parting thoughts on the gay marriage situation.
  • I just don't get the opposition (the spiel about it breaking state budgets is a new one). Of all people, the person who said it best was Keith Olbermann (yes, I know, he's a self-parody at this point, but damn it, this time he was dead on). To quote from him: If you voted for this Proposition or support those who did or the sentiment they expressed, I have some questions, because, truly, I do not understand. Why does this matter to you? What is it to you? In a time of impermanence and fly-by-night relationships, these people over here want the same chance at permanence and happiness that is your option. They don't want to deny you yours. They don't want to take anything away from you. They want what you want—a chance to be a little less alone in the world.
and

You don't have to help it, you don't have it applaud it, you don't have to fight for it. Just don't put it out. Just don't extinguish it. Because while it may at first look like that love is between two people you don't know and you don't understand and maybe you don't even want to know. It is, in fact, the ember of your love, for your fellow person just because this is the only world we have. And the other guy counts, too.
  • Judge Walker's ruling, and the Ninth Circuit's affirmation of the ruling, striking down Prop 8 is a pretty narrow ruling. It states that since California had originally granted the right of same sex couples to marry, and Prop 8's sole effect was to take that away, it violated equal protection. Basically, you can't give a group of people rights and then take them away. Neither ruling states "gay marriage is legal everywhere."
  • The law in New York allows religious organizations to decline to officiate same sex marriages. The bill going through Maryland has the same provision. I'm short on time, so I won't check right now with other states, but I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't have the same provisions. Nobody is forced to do anything.
#88 | 918 days ago

(Edited by ML31)
Cactus_Jack wrote:
I will just sit back and wait for the "Truth Teams" to come tell me what to believe.
Funny that you use that term.  Late last year a group was garnering signatures to (once again) try and get a proposition on the ballot requiring Unions to ask permission to spend member dues money on political causes. (which technically is already a law that no one seems to be enforcing)  In our newsletter they asked us members to keep an eye out for those people and when we see where they are gathering signatures we should call the union and tell them so they can send their "truth squads" (no joke, that is exactly what they called them!) to the site.
#89 | 918 days ago

Hilblee wrote:
I'm not talking militarily.  I'm talking philosophically.   The radical muslim agenda is spreading across europe as we speak.  It wont be long before we start to feel it here.  They will use our rights and freedoms against us so that we cant stop the onslaught.  Good people will stand by and think it wont happen.  If we say anything, its bigotry and racist. 

If muslim is such a peaceful religion, why dont those peaceful muslims stand up and trounce the radicals?  We have a few teenage marines piss on a dead muslim and its the end of the world---yet they behead a marine and oooooh dam.
There are over 1.5 billion Muslims on this earth. What, 1% (if that) are radical terrorists? Also, "stand up and trounce?" Isn't that just advocating more violence.

Also, RE: the pissing incident. Here's how I see it. If we do things like that, and Abu-Gharib, and burning Korans, and treating all Muslims like terrorists, and above all else, torturing people, how the hell do *we* get to claim moral high ground? Doesn't that drag us into the mud with those we're fighting? We're supposed to be better than the terrorists, but actions like these sure don't show it.
#90 | 917 days ago

Eric_ wrote:
There are over 1.5 billion Muslims on this earth. What, 1% (if that) are radical terrorists? Also, "stand up and trounce?" Isn't that just advocating more violence.

Also, RE: the pissing incident. Here's how I see it. If we do things like that, and Abu-Gharib, and burning Korans, and treating all Muslims like terrorists, and above all else, torturing people, how the hell do *we* get to claim moral high ground? Doesn't that drag us into the mud with those we're fighting? We're supposed to be better than the terrorists, but actions like these sure don't show it.
I agree that actions like that dont show it but we are talking about teenagers fighting for their lives over there that made a mistake.  I did 22 years in the military and when they start talking court martial over something so stupid, it busts my balls.   These guys are dirty, tired, fearful, remorseful, mad, sad -- sometimes all in just one day.  They see their best friend or wingman get their head blowed off and have to move on and complete whatever mission is expected of them. 

1.5 billion muslims and yet where is their leadership on the news every night denouncing the actions of the 1%?  Nothing!  They are letting that 1% speak for them.  Make no mistake, that 1% wants to cut your infidel head off and will if it ever gets the chance.
#91 | 917 days ago

(Edited by kobe_lova)
Hilblee wrote:
I personally dont care.  I dont use religious arguments against it, but do think is against nature.  The fight is financial in my opinion.  they want all the financial benefits of marriage but the state is thinking its a can of worms that will destroy their budgets.    On the religious side, it will be that they are afraid they will be sued if they dont perform the ceremonies.  Its already happened.  Should a church be forced to perform a marriage they dont beleive in?

I dont think anyone beleives straight marriage will be outlawed or anything.  Its just the matter of where does it end.
I'm stuck on the "against nature" part, since it's not a religious aspect for you. Nature equals natural, right? So, why do you think it's against nature when people are in fact doing what feels natural to them? I guess I'm wondering how you judge what's natural when it comes to love and relationships. I mean liking men came natural to me, so I'm straight (though I do dig the ladies from a distance) and I would be offended if someone told me that that was against nature. I'm assuming you're straight. What if people were standing up, having hearings and rallies telling you that what you feel for you lover was wrong?
87  
#92 | 917 days ago
unopescatore (+)

cubsgirl2 wrote:
And that's ok. i knew gay men who want to throw up when they see a straight couple kiss. All that means is, you were born straight and they were born gay. Thats all. But because you were born straight does that mean you should have more rights than those born gay? 

 I really don't think you believe that. 
I hear ya....but in this one instance I feel that right shouldn't be extended to anyone but a man & a women......I'm all about equal....but don't ya have to draw the line somewhere. Well that would be my line....I don't expect everyones line to be the same as mine.
#93 | 917 days ago

Eric_ wrote:
A few parting thoughts on the gay marriage situation.
  • I just don't get the opposition (the spiel about it breaking state budgets is a new one). Of all people, the person who said it best was Keith Olbermann (yes, I know, he's a self-parody at this point, but damn it, this time he was dead on). To quote from him: If you voted for this Proposition or support those who did or the sentiment they expressed, I have some questions, because, truly, I do not understand. Why does this matter to you? What is it to you? In a time of impermanence and fly-by-night relationships, these people over here want the same chance at permanence and happiness that is your option. They don't want to deny you yours. They don't want to take anything away from you. They want what you want—a chance to be a little less alone in the world.
and

You don't have to help it, you don't have it applaud it, you don't have to fight for it. Just don't put it out. Just don't extinguish it. Because while it may at first look like that love is between two people you don't know and you don't understand and maybe you don't even want to know. It is, in fact, the ember of your love, for your fellow person just because this is the only world we have. And the other guy counts, too.
  • Judge Walker's ruling, and the Ninth Circuit's affirmation of the ruling, striking down Prop 8 is a pretty narrow ruling. It states that since California had originally granted the right of same sex couples to marry, and Prop 8's sole effect was to take that away, it violated equal protection. Basically, you can't give a group of people rights and then take them away. Neither ruling states "gay marriage is legal everywhere."
  • The law in New York allows religious organizations to decline to officiate same sex marriages. The bill going through Maryland has the same provision. I'm short on time, so I won't check right now with other states, but I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't have the same provisions. Nobody is forced to do anything.
 Maybe its just  as simple as if we let this go, we as a society are condoning homosexuality.  I dont think most of our society does and that may be the kicker. 
#94 | 917 days ago

beerstudk wrote:
First off, you made me laugh my a$$ off with the Iran statement.  Their navy consists of Battleships and Cruisers which have been obsolete since a BI-PLANE sank the Bismark in WWII (In fact, I think we may have sold them our old, obsolete ships).  Carriers and Subs are the  thing in today's naval combat. Their air fleet consists of old ass russian and chinese MiG's. If anything, we'll take the fight to them.

Secondly,  again, I have no problem with people practicing whatever religion they want (within reason of course no human sacrifices or cerimonial rapings), just keep it out of politics. The bible is about 2000 years old and is based on the Torrah which is something like 4000 years old.... things have changed a lot since then. People know better than to f**k their sister. Pork is a good meat to eat if cooked to 145F. Morals and values have changed since then and most religions don't reflect that.  We don't need to have 12 kids like they did back then.  Out of 12, only 3 or 4 would live long enough to reproduce themselves. Today in the US its something like 999 out of 1000 will live long enough to reproduce, so we need population control more so than 1000 years ago.  People don't go around from village to village raping and pillaging, so sex doesn't need to be demonized.  And with Birth Control, people can acctually enjoy it.

There's no perfect solution to any social problem, but looking for answers in a book that was used more to control stupid people that couldn't think for themselves that is vastly outdated is about as wrong as you can get in my opinion.
There is nothing new under the sun.  Everything we do has consequences.
14  
#95 | 917 days ago
unopescatore (+)

DallasFan55 wrote:
Well obviously I'm not gay either...But I would think the gays can see the importance of fixing the serious issues too. I mean seriously, If we don't increase jobs too keep the social security money coming in, this will indeed affect my grown children but even more important there may not be any more social security funds when my grandkids are at retiring age. It's not just social security that's at risk. This affects the monies needed to give medicare benefits to the elderly as well. Your only 2 years younger then my oldest daughter so your probably gonna be safe but we have to lookout for our future generations. They will need those benefits just as much as my grandparents needed it.
Wow...that's over my head, my #1 concern is the future of my daughter.....which has nothing to do with extending marriage rights to gays but that's how I feel at the moment. Everyone's out for their own ass (no pun intended).
#96 | 917 days ago

kobe_lova wrote:
I'm stuck on the "against nature" part, since it's not a religious aspect for you. Nature equals natural, right? So, why do you think it's against nature when people are in fact doing what feels natural to them? I guess I'm wondering how you judge what's natural when it comes to love and relationships. I mean liking men came natural to me, so I'm straight (though I do dig the ladies from a distance) and I would be offended if someone told me that that was against nature. I'm assuming you're straight. What if people were standing up, having hearings and rallies telling you that what you feel for you lover was wrong?
Against Nature---The very existence of our species.  Man/Woman/Child--repeat.
#97 | 917 days ago

(Edited by kobe_lova)
Hilblee wrote:
Against Nature---The very existence of our species.  Man/Woman/Child--repeat.
I see...



(for now, I have to go)

but before I go, are you not drawing that order from religion? I'm asking because children will still be born with gays and lesbians around. And as a woman, I never wanted a child at all, so man/woman/child never felt natural to me, but I was raised in church so it was often preached to me.
87  
#98 | 917 days ago

cubsgirl2 wrote:
Tell you what, why don't you lose some of your rights, then let's see how important it is for you to get them back. 
Young lady we have been losing "some" of our rights for years.  They are doing it slowly so you dont realize it all at once.  Some are happy for the changes but its a slippery slope. 
#99 | 917 days ago

kobe_lova wrote:
I see...



(for now, I have to go)

but before I go, are you not drawing that order from religion? I'm asking because children will still be born with gays and lesbians around. And as a woman, I never wanted a child at all, so man/woman/child never felt natural to me, but I was raised in church so it was often preached to me.
No, not religion.  Take any endangered species.  If all you have left are males, party over. 
#100 | 917 days ago

Hilblee wrote:
No, not religion.  Take any endangered species.  If all you have left are males, party over. 
Are you saying woman are going to become extinct? Cause it sure sounds like it from that comment. Statistically speaking (woot woot used my big words) more females are born than males, so I really dont see the argument there.
367  
#101 | 917 days ago
unopescatore (+)

(Edited by unopescatore)
kobe_lova wrote:
I'm stuck on the "against nature" part, since it's not a religious aspect for you. Nature equals natural, right? So, why do you think it's against nature when people are in fact doing what feels natural to them? I guess I'm wondering how you judge what's natural when it comes to love and relationships. I mean liking men came natural to me, so I'm straight (though I do dig the ladies from a distance) and I would be offended if someone told me that that was against nature. I'm assuming you're straight. What if people were standing up, having hearings and rallies telling you that what you feel for you lover was wrong?
some people (I like to call them scumbags) think it's natural for them to bang young boys or girls or animals....are we as a society to say....have at it.....I think not.  Now I know that's a stretch from 2 men or women doing their thing....but then again...IS IT.  Like I said...it's a slippery slope when ya start allowing all kinds of sh-t.

NJ is a liberal state....they'll allow it....eventually.
#102 | 917 days ago

unopescatore wrote:
Wow...that's over my head, my #1 concern is the future of my daughter.....which has nothing to do with extending marriage rights to gays but that's how I feel at the moment. Everyone's out for their own ass (no pun intended).
And if your daughter comes home at 14, tells you shes in love with Julie?
367  
#103 | 917 days ago
John_Daly (+)

JenX63 wrote:
Are you saying woman are going to become extinct? Cause it sure sounds like it from that comment. Statistically speaking (woot woot used my big words) more females are born than males, so I really dont see the argument there.
Hes talking about procreation. Man and woman.
#104 | 917 days ago

JenX63 wrote:
Are you saying woman are going to become extinct? Cause it sure sounds like it from that comment. Statistically speaking (woot woot used my big words) more females are born than males, so I really dont see the argument there.
OK--No, not religion.  Take any endangered species.  If all you have left are FEmales, party over. 
#105 | 917 days ago
unopescatore (+)

JenX63 wrote:
And if your daughter comes home at 14, tells you shes in love with Julie?
14...she aint dating anyone....boy girl or beast till she's 35 & that's the end of that!!!! :) In reality I'd be highly disapointed & hope she'd get her head screwed on right....but what can ya do, she's gonna do what she's gonna do. Still doesn't mean I'd like gay marriage. ;)
#106 | 917 days ago

Hilblee wrote:
OK--No, not religion.  Take any endangered species.  If all you have left are FEmales, party over. 
Most if not all "endangered species", are endangered cause folks hunt them. As long as there are eggs & sperm, the human race will be just fine. (and on that note, I must leave before I get myself in trouble)
367  
#107 | 917 days ago

JenX63 wrote:
Most if not all "endangered species", are endangered cause folks hunt them. As long as there are eggs & sperm, the human race will be just fine. (and on that note, I must leave before I get myself in trouble)
Not the point!  Holy crap.
#108 | 917 days ago

unopescatore wrote:
14...she aint dating anyone....boy girl or beast till she's 35 & that's the end of that!!!! :) In reality I'd be highly disapointed & hope she'd get her head screwed on right....but what can ya do, she's gonna do what she's gonna do. Still doesn't mean I'd like gay marriage. ;)
You know I use to think like that, til my daughter came home with her girlfriend Emily. Whether it was teenage rebellion or real, I had to rethink my thinking. At the time I could care less who you loved as long as you were a decent HUMAN, this hit close to home and tested my do not judge others. In most states, after 2 years your common law and can get the benefits as a legally married couple including health benefits, seriously, are you being hurt by these folks wanting the same rights......i got to go, really, getting pissed at ignorance and intolerance. If "straight" was the minority , you would be singing a different tune.
367  
#109 | 917 days ago

irmacourt wrote:
they all act like kids fighting over a candy bar to me thats my opinion anyway
(whispers back in jacks ear ...) and cheaters too . they cant help themselves its politics or is it Pollock
#110 | 917 days ago
John_Daly (+)

JenX63 wrote:
You know I use to think like that, til my daughter came home with her girlfriend Emily. Whether it was teenage rebellion or real, I had to rethink my thinking. At the time I could care less who you loved as long as you were a decent HUMAN, this hit close to home and tested my do not judge others. In most states, after 2 years your common law and can get the benefits as a legally married couple including health benefits, seriously, are you being hurt by these folks wanting the same rights......i got to go, really, getting pissed at ignorance and intolerance. If "straight" was the minority , you would be singing a different tune.
Speak!!!
#111 | 917 days ago

unopescatore wrote:
some people (I like to call them scumbags) think it's natural for them to bang young boys or girls or animals....are we as a society to say....have at it.....I think not.  Now I know that's a stretch from 2 men or women doing their thing....but then again...IS IT.  Like I said...it's a slippery slope when ya start allowing all kinds of sh-t.

NJ is a liberal state....they'll allow it....eventually.
Right. But, I'm not talking about pedophilia. I could've posed that argument to him, but I figure we all agree that they should just be shot.
87  
#112 | 917 days ago

Hilblee wrote:
No, not religion.  Take any endangered species.  If all you have left are males, party over. 
Oh okay. But, knowing that allowing gay people to get married won't turn straight people gay, I don't see problem. You won't become a gay next week because some gays got married, so we aren't in any more danger of extinction than the mayans or the Bible have already predicted. Do you just think it's gross?
87  
#113 | 917 days ago
unopescatore (+)

JenX63 wrote:
You know I use to think like that, til my daughter came home with her girlfriend Emily. Whether it was teenage rebellion or real, I had to rethink my thinking. At the time I could care less who you loved as long as you were a decent HUMAN, this hit close to home and tested my do not judge others. In most states, after 2 years your common law and can get the benefits as a legally married couple including health benefits, seriously, are you being hurt by these folks wanting the same rights......i got to go, really, getting pissed at ignorance and intolerance. If "straight" was the minority , you would be singing a different tune.
there's no need to get ticked off....I mean I like the G-men and you like the Skins...it's cool.  BIG BLUE!!!!!  You can spin it however you want to spin it...it's not natural & for me that's it. 

WHY get pissed off....is everyone spose to think the same way.....if you USE to feel the same way I do, then you should understand.  So if you didn't have a gay daughter (she may not be gay, but ya see where I'm going with this) then you'd still feel the same way I do. 
#114 | 917 days ago
unopescatore (+)

kobe_lova wrote:
Right. But, I'm not talking about pedophilia. I could've posed that argument to him, but I figure we all agree that they should just be shot.
hang em high.laugh  Like I said....it's gonna happen whether I like it or not, I just don't agree with it at all. 
#115 | 917 days ago

jesus christ, people are so f**ing ignorant, that's why I don't normally participate in these polls. 

You guys wanna bring back segregated water fountains too?
#116 | 917 days ago

I dont care.  You guys are missing my point in the original post.  I wouldnt disagree with it using religious concepts.  I would disagree with it using the natural order of the universe.  Doesnt make me a homophobe because I disagree. 
#117 | 917 days ago

The_Real_Stoney wrote:
jesus christ, people are so f**ing ignorant, that's why I don't normally participate in these polls. 

You guys wanna bring back segregated water fountains too?
I feel so blessed to have your brilliance shine down on us all!
#118 | 917 days ago

unopescatore wrote:
14...she aint dating anyone....boy girl or beast till she's 35 & that's the end of that!!!! :) In reality I'd be highly disapointed & hope she'd get her head screwed on right....but what can ya do, she's gonna do what she's gonna do. Still doesn't mean I'd like gay marriage. ;)
If she is gay, her head will still be screwed on just fine!

That is what bugs me about it. When I was about 17, my parents called me in the room looking terrified and asked me if I was gay...no idea why and I've never even asked, but I've often wondered what she would have done had I said yes. My dad probably wouldn't care, I don't even know. She, on the other hand, is not a fan, and has pretty much made it a point to let us all know it, so part me wanted to say "you god**mn right" with all of my heart because I, personally, am not a fan of bigotry. And that is what it is...bigotry, plain and simple. Your child probably will be straight, but I would hope that if she wasn't... in her house, with her dad, she wouldn't feel like she's less than, like an outcast like so many of them already do, they get enough of that outside of the family.
87  
#119 | 917 days ago

Hilblee wrote:
I feel so blessed to have your brilliance shine down on us all!
so you assumed I was talking about you
#120 | 917 days ago

The_Real_Stoney wrote:
so you assumed I was talking about you
Well, I was in the conversation so, ya.
#121 | 917 days ago

(Edited by kobe_lova)
Hilblee wrote:
I dont care.  You guys are missing my point in the original post.  I wouldnt disagree with it using religious concepts.  I would disagree with it using the natural order of the universe.  Doesnt make me a homophobe because I disagree. 
The gays and/or gay marriage are not going to make us extinct. None of it will affect you personally in any way, unless someone in your family becomes infected and even then, it still shouldn't. That's all I'm saying.
87  
#122 | 917 days ago

I figured he was referring to me. 
13  
#123 | 917 days ago

kobe_lova wrote:
If she is gay, her head will still be screwed on just fine!

That is what bugs me about it. When I was about 17, my parents called me in the room looking terrified and asked me if I was gay...no idea why and I've never even asked, but I've often wondered what she would have done had I said yes. My dad probably wouldn't care, I don't even know. She, on the other hand, is not a fan, and has pretty much made it a point to let us all know it, so part me wanted to say "you god**mn right" with all of my heart because I, personally, am not a fan of bigotry. And that is what it is...bigotry, plain and simple. Your child probably will be straight, but I would hope that if she wasn't... in her house, with her dad, she wouldn't feel like she's less than, like an outcast like so many of them already do, they get enough of that outside of the family.
I have 2 sons that are 19 and 22.  If one turns out to be gay, so be it.  I will love him regardless.  I will still disagree with it, but he is my son and an adult and can make his own way in the world.  Doesnt make me a bigot.  What parent doesnt disagree with some of their childrens life decisions?
#124 | 917 days ago

kobe_lova wrote:
The gays and/or gay marriage are not going to make us extinct. None of it will affect you personally in any way, unless someone in your family becomes infected and even then, it still shouldn't. That's all I'm saying.
I agree--Im not fighting against it and it hasnt directly affected me.  I have a best friend whos brother is gay and I dont feel that I treat him any different than I would anyone else. 
#125 | 917 days ago

Hilblee wrote:
I have 2 sons that are 19 and 22.  If one turns out to be gay, so be it.  I will love him regardless.  I will still disagree with it, but he is my son and an adult and can make his own way in the world.  Doesnt make me a bigot.  What parent doesnt disagree with some of their childrens life decisions?
Sure, disagreeing is one thing, bigotry is another. You need an example. Mama #1 doesn't like the "decision" (i won't even get into that right now, but... ugh) but says oh well, and goes on. Mama #2 says GTFO. If your convictions are so strong that you can't tolerate or accept it...bigot. You may not be one, but there are plenty of them still.
87  
#126 | 917 days ago
unopescatore (+)

The_Real_Stoney wrote:
jesus christ, people are so f**ing ignorant, that's why I don't normally participate in these polls. 

You guys wanna bring back segregated water fountains too?
I see you used the word "ignorant" wouldn't that make you ignorant as to the way the opposition feels on the matter. 

nice touch going to the racist over the top sh-t....typical. indecision  
#127 | 917 days ago

Hilblee wrote:
I agree--Im not fighting against it and it hasnt directly affected me.  I have a best friend whos brother is gay and I dont feel that I treat him any different than I would anyone else. 
Good.
87  
#128 | 917 days ago

unopescatore wrote:
there's no need to get ticked off....I mean I like the G-men and you like the Skins...it's cool.  BIG BLUE!!!!!  You can spin it however you want to spin it...it's not natural & for me that's it. 

WHY get pissed off....is everyone spose to think the same way.....if you USE to feel the same way I do, then you should understand.  So if you didn't have a gay daughter (she may not be gay, but ya see where I'm going with this) then you'd still feel the same way I do. 
But I don't and I dont nor have I ever thought the way you do. I was taught to love my neighbor. I respect your right to your opinion, I just disagree with it.
367  
#129 | 917 days ago

Hilblee wrote:
Not the point!  Holy crap.
Thats what I took from your statement.
367  
#130 | 917 days ago
unopescatore (+)

kobe_lova wrote:
If she is gay, her head will still be screwed on just fine!

That is what bugs me about it. When I was about 17, my parents called me in the room looking terrified and asked me if I was gay...no idea why and I've never even asked, but I've often wondered what she would have done had I said yes. My dad probably wouldn't care, I don't even know. She, on the other hand, is not a fan, and has pretty much made it a point to let us all know it, so part me wanted to say "you god**mn right" with all of my heart because I, personally, am not a fan of bigotry. And that is what it is...bigotry, plain and simple. Your child probably will be straight, but I would hope that if she wasn't... in her house, with her dad, she wouldn't feel like she's less than, like an outcast like so many of them already do, they get enough of that outside of the family.
I'm not going to blow smoke up your arse, like I said I'd be highly disapointed but then again, that's for selfish reasons (wanting grandchildren and what not) but I'd NEVER disown my flesh and blood.
#131 | 917 days ago

John_Daly wrote:
Hes talking about procreation. Man and woman.
Isnt that what sperm banks were invented for? All comes down to sperm & eggs, regardless of who your partner is.
367  
#132 | 917 days ago
unopescatore (+)

JenX63 wrote:
But I don't and I dont nor have I ever thought the way you do. I was taught to love my neighbor. I respect your right to your opinion, I just disagree with it.
I respect yours as well....I thought I read you use to feel like I do on the matter....sorry.  We're still cool right? indecision
#133 | 917 days ago

unopescatore wrote:
some people (I like to call them scumbags) think it's natural for them to bang young boys or girls or animals....are we as a society to say....have at it.....I think not.  Now I know that's a stretch from 2 men or women doing their thing....but then again...IS IT.  Like I said...it's a slippery slope when ya start allowing all kinds of sh-t.

NJ is a liberal state....they'll allow it....eventually.
The "slippery slope" argument is false. Children can not legally consent. Dogs can not consent. That's why doing anything sexually to them is illegal. Same sex marriage is between two consenting adults. Those three words are the key.
#134 | 917 days ago

Hilblee wrote:
 Maybe its just  as simple as if we let this go, we as a society are condoning homosexuality.  I dont think most of our society does and that may be the kicker. 
Polling has shown gradual acceptance. Acceptance is happening. It's happening somewhat slow, but it is happening.
#135 | 917 days ago

unopescatore wrote:
I see you used the word "ignorant" wouldn't that make you ignorant as to the way the opposition feels on the matter. 

nice touch going to the racist over the top sh-t....typical. indecision  
it's not the topic, it's the reasoning.  I will never say anything about anyone for having an opinion, but I will comment on the reasoning behind the opinion.  And if you want to call me ignorant for that, please do. Do it repeatedly, use caps if you feel the urge.

And you're right, it is typical.  I have a contractual agreement with the reverend al sharpton to do that in 84% of my comments per day to sustain my sponsorship
#136 | 917 days ago

Hilblee wrote:
I agree that actions like that dont show it but we are talking about teenagers fighting for their lives over there that made a mistake.  I did 22 years in the military and when they start talking court martial over something so stupid, it busts my balls.   These guys are dirty, tired, fearful, remorseful, mad, sad -- sometimes all in just one day.  They see their best friend or wingman get their head blowed off and have to move on and complete whatever mission is expected of them. 

1.5 billion muslims and yet where is their leadership on the news every night denouncing the actions of the 1%?  Nothing!  They are letting that 1% speak for them.  Make no mistake, that 1% wants to cut your infidel head off and will if it ever gets the chance.
Well, most of the leaders are dictators that are more concerned with putting down revolutions at the moment. As I see it, the people are speaking through Arab Spring. The Muslim world is changing before our eyes, but what happens next is anyone's guess.
#137 | 917 days ago
unopescatore (+)

Eric_ wrote:
The "slippery slope" argument is false. Children can not legally consent. Dogs can not consent. That's why doing anything sexually to them is illegal. Same sex marriage is between two consenting adults. Those three words are the key.
you're right....but when is enough / enough, for me that's the line in the sand for you it's different....so be it.   I aint out there holding a sign up in protest, if they allow it then they allow it....at this point in my state it's NO....that'll change.   The majority on the Q seem to want it....so I'll catch some heat on the subject....it's all good in the hood.  I have a couple gay friends or aquantances....I tell em the same thing.....they don't hate me....at least to my face. :)
#138 | 917 days ago

Eric_ wrote:
Well, most of the leaders are dictators that are more concerned with putting down revolutions at the moment. As I see it, the people are speaking through Arab Spring. The Muslim world is changing before our eyes, but what happens next is anyone's guess.
Im not talking about the country leaders. Im talking about the Imams and other religious leaders.  Why arent they standing up and defying the 1% that is doing all the speaking for them.  I would like to hear from them and show me that their religion is peaceful.

I think it is more around 10% of the muslim religion is truely peaceful and 89% secretly keep their mouths shut and enjoy the 1% doing what they do.
#139 | 917 days ago

I can't get over this "if you allow gays to marry, then what happens?"

1 - We're not going to become an endangered species (not due to that anyway), because it's never going to be an "all gay" society. Also, do you think if you prohibit gays to marry that they're going to start magically procreating with the opposite sex? Sorry. Not gonna happen. That argument is completely invalid.

2 - Holy crap with the "how far will it go?" People just want to have the same rights as everybody else. Two. Consenting. Adult. Human. Beings. Nobody is ever going to let people start doing "unnatural" things to or marrying children or animals legally. This is not the next step - it's people asking for rights that are supposedly guaranteed them as American citizens. 

3 - What's natural for some is not natural for everybody. Ashlie hit the nail on the head - it's no more natural for a gay man to want to be with a woman than it is for a straight man to want to be with a man. Who are we to say what they do, sexually? The only reason parts of our society frown on it is because of what has been preached about it in the bible. Well...there have been some other things that they said in the bible, too, that don't fly now. (Also, some may want to read a little bit of middle eastern/west Asia "wedding night" history...interesting stuff.)

I know people's minds are never going to be changed on this matter, but there are some arguments being used against it that are just asinine. 
34  
#140 | 917 days ago
unopescatore (+)

The_Real_Stoney wrote:
it's not the topic, it's the reasoning.  I will never say anything about anyone for having an opinion, but I will comment on the reasoning behind the opinion.  And if you want to call me ignorant for that, please do. Do it repeatedly, use caps if you feel the urge.

And you're right, it is typical.  I have a contractual agreement with the reverend al sharpton to do that in 84% of my comments per day to sustain my sponsorship
no sir...I wouldn't call ya ignorant for your thinking.  If I did then we'd be calling each other names, saying I'll kick your ass & what not over the internet....I'm not interested in that what so ever.  Looks like you do come to Jersey now & then though. smiley  Tell her to take ya to Sandy Hook beach. smiley
#141 | 917 days ago

Hilblee wrote:
Not the point!  Holy crap.
I think the point is that if gays exist, which they do, allowing them to marry is not going to resolve that potential problem either way.  We're not talking about forcing people to become gay.  We're not talking about a society/world completely comprised of gay people.  We're talking about letting the ones who DO exist get married and enjoy all the same benefits (and suffering) that comes with marriage.  So the "survival of the species" has nothing to do with gay marriage.  
I think you may be the one who veered away from the point.
#142 | 917 days ago
unopescatore (+)

Jess wrote:
I can't get over this "if you allow gays to marry, then what happens?"

1 - We're not going to become an endangered species (not due to that anyway), because it's never going to be an "all gay" society. Also, do you think if you prohibit gays to marry that they're going to start magically procreating with the opposite sex? Sorry. Not gonna happen. That argument is completely invalid.

2 - Holy crap with the "how far will it go?" People just want to have the same rights as everybody else. Two. Consenting. Adult. Human. Beings. Nobody is ever going to let people start doing "unnatural" things to or marrying children or animals legally. This is not the next step - it's people asking for rights that are supposedly guaranteed them as American citizens. 

3 - What's natural for some is not natural for everybody. Ashlie hit the nail on the head - it's no more natural for a gay man to want to be with a woman than it is for a straight man to want to be with a man. Who are we to say what they do, sexually? The only reason parts of our society frown on it is because of what has been preached about it in the bible. Well...there have been some other things that they said in the bible, too, that don't fly now. (Also, some may want to read a little bit of middle eastern/west Asia "wedding night" history...interesting stuff.)

I know people's minds are never going to be changed on this matter, but there are some arguments being used against it that are just asinine. 
I could care less about a bible quran or a torah have to say.  It's black and white for me....marriage is reserved for men & women. 

I should be able to marry 10 women or 50 women....I want a harim....are you gonna fight for my cause???...I should have that right!!!!!  (I'm kidding BTW)  slippery slope

I want to re-found the country of Deseret....Mormons rule! laugh
#143 | 917 days ago

The_Real_Stoney wrote:
jesus christ, people are so f**ing ignorant, that's why I don't normally participate in these polls. 

You guys wanna bring back segregated water fountains too?
Aww, I mentioned that earlier.  This is why I'm gay for you (partially).
#144 | 917 days ago

unopescatore wrote:
no sir...I wouldn't call ya ignorant for your thinking.  If I did then we'd be calling each other names, saying I'll kick your ass & what not over the internet....I'm not interested in that what so ever.  Looks like you do come to Jersey now & then though. smiley  Tell her to take ya to Sandy Hook beach. smiley
We'd never go to Sandy Hook.  Far too many straights for my liking.

PS - When it comes to human rights, there is no slippery slope.  Our way of thinking is just antiquated and 20 years from now we'll look back on this whole mess and be ashamed of ourselves for not allowing it sooner.  Same as the Civil Rights movement.

PPS - If I were a lesbian, I'd be asking for a larger refund on my taxes every year since we all have to pay the same taxes but I'd be getting fewer rights than the breeders.  Or at least Home Depot gift cards.  "Here's your 40 acres and a mule."
#145 | 917 days ago

janet011685 wrote:
I think the point is that if gays exist, which they do, allowing them to marry is not going to resolve that potential problem either way.  We're not talking about forcing people to become gay.  We're not talking about a society/world completely comprised of gay people.  We're talking about letting the ones who DO exist get married and enjoy all the same benefits (and suffering) that comes with marriage.  So the "survival of the species" has nothing to do with gay marriage.  
I think you may be the one who veered away from the point.
I didnt veer, and I dont beleive gay marraige is going to ruin anything.  Again, I think it is against nature, that is my opinion.  I dont care what you, he, they, she or any freakin body else does.  Do it.  I wont deny you any of it. 
#146 | 917 days ago

(Edited by janet011685)
Hilblee wrote:
I didnt veer, and I dont beleive gay marraige is going to ruin anything.  Again, I think it is against nature, that is my opinion.  I dont care what you, he, they, she or any freakin body else does.  Do it.  I wont deny you any of it. 
But if it were on a ballot, you would vote against it?
#147 | 917 days ago

I dont beleive "rights" should be on a ballot.  If people smarter than me (like norse) determine that it is constitutionally a right, then done deal.
#148 | 917 days ago
unopescatore (+)

(Edited by unopescatore)
janet011685 wrote:
We'd never go to Sandy Hook.  Far too many straights for my liking.

PS - When it comes to human rights, there is no slippery slope.  Our way of thinking is just antiquated and 20 years from now we'll look back on this whole mess and be ashamed of ourselves for not allowing it sooner.  Same as the Civil Rights movement.

PPS - If I were a lesbian, I'd be asking for a larger refund on my taxes every year since we all have to pay the same taxes but I'd be getting fewer rights than the breeders.  Or at least Home Depot gift cards.  "Here's your 40 acres and a mule."
ok...Asbury Park or New Hope, PA. ;)

You maybe right & I'm sure it'll change, but I still say it aint normal or natural so that right doesn't need to be extended to them.....they can do what they gotta do but to give a right that was meant for men and women don't seem right....TO ME.  
look I'm just chasing my tail here
#149 | 917 days ago

Wow.  This thread sure blew up in a hurry.   As I read this all over, and SMH, I just,   UGH>>>>>>>>>>>>

"1.5 billion muslims and yet where is their leadership on the news every night denouncing the actions of the 1%?  Nothing!  They are letting that 1% speak for them.  Make no mistake, that 1% wants to cut your infidel head off and will if it ever gets the chance."                                    Sounds a lot like the good ol USA.       Hmm.  Imagine that.
1
500  
#150 | 917 days ago

unopescatore wrote:
ok...Asbury Park or New Hope, PA. ;)

You maybe right & I'm sure it'll change, but I still say it aint normal or natural so that right doesn't need to be extended to them.....they can do what they gotta do but to give a right that was meant for men and women don't seem right....TO ME.  
look I'm just chasing my tail here
Isn't normal or natural?  Neither are fake t*ts but guys LOVE them.  
Please, I know you're smarter than that.  
#151 | 917 days ago

Hilblee wrote:
I dont beleive "rights" should be on a ballot.  If people smarter than me (like norse) determine that it is constitutionally a right, then done deal.
Well then I don't see how it's not a right in your mind.  Straight people have a legal right to get married.  They don't have to EARN it, or work for it, or purchase it.  They just have that inherent right, if they so choose to utilize it.  Gay people do not. 
#152 | 917 days ago
unopescatore (+)

janet011685 wrote:
Isn't normal or natural?  Neither are fake t*ts but guys LOVE them.  
Please, I know you're smarter than that.  
I'd like to retract my normal statement please, who's to say what's normal.

You make a great point....how could I argue with the fake t-ts angle....that's freaken brilliant. laugh

really it's out of our hands....so they're gonna do what they're gonna do.  It's not going to hurt my feelings nor am I going to lose any sleep if they extend the right.  I'm just saying....I'm not down with it.  I thought they should legalise POT as well....but that's not the brightest idea either.  Least we can vote on that. ;)
#153 | 917 days ago

Hilblee wrote:
I dont beleive "rights" should be on a ballot.  If people smarter than me (like norse) determine that it is constitutionally a right, then done deal.
So then you would agree Prop 8 is unconstitutional.
#154 | 917 days ago
unopescatore (+)

ohwell_ wrote:
Wow.  This thread sure blew up in a hurry.   As I read this all over, and SMH, I just,   UGH>>>>>>>>>>>>

"1.5 billion muslims and yet where is their leadership on the news every night denouncing the actions of the 1%?  Nothing!  They are letting that 1% speak for them.  Make no mistake, that 1% wants to cut your infidel head off and will if it ever gets the chance."                                    Sounds a lot like the good ol USA.       Hmm.  Imagine that.
1
jezz....now I gotta start on the muslims....give me a minute, I'm on the gays. cheeky
#155 | 917 days ago

Eric_ wrote:
So then you would agree Prop 8 is unconstitutional.
Ive never read it but probably.  Heck, is marriage a right or a privledge? 
#156 | 917 days ago

Hilblee wrote:
Ive never read it but probably.  Heck, is marriage a right or a privledge? 
Marriage is a legally binding contract.
500  
#157 | 917 days ago

You are right but that doesnt mean marriage is a constitutional right or a privledge? 
#158 | 917 days ago

I love this $h*t.
#159 | 917 days ago

Hilblee wrote:
You are right but that doesnt mean marriage is a constitutional right or a privledge? 
In 1967,  it was against the law to marry someone other than your own race. 
Loving vs Virginia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._Virginia



Marriage (or wedlock) is a social union or legal contract between people that creates kinship
500  
#160 | 917 days ago

Hilblee wrote:
You are right but that doesnt mean marriage is a constitutional right or a privledge? 
According to the dictionary, they're kind of the same thing.  
#161 | 917 days ago

Hilblee wrote:
You are right but that doesnt mean marriage is a constitutional right or a privledge? 
Well, you have the right to get married.
87  
#162 | 917 days ago
cubsgirl2 (+)

Hilblee wrote:
I dont care.  You guys are missing my point in the original post.  I wouldnt disagree with it using religious concepts.  I would disagree with it using the natural order of the universe.  Doesnt make me a homophobe because I disagree. 
How do you know what the natural order of the universe is? Good God do you know how many men and women cannot produce offspring? Does that make them not part of the natural universe? Are they freaks because they can't?  And what does that have to do with gays being able to marry and have insurance on their partners the same way straight couples can? Seriously, once again the last time I checked we were NOT governed by the natural order of the universe. 

 
69  
#163 | 917 days ago

Sorry folks, I gotta side with the Libs on this one.  It aint none of my f**king business who somebody else falls in love with.  Some folks on here even know about my short stint as a modified sorta half a$$ed clergy to perform a "commitment ceremony" for a woman that I hold in very, very high regard.
#164 | 917 days ago
Nick__ (+)

Cactus_Jack wrote:
Sorry folks, I gotta side with the Libs on this one.  It aint none of my f**king business who somebody else falls in love with.  Some folks on here even know about my short stint as a modified sorta half a$$ed clergy to perform a "commitment ceremony" for a woman that I hold in very, very high regard.
Don't be sorry for being smart!  wink
#165 | 917 days ago

Nick__ wrote:
Don't be sorry for being smart!  wink
I know, but there's a part of me that is just about as conservative as you can possibly get, but then I do $h*t like that and I fall way left of the middle line.  Ask me about my view on the second amendment, and you would think you were talking to a 3 percenter.  Ask about gay marriage and I sound like Joe Biden's brother. 
#166 | 917 days ago

Cactus_Jack wrote:
Sorry folks, I gotta side with the Libs on this one.  It aint none of my f**king business who somebody else falls in love with.  Some folks on here even know about my short stint as a modified sorta half a$$ed clergy to perform a "commitment ceremony" for a woman that I hold in very, very high regard.
It's the only reason that thread hasn't been cut. :heart:
87  
#167 | 917 days ago

Cactus_Jack wrote:
I know, but there's a part of me that is just about as conservative as you can possibly get, but then I do $h*t like that and I fall way left of the middle line.  Ask me about my view on the second amendment, and you would think you were talking to a 3 percenter.  Ask about gay marriage and I sound like Joe Biden's brother. 
Hmm, Old Mike Biden.  Sounds like a character in "To Kill a Mockingbird".  You and Boo Radley can go squirrel hunting, kill and skin 'em, then bring them over to Tom and Bubba's wedding reception in lieu of a gift.  
#168 | 917 days ago

The 2nd Amendment guarantees the citizenry  the right....


to...

keep...

an........





Aw, Christ, I forgot what I was saying.
#169 | 917 days ago
unopescatore (+)

I saw this on another site....just some food for thought....I have to say....everyone on this site "held it together" & didn't start with the name calling and what not:


Wake up America. The voices that preach tolerance are turning violent. This time the target is an innocent young girl, Sarah Crank, who testified before the Maryland Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee in support of traditional marriage.

The calm, truthful testimony of a 14-year-old minor – without profanity or harsh language – generated vulgar attacks, threats of violence and even death wishes divulged on numerous pro-homosexual websites, blogs, and comment entries. In fact, pro-homosexual activists unleashed a campaign of harassment against the Maryland family, including a call to have the mother’s parental rights revoked for simply encouraging her daughter to defend the reality of marriage between one man and one woman.

Violent Reactions

“And now everyone knows her name, so hopefully she will feel what its like to be harassed and bullied…” reads a comment posted on LGBTNation.com

From YouTube: “My god I hate people like this. Most (not all) Americans are [expletive] retards. If I ever see this girl, I will kill her. That’s a promise.”

Other entries: “Her parents should be exterminated.”

“The [sic] is why abortion must stay legal – to prevent little bigots like this from being Born…”

“Kill this child and his [sic] parent, for my 11 birthday would be a wonderful gift, thanks.”

“Her belief is hurting other people. I will attack her as much as I please.”

“Parents like hers should be sterilized…”

“I’m gonna kill ‘er!”

That is only a small sample. The vitriolic tone of over 2,600 comments posted on The Huffington Post alone, reveal how the “tolerance” promoted by the homosexual movement is anything but tolerant, nothing more than an empty slogan to silence most Americans. In fact, hundreds of additional comments posted across the blogosphere demonstrate just how willing pro-homosexual activists are to deny traditional marriage supporters their freedom of speech.


Transcript of the Testimony


Listen to the audio recording “Hi, I’m Sarah Crank. Today’s my 14th birthday, and it would be the best birthday present ever if you would vote ‘no’ on gay marriage. I really feel bad for the kids who have two parents of the same gender. Even though some kids think it’s fine, they have no idea what kind of wonderful experiences they miss out on. I don't want more kids to get confused about what's right and okay. I really don't want to grow up in a world where marriage isn't such a special thing anymore.

"It's rather scary to think that when I grow up the legislature or the court can change the definition of any word they want. If they could change the definition of marriage then they could change the definition of any word. People have the choice to be gay, but I don't want to be affected by their choice. People say that they were born that way, but I've met really nice adults who did change. So please vote ‘no’ on gay marriage. Thank you.” (January 31, 2012)
#170 | 917 days ago

unopescatore wrote:
I saw this on another site....just some food for thought....I have to say....everyone on this site "held it together" & didn't start with the name calling and what not:


Wake up America. The voices that preach tolerance are turning violent. This time the target is an innocent young girl, Sarah Crank, who testified before the Maryland Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee in support of traditional marriage.

The calm, truthful testimony of a 14-year-old minor – without profanity or harsh language – generated vulgar attacks, threats of violence and even death wishes divulged on numerous pro-homosexual websites, blogs, and comment entries. In fact, pro-homosexual activists unleashed a campaign of harassment against the Maryland family, including a call to have the mother’s parental rights revoked for simply encouraging her daughter to defend the reality of marriage between one man and one woman.

Violent Reactions

“And now everyone knows her name, so hopefully she will feel what its like to be harassed and bullied…” reads a comment posted on LGBTNation.com

From YouTube: “My god I hate people like this. Most (not all) Americans are [expletive] retards. If I ever see this girl, I will kill her. That’s a promise.”

Other entries: “Her parents should be exterminated.”

“The [sic] is why abortion must stay legal – to prevent little bigots like this from being Born…”

“Kill this child and his [sic] parent, for my 11 birthday would be a wonderful gift, thanks.”

“Her belief is hurting other people. I will attack her as much as I please.”

“Parents like hers should be sterilized…”

“I’m gonna kill ‘er!”

That is only a small sample. The vitriolic tone of over 2,600 comments posted on The Huffington Post alone, reveal how the “tolerance” promoted by the homosexual movement is anything but tolerant, nothing more than an empty slogan to silence most Americans. In fact, hundreds of additional comments posted across the blogosphere demonstrate just how willing pro-homosexual activists are to deny traditional marriage supporters their freedom of speech.


Transcript of the Testimony


Listen to the audio recording “Hi, I’m Sarah Crank. Today’s my 14th birthday, and it would be the best birthday present ever if you would vote ‘no’ on gay marriage. I really feel bad for the kids who have two parents of the same gender. Even though some kids think it’s fine, they have no idea what kind of wonderful experiences they miss out on. I don't want more kids to get confused about what's right and okay. I really don't want to grow up in a world where marriage isn't such a special thing anymore.

"It's rather scary to think that when I grow up the legislature or the court can change the definition of any word they want. If they could change the definition of marriage then they could change the definition of any word. People have the choice to be gay, but I don't want to be affected by their choice. People say that they were born that way, but I've met really nice adults who did change. So please vote ‘no’ on gay marriage. Thank you.” (January 31, 2012)
She's 14.  It shows. 
500  
#171 | 917 days ago

ohwell_ wrote:
She's 14.  It shows. 
Yes.




and that specific set of idiotic responses just prove straight people aren't the only ones allowed to be ridiculous.
87  
#172 | 917 days ago
unopescatore (+)

ohwell_ wrote:
She's 14.  It shows. 
yes it does....as a parent I'd NEVER let my 14 yr old get involved with this sh-t.  Everyone should be aware that there are just as many radicals (scumbags) on one side as there is the other.
#173 | 917 days ago

unopescatore wrote:
I saw this on another site....just some food for thought....I have to say....everyone on this site "held it together" & didn't start with the name calling and what not:


Wake up America. The voices that preach tolerance are turning violent. This time the target is an innocent young girl, Sarah Crank, who testified before the Maryland Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee in support of traditional marriage.

The calm, truthful testimony of a 14-year-old minor – without profanity or harsh language – generated vulgar attacks, threats of violence and even death wishes divulged on numerous pro-homosexual websites, blogs, and comment entries. In fact, pro-homosexual activists unleashed a campaign of harassment against the Maryland family, including a call to have the mother’s parental rights revoked for simply encouraging her daughter to defend the reality of marriage between one man and one woman.

Violent Reactions

“And now everyone knows her name, so hopefully she will feel what its like to be harassed and bullied…” reads a comment posted on LGBTNation.com

From YouTube: “My god I hate people like this. Most (not all) Americans are [expletive] retards. If I ever see this girl, I will kill her. That’s a promise.”

Other entries: “Her parents should be exterminated.”

“The [sic] is why abortion must stay legal – to prevent little bigots like this from being Born…”

“Kill this child and his [sic] parent, for my 11 birthday would be a wonderful gift, thanks.”

“Her belief is hurting other people. I will attack her as much as I please.”

“Parents like hers should be sterilized…”

“I’m gonna kill ‘er!”

That is only a small sample. The vitriolic tone of over 2,600 comments posted on The Huffington Post alone, reveal how the “tolerance” promoted by the homosexual movement is anything but tolerant, nothing more than an empty slogan to silence most Americans. In fact, hundreds of additional comments posted across the blogosphere demonstrate just how willing pro-homosexual activists are to deny traditional marriage supporters their freedom of speech.


Transcript of the Testimony


Listen to the audio recording “Hi, I’m Sarah Crank. Today’s my 14th birthday, and it would be the best birthday present ever if you would vote ‘no’ on gay marriage. I really feel bad for the kids who have two parents of the same gender. Even though some kids think it’s fine, they have no idea what kind of wonderful experiences they miss out on. I don't want more kids to get confused about what's right and okay. I really don't want to grow up in a world where marriage isn't such a special thing anymore.

"It's rather scary to think that when I grow up the legislature or the court can change the definition of any word they want. If they could change the definition of marriage then they could change the definition of any word. People have the choice to be gay, but I don't want to be affected by their choice. People say that they were born that way, but I've met really nice adults who did change. So please vote ‘no’ on gay marriage. Thank you.” (January 31, 2012)
OK, well, everything she said is pretty ignorant, in my opinion ("really nice adults who did change", "people have the choice to be gay", "where marriage isn't such a special thing any more", "I don't want to be affected by their choice", etc.), but it doesn't warrant attacks like those.  

However, it takes a lot less digging to find the other side of the coin.  It's very rare to see this kind of thing happening to a straight person.  Much more likely to find stories about gay-bashing and homophobic comments made.  I have yet to read an article online about ANY issue dealing with homosexuals where there's not several comments made that are similar, if not worse, in nature to the ones you listed from that situation.  

And what people fail to realize also is that this little girl's testimony is hate speech.  In actuality, that's exactly what it is.  It's said in a nice way, probably in a calm tone, from an innocent little girl, but it IS hate speech, nonetheless.  Substitute ANY other minority group in for homosexuals and what would you call it?  

"...it would be the best birthday present ever if you would vote 'no' on (interracial) marriage."
"I feel really bad for the kids who have two parents of (different races)."
"Please vote 'no' on (black/hispanic/asian people) marriage."
#174 | 917 days ago

unopescatore wrote:
yes it does....as a parent I'd NEVER let my 14 yr old get involved with this sh-t.  Everyone should be aware that there are just as many radicals (scumbags) on one side as there is the other.
Those comments are abhorrent, but well, that's the Internet. It's a cesspool (especially Youtube). It's never a good idea to define a group of people by their most extreme fringiest members. It would be the same as me assuming all conservatives are like those that post at FreeRepublic.

Luckily, we're all much more civilized (sort of...).
#175 | 917 days ago

janet011685 wrote:
According to the dictionary, they're kind of the same thing.  
I thought a Constitutional right was something you enjoyed merely for being a citizen.

A privilege is something one must earn somehow.

ie:  Driving is a privilege.  Not a right.
#176 | 917 days ago

ML31 wrote:
I thought a Constitutional right was something you enjoyed merely for being a citizen.

A privilege is something one must earn somehow.

ie:  Driving is a privilege.  Not a right.
That's how I always thought it was too. The dictionary just made me a confused parent for saying "going out to dinner is a privilege, not a right," (and other similar statements used to note appreciation is warranted) to my child.
34  
#177 | 917 days ago

(Edited by Hilblee)
cubsgirl2 wrote:
How do you know what the natural order of the universe is? Good God do you know how many men and women cannot produce offspring? Does that make them not part of the natural universe? Are they freaks because they can't?  And what does that have to do with gays being able to marry and have insurance on their partners the same way straight couples can? Seriously, once again the last time I checked we were NOT governed by the natural order of the universe. 

 
Nothing at all.  You dont beleive that each species has a male and a female for a purpose?  I think you are just talking in generalization and im trying to be a little more scientific (which isnt my bag--sorry)
#178 | 917 days ago

It's time to break out the West Wing Episode.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eD52OlkKfNs
500  
#179 | 917 days ago

ML31 wrote:
Funny that you use that term.  Late last year a group was garnering signatures to (once again) try and get a proposition on the ballot requiring Unions to ask permission to spend member dues money on political causes. (which technically is already a law that no one seems to be enforcing)  In our newsletter they asked us members to keep an eye out for those people and when we see where they are gathering signatures we should call the union and tell them so they can send their "truth squads" (no joke, that is exactly what they called them!) to the site.
As much as I would like to take the credit for coining that term, sometimes the truth is stranger than fiction.

(ABC News) — The Obama campaign is today beginning a new effort to enlist and educate at least 2 million supporters for a “grassroots communications team” they’re calling the Truth Team.

“The goal is to ensure that when Republicans attack President Obama’s record, grassroots supporters can take ownership of the campaign and share the facts with the undecided voters in their lives,” the campaign said in a statement.

The teams will be first launched in 13 “swing states,” including Iowa, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, Wisconsin, Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Minnesota, Nevada, Ohio and Virginia.

The rollout also includes a social media blitz, directing supporters to three new websites: KeepingHisWord.com, which highlights Obama’s record and “promises kept”; KeepingGOPHonest.com, which highlights GOP policy positions; and AttackWatch.com, which fact-checks claims made against Obama on the campaign trail.

“If the other guys are going to run a campaign based on misrepresenting the president’s record – and their own – we have two options: sit back and let these lies go unchallenged, or fight back with the truth,” deputy Obama campaign manager Stephanie Cutter said in an email. ”We’re fighting back.”

#180 | 917 days ago

ML31 wrote:
I thought a Constitutional right was something you enjoyed merely for being a citizen.

A privilege is something one must earn somehow.

ie:  Driving is a privilege.  Not a right.
I was going to make the same argument, but then I looked up the actual definition for my own purposes and found it defined AS a right.

Either way, I agree with your definition of a Constitutional right.  And since gay Americans ARE citizens, they should have all the same rights AND privileges that heterosexual Americans have.
#181 | 917 days ago

unopescatore wrote:
I respect yours as well....I thought I read you use to feel like I do on the matter....sorry.  We're still cool right? indecision
Its alright.....we just dont agree.
367  
#182 | 917 days ago
NorseHeathen (+)

Wow, this has taken off.....guess it's time to go up and start reading....LOL
#183 | 917 days ago

JenX63 wrote:
Its alright.....we just dont agree.
That's right.  Every conservative needs a liberal to balance out.  Just like everyone that knows football needs a Redskins fan.
#184 | 917 days ago
NorseHeathen (+)

Eric_ wrote:
Polling has shown gradual acceptance. Acceptance is happening. It's happening somewhat slow, but it is happening.
I've listened to so many news interviews on the subject I can't remember which one, or who said it, but I recall one being interviewed who's daughter said that marriage equality is the civil rights issue of (this) her generation.
#185 | 917 days ago

Cactus_Jack wrote:
That's right.  Every conservative needs a liberal to balance out.  Just like everyone that knows football needs a Redskins fan.
if I ever doubted you were 100% male, ^^^, that removed it.
367  
#186 | 917 days ago
NorseHeathen (+)

janet011685 wrote:
I think the point is that if gays exist, which they do, allowing them to marry is not going to resolve that potential problem either way.  We're not talking about forcing people to become gay.  We're not talking about a society/world completely comprised of gay people.  We're talking about letting the ones who DO exist get married and enjoy all the same benefits (and suffering) that comes with marriage.  So the "survival of the species" has nothing to do with gay marriage.  
I think you may be the one who veered away from the point.
Very well said Janet....

I especially agree with the true statement of "get married and enjoy all the same benefits (and suffering) that comes with marriage".

People always forget the suffering part of it.....wink
#187 | 917 days ago
NorseHeathen (+)

Cactus_Jack wrote:
The 2nd Amendment guarantees the citizenry  the right....


to...

keep...

an........





Aw, Christ, I forgot what I was saying.
I so saved this picture.....If I were only 20 years younger, I'd chase that cougar,.....er, I mean Cobra.
#188 | 917 days ago

NorseHeathen wrote:
I so saved this picture.....If I were only 20 years younger, I'd chase that cougar,.....er, I mean Cobra.
And she's a good Christian girl too.  See all the crucifixes (crucifixii, crosses, whatever) around her neck?
#189 | 917 days ago
NorseHeathen (+)

unopescatore wrote:
I saw this on another site....just some food for thought....I have to say....everyone on this site "held it together" & didn't start with the name calling and what not:


Wake up America. The voices that preach tolerance are turning violent. This time the target is an innocent young girl, Sarah Crank, who testified before the Maryland Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee in support of traditional marriage.

The calm, truthful testimony of a 14-year-old minor – without profanity or harsh language – generated vulgar attacks, threats of violence and even death wishes divulged on numerous pro-homosexual websites, blogs, and comment entries. In fact, pro-homosexual activists unleashed a campaign of harassment against the Maryland family, including a call to have the mother’s parental rights revoked for simply encouraging her daughter to defend the reality of marriage between one man and one woman.

Violent Reactions

“And now everyone knows her name, so hopefully she will feel what its like to be harassed and bullied…” reads a comment posted on LGBTNation.com

From YouTube: “My god I hate people like this. Most (not all) Americans are [expletive] retards. If I ever see this girl, I will kill her. That’s a promise.”

Other entries: “Her parents should be exterminated.”

“The [sic] is why abortion must stay legal – to prevent little bigots like this from being Born…”

“Kill this child and his [sic] parent, for my 11 birthday would be a wonderful gift, thanks.”

“Her belief is hurting other people. I will attack her as much as I please.”

“Parents like hers should be sterilized…”

“I’m gonna kill ‘er!”

That is only a small sample. The vitriolic tone of over 2,600 comments posted on The Huffington Post alone, reveal how the “tolerance” promoted by the homosexual movement is anything but tolerant, nothing more than an empty slogan to silence most Americans. In fact, hundreds of additional comments posted across the blogosphere demonstrate just how willing pro-homosexual activists are to deny traditional marriage supporters their freedom of speech.


Transcript of the Testimony


Listen to the audio recording “Hi, I’m Sarah Crank. Today’s my 14th birthday, and it would be the best birthday present ever if you would vote ‘no’ on gay marriage. I really feel bad for the kids who have two parents of the same gender. Even though some kids think it’s fine, they have no idea what kind of wonderful experiences they miss out on. I don't want more kids to get confused about what's right and okay. I really don't want to grow up in a world where marriage isn't such a special thing anymore.

"It's rather scary to think that when I grow up the legislature or the court can change the definition of any word they want. If they could change the definition of marriage then they could change the definition of any word. People have the choice to be gay, but I don't want to be affected by their choice. People say that they were born that way, but I've met really nice adults who did change. So please vote ‘no’ on gay marriage. Thank you.” (January 31, 2012)
Main issue aside, this is what saddens me about the current condition of American society.....  We have gone from assertive to aggressive, to volatile.  I haven't seen so much pre-conditioned animosity since the days of the Vietnam protests.  Unfortunately, there are some of both sides that desire such, and the OWS protests gearing up for the good weather, I fear we are in for an escalation in violent action on both sides....

Seemingly regardless of which issue is being addressed, people are angry and becoming polarized into various segregated "orders".  I only hope something happens to get people to take a step back, take in a deep breath of humility, and re-adopt a sense of reason.  Unfortunately, I will not venture to holding my breath as the state of human nature shows such a wish to be futile.

This country isn't just segregated, or regionally diverse--it's fractured.  I would argue this state to be beyond reconciliation and the future of our country is to break into several smaller countries based upon demographic cultural divisions.  

Only time will tell.
#190 | 917 days ago
NorseHeathen (+)

Well, I have to take a moment to recognize that despite the extremely intense nature of the issues at hand, and the opposing perspective of the people contributing, this thread has actually reflected well upon itself and the participants.  These are tough issues that too oft time degenerate.  Regardless of which "side" of the issues people are on, kudos to all for keeping the discussion civil.

And a special thanks to Jack for the picture.....I absolutely love that car!  Although, keeping in the spirit of debate, I don't prefer black--I'd repaint it an "eggplant purple".....
#191 | 917 days ago

Maybe we need to put together a list of all these "rights" we have so that we dont forget em---I dont think they are written down anywhere (you know, like the bill of rights).

1.  Marriage
2.  Dinner
3.  Call names as long as its not to their face
4.  Gamble
5.  Drink Beer (as long as Im 3 yrs older than the minimum dying age for the military)
6.  Call in sick
7.  Wear my pants so my boxers hang out
8.  Listen to my music as loud as I want
9.  Apply make-up while driving

More...........
#192 | 917 days ago

NorseHeathen wrote:
Well, I have to take a moment to recognize that despite the extremely intense nature of the issues at hand, and the opposing perspective of the people contributing, this thread has actually reflected well upon itself and the participants.  These are tough issues that too oft time degenerate.  Regardless of which "side" of the issues people are on, kudos to all for keeping the discussion civil.

And a special thanks to Jack for the picture.....I absolutely love that car!  Although, keeping in the spirit of debate, I don't prefer black--I'd repaint it an "eggplant purple".....
what car?
#193 | 917 days ago

Thanks for a lively debate everyone!  I end with one of my favorite quotes that I wish governed our country more today than ever.

"On every question of construction, let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed" --Thomas Jefferson

I still want to discuss those dang muslims tomorrow!
#194 | 917 days ago
John_Daly (+)

JenX63 wrote:
Isnt that what sperm banks were invented for? All comes down to sperm & eggs, regardless of who your partner is.
I dont care what anyone says, men were created to f**k women. Its why men have a penis and women have a vagina.  We dont need sperm banks, we just need men to keep f**king women.

Ive been reading most of these posts and I see good arguments from both sides.  What I find funny is that its not ok for straight people to "disagree" with homosexuality, right or wrong.  I couldnt care either way, San Diego has a  pretty large homosexual community and ive never given it a second thought, but as a straight man I have the right to disagree with it. If you disagree with homosexuality you are automatically deemed a homophobe.  You think all gays agree with heterosexuality? Probably not.   Ahhh f**k it, who caaaaaaaaares.
#195 | 917 days ago

John_Daly wrote:
I dont care what anyone says, men were created to f**k women. Its why men have a penis and women have a vagina.  We dont need sperm banks, we just need men to keep f**king women.

Ive been reading most of these posts and I see good arguments from both sides.  What I find funny is that its not ok for straight people to "disagree" with homosexuality, right or wrong.  I couldnt care either way, San Diego has a  pretty large homosexual community and ive never given it a second thought, but as a straight man I have the right to disagree with it. If you disagree with homosexuality you are automatically deemed a homophobe.  You think all gays agree with heterosexuality? Probably not.   Ahhh f**k it, who caaaaaaaaares.
Man was created first, so technically I don't think that's accurate.

But, who called you a homophobe? I don't see that here. Plenty of people disagree with it who aren't homophobes. Homophobes typically protests the loudest. Most of the dudes I know in real life that aren't gay think it's gross or unnatural like some here, but I haven't known any to be homophobic. Most don't care beyond it not being for them.
87  
#196 | 917 days ago
John_Daly (+)

kobe_lova wrote:
Man was created first, so technically I don't think that's accurate.

But, who called you a homophobe? I don't see that here. Plenty of people disagree with it who aren't homophobes. Homophobes typically protests the loudest. Most of the dudes I know in real life that aren't gay think it's gross or unnatural like some here, but I haven't known any to be homophobic. Most don't care beyond it not being for them.
Really, thats not accurate?  You really dont think men were created to procreate with women?
#197 | 917 days ago

John_Daly wrote:
Really, thats not accurate?  You really dont think men were created to procreate with women?
As, I understand the whole creationism thing... man was first.
87  
#198 | 917 days ago

kobe_lova wrote:
As, I understand the whole creationism thing... man was first.
Yeah, in baseball they call that preseason.
2012  
#199 | 917 days ago

Beaneaters wrote:
Yeah, in baseball they call that preseason.
HAt!
87  
#200 | 917 days ago
John_Daly (+)

kobe_lova wrote:
As, I understand the whole creationism thing... man was first.
Its fine, I dont want to talk about this anymore. How are you?  Hows the knee?
#201 | 917 days ago

John_Daly wrote:
Its fine, I dont want to talk about this anymore. How are you?  Hows the knee?
LMAO. It's funny I was gonna say the same thing to you. Aww. I'm okay. Knee seems good, will see soon. Thanks for asking.
87  
#202 | 917 days ago

Alan West is the banner at the top of this thread.   GO.   AWAY!!


If you have Twitter and are NOT following #The Canada Party you're missing out on some good stuff.
500  
#203 | 916 days ago

John_Daly wrote:
I dont care what anyone says, men were created to f**k women. Its why men have a penis and women have a vagina.  We dont need sperm banks, we just need men to keep f**king women.

Ive been reading most of these posts and I see good arguments from both sides.  What I find funny is that its not ok for straight people to "disagree" with homosexuality, right or wrong.  I couldnt care either way, San Diego has a  pretty large homosexual community and ive never given it a second thought, but as a straight man I have the right to disagree with it. If you disagree with homosexuality you are automatically deemed a homophobe.  You think all gays agree with heterosexuality? Probably not.   Ahhh f**k it, who caaaaaaaaares.
I don't think you are a homophobe for disagreeing. I think that people, whoever you are, whoever you love are entitled to the same privileges/rights as everyone else. Politicians that want to deny them are less than human in my book. I'm not asking people to agree on sexuality only on whats a given to most folks.
367  
#204 | 916 days ago
cubsgirl2 (+)

Beaneaters wrote:
Yeah, in baseball they call that preseason.
ooohhhh baseball. smiley
69  
#205 | 916 days ago

(Edited by Cactus_Jack)
When did the people of this country forget the foundations that it was built upon?  How many of us can recite the words of the Declaration of Independence?  How f**king hard is it to understand that "We hold these truths to be self evident" (meaning even an absolute DERP should be able to get it), "that all men (black, white, brown, green, gay) are created equal (the f**king same), and are endowed by their creator (yup, there's a God in their opinion, but they don't say which one is the right one) with certain unalienable rights (that means this is some $h*t that another man has no authority to take away), that among these are the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness (which would include marrying the person of your choice).

Notice there is no differentiation among skin color....that was pretty much summed up in the Lincoln/Douglas debates.  Lincoln himself stated it the best when he argued that the wording of the Declaration was universal, to set a higher standard for this country to live up to.

I guess what I'm saying here is that, we have a set of rules to go by in this country.  Rules that were laid out a long time ago by F'ers smarter than me.  Too much time is wasted by people that think we have to "decipher" what the founding fathers meant.  In my opinion, it aint that hard.  Read the document, and what it says is what it says.  The confusing $h*t didn't come until way later on in the ballgame.
#206 | 916 days ago

For the record...  When the DofI and the Constitution were written it was determined to NOT mention skin color or to touch the slavery issue at all.  Which WAS an issue even in the 1770's.  This was done in order to keep the colonies unified.  So the southern colonies would not be alienated.  As it turns out, the generic language used was perfect for extending rights to all as time went by.
#207 | 916 days ago

ML31 wrote:
For the record...  When the DofI and the Constitution were written it was determined to NOT mention skin color or to touch the slavery issue at all.  Which WAS an issue even in the 1770's.  This was done in order to keep the colonies unified.  So the southern colonies would not be alienated.  As it turns out, the generic language used was perfect for extending rights to all as time went by.
See that...them F'ers was so smart they was future smart.
#208 | 916 days ago

Cactus_Jack wrote:
When did the people of this country forget the foundations that it was built upon?  How many of us can recite the words of the Declaration of Independence?  How f**king hard is it to understand that "We hold these truths to be self evident" (meaning even an absolute DERP should be able to get it), "that all men (black, white, brown, green, gay) are created equal (the f**king same), and are endowed by their creator (yup, there's a God in their opinion, but they don't say which one is the right one) with certain unalienable rights (that means this is some $h*t that another man has no authority to take away), that among these are the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness (which would include marrying the person of your choice).

Notice there is no differentiation among skin color....that was pretty much summed up in the Lincoln/Douglas debates.  Lincoln himself stated it the best when he argued that the wording of the Declaration was universal, to set a higher standard for this country to live up to.

I guess what I'm saying here is that, we have a set of rules to go by in this country.  Rules that were laid out a long time ago by F'ers smarter than me.  Too much time is wasted by people that think we have to "decipher" what the founding fathers meant.  In my opinion, it aint that hard.  Read the document, and what it says is what it says.  The confusing $h*t didn't come until way later on in the ballgame.
Wow you are so wise cheeky
#209 | 916 days ago

(Edited by kobe_lova)
Cactus_Jack wrote:
When did the people of this country forget the foundations that it was built upon?  How many of us can recite the words of the Declaration of Independence?  How f**king hard is it to understand that "We hold these truths to be self evident" (meaning even an absolute DERP should be able to get it), "that all men (black, white, brown, green, gay) are created equal (the f**king same), and are endowed by their creator (yup, there's a God in their opinion, but they don't say which one is the right one) with certain unalienable rights (that means this is some $h*t that another man has no authority to take away), that among these are the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness (which would include marrying the person of your choice).

Notice there is no differentiation among skin color....that was pretty much summed up in the Lincoln/Douglas debates.  Lincoln himself stated it the best when he argued that the wording of the Declaration was universal, to set a higher standard for this country to live up to.

I guess what I'm saying here is that, we have a set of rules to go by in this country.  Rules that were laid out a long time ago by F'ers smarter than me.  Too much time is wasted by people that think we have to "decipher" what the founding fathers meant.  In my opinion, it aint that hard.  Read the document, and what it says is what it says.  The confusing $h*t didn't come until way later on in the ballgame.
   
87  
#210 | 916 days ago

If Republicans want so much to 'defend marriage', why don't they just write some laws which make it more difficult to divorce?

And, how do you 'defend marriage' from people who do not want to over-turn the system, but only want to join it?
8  
#211 | 916 days ago

Cali_Kat wrote:
Wow you are so wise cheeky
You should test me on my knowledge of the Kama Sutra
#212 | 916 days ago
NorseHeathen (+)

ML31 wrote:
For the record...  When the DofI and the Constitution were written it was determined to NOT mention skin color or to touch the slavery issue at all.  Which WAS an issue even in the 1770's.  This was done in order to keep the colonies unified.  So the southern colonies would not be alienated.  As it turns out, the generic language used was perfect for extending rights to all as time went by.
Very well put......unfortunately we're still fighting pockets of inequality in that respect. 
#213 | 916 days ago
NorseHeathen (+)

MIKELIN8 wrote:
If Republicans want so much to 'defend marriage', why don't they just write some laws which make it more difficult to divorce?

And, how do you 'defend marriage' from people who do not want to over-turn the system, but only want to join it?
Because Republicans would get someone like Newt Gingrich to write the law.....cool
#214 | 915 days ago

(Edited by Jess)
Hilblee wrote:
Seperation of Church and State--Amendment 1.  "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"---(Meaning that there will not be an official government sponsored religion.  Like the one they left in England).  What most ignore is the second part of that statement which says "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof".  I feel most atheist arguments are doing exactly that!

It is good to leave religion out of politics.  I agree with you there.

Info you, you may not have to move to Iran, Iran may very well be coming to you. 
Thanks for posting. IMO the conservatives are trying to ignore the 1st part of the 1st ammendment while the liberals are trying to ignore the second part, each with their own f-d up agendas. Ron Paul might be a little cooky, but he's the only candidate that sticks to his guns (no pun intended) when it comes to wanting our government to abide by the constitution that was set forth in law by our countries founding fathers, who were obviously much wiser than these morons in Washington today. If you read the original constitution, its ave if, it was written foreshadowing the bulls**t that lawmakers/congress/senate are trying to pull today., and meant to protect us from such. Tell your representatives in you district too protect the constitution or you are voting them out. Government is methhodically taking  our personal freedoms, protected by the constitution from as I speak. 
52  
#215 | 915 days ago
NorseHeathen (+)

Yosefederation wrote:
Thanks for posting. IMO the conservatives are trying to ignore the 1st part of the 1st ammendment while the liberals are trying to ignore the second part, each with their own f-d up agendas. Ron Paul might be a little cooky, but he's the only candidate that sticks to his guns (no pun intended) when it comes to wanting our government to abide by the constitution that was set forth in law by our countries founding fathers, who were obviously much wiser than these morons in Washington today. If you read the original constitution, its ave if, it was written foreshadowing the bulls**t that lawmakers/congress/senate are trying to pull today., and meant to protect us from such. Tell your representatives in you district too protect the constitution or you are voting them out. Government is methhodically taking  our personal freedoms, protected by the constitution from as I speak. 
LOL......yea, OK.....  I'll give you that he's better than the other theocratic-fascists running for the Republican ticket, but hardly a constitutionalist--he's a disciple of Ayn Rand.

Is this the same Ron Paul that said (when responding to the birth control issue), that the government should not be blaming the pill for people's immorality?

So, is sex, without the intent to procreate now immoral?  Even within wedlock.......between husband and wife?

That's from the last debate, and it's not constitutional.
#216 | 915 days ago
unopescatore (+)

(Edited by unopescatore)
NorseHeathen wrote:
Main issue aside, this is what saddens me about the current condition of American society.....  We have gone from assertive to aggressive, to volatile.  I haven't seen so much pre-conditioned animosity since the days of the Vietnam protests.  Unfortunately, there are some of both sides that desire such, and the OWS protests gearing up for the good weather, I fear we are in for an escalation in violent action on both sides....

Seemingly regardless of which issue is being addressed, people are angry and becoming polarized into various segregated "orders".  I only hope something happens to get people to take a step back, take in a deep breath of humility, and re-adopt a sense of reason.  Unfortunately, I will not venture to holding my breath as the state of human nature shows such a wish to be futile.

This country isn't just segregated, or regionally diverse--it's fractured.  I would argue this state to be beyond reconciliation and the future of our country is to break into several smaller countries based upon demographic cultural divisions.  

Only time will tell.
Ya know I was going to use the example of Vietnam protests in a previous post....but I "pumped the brakes" & thought that was too extreme of an example, in addition to me not knowing enough to say enough about the protests because I've only seen them on TV....& I don't have a command of the English langauge as you do. Good Stuff man. It's amazing America (states) even came together like it has today looking at our past history.
#217 | 915 days ago

Norse--Im not supporting Paul by any means, but you know he's talking about promiscuity in our society.  Would it affect a married couple?  Yes.  All this talk (contraceptive, abortion, gay marriage) is to try to steer us back to a time before the sexual revolution when a virgin wore white. 

I didnt live in the 50's and dont remeber the 60's, but they want the "leave it to beaver" family unit back.  Is it dumb to want that?  I dont know.  Were we better off?  Dont know that either.  Can we put the genie back in the bottle?  I think not.

I wouldnt mind living in a time when the Father would and could support his entire family on one job.  Mother took care of the home and raised the children through their formative years.  Baseball, apple pie and all that stuff.  I guess I sound like a male chauvinist.  Oh well.
#218 | 915 days ago
unopescatore (+)

janet011685 wrote:
OK, well, everything she said is pretty ignorant, in my opinion ("really nice adults who did change", "people have the choice to be gay", "where marriage isn't such a special thing any more", "I don't want to be affected by their choice", etc.), but it doesn't warrant attacks like those.  

However, it takes a lot less digging to find the other side of the coin.  It's very rare to see this kind of thing happening to a straight person.  Much more likely to find stories about gay-bashing and homophobic comments made.  I have yet to read an article online about ANY issue dealing with homosexuals where there's not several comments made that are similar, if not worse, in nature to the ones you listed from that situation.  

And what people fail to realize also is that this little girl's testimony is hate speech.  In actuality, that's exactly what it is.  It's said in a nice way, probably in a calm tone, from an innocent little girl, but it IS hate speech, nonetheless.  Substitute ANY other minority group in for homosexuals and what would you call it?  

"...it would be the best birthday present ever if you would vote 'no' on (interracial) marriage."
"I feel really bad for the kids who have two parents of (different races)."
"Please vote 'no' on (black/hispanic/asian people) marriage."
She's 14...she is ignorant.smiley  Moho's are not a race so lets not go there. ;)

Let me ask ya this....do you hear where I'm coming from, I know ya don't agree, but I'd hope you'd see my point of view?  
#219 | 915 days ago
NorseHeathen (+)

(Edited by NorseHeathen)
Hilblee wrote:
Norse--Im not supporting Paul by any means, but you know he's talking about promiscuity in our society.  Would it affect a married couple?  Yes.  All this talk (contraceptive, abortion, gay marriage) is to try to steer us back to a time before the sexual revolution when a virgin wore white. 

I didnt live in the 50's and dont remeber the 60's, but they want the "leave it to beaver" family unit back.  Is it dumb to want that?  I dont know.  Were we better off?  Dont know that either.  Can we put the genie back in the bottle?  I think not.

I wouldnt mind living in a time when the Father would and could support his entire family on one job.  Mother took care of the home and raised the children through their formative years.  Baseball, apple pie and all that stuff.  I guess I sound like a male chauvinist.  Oh well.
Yea, I know what you mean.....if the tax rates were the same as back in the 50's there would probably be a chance where there could be one-parent working families (man or woman providing, so to speak).

Thing is, Ron Paul was throwing out an extremely wide net when making this statement--and the majority of those on birth control are adults...regardless of marriage or not.  For a Libertarian or even Constitutional dedication to individual freedoms is contrary to the fact that he categorized such as "immorality" completely contradicts the issue when speaking of such a subject.  He defended the drug companies like the good corporate lemming he truly is, and cast judgment like the rest of the Republican candidates.

Having at one time being a fan of Ron Paul, during my earlier days as a Libertarian, this candidacy is revealing some unfortunate disappointment on my end....


#220 | 915 days ago
NorseHeathen (+)

Apologies if I didn't explain the point(s) clearly above.  I've been up all night, my eye/vision has gone buggy, and it sometimes feels as though I'm writing on "auto-pilot" so to speak, as I've been writing upon various topics all night.
#221 | 915 days ago

Wish I could see the pics---work computer blocks most everything. 

I dont know if anything would bring us back to the "beaver" unit---We as a society are constantly on the "Want" for more and nicer stuff.  My wife and I did the same thing.  Looking back, I think we could have done it but we wanted the nicer car and maybe a camper.  The wife tried it for a year but went nuts and wanted back in the workforce.  I dont blame her.  Probably the hardest job in the world to totally dedicate yourself to the home and children. 

Now, I have two somewhat adult children that do not have my or my wife's work ethic, moral standards, life philosophy, or even national pride.  I feel responsible for that because we persued the mighty dollar over the opportunity to "raise" our children.  We depended on paying someone else to do it.  Thought we could balance it through evenings and weekends.  Didnt work. 

I could go on and on with my frustrations, but you get what Im sayin (hopefully)
#222 | 915 days ago
cubsgirl2 (+)

Hilblee wrote:
Norse--Im not supporting Paul by any means, but you know he's talking about promiscuity in our society.  Would it affect a married couple?  Yes.  All this talk (contraceptive, abortion, gay marriage) is to try to steer us back to a time before the sexual revolution when a virgin wore white. 

I didnt live in the 50's and dont remeber the 60's, but they want the "leave it to beaver" family unit back.  Is it dumb to want that?  I dont know.  Were we better off?  Dont know that either.  Can we put the genie back in the bottle?  I think not.

I wouldnt mind living in a time when the Father would and could support his entire family on one job.  Mother took care of the home and raised the children through their formative years.  Baseball, apple pie and all that stuff.  I guess I sound like a male chauvinist.  Oh well.
I don't think that's chauvinistic. But I do believe that we have been mislead with those times. Yes in a lot of cases white women stayed home while black women raised their children for about 70 cents an hour.

  But it wasn't just black women having to work because in this country at that time, black men made wages so below what white men did there was no way of raising a family on their salaries.  Low class whites in this country have never had the leave it to beaver life either. My grandmothers on both sides of my family never had the privilege of being June Clever they were to busy having to work. one as a hairdresser the other on the share crop farm her and my grandfather owned in Ar. 

  We see all the old shows the old dad comes home, the wife is in pearls, and yeah it looks good. But it really wasn't all that. 
69  
#223 | 915 days ago

It was truly amazing to hear a self-professed Libertarian like Dr. Paul pass moral judgement on those who have sex with the thought of preventing procreation...who does he think he is...Rick Santorum?

Really...Libertarianism believes in individual freedom...less government interference in the individual's life. I guess, for Dr. Paul, that hands-off attitude doesn't extend to the bedroom?   He sounds more like a Republican every day, they seem to obsess on what others are doing in their bedrooms, while asking you to ignore what they are doing.

Ron Paul's best idea: ending the 'War on Drugs'. Ron Paul's worst idea: ending the sexual revolution.
8  
#224 | 915 days ago

(Edited by Hilblee)
Agree cubsgirl----I know that when I was raised in the appalachian mtns, the men would work all day and come home just to work the gardens and hay till well past dark.  I grew up on a small farm and my dad always left me a list that I couldnt finish.  If we didnt grow it, we didnt eat it.

I think that is one of the things wrong with my children, the only chores I could find for them was mowing the yard---couldnt keep em busy enough.

Both of my grandmothers stayed home and WORKED.  One had 7 kids the other 4.  They raised the kids, canned the veggies, collected the eggs and milk, lots of stuff to stay busy on a farm.
#225 | 915 days ago

cubsgirl2 wrote:
I don't think that's chauvinistic. But I do believe that we have been mislead with those times. Yes in a lot of cases white women stayed home while black women raised their children for about 70 cents an hour.

  But it wasn't just black women having to work because in this country at that time, black men made wages so below what white men did there was no way of raising a family on their salaries.  Low class whites in this country have never had the leave it to beaver life either. My grandmothers on both sides of my family never had the privilege of being June Clever they were to busy having to work. one as a hairdresser the other on the share crop farm her and my grandfather owned in Ar. 

  We see all the old shows the old dad comes home, the wife is in pearls, and yeah it looks good. But it really wasn't all that. 
Amen, I couldnt find a nice way to respond.
367  
#226 | 915 days ago

MIKELIN8 wrote:
It was truly amazing to hear a self-professed Libertarian like Dr. Paul pass moral judgement on those who have sex with the thought of preventing procreation...who does he think he is...Rick Santorum?

Really...Libertarianism believes in individual freedom...less government interference in the individual's life. I guess, for Dr. Paul, that hands-off attitude doesn't extend to the bedroom?   He sounds more like a Republican every day, they seem to obsess on what others are doing in their bedrooms, while asking you to ignore what they are doing.

Ron Paul's best idea: ending the 'War on Drugs'. Ron Paul's worst idea: ending the sexual revolution.
You really dont like to just discuss ideas much do ya?  Every post you write, rants on about republicans this and republicans that.  Dont you have ideas of your own or do you just follow the written agenda?
#227 | 915 days ago

unopescatore wrote:
She's 14...she is ignorant.smiley  Moho's are not a race so lets not go there. ;)

Let me ask ya this....do you hear where I'm coming from, I know ya don't agree, but I'd hope you'd see my point of view?  
Not entirely.  It depends on if you think homosexuality is a choice or if it's something you are or are not born with.  
Answer me that, then I can tell you where I stand on where you stand and if I can even stand your point of view on this issue and where ... I ... stand ... on ... it.  
Yeah.  I said that right.  OK.
You now hold the talking stick.
#228 | 915 days ago

unopescatore wrote:
She's 14...she is ignorant.smiley  Moho's are not a race so lets not go there. ;)

Let me ask ya this....do you hear where I'm coming from, I know ya don't agree, but I'd hope you'd see my point of view?  
PS - Homosexuals are not a race.  So then, even if you believe homosexuality is a choice, instead of subbing in a race, sub in a religion.  That's a choice.  Is it ok to say Jews can't get married?  Or Catholics?  Or Mormons 137 times?  
#229 | 915 days ago
unopescatore (+)

unopescatore wrote:
She's 14...she is ignorant.smiley  Moho's are not a race so lets not go there. ;)

Let me ask ya this....do you hear where I'm coming from, I know ya don't agree, but I'd hope you'd see my point of view?  
I didn't say being a moho is a choice, I believe in some circumstances it can be but then again I've a met couple young adults that are gay & there's nothing they can do about it....born that way if you will. I gotta go and get my hair cut (freaken super mullet growing) then watch my DVR'ed Jersey Shore episode. ;) Can we come back to this Monday? :)
#230 | 915 days ago
unopescatore (+)

janet011685 wrote:
Not entirely.  It depends on if you think homosexuality is a choice or if it's something you are or are not born with.  
Answer me that, then I can tell you where I stand on where you stand and if I can even stand your point of view on this issue and where ... I ... stand ... on ... it.  
Yeah.  I said that right.  OK.
You now hold the talking stick.
the above post is for u.....I hit reply to your comment and it replies to me all the time....wtf.
#231 | 915 days ago

unopescatore wrote:
I didn't say being a moho is a choice, I believe in some circumstances it can be but then again I've a met couple young adults that are gay & there's nothing they can do about it....born that way if you will. I gotta go and get my hair cut (freaken super mullet growing) then watch my DVR'ed Jersey Shore episode. ;) Can we come back to this Monday? :)
Ughh, we can come back to this if you start agreeing with me (read: be on the correct side of this issue).  laugh

If it's really a super mullet, can you grease it back, stand next to an I-ROC, and get a picture?  Please?
#232 | 915 days ago
unopescatore (+)

janet011685 wrote:
Ughh, we can come back to this if you start agreeing with me (read: be on the correct side of this issue).  laugh

If it's really a super mullet, can you grease it back, stand next to an I-ROC, and get a picture?  Please?
can I borrow your I-ROC.? LOL ;) It was long but straight back in the day, so I had this girl perm it....nice and wavey....I looked like the singer from Bush....to bad Gwen didn't see me before she found him. Anyway....catch ya later! :)
#233 | 915 days ago

unopescatore wrote:
can I borrow your I-ROC.? LOL ;) It was long but straight back in the day, so I had this girl perm it....nice and wavey....I looked like the singer from Bush....to bad Gwen didn't see me before she found him. Anyway....catch ya later! :)
Gavin Rossdale is a pretty man, you should be so bold to say such things.  

But  at you having a permullet.  
#234 | 915 days ago
cubsgirl2 (+)

janet011685 wrote:
PS - Homosexuals are not a race.  So then, even if you believe homosexuality is a choice, instead of subbing in a race, sub in a religion.  That's a choice.  Is it ok to say Jews can't get married?  Or Catholics?  Or Mormons 137 times?  
Lol, Janet they don't do that anymore. That's now in the hands of child molesters who use the bible as a weapon to brain freeze idiots. smiley
69  
#235 | 914 days ago

NorseHeathen wrote:
Yea, I know what you mean.....if the tax rates were the same as back in the 50's there would probably be a chance where there could be one-parent working families (man or woman providing, so to speak).

Thing is, Ron Paul was throwing out an extremely wide net when making this statement--and the majority of those on birth control are adults...regardless of marriage or not.  For a Libertarian or even Constitutional dedication to individual freedoms is contrary to the fact that he categorized such as "immorality" completely contradicts the issue when speaking of such a subject.  He defended the drug companies like the good corporate lemming he truly is, and cast judgment like the rest of the Republican candidates.

Having at one time being a fan of Ron Paul, during my earlier days as a Libertarian, this candidacy is revealing some unfortunate disappointment on my end....


Not sure what makes one think that businesses/corporations have ever really paid any kind of significant tax.
#236 | 914 days ago

NorseHeathen wrote:
OOR, but interesting post.  Question: what is going on with PA's redistricting.  Aside from the boundaries, I heard on the news that PA is trying to change the manner upon which the delegates are rendered; are they really going to divide the delegates according to district instead of the state as a whole?
It is not about delegates...the Repubs can do whatever they want to do internally,  Our Republican Governor (you know...the guy who cuts funding to public education and state universities while not charging a fee to the natural gas drillers who are fracking a large portion of Upper PA [side note...his biggest campaign contributor owned which type of company?])  wants to have ELECTORS apportioned according to who won each Congressional district. The gerrymandering plan takes a congressional seat out of Philadelphia, the biggest Democratic area in PA, and sends it to Berks County, which is not a Democratic stronghold.
8  
#237 | 914 days ago

Hilblee wrote:
You really dont like to just discuss ideas much do ya?  Every post you write, rants on about republicans this and republicans that.  Dont you have ideas of your own or do you just follow the written agenda?
Tell me your ideas, and I'll respond. My posts respond to what I have read.

I have Republican friends, I listen to them, we discuss the problems facing the country. My brother-in-law, who is a Republican, tells me that he votes Republican because of the old Bible adage of 'give a man a fish, and he'll eat for a day, teach a man to fish and he'll never go hungry'. He says that  Democrats come up with programs which give people a fish, while Republicans come up with programs which teach people to fish. I agree that most projects which intend to help people are not perfect, but at least there is the intent there. I've told him to name one Republican program which has taught anybody anything, and he's still thinking on it. 

Here's an idea of mine...one party ran for election in 2010 proclaiming that they were the party which would be able to get jobs for Americans. Needless to say, that party's policies were a large part of the reason why the economy was in the crapper in the first place, but they played on people's fear of unemployment, got elected, and since that time have proposed ZERO job creation programs. Can we discuss that?
8  
#238 | 914 days ago
NorseHeathen (+)

MIKELIN8 wrote:
Tell me your ideas, and I'll respond. My posts respond to what I have read.

I have Republican friends, I listen to them, we discuss the problems facing the country. My brother-in-law, who is a Republican, tells me that he votes Republican because of the old Bible adage of 'give a man a fish, and he'll eat for a day, teach a man to fish and he'll never go hungry'. He says that  Democrats come up with programs which give people a fish, while Republicans come up with programs which teach people to fish. I agree that most projects which intend to help people are not perfect, but at least there is the intent there. I've told him to name one Republican program which has taught anybody anything, and he's still thinking on it. 

Here's an idea of mine...one party ran for election in 2010 proclaiming that they were the party which would be able to get jobs for Americans. Needless to say, that party's policies were a large part of the reason why the economy was in the crapper in the first place, but they played on people's fear of unemployment, got elected, and since that time have proposed ZERO job creation programs. Can we discuss that?
The 2010 state and federal elections were an abomination.....promises of jobs, and what did we get?  We got double the anti-abortion legislation, voter laws designed to keep those who generally vote liberal from voting, union busting bills, and other acts of socio-religious fascism.   Since the 2010 election, state and federal Republicans have been attacking women's vaginas so much you'd think they'd never seen or touched one before....

It's ironic.  In a discussion on my friends FaceBook page, I actually listed how I've voted in my lifetime for presidential elections.  This should be pretty amusing for some:
1984 - Reagan (R)
1988 - Bush (R)
1992 - Marrou (L)
1996 - Harry Browne (L)
2000 - Bush (R)
2004 - Michael Bednarik (L)
2008 - McCain (R)
#239 | 913 days ago

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Nfo4RYBTNfM


frown
500  
#240 | 913 days ago
NorseHeathen (+)

NorseHeathen wrote:
The 2010 state and federal elections were an abomination.....promises of jobs, and what did we get?  We got double the anti-abortion legislation, voter laws designed to keep those who generally vote liberal from voting, union busting bills, and other acts of socio-religious fascism.   Since the 2010 election, state and federal Republicans have been attacking women's vaginas so much you'd think they'd never seen or touched one before....

It's ironic.  In a discussion on my friends FaceBook page, I actually listed how I've voted in my lifetime for presidential elections.  This should be pretty amusing for some:
1984 - Reagan (R)
1988 - Bush (R)
1992 - Marrou (L)
1996 - Harry Browne (L)
2000 - Bush (R)
2004 - Michael Bednarik (L)
2008 - McCain (R)
I should have added:

2012
Obama (D) - President
Cantwell (D) - U.S. Senate
Rich Cowan (D) - U.S. House of Representatives, District 5
Jay Inslee (D) - Governor
Brad Owen (D) - Lieutenant Governor
Kathleen Drew (D) - Secretary of State
Bob Ferguson (D) - Attorney General
Marueen Walsh (R) - Washington State House of Representatives, District 16

I hate being lied too, and the Republican party adopted a policy of manipulation, deception to outright lies, and a brutal abuse of their perceived power as "leaders" in lieu of their Constitutional responsibility to represent the best interests of the people.  Instead, as "leaders" they self-righteously executed a blitzkreig of theocratic fascism based upon their own desires--without any consideration as to the best interest of their constituents.

The real danger on the national level is Fox News.  An organization that has taken on a psychology of a right-wing cult (look up the factors that determine a cult--you'll either be in a denial / rationalization mode, or literally shiver with the similarities), and more resemble the Politboro of the former Soviet Union (a propaganda machine) than an American news organization.
#241 | 913 days ago
NorseHeathen (+)

ohwell_ wrote: Unfortunately, Santorum doesn't believe in an America with mutual respect and mutual concern either....only to those he considers 'worthy'.  Did you see him infer that President Obama is a 'snob' for wanting everybody to the the opportunity to get a college education?
#242 | 913 days ago

NorseHeathen wrote:
I should have added:

2012
Obama (D) - President
Cantwell (D) - U.S. Senate
Rich Cowan (D) - U.S. House of Representatives, District 5
Jay Inslee (D) - Governor
Brad Owen (D) - Lieutenant Governor
Kathleen Drew (D) - Secretary of State
Bob Ferguson (D) - Attorney General
Marueen Walsh (R) - Washington State House of Representatives, District 16

I hate being lied too, and the Republican party adopted a policy of manipulation, deception to outright lies, and a brutal abuse of their perceived power as "leaders" in lieu of their Constitutional responsibility to represent the best interests of the people.  Instead, as "leaders" they self-righteously executed a blitzkreig of theocratic fascism based upon their own desires--without any consideration as to the best interest of their constituents.

The real danger on the national level is Fox News.  An organization that has taken on a psychology of a right-wing cult (look up the factors that determine a cult--you'll either be in a denial / rationalization mode, or literally shiver with the similarities), and more resemble the Politboro of the former Soviet Union (a propaganda machine) than an American news organization.
If you don't like being lied to by people you vote for then I recommend not voting for anyone in any election ever again.
#243 | 912 days ago
unopescatore (+)

janet011685 wrote:
Gavin Rossdale is a pretty man, you should be so bold to say such things.  

But  at you having a permullet.  
just the hair Janet. lol 
#244 | 912 days ago
NorseHeathen (+)

ML31 wrote:
If you don't like being lied to by people you vote for then I recommend not voting for anyone in any election ever again.
You see, here we were having a good conversation, and exchange of ideas and perspectives and you had to ruin it with an indignant, condescending statement of the obvious.  Of course politicians lie.  But what the 2010 congress did was a complete betrayal of public trust.  Address posts in the spirit upon which they're presented.

You just can help being.........you, can you?  Not very becoming....
#245 | 912 days ago
NorseHeathen (+)

(Edited by NorseHeathen)
NorseHeathen wrote:
You see, here we were having a good conversation, and exchange of ideas and perspectives and you had to ruin it with an indignant, condescending statement of the obvious.  Of course politicians lie.  But what the 2010 congress did was a complete betrayal of public trust.  Address posts in the spirit upon which they're presented.

You just can help being.........you, can you?  Not very becoming....
Un-freaking believable....
#246 | 912 days ago

NorseHeathen wrote:
You see, here we were having a good conversation, and exchange of ideas and perspectives and you had to ruin it with an indignant, condescending statement of the obvious.  Of course politicians lie.  But what the 2010 congress did was a complete betrayal of public trust.  Address posts in the spirit upon which they're presented.

You just can help being.........you, can you?  Not very becoming....
This gets said a lot but it just fits so very well...


Pot, meet kettle.
#247 | 912 days ago
NorseHeathen (+)

ML31 wrote:
This gets said a lot but it just fits so very well...


Pot, meet kettle.
Show me....

As for a personal recommendation, considering you seem comfortable making such:

Go find the first inanimate object (of your choice) and fornicate upon it....and I don't mean your wife.
#248 | 912 days ago

Anybody putting up any odds on who will get the VP nod from Romney if he gets the Repub party bid?  My money is on Rand Paul.  Funny how his old man has made ZERO attacks on Romney vs. multiple attacks on the others.  Its so nice to see crooks in bed together.
#249 | 912 days ago

And I'm wondering how fast my a$$ would wind up in jail for contempt if I failed to produce documents for Congressional Hearings like Mr. Fast and Furious???
#250 | 912 days ago

NorseHeathen wrote:
Show me....

As for a personal recommendation, considering you seem comfortable making such:

Go find the first inanimate object (of your choice) and fornicate upon it....and I don't mean your wife.
Wow...  Such venom. 

It's hilarious how angry and mean spirited you can get over the most trivial things..

Just calm down, get out your thesaurus and write another 20 page essay on how evil Republicans are, how perfect Democrats are and how you used to drink the Republican cool-aid.   Maybe it will take your mind off being angry over nothing.
#251 | 912 days ago

.
500  
#252 | 912 days ago
NorseHeathen (+)

ML31 wrote:
Wow...  Such venom. 

It's hilarious how angry and mean spirited you can get over the most trivial things..

Just calm down, get out your thesaurus and write another 20 page essay on how evil Republicans are, how perfect Democrats are and how you used to drink the Republican cool-aid.   Maybe it will take your mind off being angry over nothing.
Yes, yes.....you would assume such.  Frankly, I was laughing.

The irony to your assertion is that I actually pity those who will be voting Republican during this next election.  Considering the actions of the 2010 congressional electees, and their conduct during the 2011 session, those who vote Republican are voting for a corporate based theocratic fascism.  The greater pity is that far too many who do so will think they're voting for "constitutional principle".

That, is sad.

Any more poor assumptions you would like to make?
#253 | 911 days ago

Sure didn't sound like you were laughing.  It was a spiteful and mean spirited comment that would normally be made by someone full of anger or hate.  That is hardly a poor assumption to make.  Possibly wrong, but the odds favor that conclusion big time.

The poor assumption is that people who vote republican are doing so on "constitutional principle".   There could be some who vote R because of that.  But there are also plenty who are voting D for that very same reason.  It is also pretentious to think that people who vote R are really voting for, as you so quaintly put it, corporate based theocratic fascism.  That is an alarmist viewpoint.  An over reaction to the idea that someone is voting for a candidate or platform you personally do not endorse.  The very height of arrogance.  To pity those poor people who are just too dumb to see things the way smart people like you do.

It's fine to favor a political viewpoint.  But don't claim people are being duped just because their political views run counter to yours.  That kind of comment you made runs counter to an open discussion or a free exchange of ideas.
#254 | 911 days ago

(Edited by Jess)
Good morning, Worm your honor.
The crown will plainly show
The prisoner who now stands before you
Was caught red-handed showing feelings
Showing feelings of an almost human nature;
This will not do.
Call the schoolmaster!

I always said he'd come to no good
In the end your honor.
If they'd let me have my way I could
Have flayed him into shape.
But my hands were tied,
The bleeding hearts and artists
Let him get away with murder.
Let me hammer him today?

Crazy,
Toys in the attic I am crazy,
Truly gone fishing.
They must have taken my marbles away.
Crazy, toys in the attic he is crazy.

You little sh*t you're in it now,
I hope they throw away the key.
You should have talked to me more often
Than you did, but no! You had to go
Your own way, have you broken any
Homes up lately?
Just five minutes, Worm your honor,
Him and Me, alone.

Baaaaaaaaaabe!
Come to mother baby, let me hold you
In my arms.
M'lud I never wanted him to
Get in any trouble.
Why'd he ever have to leave me?
Worm, your honor, let me take him home.

Crazy,
Over the rainbow, I am crazy,
Bars in the window.
There must have been a door there in the wall
When I came in.
Crazy, over the rainbow, he is crazy.

The evidence before the court is
Incontrovertible, there's no need for
The jury to retire.
In all my years of judging
I have never heard before
Of someone more deserving
Of the full penalty of law.
The way you made them suffer,
Your exquisite wife and mother,
Fills me with the urge to defecate!

"Hey Judge! Sh*t on him!"

Since, my friend, you have revealed your
Deepest fear,
I sentence you to be exposed before
Your peers.
Tear down the wall!





That's all I got
49  
#255 | 911 days ago

Hilblee wrote:
You really dont like to just discuss ideas much do ya?  Every post you write, rants on about republicans this and republicans that.  Dont you have ideas of your own or do you just follow the written agenda?
We can--one question? can we agree that congress is where the meat and potatoes of our policies are created and implemented? And if we can agree on that, you will notice that the last years of Bush was with a democratic congress under Nance Pelosi. Obama's first 2 years they had a democratic sweep in the congress and senate and still nothing happened. Are you just as full of disappointment in your own party as you are in the hate of mine? What about Obama's promises when he was trying to get elected? Transparent government really sounded good to me but under the table crap is still rampant. Whatever happened to the guantanimo rallies and how it's illegal to hold them against their rights? Where are the people that railed against bush for the soldiers dying? Guess what, they still are. Where are the women marching to ensure equal rights for those persecuted muslim women. They wont because it would make the messiah look bad. Green energy has been a sham thats lined obama's benefactors pockets as bad as bush's oil buddies. Obamacare for all--unless you are a union donating machine and then you can opt out. This can go on and on and we would never meet in the middle so this will be my last response on it.
#256 | 911 days ago
NorseHeathen (+)

ML31 wrote:
Sure didn't sound like you were laughing.  It was a spiteful and mean spirited comment that would normally be made by someone full of anger or hate.  That is hardly a poor assumption to make.  Possibly wrong, but the odds favor that conclusion big time.

The poor assumption is that people who vote republican are doing so on "constitutional principle".   There could be some who vote R because of that.  But there are also plenty who are voting D for that very same reason.  It is also pretentious to think that people who vote R are really voting for, as you so quaintly put it, corporate based theocratic fascism.  That is an alarmist viewpoint.  An over reaction to the idea that someone is voting for a candidate or platform you personally do not endorse.  The very height of arrogance.  To pity those poor people who are just too dumb to see things the way smart people like you do.

It's fine to favor a political viewpoint.  But don't claim people are being duped just because their political views run counter to yours.  That kind of comment you made runs counter to an open discussion or a free exchange of ideas.
Uff da.....
#257 | 911 days ago

NorseHeathen wrote:
Uff da.....
And there it is.  The grunt sound you make when you have been logic-ed into a corner.  I considered saying that earlier for you to save you the trouble but decided not to rob you of your trademark comment.

I hope I never know what it is like to see the world with such a narrow vision...

Take care.