Supremes’ ruling on gay marriage important, not critical
The U.S. Supreme Court announced Friday that it hear arguments in two important but very different cases involving gay marriage, raising the odds that it will soon establish the basic legal architecture for how that issue is handled in the future.
One case, out of New York, addresses how the federal government must handle gay marriages that are conducted in states where such marriages are legal. The second, out of California, raises the more fundamental question of whether gay marriage is a right protected under the Constitution’s promise of equal protection.
Given the range of legal questions at stake in those two cases, the court’s final ruling next June could take any number of turns. And you just know that Justice Antonin Scalia is itching to get his hands on this issue.
However, it is also important to point out that however the nine justices decide, all final decisions on the matter will be made by the American people. And they have already made it clear that we will not be going backward on this issue, and that whatever the Supreme Court’s ruling this year, in time the right to marry will be extended to all Americans, gay or straight.
Young people support that right overwhelming. Despite the stern opposition of their church, almost 60 percent of Catholics support it. According to a Pew poll in July, political independents support it by an 11-point margin. Black Americans, long dubious of the notion, also support it in increasing numbers.
As recently as 1996, 65 percent of Americans rejected the notion of gay marriage; only 27 percent supported it. Yet in the July Pew poll, 48 percent of Americans supported it and just 44 percent opposed it. That is an extraordinary shift in public opinion in just 16 years, on an issue that that you might think people might be stubborn about.
So do your worst, Justice Scalia. At worst, you and others can temporarily affect the pace of the change that is taking place across this country. But you cannot affect the final outcome.
– Jay Bookman
1,132 comments Add your comment
Bye Bye Cheesy Grits
December 8th, 2012
8:56 am
Another win for Liberalism
Curtis Rivers
December 8th, 2012
9:01 am
As the chart lists me as being one of the “silent” generation, I wonder if that gives me the right to speak? List me, however, as one who thinks the argument over this issue has become silly, in that all people and their situations need equal protection under the law. The constitution doesn’t define marriage, so I would think the rising agreement with gay marriage should determine the justices’ opinion…then there’s Scalia, who seems mired in a past of increasing conservative fantasy.
Donovan
December 8th, 2012
9:04 am
Gosh, I guess I’m just old fashion, because I see the world in which I live in as becoming upside down.
I see natural things in this world as the way it should be. I don’t see dogs having sex with cats and cats having dog babies. I don’t see lions sleeping with baboons or great white sharks playing with seals. And I don’t see vultures kept as household pets.
Trying to validate what is not natural is really a crime against nature. Therefore, men marrying men and women marrying women is preposterous. Get over it? I’m not that gullible or condoning.
Supremes’ ruling on gay marriage important, not critical – Atlanta Journal Constitution (blog) | allpharmacyblogs.com
December 8th, 2012
9:05 am
[...] Supremes’ ruling on gay marriage important, not critical – Atlanta Journal Constitution … Dec.08, 2012 in Pharmacist News, Pharmacy Blogs [...]
Bye Bye Cheesy Grits
December 8th, 2012
9:07 am
I honestly dont think the Supreme Court would have even taken these case if they werent someone prepapred ( or resigned ) to rule in the affirmitive.
Might be wrong about that but I dont see how they could rule otherwise.
The act of discriminating against a group of people because of a shared charecteristic just wont fly.
stands for decibels
December 8th, 2012
9:09 am
a side issue, but
Despite the stern opposition of their church, almost 60 percent of Catholics support it.
Would someone please pass along to American conservatives that most American catholics, despite what you have heard, do not take their orders directly from some ivory-tower group of American bishops?
I don’t claim to speak for them, but based on my intimate experience, the vast majority take their orders from their consciences.
Latest News » Blog Archive » Supremes’ ruling on gay marriage important, not critical – Atlanta Journal Constitution (blog)
December 8th, 2012
9:09 am
[...] Go here to review a rest: Supremes’ statute upon happy matrimony important, not vicious – Atlanta Journal Constitu… [...]
They BOTH suck
December 8th, 2012
9:12 am
Good morning.
It will be tough skiing today.
The slopes will surely be slippery today with the usual asinine pedophilla and beastiality comments from the usual suspects.
Let’s hope that the Supreme Court rules in favor of gay marriage. These folks have fought and died for this country, pay taxes, own businesses, etc, etc.
As Jay states, it is coming, it is just a matter of when.
And if anyone can explain exactly how gays getting married will negatively impact their own life and what they believe that would be great.
Bye Bye Cheesy Grits
December 8th, 2012
9:13 am
I see natural things in this world as the way it should be. I don’t see dogs having sex with cats and cats having dog babies. I don’t see lions sleeping with baboons or great white sharks playing with seals. And I don’t see vultures kept as household pets.
This is what im talking about. This is the arguments the other side comes up with.
Cats and dogs stuff.
No way they can win this one.
Lets face facts. Their argument is based on Religous dogma.
And im sorry but that has to go.
They BOTH suck
December 8th, 2012
9:16 am
Donavan
Are more people going to all of a sudden become gay if they have the same right as you do to marry?
indigo
December 8th, 2012
9:16 am
Think of America as a large house being held in place by a strong foundation. Then imagine, years ago, “an extraordinary shift in public opinion” caused the bricks of America’s foundation to start being removed, one by one.
Because of this, would you be surprised to see large numbers of people being murdered by guns every year, a huge increase in crime, a crumbling infrastructure, millions of illegals causing havoc in many of our social systems, once safe streets now virtual combat zones, teachers struggling in out of control classrooms, and a thoroughly amoral political system?
Of course you wouldn’t admit this. Instead, you’d deliver a lecture about the blessings of civil rights, large numbers of illegals bringing “fresh blood” to our society, and a glorious prediction that the “change that is taking place across this country” will eventually lead us to a glorious future.
And, most frightning of all, you are deluded enough to actually believe all these changes are good.
We’re well on the way to being a third world country with a first rate Military.
Welcome to hard times.
GT
December 8th, 2012
9:18 am
I worry more about the institution itself being around in a few years. Gays seem to be rushing for a burning house others are running from. I can only guess the benefits offered to straights will keep some of America glued together in marriage but the statistics are saying otherwise.
Divorce in my parent’s day was controlled by social and monetary punishment. A man could be fired or not promoted, but today the fences are down. We run on two tracks here, one telling gays they can’t marry and another saying we are not the marrying type.
I heard a woman last night ask, “if marriage is not for having children what is it for?” Use to be for love, lot of cold fish out there now days. People are too busy to fall in love anymore. Yet even something we don’t want we want to deprive others that might can use it better than us not to have it.
Oscar
December 8th, 2012
9:20 am
Looks like Roberts and Kennedy will be the swing votes again. So to speak.
stands for decibels
December 8th, 2012
9:20 am
Gosh, I guess I’m just old fashion [sic]
Donovan, you represent a shrinking minority. I wrote a few years ago that this anti-marriage equality movement would become marginalized, to the point that people will wind up lying about how they’d supported it since the early days. I am seeing a trajectory of public opinion and political movement that indicates I am correct.
So you can be bitter over your loss, or just try to be civilized and decent about it. And calling it a “crime against nature” ain’t civilized or decent. In fact, at this point in the discussion, it is infantile.
stands for decibels
December 8th, 2012
9:22 am
Gays seem to be rushing for a burning house others are running from.
And i’m going to have to ask for a cite please. I don’t think the marriage success rates have changed all that much in the last generation–yes, there was an increase once the floodgates opened and it wasn’t the social stigma it was 40-50 years ago, but I’m fairly sure it’s stabilized since.
They BOTH suck
December 8th, 2012
9:22 am
GT
Gays will not be immune from the emotional and financial stress of divorce.
That will be no different than straight folks.
They will be experiencing the good and the bad… as it should be.
guy
December 8th, 2012
9:23 am
It does not matter what the court rules. Gay marriage is wrong in God’s sight and no man or women can change that. People don’t want to hear the truth so they think what humans say is ok. What difference does it make anyway? Most are going to do as they please in the end. Rant and rave all you want but you can’t legalize sin!!!!!
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
December 8th, 2012
9:23 am
And you just know that Justice Antonin Scalia is itching to get his hands on this issue.
Heh, heh, heh.
Fred ™
December 8th, 2012
9:24 am
Did you catch this Jay?
http://www.ajc.com/ap/ap/political/ex-fla-gov-crist-tweets-hes-joining-democrats/nTQcz/
When there is sufficient hate and rhetoric on this topic maybe you can explore the ramifications and figure out if this is a one time occurrence or the beginning of a trend. Will more of the “sane” Republicans get tired of the lunacy and of being called “RINO’S” because they aren’t to the right of Attila the Hun?
Anyway, I’ll check back later to see if there is another topic, I feel to good today to be dragged down in the hate and vileness that this thread is going to go.,
barking frog
December 8th, 2012
9:28 am
Scalia should have been impeached for his refusal to recuse
himself when he had a clear conflict of interest. As a lawyer he
should have gone hunting with Cheney. They will probably find
for due to equal protection but shift it back to the states for approval
or not.
Recon 0311 2533
December 8th, 2012
9:28 am
Interesting that the people vote in disfavor and federal judges come in and overrule the peoples decision. Jay now says that regardless of what judges on the Supreme Court decide the people will overrule them.
Oscar
December 8th, 2012
9:28 am
Piece on the divorce rate in the US.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/46797203/As_TwoIncome_Family_Model_Matures_Divorce_Rate_Falls
Morality?
December 8th, 2012
9:30 am
God is my Supreme Court…….and His opinion is critical.
Morality?
December 8th, 2012
9:32 am
Obama Principle: The only important laws are the one’s he agrees with…… ignore the rest.
stands for decibels
December 8th, 2012
9:33 am
Interesting that the people vote in disfavor
Two things:
1. you won’t have that “but we had a vote!” talking point for long. Overwhelming majority of younger people support marriage equality across the country. Opposition is literally dying out.
2. Civil rights really don’t get to be decided by a majority, at the end of the day. and I don’t recall you complaining about the SCOTUS re-affirming this notion in the Heller decision.
JamVet
December 8th, 2012
9:34 am
guy, I spoke with God just now and he’s cool with it…
stands for decibels
December 8th, 2012
9:35 am
and His opinion is critical.
oh, bullsh-t. The “opinion” you speak of was written by men thousands of years ago. If you have any respect for the world God created, you’d recognize that those proscriptions applied to a very different time and place (and if you troubled yourself to learn a thing or two about the fundamentally abusive nature of what would’ve been regarded as homosexual relations, at the time, you’d understand why those proscriptions existed in the first place.)
I mean, read a damn book or three. Not just, you know, “The Book.”
barking frog
December 8th, 2012
9:35 am
Morality?
God is my Supreme Court…….and His opinion is critical.
………………………………………………….
Following his biblical ruling when will you hold your next stoning ?
appleseed
December 8th, 2012
9:36 am
Think I would prefere a vulture as pet than a snake.As for marriage the records not that good.Just a Bush-Whacking of the norm.
stands for decibels
December 8th, 2012
9:37 am
I’ll add, Morality, you might start with this one.
http://books.google.com/books/about/Paul_Among_the_People.html?id=UMOEXpPjHcMC
(which isn’t about the OT, but provides a scholarly look at the influence of Greek culture on the Hebrews and early Christians, and is easily digestable.)
GT
December 8th, 2012
9:37 am
Well said They BOTH suck and I think gays see a greener pasture on the other side than exist but Lord didn’t we all?
God and government law worries me far more than gay marriage. You can’t win this argument void of religious interpretation unless we are foolish enough to believe this is not a natural handicap same as any other handicap covered by the civil rights of a human being. And to make this the purpose of the church which has done an absolutely abysmal job of protecting the institution of marriage in the first place is beyond the pale. The stubborn right has decided dragging their mud through our churches is their privilege and destroying the church to them is very similar to taking the economy over the cliff for their minority and selfish sicknesses.
Mr Right
December 8th, 2012
9:38 am
Less and less straits want to get married and the queers seem to think it’s important to get married, crazy world!
Cheesy Grits is gone but not forgotten
December 8th, 2012
9:39 am
Interesting that the people vote in disfavor and federal judges come in and overrule the peoples decision.
Did you happen to catch the last election ?
Fred ™
December 8th, 2012
9:41 am
Mr Right
December 8th, 2012
9:38 am
Less and less straits want to get married and the queers seem to think it’s important to get married, crazy world!
++++++++++++++++++++++
OK I had to check in one more time………
Mr. Right may not have expressed that in a way that will please everybody, but he DOES have a point lol. It set ME back on my heels anyway……………
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
December 8th, 2012
9:43 am
Less and less straits want to get married…
When the Strait of Gibraltar wants to marry the Strait of Hormuz, which church will they choose?
smart republican
December 8th, 2012
9:43 am
god created adam and eve, not adam and steve.
Recon 0311 2533
December 8th, 2012
9:43 am
“Civil rights really don’t get to be decided by a majority, at the end of the day. and I don’t recall you complaining about the SCOTUS re-affirming this notion in the Heller decision.”
Evidently you didn’t fully comprehend Jay’s commentary or mine. BTW….people’s views can and do change as they age. I can’t predict the majority views on social issues that today’s 21 year old might have when they turn 35 much less make predictions for what those views may be one or two generations from now and neither can you.
They BOTH suck
December 8th, 2012
9:44 am
Before this day is over, more “get out of Leviticus free cards” will have been played than “get of a jail cards” in 10 yrs of all the Monopoly games played worldwide
stands for decibels
December 8th, 2012
9:44 am
Fred, looks like the last straw for Crist had to be the way his successor railroaded voting rights.
I’ve said it before, but I don’t know how anyone with a conscience could deliberately disenfranchise American citizens like they’ve done. And between that, just last month, and this latest insult to Senators Bob and Elizabeth Dole on the floor of the Senate, the official party-line depravity it is just unfathomable to me.
Cheesy Grits is gone but not forgotten
December 8th, 2012
9:46 am
Evidently you didn’t fully comprehend Jay’s commentary or mine. BTW….people’s views can and do change as they age. I can’t predict the majority views on social issues that today’s 21 year old might have when they turn 35 much less make predictions for what those views may be one or two generations from now and neither can you.
Very true but when 63 percent already approve and you see how things are trending.
Its obvious to anyone who isn’t a moron where this is heading.
The Dems got 60 percent of the under 30 vote this time around. And when people make a party affiliation early on they tend to stick with it. Will they all… no.
But most will.
They BOTH suck
December 8th, 2012
9:46 am
Smart republican
So steve was created by another God and not your god?
stands for decibels
December 8th, 2012
9:47 am
Recon, I *think* I read you and Jay correctly. The SCOTUS are, I believe, going to be ruling on narrowly defined aspects of existing law. They are not likely to render a ruling that would somehow make hetero marriage the only one recognized by the law, forever and ever, amen.
It certainly wouldn’t be very conservative of them to do so.
/drive-by, and pleasant Sat. mornin’ to all.
smart republican
December 8th, 2012
9:50 am
God said that man and man are an Obamanation.
Cheesy Grits is gone but not forgotten
December 8th, 2012
9:50 am
god created adam and eve, not adam and steve.
Psstt. He didn’t create Adam and Ever either.
And guess what.. man didn’t walk with Dinosaurs and the world is over 6,000 years old.
stands for decibels
December 8th, 2012
9:53 am
oh, one other thing–
“smart republican”, can you and the last three human beings on the planet who find that “adam and steve” alleged-joke to be funny, please turn out the lights when you leave? kthnxbye.
smart republican
December 8th, 2012
9:53 am
I am going to say that this is all Obama Fault.
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
December 8th, 2012
9:56 am
man didn’t walk with Dinosaurs
Don’t be silly.
Fred Flintstone worked on the back of an apatosaurus and had dino as a pet.
breckenridge
December 8th, 2012
9:58 am
I often find myself wishing James Madison would have used stronger, much stronger, language when writing the Establishment Clause in the 1st Amendment. Instead of “Congress shall make no law regarding an establishment of religion” something along the lines of “Concerning matters of faith, as they relate to federal legislation, I hereby instruct all Americans to take their religious beliefs and shove them up their backsides” would have been preferable.
“An alliance or coalition between Government and religion cannot be too carefully guarded against……Every new and successful example therefore of a PERFECT SEPARATION between ecclesiastical and civil matters is of importance……..religion and government will exist in greater purity, without rather than with the aid of government.” James Madison, 1822.
barking frog
December 8th, 2012
9:59 am
Did Adam and Eve get married ?
Recon 0311 2533
December 8th, 2012
10:00 am
The Dems got 60 percent of the under 30 vote this time around. And when people make a party affiliation early on they tend to stick with it. Will they all… no.
I think today it’s more about ideology and less about party affiliation. Today we have a majority who view a large centralized federal government as what’s best for the country. That attitude can change by the time of our next election and can be driven by significant events. Two on the horizon is our deficit and weak economic recovery, the deteriorating conditions in the Middle East and what that might portend for world peace.
guy
December 8th, 2012
10:01 am
JamVet, You must have talked with your earthly god,your annointed one, and YOUR president,obama, about same sex marriage being cool You dialed the wrong number because obama,your god, doesn’t care. Like I said,we earthlings don’t over rule the Heavenly God but we try. Rave on pussycat!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)
December 8th, 2012
10:01 am
O me! The Gays are going to clog up the divorce courts and ruin our Way of Life! It won’t be easy to be a GA redneck then. It’ll take years to swap out. They’re threatening the sanctity of marriage!
Mr Right
December 8th, 2012
10:01 am
And guess what.. man didn’t walk with Dinosaurs and the world is over 6,000 years old.
And how would know? Were you around 6000 years ago?
Oscar
December 8th, 2012
10:03 am
One case, out of New York, addresses how the federal government must handle gay marriages that are conducted in states where such marriages are legal. The second, out of California, raises the more fundamental question of whether gay marriage is a right protected under the Constitution’s promise of equal protection.
_____
I think the decisions will be pretty narrow and just one those two issues.
Looks to me that the court will have to find that since marriage is not addressed in the constitution, that it is a state matter, and the federal government will have to treat all legal state marriages as legal marriages.
On the second issue, don’t have a prediction other than Roberts will try to decide on some other grounds and leave that question hanging for a while.
Cherokee
December 8th, 2012
10:03 am
guy, when you get as worked up by bankers charging interest, and people eating shrimp, and rednecks wearing polyester, as you do about gay marriage, get back to me. God also called all of those things sin – wonder why you aren’t writing on blogs condemning them?
Oscar
December 8th, 2012
10:08 am
Cherokee – You left out the part that says children who talk back to their parents should be stoned to death.
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
December 8th, 2012
10:12 am
Like I said,we earthlings don’t over rule the Heavenly God but we try.
So true.
God’s laws are self-enforcing and don’t need help from anyone.
Cheesy Grits is gone but not forgotten
December 8th, 2012
10:13 am
Today we have a majority who view a large centralized federal government as what’s best for the country.
Yes we do and I think ideology plays a huge part in the large centralized government belief.
People see what goes on when local yahoo’s take control.
Like in Kansas where the BOE went nuts and tried to ban teaching evolution.
People want a large Federal government that is a buffer against the nut down the street who would gladly force his Religious views right down your throat.
The Supreme Court is about to ( hopefully ) put this one behind us and we can move on. Federal government trumps local yahoo’s again.
Morality?
December 8th, 2012
10:15 am
What do Obama and Castro have in common? Many things but one in particular. They ignore the laws on the books and create their own. Banana Republic.
Morality?
December 8th, 2012
10:17 am
Large Fed gub’ment = SOCIALISM
Gale
December 8th, 2012
10:18 am
I think most Americans don’t give much thought at all to gay marriage. The reason opinion is trending positive is because gays have been more open. As more people learn that gays include people who live lives quite similar to their own, that they are not only the the crazies parading in the Pride parades, and as they learn about the reality of the rights and benefits they have being married that are denied to long established gay couples, people will begin to say, sure, why shouldn’t they be married. It doesn’t effect my life. So, terrible sentence structure aside, it is high time the issue was resolved. There is no compelling interest of the state to restrict marriage to straights. Religion and tradition should not hold sway over equality under the law.
Where ever gay marriage has become legal, we always see couples who have been together 30 and 40 years. No, they did not need the paper to be together. But why should they not have the legal standing of marriage. I have been with my partner 20 years. When we are finally married –when it is recognized at the federal level– it will not change how we live. It will not change how you live. The issue will return to obscurity where marriage is only important to your closest associates, and the tax man.
Morality?
December 8th, 2012
10:18 am
Of course it’s not critical. The level of the FED debt – now that’s critical.
Morality?
December 8th, 2012
10:21 am
I don’t consider the Supreme’s opinion to be important or critical on this “issue”. The level of the Fed Debt and how to avoid a depression in 2013 – now that’s what I call important and critical. Get an opinion from the Supreme’s on that.
Morality?
December 8th, 2012
10:22 am
I could care less about your current topic…….. marry anything you want to. Pet lizard,….. whatever.
Gale
December 8th, 2012
10:23 am
The federal budget is not in the jurisdiction of the SCOTUS. That is the responsibility of Congress. Rant at them about the budget.
Donovan
December 8th, 2012
10:24 am
Hey Stands and They Both Suck…you liberal lunatics just don’t get it with your apparent mind-set.
When we have a sexual deviant minority demanding equal rights for unnatural behavior, it’s foolish to think that we have to agree to their deviance as a natural acceptance.
I don’t appreciate parades where men dress up like women and women dress up like men to be seen as funny. Children become confused looking at such deviance. It’s wrong and your acceptance is ludicrous. People like you vote for Obama and want more lunatic thinking liberals presiding on the Supreme Court.
Sorry, but no sale here.
guy
December 8th, 2012
10:24 am
cherokee, I totally agree that there are many sins we comment while we fail to look in the mirror about ourselves.Bookman wrote this article for all to read and respond if we wanted to. None of us are near as smart as we think we are. Selfish humans we are!!!!
Morality?
December 8th, 2012
10:24 am
Taxation is the way the gub’ment “redistributes the wealth”. …… taking from those that earned it and giving to those that voted Obama.
zeke
December 8th, 2012
10:25 am
Your chart shows exactly why it is an abomination for those not mature to be able to vote! Their minds have been so indoctrinated in socialism, they have no ability to think logically! After all, how did those under 25 vote in the past two Presidential elections? The Court should toss any challenge to the DOMA as irrelevant! Congress passed the law, the President signed the law, it is the law! But, looking at the absurd ruling on the tax for obozocare, you never know! And, by the way, THEY ONLY RULED ON THE FINE AS A TAX, NOT ON THE 2500 PAGE BOONDOGGLE AS CONSTITUTIONAL! THAT FIGHT STILL NEEDS TO BE TAKEN TO THE COURT!
guy
December 8th, 2012
10:27 am
Amen Morality!!!! people will do what they want to do anyway!
DannyX
December 8th, 2012
10:27 am
“god created adam and eve, not adam and steve”
God created Adam and Eve!!! Not “Adam and Eve, then Adam and Cindy, then Adam and Michelle.”
Divorce is a CHOICE. God hates divorce, Jesus said so. Its “Until death do us part, NOT, until the next bimbo comes along.”
Divorce will lead to animal + human marriage and animal + human divorce!!!
We earthlings don’t over rule the Heavenly God!!!
barking frog
December 8th, 2012
10:28 am
Morality?
Taxation was invented by God and his priests except they called it tithing
and they also invented bankruptcy except they called it forgiveness of all
7 year old debts.
Morality?
December 8th, 2012
10:28 am
Obama will go down in history – not for so called “gay marriage” or his other pipe dreams but for being the HERBERT HOOVER of 2013 …. he and his handlers aka Nanny Pelosi and Hairy Weed will get the credit for the GREAT DEPRESSION of 2013.
Morality?
December 8th, 2012
10:31 am
Ignorant Frog: tithing is not taxation – tithing means VOLUNTARY giving. God did not invent taxation . He can not do evil.
Gale
December 8th, 2012
10:32 am
And then there are those who think a lot about gay marriage, in the sense that they think everyone should toe the line they have decided as the correct way to live. The trend is apparent. Politicians being as they are will see the trend. If SCOTUS decides narrowly, look for Congress to repeal DOMA. If popular opinion is contrary to the health care law, look for Congress to defund it. They want to be reelected. I see the trend away from hard right Tea Party conservatives. They went too far.
Bhorsoft
December 8th, 2012
10:33 am
I think Adam and Eve were shacking up, but that’s long before Moses and Jesus came into the picture. Who’s to say what is right and wrong before the Ten Commandments, the Bible, or the Koran came along….
Morality?
December 8th, 2012
10:34 am
Ignorant Frog : As for bankruptcy – I think Oprah 1st suggested it on one of her sob sessions.
Best professional crier ever – OPRAH.
GA Dawg
December 8th, 2012
10:36 am
I’m not sure I am ready for a gay marriage amendment. But the Anton Scalia is one sexy dago!
Morality?
December 8th, 2012
10:36 am
Danny X : Marrying animals – Not under Obama – animals don’t have the right to vote YET.
DannyX
December 8th, 2012
10:36 am
Best professional crier ever—John BOEHNER.
Morality?
December 8th, 2012
10:39 am
However PETA is pressuring Obama to promote a healthy marriage between Owners and their pets . with survivor’s rights of course.
Morality?
December 8th, 2012
10:46 am
With legalized weed high on Obama’s agenda (coming soon) there will be a new source of taxation that will hit the 47%. . as well as the 1 %….. Gub’ment run Weed Stores – the only source of legal weed and will be highly taxed. Weed sold in the private sector will be heavily punished. Part of Obama’s plan to reduce the Fed debt.
Jerome Horwitz
December 8th, 2012
10:49 am
Don’t like gay marraige – don’t marry one.
As for “God’s Word” – Well, as far as I know God has never really spoken directly to mankind. It’s always been thru some’s interpretation. So we really don’t what He thinks.
Morality?
December 8th, 2012
10:49 am
Also look forward to a Fed Gub’ment run nationwide SUPER LOTTERY….. proceeds to go to reduce the Fed Debt…. after 10% taken off the top for Congress’s self voted pay raise.
Max Headroom
December 8th, 2012
10:50 am
GLBT make up something like 3% of the population. I guess being the queaky wheel will trully get you to the supreme court. I really dont think we should even be taking up the issue…
As a political moderate, I couldn’t care less who gets married to whom. However, based on the few homosexual couples that I’ve known, I suggest you be careful what you ask for. In fact, I recommend you get a tattoo. It’s more permanent and less painful.
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
December 8th, 2012
10:50 am
Jerome
Blue Lions 2
Sunderland 0
At the half.
DannyX
December 8th, 2012
10:52 am
Why should gay people be afraid of the Bible?
Straight Christian conservatives aren’t. The very Christian south leads the country in divorce, around half of all marriages. Jesus made it clear that divorce is only allowed when adultery is involved. He then set rules that limit re-marriage. All Christian divorces involve sin, either because of adultery or divorce that is not allowed. Re-marriage law according to Jesus is totally ignored.
On top of that when people are married they usually get married in a church, supposedly a holy place. They swear before their God to stay together until death. Half of them will break that pledge.
Finally Jesus said nothing about gays but laid down the law on divorce and re-marriage.
Tell me guy, and Morality, why should gays be afraid of your Bible?
Divorce is a CHOICE!!!
josef
December 8th, 2012
10:52 am
I think Gale hit the nail on the head earlier when she said that most straight people really didn’t give it that much thought. Once gay people became more comfortable being “out.” and more straight people became comfortable with them being out, attitudes began to change.
Why?
Straight people got the chance to see how boringly “normal” and how alike we really are. We both go about our daily lives without a whole lot of thought to our “orientation.” Unless the subject comes up, neither “side” gives it much thought.
Of course, me and mine have a dog in this fight, and are paying attention, but even we didn’t get up this morning kicking back the gay blanket, turning on the gay coffee maker, frying up the gay bacon and eggs, “discussing” the gay bills to be paid, etc. etc.
On the other hand, long before I came in to pick up here, it did come up and did come up in a way that reminded us of the inequalities. we’re having to deal with the transfer of title of a piece of property and with that a bunch of lawyer sh*t that, were we married, would not be necessary. Added into that equation is the fact that we’re old f*rts facing our own equality of oblivion and there’s this whole matter of survivor’s benefits, etc….
And folks on the “pervert” side, are you listening? How we diddle our dangles hasn’t come up!
Morality?
December 8th, 2012
10:55 am
Horwitz – As far as you know? As long as you do not invite God in to your life He is not likely to enter. God gave you free will to make your own decisions. God does not force Himself upon people. If you want Him to speak to you invite Him in. God has spoken to me out loud with a “male” toned voice. He said ” I will do my part. You do yours.” and I knew exactly what that meant and God kept His Word. God did His part.
Scrivener
December 8th, 2012
10:55 am
Cherokee as usual is wrong. Purity codes in regard to shellfish and clothing were in the Old Testament and were forgiven in the New Testament. Typical deflection from people who are uninformed about the Bible. Yes, it’s a sin, but I sin every time I worry about something or think bad thoughts about my neighbor’s barking dog. Sin is between the individual and God and is not for others to worry about. I couldn’t care less if two same-sex people want to shack up, but don’t call it marriage. Marriage is and always has been between a man and a woman. I would never support taking an institution that has been around forever and changing its very meaning.
josef
December 8th, 2012
10:57 am
DANNY
“The very Christian south leads the country in divorce, around half of all marriages.”
And, in one of those interesting little bits of trivia that Uncle Sam’s Redheaded Step Children will buck the trend or die trying….the 2010 Census shows that the South leads the nation in number of same sex households and same sex households with children…also the nation’s highest rates of racially mixed marriages…
Free Mind Is In The House
December 8th, 2012
10:58 am
The thing that gays need to comprehend is that everyone will not cosign to your lifestyle nor do we have to. Many people see homosexuality as a morality issue and guess what,people are allowed to have morals.
What you do is your business no doubt and that is indeed your choice to be homosexual but understand that people are allowed to choose not to support unnatural lifestyle so you need to get over getting upset at anyone that don’t support your lifestyle.
Morality?
December 8th, 2012
10:58 am
Gay used to mean happy before the word was confiscated and altered in meaning. Why not make up your own word, rather than steal one, if you don’t like the word homosexual?
Soothsayer
December 8th, 2012
10:58 am
I don’t how many of you are familiar with the whole Princess Kate bru-ha-ha. Apparently a couple of DJs from an Australian radio station called the hospital impersonating Queen Elizabeth and Prince Charles inquiring about Kate’s condition. It’s amazing to me that the nurse who took the call committed suicide. Cursor down and listen to most of the conversation (edited).
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
11:01 am
“Marriage is and always has been between a man and a woman”
Marriage is and always has been a legal contract. For millenia love had very little to do with it. So weren’t we “changing” marriage when we began raising the importance of the love connection and reducing the power of parents to dictate whom their children marry?
Morality?
December 8th, 2012
11:02 am
And Coke used to be slang for Coca Cola… back before Obama “experimented” with it. !st legal weed for taxation and net legal “Croak”?
josef
December 8th, 2012
11:02 am
FREE MIND
Lifestyle? Got news for ya, Bub, I’ll put mine and my partner’s up against yours any day of the week for downright boring!
Soothsayer
December 8th, 2012
11:04 am
josef: you’re boring!
josef
December 8th, 2012
11:06 am
SOOTH
“josef: you’re boring!
”
Which is why I come here…I believe in sharing the wealth!
barking frog
December 8th, 2012
11:07 am
Why do heterosexuals believe they have the right to delve into
the bedroom of non-heterosexuals? Morality?
Morality?
December 8th, 2012
11:09 am
Horwitz- God will speak to you if you invite God in to your life. God has spoken to me with a clear deep voice ” I will do my part. You do yours.” and I knew exactly what that meant and God kept his Word.
josef
December 8th, 2012
11:10 am
Morality
And sinister used to mean “left handed…” Until the witch-burners got a’hold of it…
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
11:10 am
“Why do heterosexuals believe they have the right to delve into
the bedroom of non-heterosexuals? Morality?”
Fear?
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 8th, 2012
11:12 am
Josef
You are NORMAL.
Before you said that I was all for everyone having a choice in marrying whomever they wanted, but now I will have to rethink my position.
J/k
Morality?
December 8th, 2012
11:12 am
Been waiting since 1966 for the Falcons to win the Super Bowl . Love those Dirty Birds.
josef
December 8th, 2012
11:13 am
COMMON SENSE
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
11:14 am
“God will speak to you if you invite God in to your life. God has spoken to me with a clear deep voice ” I will do my part. You do yours.””
And how do you handle it if God tells me something totally different from what he tells you?
barking frog
December 8th, 2012
11:15 am
Morality?
How long have you been hearing deep male voices?
roughrider
December 8th, 2012
11:16 am
It’s hard to believe that a civilized society would entertain the notion of two men or women marrying each other. Even dogs and cats know better.If this happens , what’s next ? People marrying dead people, peopled marrying animals ? Where do we draw the line?
Morality?
December 8th, 2012
11:16 am
Doggone – I have no interest in what you do in your bedroom as long as you are not a serial killer torturing someone or a child molester.
midtownguy
December 8th, 2012
11:17 am
“It’s just a matter of time.” I’ve been saying that for years. All you had to do is look at the gaps in age groups on this and many other social issues. It’s not so much that young people “support gay rights” as much as they are just don’t see how other people live or who they marry as any of their business. Now here is Georgia me and my partner will likely be long gone before it happens, but that’s OK.
Morality?
December 8th, 2012
11:18 am
Doggone : I don’t handle it. That is between you and God.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
11:18 am
“Doggone – I have no interest in what you do in your bedroom as long as you are not a serial killer torturing someone or a child molester”
Was that supposed to be an answer to my question? ‘Cause if it is…it’s not.
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
December 8th, 2012
11:19 am
” ………. that whatever the Supreme Court’s ruling this year, in time the right to marry will be extended to all Americans, gay or straight.”
You left out polygamy.
If the Supreme Court rules there is a Constitutional right to gay marriage then there is no legal basis for not extending that same right to those who which to have multiple marriage partners.
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
December 8th, 2012
11:20 am
People marrying dead people, peopled marrying animals ?
Marriage is a legal contract.
Neither animals nor dead people can enter into a legal contract.
Geez….
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
December 8th, 2012
11:20 am
Excuse me: “wish” to have
Recon 0311 2533
December 8th, 2012
11:20 am
“People want a large Federal government that is a buffer against the nut down the street who would gladly force his Religious views right down your throat.”
The problem is paying for a large federal government and the billions of dollars its been taking out of the economy. It hasn’t worked and the country has never been terrorized and forced into religious bondage by Christians or Jews ever in our history.
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
December 8th, 2012
11:20 am
Multiple partners can enter into a legal contract.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
11:20 am
“Doggone : I don’t handle it. That is between you and God.”
But you will have to handle it if what I am told becomes more of the norm in society than what you are told.
Morality?
December 8th, 2012
11:21 am
Frog – Deep voice – God is neither male nor female. That’s what I heard – no doubt about it. God is TRUTH. God is LOVE. No matter who you are or what you have done – God loves you.
barking frog
December 8th, 2012
11:21 am
0311
Does more than one husband scare you?
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
December 8th, 2012
11:21 am
Recon:
A “polygamist” deserves the right to have those ten personal “exemptions” for his (or her) federal income tax return.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
11:22 am
“Neither animals nor dead people can enter into a legal contract.”
And neither can children
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
December 8th, 2012
11:22 am
barking frog:
Do you think the Constitution should allow for multiple marriage partners ?
barking frog
December 8th, 2012
11:23 am
Morality?
So God has no genitals, wow!
barking frog
December 8th, 2012
11:24 am
0311
The Constitution provides equal protection before the law.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
11:24 am
“The problem is paying for a large federal government and the billions of dollars its been taking out of the economy”
If it’s been “taken out of the economy” – where did it go?
Georgia
December 8th, 2012
11:26 am
People are very sexual beings. Most viral videos are from German porn. Is sex a sin, and should playing house with a tranny be illegal? If its a sin, then it means that everyone is gay. How could some be condemned for sins impossible for others to commit? Sodomy. Bible lore insists that bestiality follows on the heels of sodomy. It’s a pendulum swing. It’s the tide. From sex between spouses wanting children, to divorce, to gay, to goats and then to where we are now, with the lingerie football league. What’s been happening for over fifty thousand years is an orgy for the ages. Followed by brief periods of missionary position. Everything and everyone. Shame itself seems to have been bred out of us all. A woman drives around an unloading school bus on the sidewalk. A man fillibusters his own bill. A good Samaritan’s near-fatal gift of boots. no rules. No right or wrong. Prayer itself relegated to tv shows with nuns saying the rosary. God’s wrath? Most stars are binary stars. Our Sun is no exception. There is a companion star, an undetectable brown dwarf moving so fast that we’ll have little warning when its orbit affects ours. 122112. Repent. There’s a rosary marathon tonite!
Morality?
December 8th, 2012
11:26 am
Doggone _ I am speaking for myself – can’t speak for all heterosexuals. I don’t think, but haven’t taken a poll, that most heterosexuals are concerned with what someone does in the privacy of their home as long as it is consensual and not child molestation. That’s my final answer.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
11:26 am
“Do you think the Constitution should allow for multiple marriage partners ?”
Does it prohibit them?
indigo
December 8th, 2012
11:27 am
Morality
Please furnish us with irrefutable scientific evidence to support your belief in God so that we may all be true belivers like you.
Thank you.
breckenridge
December 8th, 2012
11:27 am
As American citizens our first obligation is to the US Constitution, not the Bible. And the Constitution is very clear in instructing us not to legislate religion or religious beliefs.
And those that actively lobby to legislate their religious views – Family Research Council, Concerned Women for America, etc – are nothing but dirty filthy traitors.
josef
December 8th, 2012
11:29 am
For those wanting to cite the Biblical…guess what, Polygamy is, at least for the Sephardim, kosher…
http://www.shamash.org/lists/scj-faq/HTML/faq/08-06.html
Recon 0311 2533
December 8th, 2012
11:30 am
If it’s been “taken out of the economy” – where did it go?
To pay the interest on our national debt and to finance an ever expanding federal government along with our entitlement programs. In short spending money we don’t have.
Morality?
December 8th, 2012
11:30 am
God has no genitals! That is correct – ’cause God is not human…….. guess you are trying to be funny but it comes across as silly.
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
December 8th, 2012
11:31 am
Doggone:
““Do you think the Constitution should allow for multiple marriage partners ?”
Does it prohibit them?”
We won’t know until the Supreme Court rules one day but in my opinion if they rule that gays have the right to legally marry under the Constitution then there is no legal basis for saying polygamists can’t have multiple partners (gay or straight polygamists included) wth all of the legal, tax and health benefits involved.
Your thoughts ?
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
11:31 am
“To pay the interest on our national debt and to finance an ever expanding federal government along with our entitlement programs. In short spending money we don’t have”
In fact, it went BACK into the economy.
Stevie Ray..Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right..here I am...
December 8th, 2012
11:32 am
barking frog
December 8th, 2012
11:07 am
I can contribute one glaring reason. I was in DC this past week and walked by a bookstore that had at featured book on sale..SATAN YOU CAN’T HAVE MY CHILDREN…now, I’m not spun from any religious clothe so you can imagine how amusing this was to me. I flipped thru the chapters and it did address SATAN as somewhat of a steering committee to homosexuality and the like..
The evangelicals, grasping for relevancy, are desperate to make a final stand before judgement day when gays have the same rights they do…so absurd you gotta laugh..
Michael
December 8th, 2012
11:32 am
But, vultures are commonly kept in households. In fact, in the northeast it is common to live in a neighborhood with a vulture capitalist. Some of them, such as Romney, are celebrated. Some of them, such as Millken and now Madoff, are kept in confinement for violating investment norms. Or,what we think are investment norms.
Met a woman last month who is the daughter of a Greek Orthodox priest. I thought that was a scandal, but she said it is accepted in the Greek Orthodox church. Since the new testament was written in Greek, I suppose we have to defer to them over the Romans. Or, the various protestant offshoots of the Romans.
I suppose the supremes could decide that if the government is not enforcing DOMA, and the states are not enforcing the prohibition against gay marriage, there is no conflict that has to be decided. Usually, someone has to prove that they have been damaged to get some kind of action by a court. In this case I don’t know what the damage is.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
11:33 am
“Your thoughts ?”
You could have answered my question with one word: No
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
December 8th, 2012
11:34 am
breckenridge:
Every law or regulation passed is one group’s attempt to legislate their morality on others.
What “you” might call fraud would be another group’s “slick business deal”.
If enough people think that is “morally wrong” ………. then you get the law/regulation you desire.
getalife
December 8th, 2012
11:34 am
cons spewing morals is like assad spewing freedom.
barking frog
December 8th, 2012
11:34 am
Morality?
God has no genitals! That is correct – ’cause God is not human…….. guess you are trying to be funny but it comes across as silly.
………………………………………………
Funny…Silly.. maybe but for a god with no genitals the followers
are certainly concerned about what people are doing with their genitals.
tom
December 8th, 2012
11:35 am
Jay, why point to Justice Scalia exclusively? 5 of the 9 justices are Catholic, are they not?
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
December 8th, 2012
11:35 am
Doggone:
Then you agree with me that “if” the SCOTUS rules favorably on gay marriage then legalized polygamy is not far behind.
Just be prepared for it.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
11:35 am
“I suppose the supremes could decide that if the government is not enforcing DOMA”
The government is, in fact, enforcing DOMA. What it is not going is DEFENDING it.
Morality?
December 8th, 2012
11:36 am
Indigo – Instead why don’t you get an open mind, join a Bible group that will explain the Bible to you and invite God in to your life. Then He will prove He is real to you himself. I know I am not here by accident.
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
December 8th, 2012
11:36 am
getalife:
I think you meant “Morsi” ?
Recon 0311 2533
December 8th, 2012
11:37 am
In fact, it went BACK into the economy
No it’s not going back into the economy and a deficit that exceeds 16 trillion dollars growing daily proves it’s not going back into the economy.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
11:38 am
“Just be prepared for it.”
No need to prepare. Just like gay marriage, it will have no effect on me.
getalife
December 8th, 2012
11:39 am
You can’t take the moral high ground cons because your actions prove you lost your your moral compass.
scalia is the only justice running his mouth on this issue tom.
I think we should join the other civilized countries and pass it.
Recon 0311 2533
December 8th, 2012
11:40 am
Morality, Indigo wants scientific proof there is a God. Maybe he/she should offer scientific proof there isn’t.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
11:41 am
“No it’s not going back into the economy and a deficit that exceeds 16 trillion dollars growing daily proves it’s not going back into the economy”
Then were IS it going? it doesn’t just disappear. Where does it go, it not back into the economy?
Morality?
December 8th, 2012
11:41 am
Supreme’s are not God…… neither is Obama….. neither is the gub’ment. Gub’ments throughout history have ended in corruption and immorality…… God is still here. SELAH!
getalife
December 8th, 2012
11:42 am
No scout,
I meant assad.
Why do you even care about this issue?
It has nothing to do with you or me.
You need to work on your own morals.
indigo
December 8th, 2012
11:42 am
Morality
That is not what I asked.
Since YOU are the one here talking about God as though His existence is factual, it’s up to YOU to furnish hard evidence to support this belief.
If this just isn’t possible, then have the decency to just man/woman up and admit all you have is childish blind faith.
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
December 8th, 2012
11:42 am
Doggone:
Then a Supreme Court ruling against gay marriage would have no affect on you either.
Good.
Jack ®
December 8th, 2012
11:42 am
I say if some hairy-legged dude wants to marry another hairy-legged dude instead of a nice pretty lady, got for it. If IRS changes the 1040 to accomodate same-sex marriage, it’ll be interesting to see who claims to be the spouse. Or will the word spouse be considered sexist? Or racist?
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
December 8th, 2012
11:43 am
“Why do you even care about this issue?”
Because I am an American citizen and I hate to see this country in such a moral, political and economic decline.
curious
December 8th, 2012
11:44 am
If God created Adam and Eve, there must have been some big time incest going on in order for us to be where we are today.
jewcowboy
December 8th, 2012
11:44 am
I just have one comment before I have to go run errands, and it’s a long one so I apologize in advance. Gay marriage is as conservative of a value you can get.
As I’ve posted before, David Cameron explains it best, “But for me, leadership on families also means speaking out on marriage. Marriage is not just a piece of paper. It pulls couples together through the ebb and flow of life. It gives children stability. And it says powerful things about what we should value. So yes, we will recognize marriage in the tax system.
But we’re also doing something else. I once stood before a Conservative conference and said it shouldn’t matter whether commitment was between a man and a woman, a woman and a woman, or a man and another man. You applauded me for that. Five years on, we’re consulting on legalizing gay marriage.
And to anyone who has reservations, I say: Yes, it’s about equality, but it’s also about something else: commitment. Conservatives believe in the ties that bind us; that society is stronger when we make vows to each other and support each other. So I don’t support gay marriage despite being a Conservative. I support gay marriage because I’m a Conservative.”
Yes, the legalization of gay marriage is inevitable in this country, in large part due to straight advocates. But for those straight people who do not see this fight for civil rights as pertinent to their lives, ask yourself what you would tell your child who grew up to be gay and was denied the right to marry the person they loved due to your apathy.
This is best encapsulated in a quote by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., whose wife Coretta Scott King was an advocate for gay marriage, who was addressing the business community on January 27, 1965, at the Dinkler Plaza Hotel in downtown Atlanta. The business community had originally plan to snub Dr. King’s speech until Robert W. Woodruff allowed his name to be used on the invitation as a sponsor. Suddenly the event was standing room only. During the speech Dr. King said, “History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the vitriolic words and the violent actions of the bad people, but the appalling silence and indifference of the good people. Our generation will have to repent not only for the words and acts of the children of darkness, but also for the fears and apathy of the children of light.”
So it remains true today for another group of American citizens and their struggle for civil rights.
The GOV
December 8th, 2012
11:44 am
“God has spoken to me out loud with a “male” toned voice.”
Was this “voice” coming from a dog?
Recon 0311 2533
December 8th, 2012
11:44 am
” Where does it go, it not back into the economy?”
I answered your question and the rest is only basic math.
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
December 8th, 2012
11:44 am
Jack:
Don’t forget those multiple “dependants” on that 1040 for polygamist marriages.
Jack ®
December 8th, 2012
11:45 am
go for it
Morality?
December 8th, 2012
11:45 am
Doggone – it does not go back in to the economy because it goes to China and Japan to whom we owe a few trillion and when they cut us off from MORE borrowing . the 47% will no longer have to vote Obama.. ’cause the gub’ment credit card will be MAXED out and DENIED.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
11:45 am
“Then a Supreme Court ruling against gay marriage would have no affect on you either.”
Quite right, it won’t. That doesn’t mean I have to agree with it. Nor does it mean it can never be changed. And it doesn’t mean that Congress can’t pass – or repeal – laws that affect it.
getalife
December 8th, 2012
11:47 am
“Because I am an American citizen and I hate to see this country in such a moral, political and economic decline.”
You voted for w twice and cheered on his destruction of your country.
You have no moral compass. You treated our President with disrespect and lies.
Repent sinner.
The GOV
December 8th, 2012
11:48 am
“Morality, Indigo wants scientific proof there is a God. Maybe he/she should offer scientific proof there isn’t.”
Where in the new testament or old testament (or any other religious book) can you find the mention of dinosaurs?
josef
December 8th, 2012
11:49 am
I’d think that our don’t take my money lot here would be championing the cause of the New York case…to my understanding, a pivotal argument is that the greedy gub’ment has some $400,000.00 in ill gotten gain riding on the outcome…
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
December 8th, 2012
11:49 am
jewcowboy:
Since you mentioned Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. I am sure you would ascribe to these words also:
“The acceptable year of the Lord is that year when every knee shall bow and every tongue shall confess the name of Jesus. And everywhere men will cry out, “Hallelujah, hallelujah! The kingdom of this world has become the kingdom of our Lord and His Christ, and He shall reign forever and ever. Hallelujah, hallelujah!” (1966)
barking frog
December 8th, 2012
11:50 am
The Federal government is restrained from failing to provide
equal protection of law to all citizens by the Constitution. The
Supreme Court has upheld that provision many times so there
is no reason to believe that it will not in these two cases.
Morality?
December 8th, 2012
11:50 am
Indigo and others: After you actually read and understand the Bible and ask God to come in to your life we’ll talk. Until then your closed mind won’t allow you to understand the difference between fact and fiction.
getalife
December 8th, 2012
11:51 am
How dare you cons pretend you have morals after the last decade.
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
December 8th, 2012
11:51 am
getalife:
You voted for “O” twice and cheer on his destruction of your country.
You have no moral compass. You treated President Bust with disrespect and lies.
Repent sinner.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
11:51 am
“Doggone – it does not go back in to the economy because it goes to China and Japan to whom we owe a few trillion and when they cut us off from MORE borrowing”
But it does go back into the economy, unless you think China and Japan are burning it when they get it. “The economy” is much bigger than just the US, you know. You DO know, don’t you?
Edward
December 8th, 2012
11:52 am
Morality and Recon must disprove the existence of the Easter Bunny and Tooth Fairy. After all, from what I can see, there is just as much evidence to support their existence as there is for your god. As a very wise man once stated, for all the same reasons you disbelieve in all the gods that came before or since, like Osiris or Thor or Zeus, I likewise dismiss your invention.
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
December 8th, 2012
11:52 am
Excuse me: “President Bush”
Same-sex marriage goes to high court - NBCNews.com | Batyam.co.ilBatyam.co.il
December 8th, 2012
11:52 am
[...] Court to hear gay marriage cases, fulfill long quest of rights activistsSan Jose Mercury NewsAtlanta Journal Constitution (blog) -CBS Newsall 2,396 news articles » This entry was posted in Uncategorized [...]
Saint Joan
December 8th, 2012
11:52 am
Indigo, How about this view? Think of America as a large house being held in place by a strong foundation. Then imagine, years ago that engineers discovered that the foundation, which had been done well but was lacking by current engineering standards. The foundation needed to be re-worked. Then let’s imagine that as other materials wore out and that technology brought roofing products that were sturdier and less toxic to the inhabitants. Then windows were invented that were not only safer but provided weather protection that kept the inhabitants more comfortable year around.
No one lives in the same house for decades without having to fix and adjust the structure.
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
December 8th, 2012
11:53 am
barking frog:
You mean “equal protection under the law” ?
Then why don’t women have to register for selective service ?
Recon 0311 2533
December 8th, 2012
11:55 am
Where in the new testament or old testament (or any other religious book) can you find the mention of dinosaurs?
If that’s your scientific proof you get a maggy’s drawers for being way off the target.
Morality?
December 8th, 2012
11:56 am
Come to our Bible study tuesday night at 6:30 and learn – God said “Ignorance of His Word is dangerous”.
getalife
December 8th, 2012
11:57 am
scout,
Only problem is you lie:
“You voted for “O” twice and cheer on his destruction of your country.”
Liars, cheaters, unpatriotic, bigots can’t claim the moral high ground.
That is a lie too.
Corey
December 8th, 2012
11:59 am
I find it blasphemous that those who constantly invoke God have reduced God to a humanlike being with all the traits, characteristics and trappings of being human. An awesome being who created the universe has been reduced to words in fables on pages penned by man call the Bible. How utterly ridiculous. I think I will visit one of those God and country churches and pass out a copy of the great patriot, Thomas Paine’s “The Age of Reason” to all those church attending patriots.
Cheryl Anne
December 8th, 2012
11:59 am
To all the Bible thumpers, especially the one who said man can’t overrule God: Ah, actually, we’ve done it throughout history. And thank goodness we have, or, for example, we’d still have slavery:
However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way. (Leviticus 25:44-46 NLT)
getalife
December 8th, 2012
11:59 am
No cons, stop lying about you having morals.
Not on my watch.
I will blast you hypocrites .
Recon 0311 2533
December 8th, 2012
11:59 am
” I likewise dismiss your invention.”
And it’s your choice to make that nobody deprives you from making but that doesn’t make you right.
Morality?
December 8th, 2012
12:00 pm
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to ALL – especially Barking Frog, Indigo and Danny X.. See you on the other side -
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
12:02 pm
“After you actually read and understand the Bible”
And what if someone else understands the Bible differently from how you understand it?
getalife
December 8th, 2012
12:02 pm
Ted Olson won this argument.
Just deal with it cons.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
12:03 pm
“Come to our Bible study tuesday night at 6:30 and learn – God said “Ignorance of His Word is dangerous”.”
God teaches your Bible study class himself?
barking frog
December 8th, 2012
12:06 pm
0311 11:53
Women don’t have to register for selective service for the same reason
that men do have to register for selective service.
Soothsayer
December 8th, 2012
12:06 pm
NOT Georgia! Brrr-r-r-r-r !
Allzunah, Eastern Germany
jconservative
December 8th, 2012
12:08 pm
There is a lot of wrong info floating around this blog on this issue. Here are the Courts two orders granting certiorari. As is evident the Court has created several options on how to decide the cases.
12-144 HOLLINGSWORTH V. PERRY
In addition to the question presented by the petition, the parties are directed to brief and argue the following question:
Whether petitioners have standing under Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution in this case.
CERT. GRANTED 12/7/2012
Question presented:
Whether the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment
prohibits the State of California from defining marriage as the union of a man and
a woman.
————————————————————-
12-307 UNITED STATES V. WINDSOR
In addition to the question presented by the petition, the parties are directed to brief and argue the following questions:
Whether the Executive Branch’s agreement with the court below that DOMA is unconstitutional deprives this Court of jurisdiction to decide the case;
and whether the bipartisan legal advisory group of the United States House of Representatives has Article III standing in the case.
CERT. GRANTED 12/7/2012
Questions presented:
Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) defines the term
“marriage” for all purposes under federal law, including the provision of federal
benefits, as “only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and
wife.” 1 U.S.C. 7. It similarly defines the term “spouse” as “a person of the
opposite sex who is a husband or a wife.” Ibid. The question presented is:
Whether Section 3 of DOMA violates the Fifth Amendment’s guarantee of
equal protection of the laws as applied to persons of the same sex who are legally
married under the laws of their State.
getalife
December 8th, 2012
12:10 pm
President Bust indeed.
Anyhoo, this issue will be over this year.
getalife
December 8th, 2012
12:10 pm
Opps, next year.
Dekalb comments
December 8th, 2012
12:13 pm
Moralilty?
I am a Christian but don’t believe in the literal Adam and Eve story. The Biblical story of creation mimics and is younger than similar creation stories that were among other nomadic tribes at the time. It is a nice, simple story that places God’s relationship with mankind in a way people of the day could comprehend.
We now know that the universe, at least as we can perceive it today, originated with the Big Bang. I have no problem reconciling the big bang, the earth’s geologic development and evolution with my belief in God. God set all of this in motion. So he didn’t create Adam and Eve and set them in the garden.
Further there is NOTHING in the Bible that speaks of persons of same-gegnder attraction. Man-on-man sex was a method of humiliation and domination among many peoples at the time. It was, as with rape, a matter of power and control, but not sexual attraction. The concept of same-gender attraction is relatively new and only now being understood.
And if you are so convinced the Bible proscribes same-gender sexual activity, I guess lesbians get a pass because there is no mention of woman-on-woman sex in the Bible.
indigo
December 8th, 2012
12:13 pm
Saint Joan
The key phrase is “current engineering standards”
It’s those “current” standards that are undermining us.
KC
December 8th, 2012
12:16 pm
The fundamentalists will frame their arguments in such a way that they will always find biblical support for their belief that not *every* citizen deserves equal rights under the law but there are two separate issues here. First, marriage is a religious sacrament. If your church doesn’t want to sanctify marriage between people of the same sex, no one is going to force them to do so. Second, certain legal rights are conferred on those who are married.
Those legal benefits conferred on heterosexual marrieds can’t reasonably be denied to others based on religious beliefs, at least not in the US which was created on the stated premise that all are created equal by God.
The scripture fundamentalists need to revisit is the one about beams and motes I think.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
12:16 pm
‘It’s those “current” standards that are undermining us”
and I think they make us stronger
indigo
December 8th, 2012
12:16 pm
Morality
Since you have a strong belief in God, but can’t furnish any honest justification for it, I’ll just ask something else.
Which God do you worship, the Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu(Gods) or some other God or Gods?
barking frog
December 8th, 2012
12:18 pm
Proving that a universal power exists that brought everything
into existence has nothing to do with proving, accepting or believing
that the Judaeo-Christian or Islamic religious books are true or not.
Thoughts
December 8th, 2012
12:18 pm
There has never been one scientific study done, that can 100% say that homosexuality is something in your DNA. Therefore it becomes a choice made by one and all. If you are willing to let each person decide if they are gay, then you are opening pandoras box for the government to give rights to others who choose to do what they feel. It has never been the same issure of ethinic color or gender. It is a choice, the question is, are you going to let anyone who wants choose as they want and give them benefits occordingly.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
12:22 pm
“First, marriage is a religious sacrament”
No, it isn’t. It’s a legal contract. That the church has muscled it’s way into that and made it ALSO a religious sacrament does not change the fact that it is primarily a legal contract.
But you are correct that there is no intention to force churches to marry those outside their faith.
Personally, though, I have a different take on that aspect of the discussion. I think that “separation” of church and state should mean that religious leaders OUGHT NOT be deputized to perform a legal function. If a couple chooses to be married in their church, that is their right, but when it comes down to the legal statement pronouncing the “man and wife” THAT should be performed by a legal functionary, not the presiding religious authority.
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
December 8th, 2012
12:23 pm
Therefore it becomes a choice made by one and all.
When, exactly, did you decide to be a heterosexual?
barking frog
December 8th, 2012
12:24 pm
It seems a vow of chastity by homosexuals would remove
the objections of heterosexuals, especially religious ones,
to homosexual marriage, even in Church.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
12:24 pm
“There has never been one scientific study done, that can 100% say that homosexuality is something in your DNA”
And that matters not one bit. If I choose to dress “like a man” that is my legally protected right. It’s not built into my DNA
Fred ™
December 8th, 2012
12:27 pm
Damn Indigo, you sure have a pathological hatred of God (apparently just Jesus, or Christianity) and those who believe in it. Were you raped by a priest or something? Have I missed your rants against Allah, Jehovah, Buddha, etal?
barking frog
December 8th, 2012
12:27 pm
Once all men wore robes and skirts. The Scots still wear plaid skirts.
Fred ™
December 8th, 2012
12:28 pm
And that matters not one bit. If I choose to dress “like a man” that is my legally protected right. It’s not built into my DNA
I know men that wear dresses, Irish, Scots, Arab…….. So if you wear a dress are you dressing like a man lol? I say that jokingly, but it DOES help illustrate how complicated “gender issues” can become.
Fred ™
December 8th, 2012
12:29 pm
LOl Barking frog, we were thinking alike.
barking frog
December 8th, 2012
12:31 pm
Fred
Skirts have occupied a great deal of thinking time during my life.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
12:32 pm
“but it DOES help illustrate how complicated “gender issues” can become.”
I would use the word “made”, not become. Because “gender issues” are totally manmade. There are on 2 things that define “gender” – only women can bear and birth a child. And only a mad can “father” one. Everything else is mankind determined.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
12:34 pm
“And only a mad can “father” one”
Ooops! But maybe not so far off, after all?
Mr Right
December 8th, 2012
12:34 pm
Don’t cast pearls before swine!
KC
December 8th, 2012
12:35 pm
Doggone, “marriage” is also a religious sacrament separate from the “legal contract”. Just because you don’t believe in something doesn’t make it untrue. That knife cuts both ways. I don’t care if churches deny that sacrament to whomever because oyher churches will. But *legal* rights can’t be denied.
Corey
December 8th, 2012
12:37 pm
Myth. Most of our debt is held by foreign investors. Fact. Fifty-two per cent of our debt is held by American investors. Truth. If we could collect 2.2 trillion in revenue and not spend it we will be able to pay off debt to China and Japan. Our law makers know this, but they spin these facts for political advantage.
barking frog
December 8th, 2012
12:37 pm
Mr. Right 12:34
Not getting any pearls?
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
12:39 pm
“Doggone, “marriage” is also a religious sacrament separate from the “legal contract”. Just because you don’t believe in something doesn’t make it untrue”
Certainly it is. But you can go through the whole ceremony. The presiding religious authority can even pronounce you “man and wife”…but if he (or she) doesn’t sign the marriage license you are NOT legally married. Marriage is, and always has been, primarily a legal contract between consenting parties. But if they fail to fulfill the laws pertaining to that contract they are not legally married…no matter WHAT their particular church says or does.
barking frog
December 8th, 2012
12:39 pm
The holding of treasury securities by other countries supports
the confidence of the world in our country’s government and
economy.
Fred ™
December 8th, 2012
12:41 pm
DG: I know you like semantics and they are important. I’ll agree to made over become. Your version is more “correct” and more of what I meant.
And now I have to go do some work. Can you believe that/ Two days in a row now. What will Folks like Donovan think? It’s gonna ruin their insipid notion that I’m a “moocher.”
Well if anyone needs me just call me on my Obamafone. I’m really taking my Mercedes to Whole Foods so I can get some choice Ostrich filets with my food stamps………… can I get a prom dress there too?
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
12:41 pm
Amendment: “Certainly it is” should be “Certainly it can be”
Brosephus™
December 8th, 2012
12:41 pm
After reading the first 200 or so posts, I saw almost everything I expected to see. I can’t understand why people feel they need to project themselve into the private affairs of others, when those private affairs have nary a damn thing to do with their own life and how they live it. It’s funny how people whine about Obama shoving Obamacare down their throats while they’re trying to shove their religious morals down the throats of others.
Two people of the same sex want to get married, big f**king deal… If you’re not one of the two making that decision, how does that affect your life? Grown folks need to stay the hell out of the private affairs of others.
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 8th, 2012
12:42 pm
Just reading through some of the previous posts.
I myself have no problem with poligamy, but why on earth would any man or woman want multiple mother in laws?
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 8th, 2012
12:44 pm
Bro
But you made the assumption that the uber religious bible humpers are GROWN UP.
getalife
December 8th, 2012
12:44 pm
I care about this issue like I care about what happens to the failed gop party.
I don’t care.
Brosephus™
December 8th, 2012
12:47 pm
NoCom
Yeah, that’s an assumption I made. I’d probably be better served by not making such assumptions, but one would think that living for 40 years or more on Planet Earth would teach a person that life isn’t always going to give you everything you want or go exactly as you think it should.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
12:47 pm
“I myself have no problem with poligamy, but why on earth would any man or woman want multiple mother in laws?”
It gets worse if you think more deeply into ti. If we presume that polygamy becomes legal I think it’s fair to also presume that it would apply equally to both men and women. So think about if: if A marries B & C; and B marries D & E; and D marries A & F; and C marries F & G…
Need I go on!?
wayne
December 8th, 2012
12:49 pm
There is no such thing as same sex marriage. If you pour a bucket of red paint in another bucket of red paint you get red paint. Same sex partners can do with each other what they want. They can leave their assets to each other with a will or trust. they can share property, they can give each other authority to make medical decisions so what’s the big stink about. Next after this will be the dsire for communes to all get married to each other. People who believe this lifestyle is okay have that right. People like me who believe what the bible says don’t. God will have the final word and that is who i am concerned about pleasing!
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
12:53 pm
“There is no such thing as same sex marriage”
Wrong.
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
December 8th, 2012
12:53 pm
Don’t cast pearls before swine!
“Strait” swine?
Corey
December 8th, 2012
12:54 pm
@Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
12:24
Think about what you are saying. If sexuality is in our DNA then homosexuality and heterosexuality are in our DNA? We have been conditioned to use phrases like “gay lifestyle” and “practicing homosexual” when referring to gays, and in essence, we have reduced them to walking sex acts rather than whole human beings. This is a sad commentary on our much cherished freedoms and liberties as a society
St Simons - he-ne-ha
December 8th, 2012
12:54 pm
Equal Protection. The End. A freshman law student could get this.
On the other hand, only THIS SC bunch could f* it up.
I want to stop and thank most of the regular conservative bloggers on
this blog. You are as a group way out front on this one.
And while we love to bash em, let’s give a shout to Ga’s economic
development team. Our port down here in YOUR Golden Isles is now
the 3rd busiest port for auto import/export in the US, behind NJ and
the port of LA. Finally, something not to be laughed at. Good job.
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 8th, 2012
12:55 pm
My personal opinion of WHY the supremes took this issue on is because they think they can quash the issue by ruling against it while the right has a majority.
They know President Obama will have a majority sometime in the next 4 years and they are afraid if they don’t rule against it now at their level it will be passed sometime in the next 4 years.
IMO
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
12:57 pm
“Think about what you are saying. If sexuality is in our DNA then homosexuality and heterosexuality are in our DNA”
What *I* say? When did I ever say sexual orientation was in our DNA?
They BOTH suck
December 8th, 2012
12:58 pm
Doggone
The polygamy issue is one of the same weak excuses that the same blogger brings up each time Jay as an article pertaining to gay marriage.
Earlier this morning I said that skiing the slippery slopes would be tough today and the usual suspects like clockwork have not disappointed.
Outside of their own faith, which I don’t believe anyone is asking them to change, they know they have little substance to refute why gays should not be able to marry.
If they did, they would be posting it without the usual slippery slope deflections.
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 8th, 2012
12:58 pm
Doggone/GA
12:47 pm
You made my head hurt with that multiplier LOL
Just think of the divorce rate
DannyX
December 8th, 2012
12:58 pm
“There is no such thing as same sex marriage.”
Sure there is, in fact there are many Episcopal churches that perform the ceremony.
In a bit of irony gay couples can get married in an Episcopal church in states that don’t recognize gay marriage.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
12:59 pm
“They know President Obama will have a majority sometime in the next 4 years and they are afraid if they don’t rule against it now at their level it will be passed sometime in the next 4 years”
Not very well thought out. Even if they rule against it, that does not stop Congress from passing laws in the future to make that decision null and void. Nor does it stop a future SC from re-deciding the issue.
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 8th, 2012
1:00 pm
Hey cons
THINK GAY POLIGAMY
BOO
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 8th, 2012
1:01 pm
Dog
When have they ever thought ahead that far?
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
1:01 pm
“If they did, they would be posting it without the usual slippery slope deflections”
Of course! No argument there. There is NO LEGAL argument against same sex marriage. Or even polygamy, but it would be my opinion that polygamy would have to have some legal controls – precisely because of the legal complications that could arise.
Mr Right
December 8th, 2012
1:02 pm
It’s funny how people whine about Obama shoving Obamacare down their throats while they’re trying to shove their religious morals down the throats of others
Yea,the reverse is the same!
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
December 8th, 2012
1:03 pm
barfing frog:
“Women don’t have to register for selective service for the same reason
that men do have to register for selective service.”
I agree ……….. but it’s still not “equal protection under the law”.
UGADawg83
December 8th, 2012
1:05 pm
Folks, in the end it isn’t about popular opinion. It isn’t about what the Supreme Court rules as constitutional or unconstitutional. It isn’t about what Jay Bookman thinks or anyone on this blog thinks. In the end there is an ultimate truth. In the end there is an ultimate arbitrator of right and wrong. In the end it the only opinion that matters is God’s. God’s opinion is not changed just because it doesn’t square with what we want. Whether one is on the left or the right we should all be in pursuit of God’s ultimate truth.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
1:05 pm
“It’s funny how people whine about Obama shoving Obamacare down their throats while they’re trying to shove their religious morals down the throats of others”
And the funniest part of that is that it’s quite likely a LOT of those complaining have had “company provided healthcare” “shoved down their throats” with NO complaints at all!
DannyX
December 8th, 2012
1:06 pm
“There has never been one scientific study done, that can 100% say that homosexuality is something in your DNA”
I say we start our own study. Lets make January 8th “Change Your Sexual Orientation Day.”
On that day straight people will switch and become gay for just that one day. Don’t worry, you’ll just change back on the 9th, it’s that simple. Lets prove once and for all that being gay is a choice.
Now who gets dibs on Tom Brady?????
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
1:08 pm
“In the end it the only opinion that matters is God’s.”
When God deigns to give us his opinion on a legal matter, it better be Constitutional as well.
Christian Conservative
December 8th, 2012
1:10 pm
Its a simple question for the Supreme’s really. Do we as a nation want to give a perverse lifestyle the title of marriage or do we want our nation to continue to uphold traditional family values????
St Simons - he-ne-ha
December 8th, 2012
1:11 pm
the 1st 4 years – Hope
the 2nd 4 years – Cha-a-a-a-a-nge, baby.
Dig it.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
1:13 pm
“Do we as a nation want to give a perverse lifestyle the title of marriage or do we want our nation to continue to uphold traditional family values????”
What “perverse” lifestyle”? Which “perverse” lifestyle? I happen to think that people who hate dogs are perverse. Should we outlaw their “perverse” lifestyle of living without a pet dog?
DannyX
December 8th, 2012
1:14 pm
“Do we as a nation want to give a perverse lifestyle the title of marriage or do we want our nation to continue to uphold traditional family values????”
Divorce is not a traditional family value. Christian conservatives divorce like crazy. Jesus said God hates divorce.
Re-marriage in a church should be a no-no but it happens all the time.
Christian Conservative
December 8th, 2012
1:15 pm
Doggone/GA:
The perverse lifestyle that spreads diseases at a rapid rate. the perverse lifestyle that promotes child pornography and molestation. That perverse lifestyle….
RF
December 8th, 2012
1:16 pm
wayne: a lot of it is about spousal rights. If you have a “partner”, yes you can leave anything you want in a will. It’s then subject to estate taxes. A same-sex partner also can’t legally qualify for survivor benefits if your pension or insurance plans offer such. There are limits to what one can leave for a partner’s care, and surely any couple who stay together as partners in life should have those rights.
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 8th, 2012
1:16 pm
Christian Conservative
Nope the simple question is.
Is it legal to not allow a segment of the population to enjoy the rights that the other segment of the population NOW have.
Once upon a time blacks were not allowed to marry whites.
Time to get with reality.
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
December 8th, 2012
1:17 pm
the perverse lifestyle that promotes child pornography and molestation.
There’s your sign.
Christian Conservative
December 8th, 2012
1:18 pm
DannyX:
I agree with you about divorce. But it doesn’t happen in true Christian households unless there’s abuse normally. But this debate is about homosexual marriage. Not divorce. Its funny how homo marriage supporters like to change the subject when there’s no way they can defend their stance….
RF
December 8th, 2012
1:18 pm
“On that day straight people will switch and become gay for just that one day.”
Careful there, Danny. A lot of folks might not switch back, and then where would we be?
barking frog
December 8th, 2012
1:20 pm
0311
The Constitution is the law and the SCOTUS says it is constitutional equal protection.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
1:20 pm
“The perverse lifestyle that spreads diseases at a rapid rate.”
Like “traditional” marriage? STD’s are not limited to homosexual relationships.
” the perverse lifestyle that promotes child pornography and molestation. ”
Like “traditional” marriage? Child pornography is not limited to homosexuals.
Sounds good to me! Let’s do away with ALL marriages, since they promote the transmission of STD’s and the continuation of child pornography. I think you’re on to something!
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 8th, 2012
1:20 pm
Danny
You got someone in your sights? j/k
Christian Conservative
December 8th, 2012
1:20 pm
I’ve got one question for you homo marriage supporters. If your child came to you as a teen and expressed his or her desire to be homosexual would you be happy? If you say yes your either already in denial or delusional…
DannyX
December 8th, 2012
1:22 pm
” the perverse lifestyle that promotes child pornography and molestation. ”
Very funny. In fact a growing concern among conservative churches all across the south, and the subject of many sermons, is the problem of internet porn and how it has affected many, many of their members.
Gays get the blame for that too? They forcing you to ignore your wives and watch internet porn all night?
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
1:22 pm
“But it doesn’t happen in true Christian households unless there’s abuse normally”
So a deeply mismatched couple that makes the mistake of getting married is a couple who are not “true Christians”? Interesting concept.
Luckily for Christians, the decision of who is or is not a “true Christian” has not been given to YOU to decide.
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
December 8th, 2012
1:23 pm
Reprised from last night:
Gay women will marry your boyfriends.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0Be8LnuG3U
RF
December 8th, 2012
1:23 pm
Christian Conservative: OKAY, just so you know, I’m gay and raising two healthy, happy boys I took custody of from a heterosexual, drug addicted couple. They were neglected and probably abused, and you wouldn’t know it to look at them now. They’re smart, they’re successful in school, and have a much more mature and healthy outlook on life and their responsibilities as citizens and members of God’s community than a lot of kids from homes with “traditional family values.” They don’t think my lifestyle is “pervers”, nor do they hide behind some religious notion that they have the right to judge anyone who doesn’t think, live, or believe like they do. Ironically, their treatment of others is so Christ-like, you’d think surely they had to have had the finest of your examples of family raising them. They didn’t…..and they’re turning out to be better men than I ever could have hoped.
Christian Conservative
December 8th, 2012
1:23 pm
Doggone/GA:
Aids is almost completely a gay disease. Homosexuals transmit a variety of STD’s with their repulsive behavior. Look it up. http://www.cdc.gov/
A man who molests a boy is homosexual. I realize that most times the media and homo sympathizers try and spin this but its simple common sense….
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
1:25 pm
“If you say yes your either already in denial or delusional…”
But let’s not prejudge someone’s reactions now…that would be SO unChristian
Christian Conservative
December 8th, 2012
1:25 pm
RF:
That’s because they don’t understand your lifestyle. You can teach a child to think however you want. They look to adults for guidance….
Christian Conservative
December 8th, 2012
1:27 pm
DannyX:
I’ve never heard that. I guess to try and support your cause you just grasp straws right out of thin air. I use facts and statistics to back up my opinion.
RF
December 8th, 2012
1:27 pm
“A man who molests a boy is homosexual.”
NO, he’s a pedophile, a sexual abuser of children. Anyone who does that, gay or straight, is a criminal. Two grown men or two grown women in a relationship is homosexualtiy. Get it right pal.
DannyX
December 8th, 2012
1:27 pm
“But it doesn’t happen in true Christian households unless there’s abuse normally.”
Sorry Christian Conservative, Jesus gave no divorce waiver for abuse, only adultery. Since there are literally thousands of divorce cases a year there must be a lot of abusers and adulterers in your conservative churches. Yet you get hysterical over gay marriage?
Divorce is a CHOICE!
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
1:27 pm
“Aids is almost completely a gay disease”
Try telling that to all the men and women infected by their spouses in Africa. They’ll be really surprised to hear that.
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
December 8th, 2012
1:27 pm
I use facts and statistics to back up my opinion.
And which statistics are those?
Christian Conservative
December 8th, 2012
1:28 pm
DannyX:
By the way Danny. We are all sinners and should pray for forgiveness ever day. If someone has a porn problem that’s something that they must deal with on their own. Forcing homosexual marriage down out throats affects us all…..
They BOTH sucks
December 8th, 2012
1:29 pm
RF
A big thank you for your unselfish actions and willigness to make a difference in those kids lifes.
I’m sure they appreciate your love and are better for it.
Kudos, dude
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
1:29 pm
“That’s because they don’t understand your lifestyle”
And you DO? Now that was FUNNY.
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
December 8th, 2012
1:29 pm
barking frog:
Yes they did but that doesn’t make it so anymore than when the Supreme Court said slavery was Constitutional.
barking frog
December 8th, 2012
1:29 pm
Marriage cannot be a religious issue or the SCOTUS would have
to void them all due to separation of church and state.
RF
December 8th, 2012
1:29 pm
“They look to adults for guidance”
And examples. They see what we do, especially in our treatment of others, and will often adopt similar patterns. Sad that you would teach children to hate and legally bind other humans. Is that what Christ did? I must not have read that book in my Bible.
They BOTH suck
December 8th, 2012
1:30 pm
everyone watch out for the “slippery slopes”………. they wil be all around today
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
1:31 pm
“Forcing homosexual marriage down out throats affects us all…..”
and just exactly WHO is forcing YOU to get gay married?
Christian Conservative
December 8th, 2012
1:31 pm
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes:
http://www.cdc.gov/
http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=Is01B1
http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/homosexuality/ho0075.html
Christian Conservative
December 8th, 2012
1:32 pm
Doggone/GA:
Forcing someone to get married is not the issue. Redefining the definition of marriage is.
DannyX
December 8th, 2012
1:32 pm
“I guess to try and support your cause you just grasp straws right out of thin air.”
Christian Conservative, google “internet porn baptist church”. You will see 2,670,000 results dealing with the problem.
barking frog
December 8th, 2012
1:33 pm
Slavery was constitutional until Lincoln changed the Constitution
by Proclamation and war. The Congress followed suit with laws.
indigo
December 8th, 2012
1:34 pm
Fred – 12:27
I’m still waiting for you to provide hard scientific evidence for your religious beliefs.
And, if you think, even for one second that I’m afraid of you “hitting back hard”, think again sporty.
Provoke me enough and I’ll give you a whole new verbal meaning of what “hitting back hard” really is.
Take your best shot.
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 8th, 2012
1:35 pm
Christian Conservative
A man who molests a boy is homosexual. I realize that most times the media and homo sympathizers try and spin this but its simple common sense….
——————————————————–
Don’t call your delusional ideas common sense, because they are not
Brosephus™
December 8th, 2012
1:35 pm
Aids is almost completely a gay disease.
The only response I could come up with was…
……………………………………..________……………………
………………………………,.-‘”……………….“~.,………………
………………………..,.-”……………………………..“-.,…………
…………………….,/………………………………………..”:,……..
…………………,?………………………………………………\,…..
………………./…………………………………………………..,}….
……………../………………………………………………,:`^`..}….
……………/……………………………………………,:”………/…..
…………..?…..__…………………………………..:`………../…..
…………./__.(…..“~-,_…………………………,:`………./……..
………../(_….”~,_……..“~,_………………..,:`…….._/………..
……….{.._$;_……”=,_…….“-,_…….,.-~-,},.~”;/….}………..
………..((…..*~_…….”=-._……“;,,./`…./”…………../…………
…,,,___.\`~,……“~.,………………..`…..}…………../………….
…………(….`=-,,…….`……………………(……;_,,-”……………
…………/.`~,……`-………………………….\……/\……………….
………….\`~.*-,……………………………….|,./…..\,__………..
,,_……….}.>-._\……………………………..|…………..`=~-,….
…..`=~-,_\_……`\,……………………………\……………………
……………….`=~-,,.\,………………………….\…………………..
…………………………..`:,,………………………`\…………..__..
……………………………….`=-,……………….,%`>–==“…….
…………………………………._\……….._,-%…….`\……………
……………………………..,<`.._|_,-&“…………….`\…………..
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
1:36 pm
“Forcing someone to get married is not the issue. Redefining the definition of marriage is.”
And how, exactly, does that affect you and your marriage (if any)?
RF
December 8th, 2012
1:36 pm
“I’m sure they appreciate your love and are better for it.”
BOTH: I dont’ think my sixteen year old appreciates me much here lately. He’s got a truck, so I told him he had to get out and start putting in job applications today. He’s having a lesson in being a grownup, and he’s finding out the responsibility side of it sucks!!
Conservative (I just can’t seem to call you Christian for some reason): noone’s forcing anything down your throat. You don’t have to have gay weddings in your church or condone those unions in any way. This is only about the legal recognition of that commitment. It doesn’t involve your church in any way. In fact, if you think about it, if more gays got married, then there’d be less of them prowling around spreading their hateful ideology to unsuspecting Christians, who we all know could just neeeeever decide to accept that reality about themselves on their own, right?
They BOTH suck
December 8th, 2012
1:36 pm
CC
so if two gays get married, exactly how will that change your life and beliefs?
Please work to keep it in the context of gay marriage not the slippery slopes and deflections such as poligamy, slavery or whatever other excuses and deflections you and others have been presenting
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
December 8th, 2012
1:37 pm
Bait.
Cast.
STRIKE
Those are the same links you always post, Trev.
Did you think a new sock-puppet would disguise you?
DannyX
December 8th, 2012
1:37 pm
“Redefining the definition of marriage is.”
The Episcopal church has redefined marriage. US states and other countries too. In fact the more Catholic a country is the better chance they allow gay marriage.
Christian Conservative
December 8th, 2012
1:37 pm
RF:
Why would you bring Christ into the conversation? I honestly could care less who wants to be homosexual. I have a problem with the gubmint trying to force us to accept that it is somehow normal when its certainly not. By the way Jesus said man and woman shall be joined to form one. That sums up the definition of marriage for me…
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
1:37 pm
“Slavery was constitutional until Lincoln changed the Constitution by Proclamation and war”
He changed the laws, not the Constitution. That did not happen until a Constitutional amendment was passed. No President (or Congress) alone can change the Consitution.
They BOTH suck
December 8th, 2012
1:39 pm
RF
as he matures and looks back at the postive changes initiated and nurtured by your efforts, he will know
Christian Conservative
December 8th, 2012
1:40 pm
Brosephus™:
I gave you links with actual facts…. All I can do is shake my head and say bless your heart if your to stupid to realize living a homosexual lifestyle is dangerous….
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
1:40 pm
“In fact the more Catholic a country is the better chance they allow gay marriage”
“Mexico’s Supreme Court unanimously ruled that a law banning gay marriage in southern Oaxaca state is unconstitutional setting a legal precedence that could pave the way for national legalization”
Read more: http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/news/2012/12/06/mexican-court-rules-in-favor-same-sex-marriage/#ixzz2EUGoRkmI
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 8th, 2012
1:40 pm
Christian Conservative
Are you Catholic or Christian?
For many years the Catholic Church taught that the Christian churches were not HOLY enough.
That they didn’t believe in quite the same God.
Funny you fall back to sin, when according to the Catholic Church if you confess your sin to God all will be forgiven.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
1:41 pm
“I have a problem with the gubmint trying to force us to accept that it is somehow normal when its certainly not”
But “the government” is not doing that. There’s no legal requirement for YOU to recognize ANYthing as “normal”
barking frog
December 8th, 2012
1:43 pm
Doggone/GA
If Lincoln did not change the Constitution then the slaves were
freed illegally and would not have had freedom until the amendment
was ratified.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
1:43 pm
“All I can do is shake my head and say bless your heart if your to stupid to realize living a homosexual lifestyle is dangerous….”
I bet that a wife murdered by her husband, or a husband murdered by his wife…would thing that the heterosexual “lifestyle” is dangerouse too
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
1:45 pm
“If Lincoln did not change the Constitution then the slaves were freed illegally and would not have had freedom until the amendment was ratified”
Well, since they were only freed in the seceded states, which were in an illegal state under the Constitution already…those slaves were not freed “illegally”
Slave were not univerally freed you know, UNTIL the Constitutional amendment was passed.
Brosephus™
December 8th, 2012
1:47 pm
All I can do is shake my head and say bless your heart if your to stupid to realize living a homosexual lifestyle is dangerous….
Actual facts that AIDS is an almost completely gay disease???
http://aids.gov/hiv-aids-basics/hiv-aids-101/statistics/
Gay, Bisexual, and Other Men Who Have Sex with Men (MSM):
By risk group, gay, bisexual, and other MSM of all races remain the population most severely affected by HIV.
•MSM accounted for 61% of all new HIV infections in the U.S. in 2009, as well as nearly half (49%) of people living with HIV in 2008 (the most recent year national prevalence data is available).
•CDC estimates that MSM account for just 2% of the U.S. male population aged 13 and older, but accounted for more than 50% of all new HIV infections annually from 2006 to 2009. In 2010, MSM accounted for 61% of HIV diagnoses.
•In 2009, white MSM accounted for the largest number of annual new HIV infections of any group in the U.S. (11,400), followed closely by black MSM (10,800).
•Young, black MSM were the only risk group in the U.S. to experience statistically significant increases in new HIV infections from 2006–2009—from 4,400 new HIV infections in 2006 to 6,500 infections in 2009.
Heterosexuals and Injection Drug Users:
Heterosexuals and injection drug users also continue to be affected by HIV.
•Individuals infected through heterosexual contact accounted for 27% of estimated new HIV infections in 2009 and 28% of people living with HIV in 2008.
•As a group, women accounted for 23% of estimated new HIV infections in 2009 and 25% of those living with HIV in 2008.
•Injection drug users represented 9% of annual new HIV infections in 2009 and 17% of those living with HIV in 2008.
AIDS is almost a completely gay disease just as you are almost completey smart. Get better with googling facts and stay away from the propaganda sites.
RF
December 8th, 2012
1:47 pm
“I have a problem with the gubmint trying to force us to accept that it is somehow normal when its certainly not.”
They’re not saying it’s “normal” or “moral” or anything other than LEGAL, and thus allowed the rights afforded to married couples. They’re not endorsing it, they’re just deciding whether it is allowed legal recognition under the Constitution…you know, that document many like you always throw up as THE most important document in the “gubmint”?
“Why would you bring Christ into the conversation?”
Well, you call yourself Christian, so I thought it reasonable to share my understanding of him based on my life and reading the Bible quite a bit.
stands for decibels
December 8th, 2012
1:47 pm
(not) Christian Conservative wrote:
I’ve got one question for you homo marriage supporters. If your child came to you as a teen and expressed his or her desire to be homosexual would you be happy?
“Desire to be a homosexual?”
There’s so much stupid in that phrase, I’m not even sure where to go with it.
But suffice to say that as a parent, if my kid comes out as a same-sexer (extremely not likely, mind you, but you never know) at some point I’ll be totally supportive. As my kid already knows.
Anyway, you obviously need to get out more.
stands for decibels
December 8th, 2012
1:49 pm
Hey, you know what? I “desire to be heterosexual!” you think maybe our “Christian Conservative” can tell me how?
heh heh heh.
stands for decibels
December 8th, 2012
1:51 pm
Hey, Soothsayer (@10.58)–if you come back, I did weigh in on that tragic DJ pranking thing, here:
http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookman-blog/2012/12/07/take-five-mr-brubeck-youve-earned-it/?cp=all#comment-1169825
if’n you’re interested.
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 8th, 2012
1:52 pm
Bro
I read a while back that a very fast growing segment of society to show up as HIV positive were retired men.
It seems that when they get their retirement checks they visit prostitutes.
I guess those prostitutes got HIV from ONLY gay men. Who woulda thunk that?
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
December 8th, 2012
1:52 pm
Hey, you know what? I “desire to be heterosexual!” you think maybe our “Christian Conservative” can tell me how?
You can start here.
http://www.trevorgrantthomas.com/
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
1:52 pm
“Hey, you know what? I “desire to be heterosexual!” you think maybe our “Christian Conservative” can tell me how?”
I’m in an odd mood, and can’t even begin to know why this reminded me of this joke, but it did!
How many psychiatrists does it take to change a lightbulb?
Only 1…but the bulb has to really WANT to change
stands for decibels
December 8th, 2012
1:54 pm
stay away from the propaganda sites.
It’s been awhile since I’ve been to any of the really stupid homophobe sites–anyone got any especially larf-worthy links to share?
MiltonMan
December 8th, 2012
1:54 pm
Who give a crap what the child molesting Catholics think??? Hitler himself was a Catholic.
stands for decibels
December 8th, 2012
1:55 pm
Kammy, I don’t want to “convert” from Teh Ghey, I just desire to be hetero. I don’t know how to go about it. Can someone help? I might be doing it wrong!
stands for decibels
December 8th, 2012
1:56 pm
Milton, I guess it’s five o’clock somewhere…
getalife
December 8th, 2012
1:58 pm
You want to play the moral card?
Fine, address income inequality and stop slobbering on the wealthy.
Greed is a sin.
Brosephus™
December 8th, 2012
1:58 pm
There’s so much stupid in that phrase, I’m not even sure where to go with it.
http://www.bruguru.com/hopstoopid.jpg
Why not ferment it and sell the results for a profit?
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
December 8th, 2012
1:59 pm
dB
I’m sure that if you wade through TGT’s website, all your wishes will be fulfilled.
St Simons - he-ne-ha
December 8th, 2012
1:59 pm
“How many psychiatrists does it take to change a lightbulb?
Only 1…but the bulb has to really WANT to change”
heheh if mrsstsimons had a nickel for……….
i said earlier ‘the regular conservative bloggers here…’
the ‘Left Behind’ book club must’ve got a link to this article….
stands for decibels
December 8th, 2012
2:01 pm
Can we make “baiting the homophobe” an Olympic sport in time for the 2016 games?
Brosephus™
December 8th, 2012
2:01 pm
NoCom
I heard something similar to that. I couldn’t recall which group it was that put it out, but they referenced an increase in STDs with the increase in Viagra, Cialis, and other wood enabling drugs.
barking frog
December 8th, 2012
2:01 pm
Doggone/GA
The military was ordered to treat the slaves as freemen in the rebellious
states which was illegal under the Constitution and if the Constitution did
not apply to the CSA then Lincoln had no authority over the slaves in those
states so they were not free. Thus Lincoln had to change the Constitution
by Executive Order or none of the slaves would have been free until
amendment 13.
St Simons - he-ne-ha
December 8th, 2012
2:02 pm
good point, someone.
the cons who have worshipped mammon, greed and gluttony
for 30+ years wanna lecture me about sin.
It is to laugh.
They’re gonna get left behind, but not the way they think…
stands for decibels
December 8th, 2012
2:04 pm
Well, I have to run. Might be back later, udderwise–pleasant rest of the day, all. Except the homophobes, who can… well, I’m not allowed to say, and I don’t really *want* ‘em to die.
they’ll come around, most of ‘em, anyway.
getalife
December 8th, 2012
2:04 pm
I think we are in a psychiatrists bubble.
The world ends this month according to some people.
They call them preppers on cable.
DannyX
December 8th, 2012
2:05 pm
“It’s been awhile since I’ve been to any of the really stupid homophobe sites–anyone got any especially larf-worthy links to share?”
Its been years since I have been to one. After reading the Holy grail of homophobe sites, the rest would just not be any fun…
James Dobson, Focus on The Family, gay conversion therapy,
“Meanwhile, the boy’s father has to do his part. He needs to mirror and affirm his son’s maleness. He can play rough-and-tumble games with his son, in ways that are decidedly different from the games he would play with a little girl. He can help his son learn to throw and catch a ball. He can teach him to pound a square wooden peg into a square hole in a pegboard. He can even take his son with him into the shower, where the boy cannot help but notice that Dad has a ‘pen is’, just like his, only bigger.”
Classic!
Bravissimo
December 8th, 2012
2:06 pm
My employer(a large US company) already offers the same benefit package to unmarried couples as a married couple.So whats the advantage of being married? (speaking beneficially)
They BOTH suck
December 8th, 2012
2:07 pm
getalife
Maybe the AJC can get some of those on Bookman and Wingfield’s blogs who are having the hardest times with the election and do an ODS “preppers” epidose.
Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)
December 8th, 2012
2:10 pm
. . .it’ll be interesting to see who claims to be the spouse. Or will the word spouse be considered sexist? Or racist?
Y’know, when they make us get Gay Married some of us will still have a normal wife. Will they charge us with bigamy? Will we have to file two income tax returns, one for the normal family and one for the Gay Married family? If my regular wife files to divorce can I make my Gay husband pay the alimony for me? It’s stuff like this we need to worry about.
Anyhow, I’m headed out to look for a comfy recliner. I want one just like Archie Bunker’s. That sucker looks like you could go to sleep the second you got in it. Maybe I’ll look for a double recliner so old Ace can get up in it with me. Have a good Saturday everybody.
They BOTH suck
December 8th, 2012
2:11 pm
WOW
Kam called out TGT and he tucked tail and ran for the hills
too funny
Brosephus™
December 8th, 2012
2:11 pm
So whats the advantage of being married? (speaking beneficially)
Estate benefits upon death of the surviving partner. Look into the New York case that’s going before the SCOTUS.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windsor_v._United_States
In 2007, Edith “Edie” Windsor and Thea Spyer, residents of New York, married in Toronto, Ontario, after 40 years of romantic partnership.[1] Spyer died in 2009, at which time New York legally recognized same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions.[2][3] After Spyer’s death, Windsor was required to pay more than $363,000 in federal estate taxes on her inheritance. If federal law accorded their marriage the same status as different-sex marriages recognized by their state, she would have paid no taxes.[4][5] Besides Windsor other plaintiffs in the case are federal workers, who are not allowed to add their spouses to health care plans and other benefits.[6]
getalife
December 8th, 2012
2:12 pm
Both,
A new show called “seceders”,
Like Snoop said about Katt,
Get him some help man.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
2:12 pm
“Can we make “baiting the homophobe” an Olympic sport in time for the 2016 games”
Be fun, wouldn’t it…but I think it’s too one-sided to be a true sport
Tom Middleton
December 8th, 2012
2:14 pm
Well, if we’re going to be a “land of the free,” then we have to be about freedom first if that means all of us. And since “all of us” means us as individuals and together, then the right to fall in love and marry whom we will is basic to the cause.
When all is said and done and this issue fully resolved, it will be seen as a real yawner, unless, of course, Tony Perkins and Rick Santorum have yet to meet and fall in love themselves!
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
2:14 pm
“Thus Lincoln had to change the Constitution by Executive Order or none of the slaves would have been free until amendment 13.”
Nope, he didn’t change the Constitution. If you think he did…please quote the change in wording intiated by HIM. He freed the slaves under his powers as a President in time of war to weaken an enemy that had attacke the USA. The Consitition had nothing to do with it.
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 8th, 2012
2:14 pm
Bravissimo
Many states don’t allow someone of the same sex who has been in a same sex releationship to have the same rights as a spouse in a marriage.
If a same sex partner has a medical condition (end of life, etc) that partner cannot make the decision as a spouse could.
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
December 8th, 2012
2:15 pm
BOTH
A good thing too, ’cause according to the timetable he displayed next door at CT’s when she posted about this subject, his next diatribe would be multiple posts obsessing with anal sex.
Bravissimo
December 8th, 2012
2:19 pm
thanks for enlightening me.While I may not agree with same sex marraige in principle.I better understand the concerns of those involved.Seems the irs is always involved huh?
barking frog
December 8th, 2012
2:20 pm
Doggone/GA
Amendment 13 was the change in wording in the Constitution which
legalized the illegal Executive Order that he had used in fact to free
the slaves during the war.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
2:21 pm
“Seems the irs is always involved huh?”
And always has been. The first known reference to marriage is in a book of laws…not religion
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
2:22 pm
“Amendment 13 was the change in wording in the Constitution ”
but it was not written or passed by Lincoln. It was passed as required, by Congress and then ratification by the states.
barking frog
December 8th, 2012
2:28 pm
Doggone/GA
Exactly. Lincoln pushed for the amendment because without it
his wartime order to the Army would have had no effect and slavery
would still have existed.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
2:30 pm
“Exactly. Lincoln pushed for the amendment because without it his wartime order to the Army would have had no effect and slavery would still have existed”
Are you finally admitting that he did NOT “change the Constitution” as you claimed?
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
2:33 pm
I’m beginning to think we wore Christian Conservative down.
TM
December 8th, 2012
2:34 pm
The majority finds that Gay rights are not in the Constitution and Douglas was wrong when he found “penumbra rights of privacy”. Guess what happens next.
Christian Conservative
December 8th, 2012
2:34 pm
Brosephus™:
I understand how completely ignorant supporters of homosexual marriage are to facts. If you support a cause you certainly want it to be worthy.
http://www.cdc.gov/hiv/topics/msm/index.htm
Scrivener
December 8th, 2012
2:34 pm
Cheryl Ann says: “To all the Bible thumpers, especially the one who said man can’t overrule God: Ah, actually, we’ve done it throughout history. And thank goodness we have, or, for example, we’d still have slavery.
Nice of you the call people Bible thumpers. Putting down an entire group of people is always a great way to get people to engage in a discussion with you, I’m sure. Anyway, you and many others fail to realize that slavery in the times the Bible was written was not what we think of as slavery today. To quote a Biblical scholar, Christopher Seitz: “…on the Old Testament and slavery, about which there is considerable modern confusion. Debt service in the Old Testament is not chattel slavery, which would entail a breaking of Israel’s laws against stealing people. The term “slavery” is on most peoples’ ears a term having to do with a post-biblical practice, widely condemned by Christians and abolished by them by appeal to scripture—not by simply rejecting all laws from the Old Testament, including those dealing with sexual conduct, but by showing the practice in its modern guise to be against Israel’s laws and the law of Christ both.”
Christian Conservative
December 8th, 2012
2:36 pm
Brosephus™:
What concerns me is that many times when homosexuals live the repulsive lifestyle they do and get and STD they ant the gubmint to pay their medical bills. Of course when they become unable to work they get on medicaid and are completely cared for. Its sad really that someone would want to live this kind of life….
Christian Conservative
December 8th, 2012
2:37 pm
But I still haven’t received an answer from you homosexual marriage proponents. If your child comes out of the closet will you be happy for them?
barking frog
December 8th, 2012
2:38 pm
Doggone/GA
No. Are you saying that Lincoln did not change the Constitution
because he did not annotate the official document in his own hand
in the oval office? He changed the Constitution by proclamation and
war to free the slaves in fact and it was later amended to substantiate
his change.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
2:38 pm
“I understand how completely ignorant supporters of homosexual marriage are to facts”
Back at ‘cha
Christian Conservative
December 8th, 2012
2:39 pm
Doggone/GA:
No not wore down. Just have better things to do than argue with a bunch of people lacking facts and intellect…. I would probably have a more robust debate with a stop sign….
josef
December 8th, 2012
2:39 pm
Christian Conservative
December 8th, 2012
1:20 pm
I’ve got one question for you homo marriage supporters. If your child came to you as a teen and expressed his or her desire to be homosexual would you be happy? If you say yes your either already in denial or delusional…
___________
Like RF, Unmentionable and I were blessed to find ourselves the primary care givers to three children who are now grown up, responsible and reproducing heterosexual adults. No straight couple anywhere in the world could be prouder of their heirs than we are.
Now as for your question. We were asked more than once what we would say if one of ours came with that announcement. You’d be surprised how many were horrified at my (not his) immediate response that I’d say, “oh, hell, no, you’re not!”
Why? First, the purely selfish reason. If s/he were, there it would come. “Unh-hunh, see. They raise queer kids.” The second was, why would I want (note the word WANT) my child to have to deal with all the cr*ap that goes with the territory of being gay?
You use the phrase, would I be “happy.” Was I happy when they started bringing home belles and beaux to meet the folks? Well, sometimes yes, and sometimes no. But we knew one thing, whatever we had to say wasn’t going to make a lot of difference. They would make their own decisions, and, hopefully, we had raised them right by our own example. In our minds at all times was that one put in us by our own elders. “Our children learn more by watching us than by listening to us.”
As for religion. Ours is a mixed religious marriage. There, too, we saw to it that they were exposed to the tenants of each of our faiths and those of others. They would, and did, take their own paths there.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
2:40 pm
“What concerns me is that many times when homosexuals live the repulsive lifestyle they do and get and STD they ant the gubmint to pay their medical bills.”
And are you equally concerned about heterosexuals that live repulsive lifestyles and expect the government to pay their medical bills?
Brosephus™
December 8th, 2012
2:41 pm
I understand how completely ignorant supporters of homosexual marriage are to facts. If you support a cause you certainly want it to be worthy.
Dude, you just can’t quit can you??? Where did I ever say I supported anything??? I simply stated that I support people being able to live their private lives without nosey assed people like you injecting themselves where they should not be.
If you were not so single tracked minded and ignorant, you would see that I posted those same statistics earlier. Contrary to what the voices in your head are telling you, 61% infection rate does not mean or prove your “almost completely” claim.
I have been married for more than 12 years, and I don’t plan on leaving my wife before one of us stops breathing. Two men or two women getting married have absolutely NO impact on my wife or my children. Why can’t you understand that I don’t support gay marriage nearly to the point that I support religious people getting the hell out of the lives of those they are not living?
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
2:41 pm
“He changed the Constitution ”
I’m saying HE DID NOT CHANGE THE CONSTITUTION. If you like you can say he ignored it; he violated it; he misinterpreted the powers it gave him…or any number of other arguments. But he did NOT “change” it.
barking frog
December 8th, 2012
2:42 pm
christian conservative 2:37
Yes. How about you? want them to stay in the closet?
Brosephus™
December 8th, 2012
2:43 pm
If your child comes out of the closet will you be happy for them?
My child is my child and I’ll support them until I die. I don’t care if they turn out heterosexual or homosexual. My job, as a parent, is to try to protect the safety of my children as much as possible while teaching them everything I know in order for them to survive on their own. Anybody who would disown their child for any reason shouldn’t be a parent in the first place.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
2:43 pm
“Just have better things to do than argue with a bunch of people lacking facts and intellect”
We, on the other hand, get a lot of amusement out of pointing out the falacies of a bunch of people lacking facts and intellect.
weetamoe
December 8th, 2012
2:46 pm
As to Black support: what specifically are those increasing numbers of which you speak?
I do not pretend to know what Scalia’s opinion is or what his decision will be but I do know that he is much smarter and more principled than the angry person in the White House, and that all of your scorn and sneering will not do a thing to disturb his happiness or his place in the world.
It seems likely that the court will determine the matter to be one for the states to decide for the time being. Makes no difference to me.
barking frog
December 8th, 2012
2:46 pm
Doggone/GA
Then he did not free the slaves per your definition and history is wrong.
They BOTH suck
December 8th, 2012
2:46 pm
Conservative Christian
Why no mention of smoking and drinking related ailments that cost government and private insurance much more money each year than any stat you can bring up about gay this or gay that?
Good luck to you. May you get past the hate you have due to your closted feelings that do not mesh with your hate of essentially which is yourself.
take care
Brosephus™
December 8th, 2012
2:48 pm
Doggone
He claims people don’t have intellect and facts, yet he pulls out the same stats at 2:34 that I posted more than half an hour earlier to prove a point that I disproved when I posted those stats. First Mr. Conservative lost the election, and now he’s losing the debate. Gotta suck to be him today.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
2:49 pm
“Then he did not free the slaves per your definition and history is wrong”
He freed SOME of the slaves, and your knowledge of making changes to the Constitution is wrong
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 8th, 2012
2:50 pm
Josef/Bro
You guys responded to Christian Conservative in much kinder words than I was thinking.
I woulda gotten at least a temp. RED CARD
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
2:51 pm
“Gotta suck to be him today”
Yeah, no kidding! And wouldn’t it be a change if, just once, the homophobe crowd would come up with just ONE argument that was different? It’s getting boring refuting the same dumb arguments every time.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
2:54 pm
“You guys responded to Christian Conservative in much kinder words than I was thinking.”
I’m just waiting to see if he declares victory as he leaves damning us to hell for our “unchristian” attitudes
Cloudodust
December 8th, 2012
2:56 pm
Divorce lawyers will be the big winners here. Other than that, kids don’t belong in homosexual environment. I know love is grand and all that rot but kids need a Mom and a Dad, not a Mom and a Mom, etc…and too bad, I’m entitled to my opinion and calling me names or putting a label on my opinion doesn’t bother me.
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
2:56 pm
Stopped in to see if there was anything new from the anti-gay crowd.
There wasn’t.
AIDS
Polygamy
Cats and dogs
No one overrules God’s law
*yawn*
Don Abernethy
December 8th, 2012
2:57 pm
Why 42% of Georgians want to separate themselves from liberals? Liberals want gay marriage,legalized pot, abortions, no fiscal responsibilities,big big government,more sex on tv, and more liberal writers like Jay. Unfortunately the 42% are stuck with a liberal President and a liberal majority in the country and all that can be done is to try to tolerate the ignorant.
josef
December 8th, 2012
2:57 pm
BOTH
I’m being nice (so far) today…but it was. imeoiauo, a legitimate question.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
2:58 pm
“Other than that, kids don’t belong in homosexual environment”
And you know that from experience, do you?
josef
December 8th, 2012
2:58 pm
Cloudodust…
I doubt that our three and RF’s two would agree with that…
DebbieDoRight -- Minister Of Propaganda
December 8th, 2012
2:58 pm
Donovan: I see natural things in this world as the way it should be. I don’t see dogs having sex with cats and cats having dog babies. I don’t see lions sleeping with baboons or great white sharks playing with seals.
I guess you don’t wanna be around when, according to the bible, this will happen:
Isa 11:6 The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them.
Isa 11:7 And the cow and the bear shall feed; their young ones shall lie down together: and the lion shall eat straw like the ox.
Isa 11:8 And the sucking child shall play on the hole of the asp, and the weaned child shall put his hand on the cockatrice’ den.
Isa 11:9 They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain: for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the LORD, as the waters cover the sea
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
2:59 pm
“Liberals want gay marriage,legalized pot, abortions, no fiscal responsibilities,big big government,more sex on tv, and more liberal writers like Jay”
If you are not a liberal, you’re hardly an expert on what “they” want
barking frog
December 8th, 2012
2:59 pm
Doggone/GA
He freed SOME of the slaves
……………………………………………..
Since slavery was constitutional, exactly how did he do this?
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
3:00 pm
Some earlier posts were kind of interesting.
When SCOTUS was reviewing Obamacare, there was great hope by the cons that they would overturn it.
Now that SCOTUS is looking at perhaps overturning a law they like, they get their panties in a bunch and scream “judicial activism”
There is a word for that, but it escapes me at the moment.
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 8th, 2012
3:01 pm
DDR
I missed you yesterday LOL
But I see you are back with your words (from the Lord) of wisdom
josef
December 8th, 2012
3:01 pm
CHRISTIAN CONSERVATIVE
You got your answer. Next question.
barking frog
December 8th, 2012
3:02 pm
DebbieDo
Donovan wants humans to marry humans and has some
biological science to support that.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
3:02 pm
“Since slavery was constitutional, exactly how did he do this?”
Well, now that you mention it…he didn’t really. He DECLARED them free…and they freed themselves by taking him at his word.
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 8th, 2012
3:03 pm
LOOK
I think that word is lunacy
josef
December 8th, 2012
3:13 pm
CHRISTIAN CONSERVATIVE
Funny thing, got the following e-mail from one of ours last p.m.
“Guys,
Hopefully this will swing our way.”
and a link to an article on the cases before the SCOTUS.
Why funny, strange, not ha-ha? He’s by far and away the most conservative of the three, career military, married with two great kids, and a bit of, if you take the siblings’ word for it, a stick in the mud…
Yet, there he was, hoping for it to swing “our” way…
Wanna know why we’re such proud papas?
JamVet
December 8th, 2012
3:18 pm
Every modern man, in the back of his mind
Has a problem to face.
He wants security for the home in his head
All he needs is the seven rays.
And when you think about tomorrow
What goes through your mind?
Now don’t nobody get uptight
Do you think that we can put up
With this sh*t one more night
All you need is just six more rays
Take one beam of light
Prism acquire
Break the white light down
Seven rays appear
One – Red, the ruler seeking freedom
Two – Rose, the father seeking unity
Three – Orange, the thinker seeking understanding
Four – Yellow, the poet seeking harmony
Take the seven rays
Pure as fire
Focus anywhere
White light will appear
Five – Green, the scientist seeking truth
Six – Blue, the disciple seeking goodness
Seven – Indigo, the artist seeking beauty
This may sound like a bunch of trumped up words
But we keep no secrets today
The only hope for you is in your brothers, my friend
All you need is just six more rays
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e19jYE1YlBg
David
December 8th, 2012
3:20 pm
I wonder if Jay Bookman prides himself in being the self appoint @$$ clown of the AJC? The only point he has correct is that likely in the future gay marriage will be part of American culture. Where he is wrong yet again is attacking the court, or specific members of the court. I could easily say that there are other court members just waiting to get in on the action, but I won’t. The facts (at least how I see them) are that the Constitution is silent on marriage or even gay marriage. The idea that it is protected under the Constitution is an insult as well as a dangerous idea that the Constitution protects whatever is the whimsy of the moment. However it also does not outlaw it either, which comes back to the notion that we are a Government of the people who can create it’s own laws and rules, including how governments view marriage. So that being said it would be completely reasonable and correct for the Supreme court to uphold the California Law, while also upholding the Defense of Marriage Act. That being said it is up to We the People to push for changes to the laws we agree or disagree with.
They BOTH suck
December 8th, 2012
3:21 pm
josef
CC is probably listening to REO Speedwagon “I can’t fight this feeling any longer” at this very moment
I could be wrong, but that hate seems entrenched…. Almost seems like an inner fight to squash his own “demons” so to speak
josef
December 8th, 2012
3:21 pm
DDR
Looks like Christian Conservative isn’t interested in carrying on a discussion with one of “them” who doesn’t fit his cherished stereotype…you can have the boa back now…
Taylor R.
December 8th, 2012
3:22 pm
Those who want homosexual relationships to be redefined as marriages say that many aspects of their relationships are like marriage—having sexual play, living together, loving one another, etc.—and therefore they should be allowed to call their relationships marriages and should be recognized in the law as marriage partners. But this cannot be a proper legal matter until the empirical case has been made that a homosexual partnership and a marriage are indistinguishable. Otherwise, the appeal amounts to nothing more than a request that homosexual partners be allowed to call themselves what they want to call themselves regardless of the differences that exist in reality. The answer they want is for law making and adjudicating authorities to change the law based on the principle that reality is defined by the will and declarations of individuals, all of whom should be treated without discrimination..
But here, you see, is the sleight of hand. The appeal now being made for homosexual marriage rights is not an appeal for judges and lawmakers to reconsider past empirical judgments about similarities and differences between heterosexual and homosexual relationships. Rather, it is an appeal for judges and lawmakers to ignore those distinctions in order not to deny citizens the right to call things what they want to call them.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
3:23 pm
“I wonder if Jay Bookman prides himself in being the self appoint @$$ clown of the AJC?”
Nah…he ceded that title to you
josef
December 8th, 2012
3:24 pm
BOTH
My take on it, too. The spelunker enclosed storage space must be a bit crowded…
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
3:24 pm
“But this cannot be a proper legal matter until the empirical case has been made that a homosexual partnership and a marriage are indistinguishable”
Sure it can. Because it’s the same thing that makes a heterosexual partnership and a marriage indistinguishable.
indigo
December 8th, 2012
3:25 pm
I’ve never heard of anyone saying “when I was 14 I sat on my bed and flipped a coin. If it came up heads I would be straight. If it came up tails, I would be gay”.
And yet, we still have people, some in high places, talking about gays “choosing the gay lifestyle”.
I wonder why that is?
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
3:27 pm
“And yet, we still have people, some in high places, talking about gays “choosing the gay lifestyle”.”
And that can’t see that being gay is not the same thing as a “gay lifestyle” and on top of that they can’t even say WHICH “gay lifestyle” they don’t like
josef
December 8th, 2012
3:32 pm
Unmentionable and I were talking the other day about the whole matter of the prohibition of interracial marriage and how that relates here. He made an observation that may be of interest to the traditional conservatives. Under slavery, when the individual was not fully human by law, the state, of course, could not sanction marriages between chattel. Yet almost without fail, the religious institutions of the nation and the overwhelming majority of the owners permitted, sanctioned and encouraged these unions. Why? It made for a more stable society down in the quarters. It was in their own best interests. In that, it would seem, today’s so-called conservatives would be the first to support gay unions. Otherwise, the animals might revolt.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
3:34 pm
“In that, it would seem, today’s so-called conservatives would be the first to support gay unions. Otherwise, the animals might revolt”
There’s an analogy there, but there’s also a big difference. Owners of black slaves never had to worry that they would wake up one day and be black. Finding out they’re gay? That might happen.
josef
December 8th, 2012
3:38 pm
DOGGONE
Just being EOI here, but many was the slave owner who woke up one day to find out they were Black…and, do remember, the same percentage of legal free people of color as legal whites owned human chattel…
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
3:40 pm
“Just being EOI here, but many was the slave owner who woke up one day to find out they were Black…and, do remember, the same percentage of legal free people of color as legal whites owned human chattel”
I’m not talking about legalities. I’m talking about the color of their skin.
Brosephus™
December 8th, 2012
3:42 pm
NoCom: You guys responded to Christian Conservative in much kinder words than I was thinking.
Just consider that the Christian in me responding to him.
stands for decibels
December 8th, 2012
3:43 pm
. In that, it would seem, today’s so-called conservatives would be the first to support gay unions.
A conservative case for gay marriage? what the heck. I will link it again.
http://sullivanarchives.theatlantic.com/homosexuality.php
(This is the piece that turned my hetero mind around on the issue, forever. It was 1989 and I haven’t looked back. Figured if a conservative could support it, what kind of liberal was I for opposing it?)
JamVet
December 8th, 2012
3:44 pm
Almost seems like an inner fight to squash his own “demons” so to speak.
Brother both, between here and Galloway’s the whack factor is through the roof today. I’m talking unashamed rabid racism:
Gary
December 8th, 2012
9:56 am
You are exactly right its all about race. The non-white portion of our society has made such minimal evolutionary progress that we, your keepers are fed up. Your races are no better than your caged cousins in the zoo totally dependent on the keepers and handlers for their every need in life.
Ben
December 8th, 2012
12:43 pm
The man (Gary) has a point. The only work I see left to do is the eradication of the minority based political party and its members.
BOB
December 8th, 2012
1:12 pm
Because that half breed SOB encourages all that’s wrong with this country. He feels sorry for the poor and wants to make their lives better at the expense of the people who work.
benji
December 8th, 2012
1:58 pm
I wake up every morning hoping to read in the news that the SOB has been shot. Who knows how long it will take to get that smell out of the WHITE HOUSE.
I believe that these recent elections are starting to reveal rampant right wing desperation. They are proving themselves to be little more than irrational reactionaries refusing to let go of some romanticized, idealized past.
And I predict that even worse days are ahead for some of these small minded, impotently enraged conservatives…
Corey
December 8th, 2012
3:45 pm
@Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
12:57 pm
Where did your being heterosexual come from? Were you molested as a child by a heterosexual? Did your heterosexuality fall from the sky? DNA is more than physical attributes.
stands for decibels
December 8th, 2012
3:46 pm
And if you can’t be bothered to read the piece I linked, just read the last graf, which I’ll paste here:
“If these arguments sound socially conservative, that’s no accident. It’s one of the richest ironies of our society’s blind spot toward gays that essentially conservative social goals should have the appearance of being so radical. But gay marriage is not a radical step. It avoids the mess of domestic partnership; it is humane; it is conservative in the best sense of the word. It’s also about relationships. Given that gay relationships will always exist, what possible social goal is advanced by framing the law to encourage those relationships to be unfaithful, undeveloped, and insecure?”
Well? any marriage equality opponents want to answer THAT one?
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
3:47 pm
“Where did your being heterosexual come from? Were you molested as a child by a heterosexual? Did your heterosexuality fall from the sky? DNA is more than physical attributes”
Why am *I* being targeted for these DNA comments? I couldn’t care less if being gay or not-gay is in your DNA or not. *I* am the one who said it DOESN’T MATTER ONE BIT.
josef
December 8th, 2012
3:48 pm
DOGGONE
And, again, being EOI…color of the skin was not the issue at all. In Louisiana one whole class of people, numbering in the hundreds of thousands and many of them slave owners, went to bed one night one race, and woke up the next morning Black…
I’m not out to be argumentative here, please don’t misunderstand, but once we step back from the comfortable dichotomy of race as the determining factor and begin to look at slavery from the perspective of one human owning another (not just whites owning blacks), the layers one uncovers are a study in the complexities, contradictions and enigmas produced by the Peculiar Institution.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
3:50 pm
“And, again, being EOI…color of the skin was not the issue at all”
Josef, Josef…I’m not concerned a damn about what happened THEN. I’m trying to make the point that our so-called Caucasian “Christian” homophobes have no fear they will wake up one day with black skin. There does, however, appear to be an underlying fear that they MIGHT wake up one day and have to admit they are gay.
getalife
December 8th, 2012
3:51 pm
The majority decided they could judge others to discriminate and hate.
Allow me to retort:
Ezekiel 25:17. “The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the inequities of the selfish and the tyranny of evil men. Blessed is he who, in the name of charity and good will, shepherds the weak through the valley of the darkness. For he is truly his brother’s keeper and the finder of lost children. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who attempt to poison and destroy my brothers. And you will know I am the Lord when I lay my vengeance upon you.” Jules.
Boom.
Christian Conservative
December 8th, 2012
3:52 pm
Brosephus™:
And I’m saying let them live their private lives in private without having to redefine traditional values to try and support their abhorrent behavior….
They BOTH suck
December 8th, 2012
3:52 pm
Jam
Will check out Galloway. td and CC post there. Those two trip me out.
Their clowning ways are almost up there with Little Brain and Criberius at Wingfield’s. And of course some of our regulars here.
josef
December 8th, 2012
3:53 pm
SFD
“This is the piece that turned my hetero mind around on the issue, forever. It was 1989 and I haven’t looked back.”
With that, you have just joined JohnnyReb and President Obama in my pantheon of straight “heroes.” You acknowledge that you have evolved on this matter, have questioned your own “beliefs,” found them wanting and have evolved.
Deliver me from the, and, yes, I realize the weight of the word I’m using here, “liberals” who would have me believe they came out of the womb and lived a lifetime without those prejudices.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
3:55 pm
“And I’m saying let them live their private lives in private without having to redefine traditional values to try and support their abhorrent behavior”
But nobody is trying to do that. ALL that is needed is do redefine the LEGAL description of marriage. If you still prefer to stick to the “traditional” description…that is your right.
They BOTH suck
December 8th, 2012
3:56 pm
Get
Good one.
What do they call a qtr punder in France?
josef
December 8th, 2012
3:56 pm
DOGGONE
Okay, I got it. Ooops! However, I wasn’t thinking in terms of homophobes being particularly confined to white and Christian,,, sorry…we’re on the same road, just reading different signs…
They BOTH suck
December 8th, 2012
4:00 pm
CC
Have you been able to come up with a reasoned answer as to how your life will change if gays can marry and how that impacrs you to believe as you see fit and practice?
josef
December 8th, 2012
4:00 pm
Conservative Christian
My private life? Pretty much the same as yours, All you have is an idea of what goes on behind my closed doors. The difference is, you actually think about what goes on behind mine. I really don’t what goes on behind yours, Nor am I particularly interested. Why are you so taken with mine?
Brosephus™
December 8th, 2012
4:02 pm
And I’m saying let them live their private lives in private without having to redefine traditional values to try and support their abhorrent behavior….
Nope, you’re saying much more than that, even if you don’t want to acknowledge it.
Mick
December 8th, 2012
4:02 pm
Damn liberals
getalife
December 8th, 2012
4:02 pm
Both,
A royale with cheese.
They BOTH suck
December 8th, 2012
4:02 pm
Not only why, how it will change as well…..
Thanks
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
4:04 pm
“we’re on the same road, just reading different signs”
Yep, that was apparent!
They BOTH suck
December 8th, 2012
4:05 pm
Get
Don’t be a square daddio
The one liners in the movie imo are pretty damn comedic and great for a movie that wasn’t a comedy
RF
December 8th, 2012
4:05 pm
” If your child comes out of the closet will you be happy for them?”
Good lord, no!! But I’d be no more worried than if one of them came to me and said, “I’m getting married.” Either way, they’re heading down a path for life that is fraught with challenges, and I’d be cautious in support of either situation. BUT, that doesn’t change the fact that I would love them the same as I do now- unconditionally. They’re my children, but at some point they become independent individuals. All I can do is hope I’ve helped them become the best they can be without excuses. I love my children, sexual orientation aside. My love for them isn’t conditional upon their sexuality, and won’t be. I don’t know how people can call themselves loving parents and condemn a child for accepting and admitting the reality of who they really are. I would be guilt-riddled if I thought my child had denied the truth just to please me.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
4:08 pm
“I would be guilt-riddled if I thought my child had denied the truth just to please me”
Or worse, for fear of you
Brosephus™
December 8th, 2012
4:09 pm
dB
If you’re still here, did you get my Christmas to you present last night?
stands for decibels
December 8th, 2012
4:10 pm
aw shucks, josef. that was nice. but it’s no big thing; just doing what my heart tells me is right.
a friend of mine puts it best: “Gay marriage doesn’t threaten OUR marriage.” Blessedly, it’s no longer a lonely position to take; it is, per the polling Jay’s cited, very much in the mainstream nowadays.
td
December 8th, 2012
4:13 pm
DebbieDoRight — Minister Of Propaganda
December 8th, 2012
2:58 pm
Donovan: I see natural things in this world as the way it should be. I don’t see dogs having sex with cats and cats having dog babies. I don’t see lions sleeping with baboons or great white sharks playing with seals.
I guess you don’t wanna be around when, according to the bible, this will happen:
Isa 11:6 The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them.
Isa 11:7 And the cow and the bear shall feed; their young ones shall lie down together: and the lion shall eat straw like the ox.
Isa 11:8 And the sucking child shall play on the hole of the asp, and the weaned child shall put his hand on the cockatrice’ den.
Isa 11:9 They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain: for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the LORD, as the waters cover the sea
I see you took this totally out of context to make some perverted point.
Now if you add the first 6 verses then you will see that Jesus is the one that has to power to make all of the verses you mentioned happen and only he has that power. He will show the power when you, I and everyone else accepts his power and gives their heart and soul to his will.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
4:14 pm
“everyone else accepts his power and gives their heart and soul to his will.”
But it would certainly appear that not everyone has been given the same message as it concerns his will.
RF
December 8th, 2012
4:15 pm
“redefine traditional values to try and support their abhorrent behavior”
Who’s asking you to redefine those values? You’re allowed any values you choose, and the law doesn’t dictate them, nor should it. Allowing legal unions between same-sex partners is about allowing a legal definition of a marital union. The church can go right on preaching against it as a sinful lifestyle without any prohibition whatsoever. What you see as abhorrent behavior is your opinion, and you’re not going to be required to give that up. But you can’t expect that opinion to be legitimized by law.
josef
December 8th, 2012
4:15 pm
SFD
It may not be a big thing to you, and believe me, I’m happy to hear you say that, but for me it IS a big thing. I stand in awe of the sea change that came when good straight people stood up and quietly said “no, no more.”
Gay folks can take a lot of deserved pride in our triumph, but we would never be anywhere near where we are now if it weren’t for folks like you. It is time, and then some, that y’all receive the honor due.
Corbin Sharpe. I think, therefore I am...I think
December 8th, 2012
4:15 pm
This same sex BS gives me a headache. Marriage is a religious thing. If they would just do away with religions, the world would get along with each other much better. The bottom line though, is EQUALITY for ALL people. Understanding, tolerance, acceptance….then life is as it should be.
They BOTH suck
December 8th, 2012
4:16 pm
td
Who is “everyone”? Everyone as I see it doesn’t believe in your God and many who do have different intrepretations than you do.
stands for decibels
December 8th, 2012
4:16 pm
Bros, no I had not seen it, but I went back and… niiice.
tanx!
and I will share.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TPXWZxtDooY
josef
December 8th, 2012
4:18 pm
RF
Some people will never be able to grasp just how “traditional” mine and your home/family values are.
Citizens for Scientific Literacy in Government
December 8th, 2012
4:18 pm
The slow march of secular humanism will continue to deliver equality.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
4:19 pm
“but we would never be anywhere near where we are now if it weren’t for folks like you”
Josef, have I ever told you the story of my own revelation on tthe question of “race relations” that ultimately led me to my opinions on “gay relations” as well?
stands for decibels
December 8th, 2012
4:19 pm
I don’t know that it was quite such a sea change. As a not-that-secure hetero kid I’d made my share of stupid, homophobic “jokes” that made me wince as a young adult. I knew gay people who were wonderful friends, and at some point I just realized that I was clinging to some kind of stupid moral superiority in thinking that preserving marriage for heteros was necessary because of social stability.
I knew that argument was utter crap, by the time I read Sully’s piece. It was easy to change my mind at that point, I just needed a Thatcherite to show me the way I guess.
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
4:21 pm
And I’m saying let them live their private lives in private without having to redefine traditional values to try and support their abhorrent behavior….
Thought that pretty tolerant you until the 2nd to last word. Then you got all judgmental.
Why should any citizen who is not breaking the law have to live their life in some sort of seclusion due your personal discomfort?
They are not asking to do the nasty in the parking lot of the Georgia Dome.
You seem obsessed with the sexual aspect of it.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
4:21 pm
“Marriage is a religious thing”
No, it isn’t. It’s a “legal thing” and it would not be such an issue if religion hadn’t muscled in on it.
td
December 8th, 2012
4:22 pm
hey BOTH suck
December 8th, 2012
4:16 pm
td
Who is “everyone”? Everyone as I see it doesn’t believe in your God and many who do have different intrepretations than you do.
And when he returns you and those others will be the first ones bowing on your knees asking for forgiveness for the unbelief.
The other half of your brain.
December 8th, 2012
4:23 pm
However, it is also important to point out that however the nine justices decide, all final decisions on the matter will be made by the American people. And they have already made it clear that we will not be going backward on this issue, and that whatever the Supreme Court’s ruling this year, in time the right to marry will be extended to all Americans, gay or straight.
Does that mean that the final decision on Obamacare will be made by the people? What a stupid thing to say.
The Supreme courts decision will be the law of the land, like it or not. They will probably support it, but to say the people will decide is just plain dumb, the majority of people were against Obamacare and we still got it shoved down our throat.
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
4:23 pm
@td
You really should avoid weighing in here. The last time you did, I spanked you with the fact that your marriage would have been null and void here in GA a short 43 years ago.
Didn’t see you for a week after that.
stands for decibels
December 8th, 2012
4:23 pm
You seem obsessed with the sexual aspect of it.
Is there a marriage equality opponent anywhere who ISN’T?
They BOTH suck
December 8th, 2012
4:24 pm
td
and that is your right to believe it but except for your “faith” you have no proof
but thanks for playing
stands for decibels
December 8th, 2012
4:24 pm
anyhow, dinner prepwork awaits. Excellent late-afternoon, all.
Brosephus™
December 8th, 2012
4:25 pm
dB
I heard that earlier this week in a news segment on the radio. On Thursday, I heard it again on one of the XM Radio stations. I figured it had to be legit if XM played it. I can’t listen to it without fits of uncontrollable laughter though. It’s hard to overlay the rap thug image with someone who would know the lyrics to “Rudolph, the Red-Nosed Reindeer”.
They BOTH suck
December 8th, 2012
4:25 pm
look
not much different than his sparatic appearances since the election
he talk his much bigger than his walk
josef
December 8th, 2012
4:25 pm
DOGGONE
Please post it. I’m very interested in this aspect.
SFD
Funny thing about such, isn’t it? There I was in my youth a rebel against any and all things “traditional,” and what did I do? Grew up, got married and had kids, and “all that!” I strongly suspect there’s a closet Thatcherite in all of us!
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
4:26 pm
“Is there a marriage equality opponent anywhere who ISN’T?”
If they exist…they don’t come here
RF
December 8th, 2012
4:27 pm
“Some people will never be able to grasp just how “traditional” mine and your home/family values are”
Goodness, ain’t that the truth? Marriage equality opponents just can’t seem to get past the fact that there are an increasing number of healthy, happy heterosexual adults out there propagating and participating successfully in the American landscape that are the products of single and couple-led same-sex households. Just galls ‘em to no end, as Granny would have said.
Taylor R.
December 8th, 2012
4:30 pm
Doggone @ 3:24
I respectfully disagree.
The case argues for gay marriage. The word “gay” makes it distinguishable, when, at the same time, they argue that there is no difference between the two. But in reality there is.
The only thing that will change is that the law will mistakenly use the word “marriage” to refer to two different kinds of sexually intimate human relationships.
Absent infertility issues, heterosexual intercourse possesses the ability to produce offspring,. Homosexual sex does not—it can’t even be defined as intercourse (see William Jefferson Clinton)
If this happens, we will need to pay close attention to the consequences. Judges and public officials will then be required to recognize as a marriage any sexually Intimate bond between two people who want to call themselves married. Which means that there will no longer be any basis for distinguishing legally between a heterosexual union and a homosexual relationship. It will mean that when a mature mother and son, or father and daughter, or trio or quartet of partners come to the courts or to the marriage-license bureau to ask that their sexually active relationship be recognized as marriage, there will be no legal grounds of a non-arbitrary kind to reject the requests. Because if it is now arbitrary and unjust to recognize heterosexual marriage as something exclusive and different from homosexual relationships, then it will be arbitrary and unjust not to grant the request of other partners to call their sexually intimate and enduring relationships marriage..
But, of course, since legal declarations cannot turn reality into something it cannot become, a variety of conundrums, contradictions, and anomalies will inevitably arise. And the only way to resolve them will be to revise the law so it squares with, and does justice to, reality. If, that is, anyone is interested in crafting the law to do justice to reality.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
4:31 pm
“Please post it. I’m very interested in this aspect.”
It’s really not very exciting, even though it had a profound effect on me. I can’t even remember the name of the movie, but I say it many years ago and it concerned the evolution of a young man on the question of race (that’s how I remember it anyway.)
At one point in the movie, he was having dinner with his very conservative parents and their conservative guests and they were being snide in remarking about the race question and he said something like “Do you know what NAACP stands for?” And in response to the “of course we do” looks on their faces he said “Ni**ers Aren’t Always Colored People”
And just that one sentence led me to rethink the attitudes that were pretty normal in my family, and eventually to apply that change in attitude to gays as well. And BTW, my family weren’t and aren’t rabid racists or bigots. More what I call “casual bigots” in that they would not work to harm blacks or gays, but it just never occurs to them that how they talk about them is harmful.
josef
December 8th, 2012
4:32 pm
RF
“Bless their hearts. They’re as good as they know how to be.”
–Granny Jefferson
td
December 8th, 2012
4:32 pm
They BOTH suck
December 8th, 2012
4:24 pm
td
and that is your right to believe it but except for your “faith” you have no proof
but thanks for playing
And it is also my right to convince my legislators that my set of morals and values are what is in the best interest of this nation and should be the law of the land.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
4:33 pm
“The only thing that will change is that the law will mistakenly use the word “marriage” to refer to two different kinds of sexually intimate human relationships”
No, it won’t. There is no legal requirment to have any sort of “sexually intimate” relationships in a marriage. A legal marriage confers certain rights and privileges of a legal kind on the partners in that marriage. It doesn’t require them to have sex at all.
RF
December 8th, 2012
4:33 pm
“I strongly suspect there’s a closet Thatcherite in all of us!”
That’s okay as long as they don’t bring back those hairdos!! OIY!
I’ve noticed in my life teaching that some of the most rebellious youngsters become some of the most “normal”, middle-class folks as they grow up, especially once they have kids. If that doesn’t settle you down, nothing will, in my experience. I think most of us want something of the security and stability of the stereotypes.
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
4:34 pm
Gee Taylor – all that typing and it comes down to incest and polygamy.
Surprised you didn’t trot out the goat.
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
4:35 pm
” It doesn’t require them to have sex at all.”
Not sure if and where this still exists, but not getting any used to be grounds for divorce.
I think the legal term was “alienation of affection”.
td
December 8th, 2012
4:36 pm
They BOTH suck
December 8th, 2012
4:25 pm
look
not much different than his sparatic appearances since the election
he talk his much bigger than his walk
And while you are on these boards telling everyone what the rules we play by should be, I am out actually convincing my legislators and the Governor that people like you do not represent what is in the best interest of this state and to not listen to your opinions.
RF
December 8th, 2012
4:37 pm
“More what I call “casual bigots” in that they would not work to harm blacks or gays, but it just never occurs to them that how they talk about them is harmful.”
That about sums up my experience with much of my family and many friends who identify themselves as “conservatives.” They think it’s okay to make ugly, negative jokes about someone’s race and quote the Bible in the same conversation. They don’t realize how their words spread out into the world and actually hurt.
They BOTH suck
December 8th, 2012
4:37 pm
td
And did I say it wasn’t or you just back to being a dumb a$$ as usual?
I have no issue with whatever religion you are or not, however I did and will quesion when you lump “everyone” in as if they are bound to your faith or even care about it
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
4:38 pm
“Not sure if and where this still exists, but not getting any used to be grounds for divorce.”
It still can be used. But it’s still not a legal requirement for marriage. If both partners are Ok with a no-sex union, they can get married and the law won’t refuse them
td
December 8th, 2012
4:39 pm
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
4:33 pm
“The only thing that will change is that the law will mistakenly use the word “marriage” to refer to two different kinds of sexually intimate human relationships”
No, it won’t. There is no legal requirment to have any sort of “sexually intimate” relationships in a marriage. A legal marriage confers certain rights and privileges of a legal kind on the partners in that marriage. It doesn’t require them to have sex at all.
If that is true then why can a person get a annulment of a marriage due to it not being consummated and get a divorce on the ground of withholding sexual relations?
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
4:40 pm
BTW, forgot this “I think the legal term was “alienation of affection”.”
That is not the argument used for a no-sex marriage. That is generally the sort of argument used for an unfaithful partner.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
4:41 pm
“I am out actually convincing my legislators and the Governor that people like you do not represent what is in the best interest of this state and to not listen to your opinions”
That’s Ok. We’re doing the same.
Taylor R.
December 8th, 2012
4:41 pm
“A legal marriage confers certain rights and privileges of a legal kind on the partners in that marriage.”
Legal kind.
BINGO!
Those who now argue that same-sex couples should be included, as a matter of civil right, within the legal definition of marriage are appealing to the constitutional principles of equal protection and equal treatment. But this is entirely inappropriate for making the case for same-sex “marriage.” To argue that the Constitution guarantees equal treatment to all citizens, both men and women, does not say anything about what constitutes marriage, or a family, or a business enterprise, or a university, or a friendship. An appeal for equal treatment would certainly not lead a court to require that a small business enterprise be called a marriage just because two business partners prefer to think of their business that way. Nor would equal treatment of citizens before the law require a court to conclude that those of us who pray before the start of auto races should be allowed to redefine our auto clubs as churches..
The simple fact is that the civil right of equal treatment cannot constitute social reality by declaration. Civil rights protections function simply to assure every citizen equal treatment under the law depending on what the material dispute in law is all about. Law that is just must begin by properly recognizing and distinguishing identities and differences in reality in order to be able to give each its legal due..
One kind of social relationship that government recognizes, for example, is a free contract by which two or more parties agree to carry out a transaction or engage in some kind of activity. Let’s say you contract with me to paint your house. The law of contract does not define ahead of time what might be contracted; it simply clarifies the legal obligations of the contracting parties and the consequences if the contract is broken. Governments and lawyers and the law do not create the people, the house, the paint, and my desire to paint your house for a price that you want to pay. The point is that even in contract law, the law plays only a limited role in the relationship. The law encompasses the relationship only in a legal way.
Brosephus™
December 8th, 2012
4:42 pm
And it is also my right to convince my legislators that my set of morals and values are what is in the best interest of this nation and should be the law of the land.
You also have the right to convince your legislators that the moon is made of dried sour mash and that mining it will be in the best interest of the nation and should be the law of the land. Either example you choose (yours or mine) does not in and of itself indicate that your thinking is factually correct and should be applied to people who don’t think as you do.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
4:42 pm
“If that is true then why can a person get a annulment of a marriage due to it not being consummated and get a divorce on the ground of withholding sexual relations?”
Grounds for a divorce are not requirements for marriage. There’s no legal requirement that you be faithful to your spouse, but being UNfaithful can be grounds for a divorce.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
4:44 pm
“Civil rights protections function simply to assure every citizen equal treatment under the law ”
that’s right…and it’s high time the law recognized that heterosexual marriage is not the only kind of marriage that needs LEGAL protections
USA Patriot
December 8th, 2012
4:44 pm
Can’t take credit for this, it was posted by Mr. Right at 9:38 this morning, but kinda brings a different perspective on the issue….”Less and less straits want to get married and the queers seem to think it’s important to get married, crazy world!”
Rock on! & Merry Christmas!!
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
4:44 pm
If I were a hateful, emotionally stunted kind of person td, I’d start lobbying the legislature to ban marriages between caucasians and asians.
And I bet I could get quite a few conservative rednecks to sign the petition.
But I am not and I wouldn’t cuz I could not give a rat’s derriere about with whom you decide you want to have carnal relations.
RF
December 8th, 2012
4:45 pm
“Which means that there will no longer be any basis for distinguishing legally between a heterosexual union and a homosexual relationship”
If that homosexual “relationship” becomes a legal union, then you’re right. If it remains a “relationship” without any request for, or intention of becoming a legal union, then you’re also right. But the fact is, a legal union, aka marriage, is just what it is, a legal union, that shouldn’t have to be based on the gender of either person in the union. That’s the truest, unbiased definition of it.
Now as to the other situation you mentioned, equality of marriage does not suddenly allow polygamy, incest, or any other legally prohibited activity. A legal marriage isn’t dependent upon the sexual relationship, nor should it be. According to folks who emphasize abstinence until marriage, which is a popular teaching in many churches in this world, sex shouldn’t happen until afterwards anyway.
Taylor R.
December 8th, 2012
4:46 pm
All things being equal…@ 4:34
“Gee Taylor – all that typing and it comes down to incest and polygamy.”
All things being equal, it should and will. Anything short of that would warrant discrimination.
td
December 8th, 2012
4:46 pm
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
4:41 pm
I doubt very seriously if you know any Republican legislators in this state much less interact with them on a regular basis. I had dinner with mine last night at our yearly county Republican party Christmas party.
josef
December 8th, 2012
4:47 pm
DOGGONE
Excellent story. It is a part of that evolutionary process. It is confronting what you call, and I agree with the applicability of the term, “soft bigotry.” That is perhaps the most pernicious. I think a lot about my own upbringing. My grandfather was always one for analyzing it and questioning it at every turn. My grandmother, though, never saw any reason to. She made a point of whether or not one was “our people,” and that was not defined in her world view in terms of race, creed, color or (except for Yankees) national origin. I remember when as a child I asked her just who “our people” were. Her answer was. “you know.” Well, as much as I would like to say, no, I didn’t. I did.
She would have slapped me silly had I ever disrespected in any public shape, form or fashion, those who were not “our people,” I also knew that as far as she was concerned there was a line that separated “us” from “them.” Granddaddy accepted the reality, but questioned its morality and ethics. She didn’t.
jimmie
December 8th, 2012
4:47 pm
The Gay population also has a right to self-exterminate..get on with it
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
4:49 pm
td,
Liberals taking the bible out of context??? Say it aint so. The last time we had this discussion on homosexuality and what the bible says about it here some fella with the handle socrates took the libs to school whenever they took the bible out of context. I just got my popcorn and watched.
RF
December 8th, 2012
4:50 pm
“The point is that even in contract law, the law plays only a limited role in the relationship. The law encompasses the relationship only in a legal way.”
EXACTLY! So why then should law define and restrict marriage? Your premise could be easily applied to what the SCOTUS is about to consider. If marriage is a “contract”, then what is the actual limit of the governments ability to set conditions on that contract?
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
4:50 pm
“There’s no legal requirement that you be faithful to your spouse”
Adultery is a misdemeanor in GA
TITLE 16. CRIMES AND OFFENSES
CHAPTER 6. SEXUAL OFFENSES
O.C.G.A. § 16-6-19 (2008)
§ 16-6-19. Adultery
td
December 8th, 2012
4:50 pm
Look before I leap…
December 8th, 2012
4:44 pm
If I were a hateful, emotionally stunted kind of person td, I’d start lobbying the legislature to ban marriages between caucasians and asians.
And I bet I could get quite a few conservative rednecks to sign the petition.
Well my Republican legislators, the Governor, Lt. Governor, Attorney General and Superintendent of Education thinks my Asian wife is one of the most conservative, kindness people in this state. So go ahead and lobby them all you want. Please let me know when because I would love to come and hear the conversation.
josef
December 8th, 2012
4:50 pm
td
Were your county’s Republican Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, and non Believers invited to the Christmas Party…
getalife
December 8th, 2012
4:51 pm
jim,
Hate much?
You must be a con.
They BOTH suck
December 8th, 2012
4:52 pm
td
that tid bit of info you gave Doggone and $1 will get you a copy of the AJC
RF
December 8th, 2012
4:55 pm
“Well my Republican legislators, the Governor, Lt. Governor, Attorney General and Superintendent of Education thinks my Asian wife is one of the most conservative, kindness people in this state”
OH geez, now td’s married to Michelle Rhee…
barking frog
December 8th, 2012
4:55 pm
For a long time marriage conveyed certain tax benefits
not extended to single people and now the tax code contains
a marriage penalty. All benefits should be extended to
individuals without regard to their family. The existence
of a contract should not bind others to that contract and
marriage should not provide inherent benefit
outside that contract.
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
4:56 pm
“If I were a hateful, emotionally stunted kind of person td, I’d start lobbying the legislature to ban marriages between caucasians and asians.
And I bet I could get quite a few conservative rednecks to sign the petition”
Its always amusing to watch someone who is not a hateful, emotionally stunted kind of person turn around and use a bigoted term like rednecks.
josef
December 8th, 2012
4:56 pm
td
Why, you ole name dropper you! I bet we’ve met…
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
4:56 pm
As usual td, you miss the point.
Between the blinders you wear and the immense glare of your hypocrisy, I am surprised you manage to hit the commode during your morning pee.
josef
December 8th, 2012
4:58 pm
THULSA
“Its always amusing to watch someone who is not a hateful, emotionally stunted kind of person turn around and use a bigoted term like rednecks.”
Your mouth to G-d’s ears.
They BOTH suck
December 8th, 2012
4:58 pm
next thing you know td will be telling us how he had tickets to the Romney inauguration….
He was going to win big, right td?
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
4:59 pm
“I doubt very seriously if you know any Republican legislators in this state much less interact with them on a regular basis”
The seriousness of your doubt is not proof that you are correct. And there are other ways of petitioning legislators besides having dinner with them
RF
December 8th, 2012
4:59 pm
Look, let’s face facts here folks. The opponents are such because they’re either grossed out about the sexual relations for homosexual men, or don’t see how they could happen for lesbians. At the heart of all this legal mumbo-jumbo they want to throw at us along with a little dollop of GAWD is the simple fact that they’re just plain out grossed out (or perhaps secretly and guiltily attracted) by what they envision the intercourse to be.
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
4:59 pm
Most of the rednecks I know Thulsa, wear that term as a badge of honor.
Jeff Foxworthy, a native son of GA, has made a fortune using that term.
However, if you found it offensive, then I offer my sincere apologies.
td
December 8th, 2012
4:59 pm
josef
December 8th, 2012
4:50 pm
td
Were your county’s Republican Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, and non Believers invited to the Christmas Party…
All members of the Republican party in my county were invited. My wife is Buddist and has no problem with going to a Christmas party. She is not as sensitive to such matters so I guess that is what makes her a conservative and not a wimpy lib.
getalife
December 8th, 2012
4:59 pm
td,
Well, laddy freaking da.
Have you ever lived in a van down by the river?
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
5:00 pm
“that tid bit of info you gave Doggone and $1 will get you a copy of the AJC”
Holy cow. The newspaper stand copy is up to a buck now. I thought it was only fiddy cents a year or 2 ago. Glad my cheapskate self just reads it online now.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
5:00 pm
“If marriage is a “contract”, then what is the actual limit of the governments ability to set conditions on that contract?”
Except there’s no “if” about it. Marriage IS a legal contract.
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
5:02 pm
well the opposition argument seems to boil down to:
Gay sex is ooogy.
-or-
Creflo Dollar/Pat Robterson/Billy Graham tell me gay sex is ooogy (But I’d like to hear more)
They BOTH suck
December 8th, 2012
5:02 pm
td
Did your friends Rove and Morris make it to the dinner? Seems they are not getting booked on Fox lately, thought they might have dropped in to give you some of their latest predictions….
Brosephus™
December 8th, 2012
5:04 pm
And there are other ways of petitioning legislators besides having dinner with them
Doggone
That’s true for the typical legislators. Georgia’s legislators have shown, over time, to have an affinity for the three free G’s… Girls, Golf, and Grub.
td
December 8th, 2012
5:04 pm
josef
December 8th, 2012
4:56 pm
td
Why, you ole name dropper you! I bet we’ve met…
Maybe. Only name dropped to show the readers the BS some of the other posters are making when they know they do not even know a legislator much less have done the necessary hard work to be in a position to be able to influence them.
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
5:06 pm
Look before I leap,
Tone is everything. And your tone just came off as hateful in the context in which you used it. If you didn’t mean it to be that way then no apology is necessary. If your tone was intended that way then I’m sure rednecks everywhere appreciate the sincere apology. And no. I’m not offended. I just ask people for consistency and one thing that I constantly see on here is people labeling conservatives as racist and bigoted and then turning around and calling them rednecks. Just seems kinda hypocritical is all. Nevertheless no apology to me is necessary but the gesture was appreciated nonetheless.
td
December 8th, 2012
5:07 pm
They BOTH suck
December 8th, 2012
5:02 pm
Have never meet Rove or Morris.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
5:07 pm
“Adultery is a misdemeanor in GA”
and when was the last time you heard of someone being arrested for the misdemeanor? And where on the marriage license are you REQUIRED to agree to be faithful in order to GET married?
It might be on the books, but it’s still not a legal requirement to GET married
JamVet
December 8th, 2012
5:08 pm
both, to your point earlier,
td is very comfortable with the racists and the posts I listed above.
He proved it over there earlier today.
He represents the worst kind of religious nuts in this country – those that came from the Klan-based, southern white, protestant churches…
They BOTH suck
December 8th, 2012
5:08 pm
td
is a mover and shaker now
faux lobbyist if you will
he is crafting legislation as we blog
barking frog
December 8th, 2012
5:08 pm
Marriage is being avoided by many because of legal
entanglements not specified in the contract and varying
laws that are different in states other than the marriage
state especially between childless couples.
getalife
December 8th, 2012
5:08 pm
Having dinner with angry cons whining about losing twice is not my cup of tea.
I would toss a turd in their punch bowl, if you will.
josef
December 8th, 2012
5:09 pm
RF
Yep. And you’re right…that hair! Oy…but ain’t nothin quite like having kids of your own to bring you down a peg or two…and, then, ain’t nothin quite like having kids to teach you just what is of value in the great scheme of things and what is not…a humbling and uplifting experience at the same time…
As one of my tribes puts it, L’chaim!
LOOK
It’s all a matter of context…are you pleased when someone calls you a Redneck?
TD
And only the Republicans were invited? What about that big tent? Jokes aside, I’m not a Christian myself, but I have no problem whatsoever with calling it a Christmas party and I have no problem with going…and I don’t hold those who do in the highest regard…respect and tolerance is a two-way street.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
5:09 pm
“Well my Republican legislators, the Governor, Lt. Governor, Attorney General and Superintendent of Education thinks my Asian wife is one of the most conservative, kindness people in this state”
Whoooooosh! The sound of the point as it whizzes by
RF
December 8th, 2012
5:10 pm
“when they know they do not even know a legislator much less have done the necessary hard work to be in a position to be able to influence them.”
Oh I’ve met mine quite a few times, e-mail often, and I DO have an influence- it’s called a VOTE, and should be more important than schmoozing him at a cocktail party. Considering the predictions you guys had on the last election, I’d say the vote is working out to be a better deal for you buck by the way. Billions didn’t buy it, and there was a LOT of schmoozing going on along the way.
Brosephus™
December 8th, 2012
5:10 pm
getalife
You’d never make it out of the dinner in one piece. The alert would go up faster than you could blink your eyes….
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cjn0Yw0mxuk
josef
December 8th, 2012
5:11 pm
td
“..much less have done the necessary hard work to be in a position to be able to influence them.”
Is DNA hard work?
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
5:12 pm
“That’s true for the typical legislators. Georgia’s legislators have shown, over time, to have an affinity for the three free G’s… Girls, Golf, and Grub”
No kidding!
barking frog
December 8th, 2012
5:12 pm
td 5:04
Everything I have accomplished has been through politics. -Jimmy Hoffa(paraphrase)
getalife
December 8th, 2012
5:13 pm
Bro,
I would stand up and say four more years!
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
5:15 pm
@Doggone
This is what you said:
“There’s no legal requirement that you be faithful to your spouse,…”
I simply said that GA has a statute on the books that refutes that comment.
I made no case for whether or not it is enforced or even if it should be.
td
December 8th, 2012
5:15 pm
They BOTH suck
December 8th, 2012
5:08 pm
td
is a mover and shaker now
faux lobbyist if you will
he is crafting legislation as we blog
Do not have to do anything on this subject because the state of Georgia already has overwhelmingly voted and placed in our Constitution that marriage is only between one man and one woman.
Brosephus™
December 8th, 2012
5:16 pm
getalife
THAT, I would expect from you. I would probably go myself just to videotape it.
getalife
December 8th, 2012
5:17 pm
td,
The SC might rule that is unconstitutional.
Then you look like silly bigots.
Taylor R.
December 8th, 2012
5:17 pm
barking frog @ 4:55
You are absolutely correct about the tax code.
And with that, I am off to a holiday get-together.
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
5:18 pm
RF
December 8th, 2012
4:59 pm
Look, let’s face facts here folks. The opponents are such because they’re either grossed out about the sexual relations for homosexual men, or don’t see how they could happen for lesbians
RF,
Um. Nope. That is not a “fact”. That is just your supposition and conjecture of what you believe to be a fact based upon your own prejudices and biases of what you think others believe and why they believe it.
Most anti-gay marriage opponents don’t sit there and have a discussion over the kinds of oogey, nasty sex that they imagine takes place in a gay couples bed. They probably donn’t care.
Their opposition if you care to actually explore it tends to stem from their belief that its an affront to God and that should we endorse the homosexual lifestyle including marriage that we risk losing God’s blessing. Now you can argue against why they believe that and whether or not its biblical all day long. But to pass off opposition to gay marriage as just some people who are all oogey about gay sex is a cheap and simpleton copout of what the real issue is.
They BOTH suck
December 8th, 2012
5:18 pm
get
SC doesn’t have to do anything in regards to the second part
already going strong in regards to this issue
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
5:19 pm
“I simply said that GA has a statute on the books that refutes that comment.
I made no case for whether or not it is enforced or even if it should be”
And you didn’t show where it was a requirement to GET married either.
td
December 8th, 2012
5:20 pm
josef
December 8th, 2012
5:09 pm
TD
And only the Republicans were invited? What about that big tent? Jokes aside, I’m not a Christian myself, but I have no problem whatsoever with calling it a Christmas party and I have no problem with going…and I don’t hold those who do in the highest regard…respect and tolerance is a two-way street.
It was a local Republican party event so I would expect that only local Republican party members were invited. Being a Republican I would not expect an invitation to a local Democratic party event.
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
5:20 pm
@josef
I have many people in my family tree who self-refer as rednecks.
Even a few as hillbillies – and they are adamant there is a difference.
I don’t use the phrase as a term of denigration, but since tone is everything and it can easily be misconstrued, I’ll eschew the term going forward.
josef
December 8th, 2012
5:21 pm
td
When was that vote? How have attitudes changed since then? While I don’t think my view would “pass” today, I am certain it wouldn’t go down by the same margin. Why? Just listening to a lot of the same folks you run with talking. And no, they’re not just “saying that” because they know I’m gay. A lot of times they don’t know that. After all, our chit chat is most often about how proud we are of our kids, where we’re planning to go on vacation, and how the retirement plans are going.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
5:22 pm
“Do not have to do anything on this subject because the state of Georgia already has overwhelmingly voted and placed in our Constitution that marriage is only between one man and one woman”
And that requirement can be nullified or changed
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
5:22 pm
“And you didn’t show where it was a requirement to GET married either.”
Doggone: You need to drop it son. It was never my argument that it was.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 8th, 2012
5:24 pm
Most anti-gay marriage opponents don’t sit there and have a discussion over the kinds of oogey, nasty sex that they imagine takes place in a gay couples bed. They probably donn’t care.
Their opposition if you care to actually explore it tends to stem from their belief that its an affront to God and that should we endorse the homosexual lifestyle including marriage that we risk losing God’s blessing
How the heck would you know? Rather presumptive to think you know what “most people”, most opponents, etc. talk about unless you have some evidence other than just pulling it out of your arse.
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
5:24 pm
Well since ya’ll are namedropping politicans I guess I’ll have to one up you all and show what a bigwig I am by mentioning my relationship with Alabama’s ex governor George Wallace. I had my picture taken with him. Along with the rest of my cub scout group. And we spent 2-3 minutes with his old ass which at the time seemed like a damn lifetime so I’m gonna claim that I knew him a lifetime since it seems that way when you’re 8. Can’t remember if we were cub scouts or weeblos though.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
5:25 pm
“Doggone: You need to drop it son. It was never my argument that it was”
No, it was mine. There is no legal requirement to be faithful in order to get married.
josef
December 8th, 2012
5:25 pm
TD
@ 5:20
You’ve got a point there!
LOOK
I’m not a Redneck, but I am half Hilbilly (and half Swamp Rat!). And yes, there is a big difference. But I’m kinda honored whenever somebody calls me a Redneck…I take it as a compliment that I ain’t got above my raisin..
td
December 8th, 2012
5:26 pm
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
5:18 pm
You are so right. There really is nothing stopping two gay people right now into going to an attorneys office and entering into a legal contract to give them all the same legal rights as enjoyed right now between married straight couples in this state.
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
5:29 pm
@Keep
“Rather presumptive to think you know what “most people”…”
Even more presumptive to believe that one knows what God thinks.
If God has such a special disdain for homosexuality, then why does it exist?
If it is a DNA thing, He certainly has the power to correct that.
If it is matter of choice, he has options there too.
Seen any burning bushes or people being transformed into salt lately?
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
5:29 pm
“There really is nothing stopping two gay people right now into going to an attorneys office and entering into a legal contract to give them all the same legal rights as enjoyed right now between married straight couples in this state”
No, maybe not. But why should it be neccessary for them to go to that trouble and expense when there is a simple, easy way to get them already on the books? All they ask is to be treated equally UNDER that existing law.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 8th, 2012
5:30 pm
There really is nothing stopping two gay people right now into going to an attorneys office and entering into a legal contract to give them all the same legal rights as enjoyed right now between married straight couples in this state.
td, I hope that was sarcasm because it is false.
RF
December 8th, 2012
5:30 pm
“But to pass off opposition to gay marriage as just some people who are all oogey about gay sex is a cheap and simpleton copout of what the real issue is.”
Just sharing an opinion, doomie, that I hear often when the PC conversation is done and people start opening up about what bothers them. I’ve heard it too often, from folks of many political affiliations, to ignore it as insignificant to the debate. Simpleton? I’ll wear that title in this case because I’ve noticed that most issues, after all the blather back and forth, come down to simple issues. And issues involving civil rights very often are based on just such simple views.
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
5:31 pm
“How the heck would you know? Rather presumptive to think you know what “most people”, most opponents, etc. talk about unless you have some evidence other than just pulling it out of your arse.”
Pretty easy keep. Look at the debates we’ve had on here at various times about gay marriage. How often do we see cons wailing and wondering about what kind of sex those gays are having and is it deviant or not. I’ve never seen it. Usually we see cons outlining why they are opposed to it based on biblical grounds, or based on traditional societal grounds, or based on legal grounds. Perhaps its happened and I just haven’t seen it but I’ve never seen a con come on here and drone on about gay sex and why its nasty or immoral or whatever. Aint ever seen it.
And when we see debates on television do you see anti gay marriage advocates complaining about what kind of immoral or oogey sex the gays are having? Um. No. You don’t. Their usual argument is typically based on religious grounds or traditional marriage grounds- not on what kind of oogey sex those gay folks must be having behind closed doors.
Brosephus™
December 8th, 2012
5:33 pm
But why should it be neccessary for them to go to that trouble and expense when there is a simple, easy way to get them already on the books?
Is that one of those “job plans”? Sounds like that creates jobs for lawyers, pen makers, paper makers, the power company, gas companies, tire companies, etc…
Doing it your way, Doggone, is a drag on the economy because it’s all done with the stroke of a pen without all the extra legwork and other mumbo jumbo.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 8th, 2012
5:34 pm
Look before you leap, you are right.
So in other words, Doom is pulling it out of his arse based on his limited world view and trying to claim it is a fact.
td
December 8th, 2012
5:35 pm
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 8th, 2012
5:30 pm
And please tell me what is false about my statement? Can you legally give another person the right to inheritance in a contract? Visitation in a hospital?
What can two people not do in a contract that a marriage license gives them?
getalife
December 8th, 2012
5:35 pm
Change is constant.
Adapt or die.
Stan
December 8th, 2012
5:35 pm
I love it how people can take such extreme sides…..and in 20 years people who were against gay marriage will look back and should be ashamed at how silly they look. All of these same arguments were used to argue why whites and blacks should not be allowed to get married……its in the bible…..it is not pure…..it is an abomination……and yes, many idiot states had politicians who presented and passed laws against it…….doesn’t mean they were idiots for their moronic views just because they had the votes to pass a law
getalife
December 8th, 2012
5:36 pm
doomy,
Are you in the klan with George?
RF
December 8th, 2012
5:37 pm
“How often do we see cons wailing and wondering about what kind of sex those gays are having and is it deviant or not.”
As I said, those conversations happen out of the public arena, and I’d be really surprised if it did pop up here, but I’ve heard it all too often from folks. Those comments are reserved for the more private conversations. And you won’t hear it in debates or from teh pulpit, or at a campaign event. It’s not PC to discuss it in public, just like many who say they aren’t “racist” in public, but wouldn’t dare live next door to anyone of a different race or condone their children marrying into said race.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
5:37 pm
“Doing it your way, Doggone, is a drag on the economy because it’s all done with the stroke of a pen without all the extra legwork and other mumbo jumbo”
Well….just think! All those poor lawyers missing out on the work they could be doing for heterosexual partners! I *knew* there was a good reason to do away with marriage altogether!
josef
December 8th, 2012
5:37 pm
TD
“You are so right. There really is nothing stopping two gay people right now into going to an attorneys office and entering into a legal contract to give them all the same legal rights as enjoyed right now between married straight couples in this state”
Wrong. You have no earthly idea what the hurdles are there. And survivor’s benefits, Mec, survivior’s benefits…ay, there’s the rub!
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
5:39 pm
“Just sharing an opinion, doomie, that I hear often when the PC conversation is done and people start opening up about what bothers them. I’ve heard it too often, from folks of many political affiliations, to ignore it as insignificant to the debate”
I’m not sure what kind of circles you run it but in my entire life I can’t think of one con I’ve had a conversation with who is opposed to gay marriage because of the kind of sex they imagine that a gay couple is having. Aint ever seen it. I think you are grossly exxaggerating if you think that people opposed to gay marriage go into lengthy diatribes or discussions about what kind of oogey sex those gay people are having. Most people have better things to talk about then having discussions about what kind of sex gays are having. Most people just don’t give a shyte and if you’re saying that they do then your needle on the credibility scale is rapidly dropping towards that zero. That is sheer bullshyte and I think you know that.
RF
December 8th, 2012
5:39 pm
td: you can write a will and leave your estate to your dog, ala Leona Helmsley, if you wish. That estate then becomes subject to estate taxes. You also cannot leave survivor benefits from retirement pensions, Social Security, or insurance that allows such. That’s some of what a legal marriage contract allows.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
5:41 pm
“I’m not sure what kind of circles you run it but in my entire life I can’t think of one con I’ve had a conversation with who is opposed to gay marriage because of the kind of sex they imagine that a gay couple is having”
Well…*I* can. I live with her and she’s my sister
Brosephus™
December 8th, 2012
5:41 pm
Doggone
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
5:42 pm
“td: you can write a will and leave your estate to your dog, ala Leona Helmsley, if you wish. That estate then becomes subject to estate taxes”
It can also be subject to legal challenge from surviving relatives.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 8th, 2012
5:43 pm
td,1st GA constitutionally forbids same sex marriage. There are many rights that are granted by marriage, e.g hospital visitation, rights of survivorship. Perhaps you need to do some research to educate yourself. You can start here: http://www.ksfamilylaw.com/FAQS/gay_marriage
td
December 8th, 2012
5:44 pm
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
5:29 pm
“There really is nothing stopping two gay people right now into going to an attorneys office and entering into a legal contract to give them all the same legal rights as enjoyed right now between married straight couples in this state”
No, maybe not. But why should it be neccessary for them to go to that trouble and expense when there is a simple, easy way to get them already on the books? All they ask is to be treated equally UNDER that existing law.
Why is it more expensive when the two of you could spend 10 minutes writing out the rights and then get it notarized. Probably less expensive then a marriage license.
“All they ask is to be treated equally UNDER that existing law.”
Bogus argument because all laws are not written to have all parties equal under its terms. For example: There are laws on the books that allow a woman to get an abortion by her own choice no matter if she is married or what. The father of that child has no say so if the life will be taken or not. Therefore, both parents that created the child are not treated equally under the law.
RF
December 8th, 2012
5:45 pm
“That is sheer bullshyte and I think you know that.”
As I’ve typed, I’ve heard it often enough, and not in public or large group conversations. But those opinions we hold most private also very directly influence how we vote and it’s often easy to find an acceptable “reason” to cover it. Just stating an opinion based on experience, no scientific data involved and none needed.
Perhaps your angst over me stating that is motivated by some view of it being “oogey” sex?
getalife
December 8th, 2012
5:45 pm
“That is sheer bullshyte and I think you know that”
Now that is hilarious.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
5:47 pm
“Why is it more expensive when the two of you could spend 10 minutes writing out the rights and then get it notarized. Probably less expensive then a marriage license. ”
Well, I find myself agreeing. I think ALL marriages should be annulled, since it’s just so much easier for each and every couple to get their own contracts through a lawyer. Please don’t forget to come back here and let us know how easy it was for YOU and your spouse.
td
December 8th, 2012
5:47 pm
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 8th, 2012
5:43 pm
td,1st GA constitutionally forbids same sex marriage. There are many rights that are granted by marriage, e.g hospital visitation, rights of survivorship. Perhaps you need to do some research to educate yourself. You can start here: http://www.ksfamilylaw.com/FAQS/gay_marriage
You are missing the point. I did not say a word about Gay marriage. I said there is nothing stopping two people (Gay or straight) from going and entering into a legal contract to give one another the same rights and privileges as two married people. It just will not be called a marriage.
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
5:49 pm
“…an attorneys office and entering into a legal contract to give them all the same legal rights as enjoyed right now between married straight couples in this state.”
Nice idea on paper. In actual execution, not so much.
My wife and I knew a gay couple here in Atlanta.
They had been together for 21 years. had all the paperwork, wills, trusts, POA. Joint bank accounts and co-owned a beautiful home in Duluth. A couple of dogs. Pretty much the whole white picket fence deal.
Steven had the better job and higher income and placed the down payment on the house, paid the majority of the mortgage. The problem was, Steven had not so good credit so the house was in Jerome’s name only in order to qualify for a better rate.
Jerome inherited quite a bit of money from a aunt which ticked off Jerome’s family to no end.
4 months later, Jerome died at age 41 from a cerebral hemorrhage. Steven was locked out of the house with the assistance of the county sheriff, his bank account was drained, the dogs went to the pound and he was not allowed to plan or attend his lover’s funeral.
The problem, the executor of the will had died 3 weeks prior to Jerome’s death.
It took Steven 16 months and $100K in lawyer’s fees to get his life back.
The point? None of that would have happened had the state recognized their relationship for what it was.
That is NOT equal protection under the law.
Your argument is akin to the separate but equal provisions of Jim Crow and has the same failing:
It is separate, but it is never equal.
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
5:49 pm
“Even more presumptive to believe that one knows what God thinks.”
I don’t generally presume to know what God thinks although I will presume that he abhors evil, murder, etc. I just know what the bible says about homosexuality and in my opinion its pretty clear. And I do know what people who know a lot more about the bible then I do have said and where they have pointed out to me that I was wrong when I told them I had no problem with gay marriage.
If God has such a special disdain for homosexuality, then why does it exist?
That’s just silly. But let me answer a question with a question. If God has such a special disdain for evil, then why does it exist?
“Seen any burning bushes or people being transformed into salt lately?”
Hyperbole much?
indigo
December 8th, 2012
5:49 pm
A man and his nine year old lover want to be married.
All they ask is to be treated equally under the law.
Don’t laugh. If you think this can’t eventually happen in America, wake up.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 8th, 2012
5:50 pm
td, again you are wrong. Again you should start by educating yourself. I have given you a starting point already
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
5:50 pm
“It just will not be called a marriage”
“Separate but equal” has already been tried and was a dismal failure.
josef
December 8th, 2012
5:50 pm
TD
“…entering into a legal contract to give one another the same rights and privileges as two married people.”
Have you informed the Social Security Administration of this?
RF
December 8th, 2012
5:51 pm
“there is nothing stopping two people (Gay or straight) from going and entering into a legal contract to give one another the same rights and privileges as two married people. It just will not be called a marriage.”
But they can’t get survivor’s benefits, or cover the other with health insurance throughout their lives, or in some hospitals visit when the rule is “family only.” That contract wouldn’t give you much more than a will would, and you know it.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
5:52 pm
“Don’t laugh. If you think this can’t eventually happen in America, wake up”
Children cannot enter into legal agreements. It will never happen
Brosephus™
December 8th, 2012
5:53 pm
A man and his nine year old lover want to be married.
All they ask is to be treated equally under the law.
Don’t laugh. If you think this can’t eventually happen in America, wake up.
And what idiot jackass legislators do you ever see passing laws that lowers the legal age of consent to nine years old in order for that to happen?
RF
December 8th, 2012
5:54 pm
‘A man and his nine year old lover want to be married”
Well, let’s see. There are, in fact, laws about age of consent and such that would prevent that. You can’t get married as a legal minor unless you’re pregnant, and not even that before 16.
Brosephus™
December 8th, 2012
5:54 pm
“Separate but equal” has already been tried and was a dismal failure.
I think it failed to the point of getting the “Unconstitutional” stamp.
getalife
December 8th, 2012
5:58 pm
It’s a freedom issue.
Free them and the weed.
It is going to happen.
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
6:01 pm
RF,
I’m sure there are people who think gay sex is oogey. What I am saying is that most people don’t really care what other people are doing behind closed doors and that is not the reason for their opposition to gay marriage. Most of them are opposed to gay marriage based on biblical beliefs- not on the sex that is going on. You made the assertion that most cons are opposed to gay marriage based on oogey sex. That is what you said sir. And judging by the myriad number of conversations and debates we’ve had on this blog alone regarding gay marriage I’ve yet to see your contention confirmed in even the slightest degreee.
Larry
December 8th, 2012
6:04 pm
Jay,
Again, why are you being deceptive with your readers. The photo you use is a good 15-20 years old. Well, at least you combed your hair in the photo above.
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Jay+Boman%2c+ajc&view=detail&mid=470E662F2D5B512F49F3470E662F2D5B512F49F3&first=0
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 8th, 2012
6:05 pm
so now posts on this blog are the equivalent of a representative sampling of the population of the US? What a silly contention.
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
6:05 pm
“And I do know what people who know a lot more about the bible then I do have said and where they have pointed out to me that I was wrong when I told them I had no problem with gay marriage. ”
Well I know quite a bit about The Bible – read it from cover to cover and back again, I have a minor in religious studies. Had to learn Greek and Latin just to see how much King James mucked the whole thing up. But since I now think The Bible is a mixture of fairy tale, morality play and just plain hokum, what is says or doesn’t say in any language is of little value to me.
“That’s just silly. But let me answer a question with a question. If God has such a special disdain for evil, then why does it exist?”
It is not silly. It is a perfectly valid question. I am a bit disappointed you would resort to deflection as a response.
“Hyperbole much?”
When I get tired of typing, yes. It is the snark in me, sue me.
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
6:07 pm
“had all the paperwork, wills, trusts, POA. Joint bank accounts and co-owned a beautiful home in Duluth”
Look before you leap,
So the family drained a joint bank account? You sure about that? I’m not sure about the law on that but in my limited experience with joint titles and such it doesn’t seem like it would be that way. And if they had a will and the house and other items go to him in a will I don’t see how that can be overcome either. Not saying that you’re lying or exaggerating but something about that story doesn’t quite sound right. Hell it seems to me that regarding the dogs that Steven could have said the dogs were his alone and that would be the end of that. Makes me wonder if maybe he did not give you the full story.
RF
December 8th, 2012
6:09 pm
“That is what you said sir. And judging by the myriad number of conversations and debates we’ve had on this blog alone regarding gay marriage I’ve yet to see your contention confirmed in even the slightest degreee”
YEP, that’s what I said…sir. And you’re right, it isn’t stated here. As I ALSO said, and you seem to fail to read, that important influence on their opinion doesn’t come out publicly because it’s a bit too intimate for public discussion. I’ve point-blank asked my conservative friends, and when they get through with the Bible discussion, inevitably that very opinion comes up. It does influence their view, and I don’t need a blog to prove it. I’ve actually read quite a lot of comments on articles about it (yahoo especially) where posters have no shame about stating that very opinion. And in point of fact, it’s most often directed at homosexual men. Many straight males are somewhat interested in the notion of two hot women getting sexual.
At any rate, your diatribe and attempts to belittle won’t change what I’ve experienced, what I’ve heard, and what opinions I choose.
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
6:10 pm
“What I am saying is that most people don’t really care what other people are doing behind closed doors and that is not the reason for their opposition to gay marriage”
I’d buy that argument but for the state and UMCJ statutes that outlaw(ed) sodomy.
It was never a crime to be homosexual in the country, just do the things that homosexuals do.
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
6:11 pm
” It is the snark in me, sue me.”
Not likely. I appreciae snarkiness.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 8th, 2012
6:12 pm
Hell it seems to me that regarding the dogs that Steven could have said the dogs were his alone and that would be the end of that.
What a presumptively simplistic unrealistic view without a shred of evidence.
Absolute bull cockey
josef
December 8th, 2012
6:14 pm
IMAM
Just in case you DO check in at some point…check out that one thrown into moderation @ 6:06!! This one truly deserves some investigation before the Moderator gets slapped with the charge of anti-Semitism!
td
December 8th, 2012
6:15 pm
RF
December 8th, 2012
6:09 pm
Gay man sex is nasty but so is fat people sex and most any sex where another man’s genitals are exposed to view. So does this mean no fat people should get married?
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
6:15 pm
RF,
Well we will have to just agree to disagree on why people legitimately oppose gay marriage. I’ll chalk it up to religious views and you will chalk it up to what you believe to be people’s emotions on oogey gay sex.
But we will find common ground on one thing.
“Many straight males are somewhat interested in the notion of two hot women getting sexual.”
Hellllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll
Yeahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
barking frog
December 8th, 2012
6:16 pm
Many benefits are spousal benefits. No spouse, no benefit.
SS death benefit is this way. 1st spouse dies, survivor gets 255.00
2nd dies no one gets anything unless remarried.
td
December 8th, 2012
6:17 pm
Look before I leap…
December 8th, 2012
6:10 pm
“What I am saying is that most people don’t really care what other people are doing behind closed doors and that is not the reason for their opposition to gay marriage”
I’d buy that argument but for the state and UMCJ statutes that outlaw(ed) sodomy.
Define sodomy and does it only pertain to partners of the same gender?
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
6:19 pm
RF,
td does does have point there about fat people sex. If we believed your point of view then we should be opposed to fat people sex because its all oogey and nasty. And what about ugly people??? I’m vehemently opposed to ugly people sex? And even worse what about fat and ugly people? Should we outlaw fat ugly people sex? I dunno bout you but I am fervently opposed to watching fat ugly people like Roseanne having sex. But does that mean I oppose Roseanne getting married?
josef
December 8th, 2012
6:19 pm
RF
And no small few straight women kinda like the thought of being with two hot men…the same straight man who’d be turned on by two women probably would, well…SAY no way Josefina, but, well…and that’s all I’ve got to say about that…
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
6:19 pm
“I think it failed to the point of getting the “Unconstitutional” stamp”
Yes, I think you’re right
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
6:21 pm
@Thulsa:
We knew them very well. And Steven laid up with us for several months while he tried to extricate himself from his nightmare.
There is not a whit of exaggeration in my story. Jerome’s family were a sty of vindictive just plain nasty people who booted Jerome from their lives because of his lifestyle “choice”. He sent care/gift packages and cash to his nephews and nieces who returned the favor by referring to him behind his back as Uncle F@ggot.
Steven recovered most of the money taken, at significant cost in terms of cash, time and emotional energy.
My wife and I had to testify to a judge about the nature of their relationship. It was a sickening process.
Mr_B
December 8th, 2012
6:23 pm
“there are other ways of petitioning legislators besides having dinner with them”
Usually, the perferred method is to buy dinner for them.
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
6:24 pm
Well keep now is your chance to give us a legal dissertation on why possession isn’t 9/10ths of the law and why he couldn’t have at least got his dogs. Go ahead and regale us with your brilliant legal mind Perry Mason. And btw I said it “seems” to me that it should be that way. I didn’t say that I knew for sure which is why I stated that. Work on your reading comprehension skills.
barking frog
December 8th, 2012
6:25 pm
look before i leap
this occurrence is not uncommon and is not only homosexual
inheritance. consider the notorious case of anna nicole smith.
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
6:25 pm
“Define sodomy and does it only pertain to partners of the same gender?”
@td
You of all people should avoid this particular thread.
When Obama came out for gay rights, you spent weeks screaming “sodomites”.
Piffle!
josef
December 8th, 2012
6:26 pm
All sex is nasty…if you’re doing it right!
“But Love has pitched his mansion in
The place of excrement…”
–William Butler Yeats, “Crazy Jane Talks With The Bishop”
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 8th, 2012
6:26 pm
Doom, when you pull your head out of the same place you are pulling your posts from, come on back. Your posting idiotic garbage as usual child
Mr_B
December 8th, 2012
6:26 pm
Evenin’ josef and Doomy.
indigo
December 8th, 2012
6:26 pm
Doggone/GA, Brosephus
Those of us who are of the straight persuasion can legally get married.
Those of the gay persusasion are fighting as had as possible for the same right.
If you think those of other sexual persuasions aren’t watching this gay rights battle, think again.
And if you think, in their wisdom, lawmakers and courts would never allow man/boy and other preferences to become legal, just look at the clowns, most of them lawyers, in Washington.
You might consider studying American History in the 1930’s and look at all the things that were illegal then but legal now.
Also:
http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-15818775.html
td
December 8th, 2012
6:28 pm
Look before I leap…
December 8th, 2012
6:25 pm
“Define sodomy and does it only pertain to partners of the same gender?”
@td
You of all people should avoid this particular thread.
When Obama came out for gay rights, you spent weeks screaming “sodomites”.
Piffle!
Now that is a bold face lie. I guess I busted your political point and you turned into a typical lib. I am very disappointed.
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
6:28 pm
@barking frog
The difference is that ANS was legally entitled to marry that scuzball lawyer.
That she chose not to is what caused the problems.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
6:30 pm
“And if you think, in their wisdom, lawmakers and courts would never allow man/boy and other preferences to become legal, just look at the clowns, most of them lawyers, in Washington”
I don’t think it. I know it. Children cannot enter into legal contracts on their own. It will never happen.
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
6:30 pm
@td
It is NOT a lie.
There were many, many posts where you used the term “sodomites”.
If you want, I can go find the links to them.
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
6:31 pm
“Steven recovered most of the money taken, at significant cost in terms of cash, time and emotional energy.”
Look before I leap,
Well ok then. That’s why I asked. It didn’t seem right that others could take all that money from a joint account when he was on the account. You did not state that he recovered most of his money.
A sad and unfortunate situation all the way around. But I’ve known lots of gays though that had no problem with legalities regarding wills, poa, etc. I’ve had couples that leave possessions, life insurance, POA to their lovers and I have yet to see a problem with that. And for the record I’ve seen a couple of heterosexual couples who lived together but were not married where 1 of the 2 died and essentially the same thing happened. It just didn’t get as nasty as what you mentioned.
I’ve yet to see the poa or will overturned though as long as its in order.
td
December 8th, 2012
6:33 pm
Look before I leap…
December 8th, 2012
6:30 pm
@td
It is NOT a lie.
There were many, many posts where you used the term “sodomites”.
If you want, I can go find the links to them.
Find away because I do not believe I have ever used the word “sodomite” in any blog. This is because I know the definition of Sodomy and it is not exclusive to same sex partners.
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
6:34 pm
@td
here u go:
goggled “td galloway sodomites”
http://blogs.ajc.com/political-insider-jim-galloway/2012/09/06/god-jerusalem-and-the-democratic-national-convention/
8:53P post
http://blogs.ajc.com/political-insider-jim-galloway/2012/09/07/clint-eastwood-barack-obama-a-%E2%80%98hoax%E2%80%99-on-america/?cp=2
12:05P post
td
December 8th, 2012
6:36 pm
What Bill Clinton did with Lewinsky is sodomy.
you can't fix stupid or Democrats
December 8th, 2012
6:37 pm
NO man can change God’s Law. No matter what men might say. Those who indulge in sexual sin ….none will inhert the Kingdom of God..There is a hell for those who follow God’s Laws…
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
6:37 pm
Mr_B,
Good evening. So far you’ve missed an interesting discussion but I’m going to throw you into the debate fire. Are you or are not against a constitutional amendment banning sex and also marriage between fat AND ugly people?
They BOTH suck
December 8th, 2012
6:38 pm
td
Did you not remember or were you lying?
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 8th, 2012
6:38 pm
Look, here a direct link to one of td’s posts: http://blogs.ajc.com/political-insider-jim-galloway/2012/09/06/god-jerusalem-and-the-democratic-national-convention/#comment-245403
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
6:39 pm
“There is a hell for those who follow God’s Laws…”
Ummmm…..
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 8th, 2012
6:39 pm
Section 16-6-2 Sodomy; aggravated sodomy
(a) (1) A person commits the offense of sodomy when he or she performs or submits to any sexual act involving the sex organs of one person and the mouth or anus of another.
josef
December 8th, 2012
6:41 pm
Mr B
Shalom! Looking forward to Baby Jesus’ Birthday and two weeks off?
FIX STUPID
“t..here is a hell ”
And if Sartre is right, you and I’ll be locked for eternity together with no exit…
td
December 8th, 2012
6:43 pm
Look before I leap…
December 8th, 2012
6:34 pm
I stand corrected, I have used the term sodomite 2 times over the last 3 plus years posting. Both times were using the words in the correct context in describing the Democratic party and their views towards Religion.
barking frog
December 8th, 2012
6:43 pm
How can you burn in hell forever if you don’t have eternal life?
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
6:44 pm
Perry Mason done got his dander up.
Brosephus™
December 8th, 2012
6:45 pm
And if you think, in their wisdom, lawmakers and courts would never allow man/boy and other preferences to become legal, just look at the clowns, most of them lawyers, in Washington.
I respond with the same question as I asked earlier. What idiot jackass legislators do you think have the testicular fortitude to lower the age of consent to 9 years old as your example stated earlier? As Doggone stated, children can NOT enter into a legal contract on their own. The only way that will happen is if the age of consent is lowered, and I don’t see it going lower than it already is. Hell, you have people fussing that 16 is too low.
James
December 8th, 2012
6:45 pm
All this talk about what is natural is silly. For a homosexual person, having a partner of the same sex is a natural thing for them. It is how they were made, divine or otherwise.
All this talk about sin is also silly. Those who oppress/deny/or otherwise put down gay people are the ones living in sin! Get a grip. Live your own life. Don’t dictate.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 8th, 2012
6:46 pm
Nope, just not tolerating posts of stupidity and childishness from a piece of garbage.
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
6:46 pm
td did in fact using the terms sodomites. Twice. That doesn’t constitute “many, many posts” though.
td
December 8th, 2012
6:47 pm
Keep and Look,
My direct quote:
”
td
September 6th, 2012
8:53 pm
You don’t say
September 6th, 2012
6:53 pm
You are full of crap also. It is you libs that think Jesus would approve of killing the unborn and sanction sodomy. That is the biggest lie in the world and then you claim to be a person of faith when more then half of your party are sodomites, baby killers or atheist.”
One of my better ones and very accurate. I will stand by it.
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
6:47 pm
Perry Mason in meltdown mode.
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
6:47 pm
@Thulsa
It was an excruciating thing to witness.
My wife is a flight attendant and she has many friends who are gay.
When we met my initial reaction was one of tolerant amusement.
And while I don’t think I was ever particularly anti-homosexual, there were quips and tasteless jokes in the locker room in HS and college and in the office.
After I got to know these folks and found them to be funny, educated, witty, hard-working, giving, caring, and very decent people, I felt quite a bit of shame for some the things I said in my youth.
I was wrong to stereotype and pre-judge.
Tainted DeMinted Tea...Tea Ya!
December 8th, 2012
6:51 pm
@td
December 8th, 2012
6:43 pm
Look before I leap…
December 8th, 2012
6:34 pm
I stand corrected, I have used the term sodomite 2 times over the last 3 plus years posting. Both times were using the words in the correct context in describing the Democratic party and their views towards Religion.
====================================================
WHERE is your outrage when PEOPLE have SEX with animals?
Some of you HYPOCRITES are doing far WORSE than having sex with
the same sex.
td
December 8th, 2012
6:51 pm
Brosephus™
December 8th, 2012
6:45 pm
The only reason the age of consent is 16 now is due to Republican efforts in the Welfare Reform act of 1996. Prior to the act being passed with the carrot of raising the law there were quite a few states (Georgia included) where the age of consent was 14 or less.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 8th, 2012
6:52 pm
Nope, but you keep on drinking child.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
6:53 pm
“The only reason the age of consent is 16 now is due to Republican efforts in the Welfare Reform act of 1996. Prior to the act being passed with the carrot of raising the law there were quite a few states (Georgia included) where the age of consent was 14 or less”
Maybe it’s just me…but this reads like you approve of it being 14 or lower
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
6:53 pm
more than twice Thulsa
http://blogs.ajc.com/political-insider-jim-galloway/2012/09/06/obama%E2%80%99s-message-tonight-%E2%80%98i-won%E2%80%99t-pretend-the-path-will-be-quick-or-easy%E2%80%99/
9:03P
Brosephus™
December 8th, 2012
6:54 pm
td did in fact using the terms sodomites. Twice. That doesn’t constitute “many, many posts” though.
Correct, but that also debunks td’s own claim @ 6:33 “Find away because I do not believe I have ever used the word “sodomite” in any blog.”
getalife
December 8th, 2012
6:54 pm
Who do you cons think you are?
How dare you judge others.
Self reflect and fix your failed party.
You Can't Legislate Morals
December 8th, 2012
6:55 pm
@td
December 8th, 2012
6:43 pm
Look before I leap…
December 8th, 2012
6:34 pm
I stand corrected, I have used the term sodomite 2 times over the last 3 plus years posting. Both times were using the words in the correct context in describing the Democratic party and their views towards Religion.
==============================================
You Can’t Legislate Morals
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 8th, 2012
6:56 pm
Look, a tip, when you find a post you want a direct link to, click on the work “link” below the post and then copy the URL and post it. Then when someone clicks the link, it is direct.
Brosephus™
December 8th, 2012
6:56 pm
The only reason the age of consent is 16 now is due to Republican efforts in the Welfare Reform act of 1996.
That still doesn’t answer my question to indigo. If he or anybody else is so concerned about a man marrying a child, what legislator will be the one to submit the bill to lower the age of consent? How many Republicans, in the state of Georgia, are going to vote to lower the age of consent so that a grown man can legally marry a 9 year old child?
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
6:56 pm
“Correct, but that also debunks td’s own claim @ 6:33 “Find away because I do not believe I have ever used the word “sodomite” in any blog.””
td drinks quite a bit for a Baptist.
you can't fix stupid or Democrats
December 8th, 2012
6:57 pm
Repent before its to late
Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals,[a] nor sodomites, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God.
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
6:58 pm
Thanks Keep.
Tried that in the past, it bombed my browser.
Have updated to latest patch and will try it going forward.
They BOTH suck
December 8th, 2012
6:58 pm
Seemed like the find away took all of 2 minutes……
You Can't Legislate Morals
December 8th, 2012
6:59 pm
@getalife
December 8th, 2012
6:54 pm
Who do you cons think you are?
How dare you judge others.
Self reflect and fix your failed party.
==============================================
getalife
December 8th, 2012
6:54 pm
Who do you cons think you are?
How dare you judge others.
Self reflect and fix your failed party.
getalife
December 8th, 2012
6:54 pm
Who do you cons think you are?
How dare you judge others.
Self reflect and fix your failed party.
Republican Sex Scandals
1.1 2011
1.2 2010
1.3 2009
1.4 2008
1.5 2007
1.6 2006
1.7 2005
1.8 2004
1.9 2003
1.10 2002
1.11 2001
1.12 2000
1.13 1999
1.14 1998
1.15 1997
1.16 1996
1.17 1995
1.18 1994
1.19 1993
1.20 1990
1.21 1989
1.22 1988
1.23 1986
1.24 1982
1.25 1980
1.26 1973
1.27 1925
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
7:00 pm
“Repent before its to late”
Kind of gives the lie to those that say they aren’t trying to force their religions down our throats, doesn’t it?
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
7:01 pm
“. Neither fornicators”
Well, when same sex marriage is made legal…those who get married will no longer be fornicators. That will be a good thing, keep them from being damned.
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
7:02 pm
“will inherit the kingdom of God.”
Since as a heathen, I doubt I will inherit anything from God, I’ll just continue to fight for the rights of my fellow citizens on this mortal coil.
Let me worry about my conversation with God come judgement day and you worry about yours.
td
December 8th, 2012
7:02 pm
Brosephus™
December 8th, 2012
6:54 pm
td did in fact using the terms sodomites. Twice. That doesn’t constitute “many, many posts” though.
Correct, but that also debunks td’s own claim @ 6:33 “Find away because I do not believe I have ever used the word “sodomite” in any blog.”
I guess “believe” is an absolute in your book so then it is a total debunking of absolutes.
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
7:05 pm
Look before I leap…
December 8th, 2012
6:47 pm
@Thulsa
“It was an excruciating thing to witness.
My wife is a flight attendant and she has many friends who are gay.”
Look before you leap,
Yes. I’m sure it was painful to watch. I would hate to see someone lose their loved one and then go through that type of trauma on top of it. Reminds me of the movie “as good as it gets”. It was just a movie but I’m sure in real life that that scenario has played out many times over.
I get around a lot and in my playa days ran with some hotties and got to know a helluva lot of gays. Obviously damn near every hot woman in Atl it seems has gay friends so you can’t help but know a lot of them. So I had my share of friendships and acquaintenaceships with quite a few gays. Out of all of them there was literally one that I absolutely could not stand. But then gays couldn’t stand his dumbmass so it wasn’t a gay thing. The rest of them I’ve found to be good, honest, hard working, and very caring people. Plus they hang out with hot women so ya gotta love em. I used to go to club anytime and a few other late night clubs one in particular where the dancers used to go and the name escapes me now. I would get my butt pinched a lot but it was worth it given the women in there- I just took it as a badge of honor. Gays are cool with you when they know you and know you’re straight and they set the boundary so I’ve found them all to be good people. The ones I have as clients especially the female ones tend to be among my favorite clients. Good folk for the most part.
td
December 8th, 2012
7:06 pm
Look before I leap…
December 8th, 2012
6:56 pm
“Correct, but that also debunks td’s own claim @ 6:33 “Find away because I do not believe I have ever used the word “sodomite” in any blog.””
td drinks quite a bit for a Baptist.
Sorry to disappoint you but I have witnessed what drinking does to families and therefore I choose not to partake (has nothing to do with my religious beliefs).
Brosephus™
December 8th, 2012
7:06 pm
I guess “believe” is an absolute in your book so then it is a total debunking of absolutes.
You guess wrong again. Believe is not an absolute. That said, your claim was still debunked. THAT is absolute.
indigo
December 8th, 2012
7:06 pm
Brosephus
Thought experiment.
It’s 1970 and you’re a college student.
A bull session is going on in your dorm.
You say “I believe that in 40 years, at most, gays will be legally married in some states and the Supreme Court will be hearing arguments about gay marriage. And, of course, blacks and whites will be able to legally marry in every state.
That dorm would record and all-time high in laughter decibels.
And, once this got around the campus, you’d be the laughing-stock of the college.
And yet, here we are.
Way too often, the law and courts go crazy in America.
Never say “it can’t happen here”.
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
7:08 pm
“…the age of consent was 14 or less.”
The reason the age of consent was 14, was because when they found Cooter and Sally necking behind the barn, they forced a marriage. NO self-respecting family was gonna tolerate a bast’uhd in the mix. Woulda been a whole lot simpler to provide a widow’s purse and do a little educating about the birds and the bees.
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
7:08 pm
“Republican Sex Scandals”
We can’t be that stale and stodgy if we have our own share of freakshows.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
7:08 pm
“Never say “it can’t happen here”.”
If it ever does, we’ll make sure it never goes into effect. In the meantime, your concern is not proof that you are correct.
sptvnt1
December 8th, 2012
7:09 pm
Guy. First, you need to keep religion as far away from government / politics as possible. I have plenty I’d like to say about people assuming that the government has in some way been structured around the ideals of Christianity, but this, however, is not the forum. Second, practice what your religion preaches. Do not point the finger and call some one a sinner you a hole. According to the Roman Catholic canonized bible, Jesus believed no one was perfect and all people were destined to sin, therefore he sacrificed his life for sinners’ forgiveness and their entrances to heaven. In addition, how dare you point the finger and suggest you know how “God” feels about a sin or person. According to the bible, again canonized by the Roman Catholic Church, judging is also a sin. So, really, who do you think you are? Do you think your sins are somehow better than someone else’s sins? Quit being a disgusting hypocrite and using religion as your right to place judgment. While you think you speak for Christianity there are man many more Christians that beg to differ.
They BOTH suck
December 8th, 2012
7:11 pm
look before I leap……
Well many Baptists drink, they just usually do it when other Baptists are not around
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
7:13 pm
“While you think you speak for Christianity there are man many more Christians that beg to differ”
You’re missing the mindset of that group. You see, if you think differently then you are not a “true Christian” /snarc
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
7:14 pm
“. Neither fornicators”
Got a lotta repenting to do. Otherwise I’m f_-_-_d.
td
December 8th, 2012
7:14 pm
Look before I leap…
December 8th, 2012
7:08 pm
“…the age of consent was 14 or less.”
“The reason the age of consent was 14, was because when they found Cooter and Sally necking behind the barn, they forced a marriage. NO self-respecting family was gonna tolerate a bast’uhd in the mix.”
And if memory serves me correctly we had a lot less poverty, abortion and divorce in those days then we do today. When a society accepts certain behaviors and does not rebuke the offenders then there are consequences that must be paid.
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
7:16 pm
“have witnessed what drinking does to families”
do u mean excess drinking?
My wife and I enjoy a cold martini on occasion, good wine and I like a good small batch bourbon.
The only disagreement that has come up was who forgot to buy the olives.
td
December 8th, 2012
7:16 pm
They BOTH suck
December 8th, 2012
7:11 pm
look before I leap……
Well many Baptists drink, they just usually do it when other Baptists are not around
They sure do and there is nothing wrong with drinking the sin is getting drunk.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
7:16 pm
“And if memory serves me correctly we had a lot less poverty, abortion and divorce in those days then we do today”
You’d be surprised how wrong you are
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
December 8th, 2012
7:18 pm
The only disagreement that has come up was who forgot to buy the olives.
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
7:19 pm
“Well many Baptists drink, they just usually do it when other Baptists are not around”
The old joke is:
Q. What is the difference between Baptists and Catholics?
A. Catholics will talk to each other in the liquor store.
Funny, I have actually witnessed that.
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
7:21 pm
“And if memory serves me correctly we had a lot less poverty, abortion and divorce in those days then we do today”
You’d be surprised how wrong you are
Nope. He’s pretty right on at least 2 of those counts. We sure as hell had less abortion and less divorce. There’s no disputing that. As for poverty it depends on when you’re talking about. Poverty is relative and as of late we now have as much or almost as much poverty as we had before all the Great Society programs began. We sure as hell didn’t have 47 million Americans on food stamps. I can damn sure guarantee that.
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
7:21 pm
“And if memory serves me correctly we had a lot less poverty, abortion and divorce in those days then we do today”
In those days, women did not have the right to vote.
That pesky 19th amendment. Screwed us all!
td
December 8th, 2012
7:21 pm
Look before I leap…
December 8th, 2012
7:16 pm
“have witnessed what drinking does to families”
do u mean excess drinking?
My wife and I enjoy a cold martini on occasion, good wine and I like a good small batch bourbon.
The only disagreement that has come up was who forgot to buy the olives.
The problem is not you because you can control your actions, have a good job and am not a drain on society so therefore what you do is not a problem. The problem with drinking, drugs or even sex is we have to many members of society that can not control themselves or their actions and can not handle the consequences and we as a society have to pay for their stupid actions.
josef
December 8th, 2012
7:22 pm
Marriage is relative to the cultural norms of time and place and always has been. When Great Aunt Ada was 12 and married her 14 year old Cherokee beau, it was not exactly kosher by either of the families’ standards, but it was sanctioned by both Cherokee and Oklahoma “white” law…today neither would permit it…yet they lived together in a most successful relationship for some 70 years, raised a passel of young uns,..and not a failure among them… When Mama at 16 married Daddy, it wasn’t exactly kosher, but…when my brother and sister in law eloped at 18 and 17, much the same thing…c’est la vie, say the old folks, it just goes to show you never can tell…
They BOTH suck
December 8th, 2012
7:22 pm
td
Did I say there was something wrong with it or are you just being td………. again?
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
7:24 pm
“We sure as hell had less abortion and less divorce. There’s no disputing that”
Yes, there is. Especially as refers to abortions. No one was counting back then, but they happened a LOT. And divorces might have been lower, but unhappy marriages were correspondingly higher. And personally, I’ll take the higher divorce rates over living in a place and time when a man could legally rape or beat his wife.
josef
December 8th, 2012
7:26 pm
TD
“They sure do and there is nothing wrong with drinking the sin is getting drunk.”
Nope. The sin is in what you DO when you’re drunk.
RF
The G-d Was I Drunk Last Night Syndrome…
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 8th, 2012
7:27 pm
doggone, I haven’t looked it up but I believe there were a lot more annulments also
td
December 8th, 2012
7:27 pm
They BOTH suck
December 8th, 2012
7:22 pm
td
Did I say there was something wrong with it or are you just being td………. again?
What are you talking about?
Dharma Bum
December 8th, 2012
7:28 pm
Why aren’t more conservatives with me on this? The government needs to get out of the way and that includes social issues… they shouldn’t be telling people who they can/cannot marry and what women can/cannot do with their bodies…
RF
December 8th, 2012
7:29 pm
“Hellllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll
Yeahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh”
thulsa: I may adamantly disagree with just about everything you type while here at the verandah, but that just made me laugh out loud!!
“The G-d Was I Drunk Last Night Syndrome”
josef: some of the best stories about things that shouldn’t be mentioned that I know ended that way!
DebbieDoRight -- Minister Of Propaganda
December 8th, 2012
7:32 pm
Frog: Since slavery was constitutional, exactly how did he do this?
Where in the constitution is slavery stated as “legal”.
Frog: Donovan wants humans to marry humans and has some biological science to support that.
Not biblical though.
Josef: DDR
Looks like Christian Conservative isn’t interested in carrying on a discussion with one of “them” who doesn’t fit his cherished stereotype…you can have the boa back now…
Thanks!
Brosephus™
December 8th, 2012
7:33 pm
Never say “it can’t happen here”.
I understand the idea, indigo. I don’t think your example has much bearing on what you’re suggesting though. There’s a big difference in fighting for rights and privileges for adults vs trying to change the rules for juveniles. This country is very protective when it comes to the legal issues with juveniles. I’m one to agree with the “never say never” idea. I just don’t see any legislator with the fortitude to purposefully lower the legal age of consent.
RF
December 8th, 2012
7:33 pm
“The rest of them I’ve found to be good, honest, hard working, and very caring people. ”
Very good point, and it’s good to know. I’m lucky to know a lot of people with similar views who are willing to accept that gay couples should be allowed the legal rights afforded to a marriage contract.
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
7:34 pm
@td
As a data geek and freak, I dislike the term “to(sic) many”.
And I am unwilling to legislate the actions of all to try an remedy what is a problem for a few.
Gambling
Drinking
even drugs
You punish those who exceed some reasonable boundary.
Else you live and let live.
I have never tried coke, meth or heroin.
Did a bit of weed in the day – did not like the feeling (nor the smell) so I eschew.
They could legalize it all tomorrow and it would not change my personal position on it. Meaning I would not go right out and start tokin, smokin, snortin or shootin.
Some might try and most would discover it’s not for them.
Some might get hooked, but those who choose to tune out are not likely to be affected by laws designed to prevent it in any event.
If you try, get hooked and your life spirals out of control, then you:
end up homeless
end up in rehab
die
All of which happen now.
td
December 8th, 2012
7:34 pm
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
7:24 pm
” And divorces might have been lower, but unhappy marriages were correspondingly higher”
Excellent point and a not yet discussed topic on this board.
What is the primary reason for the state to sanction marriage? Is it to keep two people happy or is to make sure that children have the best chance to become productive members of society?
Does the government have a vested interest in the happiness of people or does the government have a “valid state interest” in making sure the next generation of children can be productive in society?
RF
December 8th, 2012
7:35 pm
“Looks like Christian Conservative isn’t interested in carrying on a discussion with one of “them” who doesn’t fit his cherished stereotype…you can have the boa back now…”
DDR and Josef: I sho am glad you two are around to run off the crazies. I hate it if I have to get up outa my rocker and go after them. It does disturb a good evenin’ buzz from the mint juleps on the verandah.
josef
December 8th, 2012
7:36 pm
RF
There was a season back in my glory days when a group of us had a contest to see who could bed the most “straight” men in a given period of time. We got points depending on what it was that took place behind closed doors…public decorum and the moderator prevent me from listing all the varied categories, but if HE was sober when it happened, you got to double the points…
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
7:36 pm
“The G-d Was I Drunk Last Night Syndrome…”
The lament of many a “straight” boy in college dorms across America.
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
7:40 pm
“Yes, there is. Especially as refers to abortions. No one was counting back then, but they happened a LOT.”
It did not happen a LOT. First of all it was illegal. Secondly society was more moral regarding abortion. Thirdly it was the ole grandpa gonna get a shotgun and that boy is gonna marry her sydrome. Certainly there were backroom abortions but to opine that it happened a LOT when it was culturally a very taboo thing to do is an enormous exaggeration. Women routinely get abortions today. They didn’t get them routinely back in the day.
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
7:40 pm
@RF
” I’m lucky to know a lot of people with similar views who are willing to accept that gay couples should be allowed the legal rights afforded to a marriage contract.”
My experience in life is that good people attract good people.
josef
December 8th, 2012
7:40 pm
DDR
The 3/5 compromise…
RF
Well, me and DDR does try to work in tandem…it cuts down on squabbles over the boa…
TD
The state’s interest in marriage has to do with the ownership and transference of properties…
indigo
December 8th, 2012
7:40 pm
Doggone/GA – “your concern is not proof you are correct”
Nor is it proof I’m incorrect.
And, as for “we’ll make sure it never goes into effect”, that’s exactly what anti-gay marriage people have been and still are saying.
You might want to closely study just how much success those people are having.
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
7:41 pm
RF,
We aint gonna agree on much but there’s always some room for agreement- and a good laugh.
MeatAndGreet
December 8th, 2012
7:41 pm
Charlie Crist has a wife?
RF
December 8th, 2012
7:41 pm
“Does the government have a vested interest in the happiness of people or does the government have a “valid state interest” in making sure the next generation of children can be productive in society?”
Well, when you consider that the backstory of many a celebrated figure of history came from less than those sanctioned ideal situations, it makes the “valid state interest” sort of a ridiculous notion. It’s not about that at all. It’s about who’s in power at the time promoting an agenda based on their convictions about what’s best. If you had asked in the 50’s, most governors in the South would have adamantly opposed integrating the schools, saying it was best that children go to school around their own kind. And I do recall seeing pictures invoking morality, God, and the future of our children. Well, here we are alllll these years later, and the country hasn’t crumbled. Children become productive members of society from a lot of varying “family” situations, including those from gay households, whether with single parents or committed couples. I can prove that with mine and Josef’s offspring.
josef
December 8th, 2012
7:42 pm
LOOK
@ 7:36
See my 7:36
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 8th, 2012
7:48 pm
Well you can just pull statements out of your butt or you can get some real information:
•Estimates of the annual number of illegal abortions in the United States during the1950s and 1960s range from 200,000 to 1.2 million.2
•Of the 46 million abortions occurring worldwide each year, 20 million take place in countries where abortion is prohibited by law.3
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
7:50 pm
@Thulsa
“First of all it was illegal”
before c.1820, no one cared.
The legislative movement against abortion happened when MD’s got cranky because midwives were performing deliveries and abortions. It was not a moral imperative, it was a fiscal one.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
7:50 pm
“Does the government have a vested interest in the happiness of people or does the government have a “valid state interest” in making sure the next generation of children can be productive in society”
The government’s only interest in legal marriages is the disposition of the couple’s possessions and wealth, and the rights of any children of the marriage. The happyness, or lack of it, in a marriage is not legally important to the state…unless, or until, it comes up in a divorce or custody court.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
7:52 pm
“It did not happen a LOT. First of all it was illegal. Secondly society was more moral regarding abortion”
Not more “moral”…more secretive
you can't fix stupid or Democrats
December 8th, 2012
7:52 pm
8 But the cowardly, unbelieving,[a] abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.”
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
7:53 pm
“You might want to closely study just how much success those people are having.”
And is the mattress under your bed comfortable?
RF
December 8th, 2012
7:54 pm
“but if HE was sober when it happened, you got to double the points”
Josef: Safe to assume you got some of the double points?? I suspect that’s one reason you can wear the boa with such confidence!
And I could tell some stories about a once well known Baptist church in Macon I visited some in college where it was well known you could hook up… and I heard, but never took part in or witnessed, that a couple of downstairs rooms were quite the destination.
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
7:55 pm
“The state’s interest in marriage has to do with the ownership and transference of properties…”
Which is precisely why Catholic priests were forbidden to marry and have offspring around 1133.
The church was losing a lot of land to inheritance. The whole Jesus was a bachelor thing was just spin.
DebbieDoRight -- Minister Of Propaganda
December 8th, 2012
7:55 pm
Look: The reason the age of consent was 14, was because when they found Cooter and Sally necking behind the barn, they forced a marriage
Not really. The Women’s Suffragette Movement were the ones in the US pushing for ‘age of consent” laws. Before that it was the MEN who were opposed to the laws. Mainly because pedophiles were not held in contempt and rape laws were hard to prosecute because if a man “raped” a 7 year old girl; and 7was that state’s “age of consent”; then the man would not be held accountable.
Some background:
In the USA in the 1890s, most states had an age of consent of 10–12. In 1895, the age of consent in Delaware was 7, according to an article in The New York Times.[27] However, feminists and children’s rights activists began advocating raising the age of consent to 16 wanting to ultimately raise it to 18 and by 1920 almost all states had raised their age of consent to 16 or 18.
During the late 1950s to early 1990s, several paedophile membership organisations advocated lowering or abolishing age of consent laws[44][45][46][47] to legalize sexual activities involving an adult and a child. As one of their arguments to lower or abolish the age of consent, members of paedophile advocacy groups promoted their belief that children are psychologically capable of consenting to sexual interactions with adults,[48] and they often portrayed themselves as fighting for the right of children to engage in what the activists consider to be consensual sex with adults.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_consent_reform
barking frog
December 8th, 2012
7:56 pm
debbie do
Frog: Since slavery was constitutional, exactly how did he do this?
Where in the constitution is slavery stated as “legal”.
Frog: Donovan wants humans to marry humans and has some biological science to support that.
Not biblical though.
……………………………………………………………………………….
If you are looking for a quote such as : Whereas people may own people and they
shall be known as slaves and that will be legal that did not happen but
slaves were to be counted as 3/5 of a person appears to recognize that
slavery was legal.
and humans marrying humans is not biblical? and besides I was mocking
Donovan’s bestiality comment but he doesn’t believe some humans should
marry other humans….
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
7:57 pm
Its always funny when some kook cites a source and all of its sources are from far left organizations like planned parenthood. And the idiot actually thinks that’s credible. Gawd that is fun-knee!,
Planned parenthood, naral, and the allan guttmacher institute which is a pro abortion far left site.
S
T
O
O
P
I
D
!
“International Policy and Practice: Responding to Unsafe Abortion,” Ipas, 2003.
2 “Medical and Social Health Benefits Since Abortion was made Legal in the U.S.” Planned Parenthood Federation of America, 2002.
3 “Facts in Brief: Induced Abortion Worldwide, 2003,” Alan Guttmacher Institute.
4 “The Safety of Legal Abortion and the Hazards of Illegal Abortion,” NARAL Pro-Choice America Foundation, 2003.
5 “Sharing Responsibility: Women, Society, and Abortion Worldwide,” Alan Guttmacher Institute, 1999.
6 “Envisioning Life Without Roe: Lessons Without Borders,” Alan Guttmacher Institute, 2003.
7 “Abortion in Context: United States and Worldwide,” Alan Guttmacher Institute, 1999.
8 “The Public Health Impact of Legal Abortion: 30 Years Later,” Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health 35:1, January/February 2003.
RF
December 8th, 2012
7:57 pm
“We aint gonna agree on much but there’s always some room for agreement- and a good laugh.”
Laughter is the best medicine….that and a good bourbon in my opinion!
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
7:57 pm
“Which is precisely why Catholic priests were forbidden to marry and have offspring around 1133″
And during the Black Plague years the church was BEGGING people to get married, because the inheritances were so tangled and unresolved due to the number of unmarried couples.
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
7:59 pm
“…and I heard, but never took part in or witnessed, that a couple of downstairs rooms were quite the destination.”
Ok I am getting that whole con “ooogy thing” now.
Must……have…..bourbon!
LOL
j/k – while not a turn on for me, I do have the admit the guys in gay porn are much better looking than the dudes in str8 porn.
Recon 0311 2533
December 8th, 2012
7:59 pm
As an aside from what appears to be the ongoing stupidity on this thread if you have kids or grand kids this holiday season the “Elf on the Shelf” package, which evidently has been around for many years is really fun for children and adults. We got ours from Barnes and Noble and it’s something that excites children about the magic of Christmas weeks before the day itself that prolongs it for the whole family. I just learned about it recently and me with my wife whose foreign are really having fun playing the elf for our daughter’s delight.
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
7:59 pm
look before I leap,
True. But how many of those puritans and baptists pre 1820 probably thought abortion was ok? Probably not many I’m guessing.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 8th, 2012
8:00 pm
Hmmm…so I understand that because garbage posters pull it out of their butts its better than a citation to authority that they can’t dispute with facts but rather just call them kooks.
Pitiful.
DebbieDoRight -- Minister Of Propaganda
December 8th, 2012
8:01 pm
Charlie Crist married a woman — even though there has been many, (myself included) gay rumors concerning him.
They did an expose on him on LOGO a few months back; well not really of HIM more of closeted men in politics…
RF
December 8th, 2012
8:02 pm
DDR @7:55- Many don’t realize the reason for age of consent laws. Pedophilia was probably more prominent then and entirely legal. And some look back and think things were so much better in times when things like that and segregation were legal.
getalife
December 8th, 2012
8:02 pm
del is Si on Duck Dynasty.
Tea party too?
Soothsayer
December 8th, 2012
8:03 pm
Personally, I cain’t see nothing wrong with gettin’ them young girls married off while they’re still young and attractive. You’d best not wait until after they “flower.” Just ask Redneck Convert.
josef
December 8th, 2012
8:06 pm
LOOK
No turn on, eh? But guys in gay porn are better looking? Hmmmm….might want to rethink that post…
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
8:06 pm
Planned parenthood constitutes “a citation to authority”. Damn that’s fun-knee. I can’t imagine what kind of a shyte for brain assclown would believe that tripe.
RF
December 8th, 2012
8:06 pm
“They did an expose on him on LOGO a few months back; well not really of HIM more of closeted men in politics…”
There are a LOT of them in most professions. I went out with a guy once who had some “experience” with some professional sports players in the ATL, but I never checked his research on that. As to Charlie Crist, well, he’s is attractive in that clean-cut nerd with a conscience kind of way.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 8th, 2012
8:10 pm
I can’t imagine what kind of a shyte for brain assclown would believe that tripe.
Here’s a suggestion. Go look in the mirror and ask yourself what kind of tripe you believe in. How many are in that small car with you?
Soothsayer
December 8th, 2012
8:11 pm
Well, it seems to me (after the reading the posts for the last hour or so) that most of the negative posts about this subject boil to the fact that God is going to punish homosexuals for living a life of sin.
Lord, if God were to punish everyone who sinned, nobody would get to heaven. Let him who is without sin cast the first stone.
Amen.
RF
December 8th, 2012
8:12 pm
“I do have the admit the guys in gay porn are much better looking than the dudes in str8 porn.”
Well, considering my experience is somewhat biased, I don’t honestly know if that’s true, but it definitely helps sales if the guys and gals are pleasing on the eye in the porn business. Or if the camera can at least make them seem appealing!
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
8:12 pm
“As an aside from what appears to be the ongoing stupidity on this thread…”
Don’t fret Recon: The cons have received a bit of education. Some may have learned something.
Elf on a Shelf is pretty cool.
My wife is a F/A with a major international airline based here in Atlanta and has done the EOAS thing on many international flights. The PAX seemed to respond very well to it.
josef
December 8th, 2012
8:13 pm
RF
“Josef: Safe to assume you got some of the double points?? I suspect that’s one reason you can wear the boa with such confidence!”
Well, I admit I got more than my share of the double points, but alas, I only came in second place…Ricky M, the ho, made up for in quantity what I got in quality… it took a little longer to get the sober ones ready to romp…but, and G-d I wish I could use the term for the category here, when it came to the biggest point winner, well…
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
8:13 pm
“And some look back and think things were so much better in times when things like that and segregation were legal.”
Sickening, isn’t it?
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
8:17 pm
@josef
I am perfectly comfortable complimenting a man on his looks.
Did not always feel that way.
Pretty sure I wont be hanging out at the Heretic anytime soon.
Soothsayer
December 8th, 2012
8:19 pm
This is a depressing time of year. No more college football (that counts at least). The pros will be ending soon. No golf. Before you know it, it will be hockey and basketball. I’d rather watch paint dry than watch basketball or hockey. Whatever will I do . . .
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
8:19 pm
Go look in the mirror and how many are in that small car witcha??? What the F_-k? The kook has gone off the deep end and is speaking garble again. Just another episode of kooks gone crazy brought to you by Doomy.
DebbieDoRight -- Minister Of Propaganda
December 8th, 2012
8:21 pm
Frog: If you are looking for a quote such as : Whereas people may own people and they
shall be known as slaves and that will be legal that did not happen but slaves were to be counted as 3/5 of a person appears to recognize that slavery was legal.
Frog and josef – the 3/5th person was for purposes of the Electoral College system. In the south, there were more people (slaves), than in other states — so that the south wouldn’t predominantly have more representation than another state, they made up the 3/5th law.
However that didn’t legitimize slavery.
Frog: and humans marrying humans is not biblical? and besides I was mocking Donovan’s bestiality comment but he doesn’t believe some humans should marry other humans….
That wasn’t my point — and i guess I should’ve copied his FULL comment (and yours) in order to get a background to the point i was making.
I was making the point that in the bible, in Isiah where it talks about when God’s kingdom on earth comes to fruition then the lion wil lay with the lamb; since donovan stated he’d never seen different species of animals being together. I wasn’t commenting on bestiality — or advocating a biblical verse that says that. I’m not that far gone.
Isaiah 11:6
The wolf will live with the lamb, the leopard will lie down with the goat, the calf and the lion and the yearling together; and a little child will lead them.
RF: DDR and Josef: I sho am glad you two are around to run off the crazies. I hate it if I have to get up outa my rocker and go after them. It does disturb a good evenin’ buzz from the mint juleps on the verandah
Hiya RF!!! Happy saturday!
josef: Well, me and DDR does try to work in tandem…it cuts down on squabbles over the boa…
Yes — there’s nothing like a good yellow boa and a nice strong glass of vodka to get a party started!
josef
December 8th, 2012
8:22 pm
LOOK
Back in the day, he used to tell the ones sniffing around me, “yep, and you can look, but you can’t touch. Cause, guess what, it’s mine! Alllll mine. Nyanh-nyanh!”
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
8:23 pm
“Whatever will I do . .”
Return to Tara?
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
8:25 pm
soothsayer,
Look on the bright side. We got 35 bowls and God’s team the Crimson Tide plays Notre Dame in January. It will be the mighty crimson tide’s 3rd BCS national championship in 4 years. How in the hell can one not get excited about seeing the Tide run roughshod over another opponent? How???
“Might makes right”- Nick Saban
RF
December 8th, 2012
8:25 pm
josef @8:13- see, I know why you keep the boa. Quality is ALWAYS better than quantity, in my opinion!!
As to the biggest point winner here, that would be a tough debate!
Bobby
December 8th, 2012
8:25 pm
I don’t think gay marriage is a victory for liberalism as much as simply a victory for what is right in God’s eyes.
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
8:26 pm
“Dominate isn’t just a word. Its a lifestyle!”- Nick Saban
DebbieDoRight -- Minister Of Propaganda
December 8th, 2012
8:26 pm
RF: DDR @7:55- Many don’t realize the reason for age of consent laws. Pedophilia was probably more prominent then and entirely legal. And some look back and think things were so much better in times when things like that and segregation were legal
Uh huh. That’s those “good old days” that a lot of angry people want to go back to. The days when a white man’s word would beat out the words/eyewitness statements of:
10 Indians
15 Blacks
5 Asians
and
2500 Women.
josef
December 8th, 2012
8:26 pm
DDR
If you go back and look at the arguments from the period you will see that it WAS the 3/5 compromise that was used to uphold the constitutionality of the system…it is in the Constitution, therefore…
Ah, the boa and vodka…I best not do the latter…makes me want to brawl…
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
8:27 pm
@RF
In str8 porn it is all about how big the boobs and booty are. The face is 2nd and proportion does not count for squat.
I like a reasonable bosom and decent tush but am not attracted to the science experiments gone wrong that seem to permeate the genre.
The dudes are even worse – Steve Buscemi types whose only attributes seem to be ..well you know.
I am artist by nature, proportion is everything.
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
8:28 pm
“Abandon ye all hope”- Nick Saban
Soothsayer
December 8th, 2012
8:28 pm
Thelma: I think Alabama is going to kick N.D.’s ass. It won’t even be close!
“Return to Tara.” I hadn’t really thought about that.
Oh, well, just over 4 months until the Masters! Hallelujah!
josef
December 8th, 2012
8:29 pm
RF
That point winner I was talking about was in the contest among my friends..i.e. what did HE do…
But it sure would fit here, too!
RF
December 8th, 2012
8:30 pm
“Yes — there’s nothing like a good yellow boa and a nice strong glass of vodka to get a party started!”
And it’s even better when you show up at a party with a bunch of conservative straight folks!! I’m always amazed at how many come to LOVE the boa once the vodka loosens them up!!
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
8:31 pm
Gonna risk getting my condo fire-bombed but I think ND wins by 5.
josef
December 8th, 2012
8:31 pm
Look
As the old queens used to say, “what are you gonna do, paint a face on it and kiss it good night? Throw it over your shoulder and burp it?” There is such a thing as too much of a good thing.
barking frog
December 8th, 2012
8:32 pm
All aboaed, last call for alcohol….
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
8:32 pm
Sooth,
Well of course we’re going to whack Notre Dame. That’s why I wrote that we’ve already won 3 national titles in 4 years. Showing up and spanking that ass is just a formality for the men in Crimson.
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
8:34 pm
pardon my ignorance guys – are josef and RF talking about a bad Diana Ross costume or a real snake?
Soothsayer
December 8th, 2012
8:34 pm
If you’re like me, whenever I need to feel inadequate, I always watch a porno flick.
RF
December 8th, 2012
8:34 pm
“That’s those “good old days” that a lot of angry people want to go back to. The days when a white man’s word would beat out the words/eyewitness statements of:
10 Indians
15 Blacks
5 Asians
and
2500 Women”
Preach it girlfriend!! Perhaps part of the angst over all this is due to some fear that the white, heteosexual male may be, in fact, losing his dominance in the world.
josef- @8:29- yeah, I was just speculating a little there. I think some might just have some stories to tell, if they would.
td
December 8th, 2012
8:35 pm
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 8th, 2012
7:48 pm
The research is from NARAL and planned parenthood. Not very credible sources when this is about their industry that they want to protect.
Brosephus™
December 8th, 2012
8:35 pm
In str8 porn it is all about how big the boobs and booty are. The face is 2nd and proportion does not count for squat.
http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mapj3fKQhr1qkrzhgo1_500.jpg
Sorry, but I just couldn’t resist posting that one…
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
8:35 pm
@josef
Can u pls fwd directions on how to clean small batch bourbon out of a computer keyboard?
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
8:35 pm
look before i leap,
ND has no chance. None. And even if they could win it would be by 1 or 2 pts but certainly not by 5. I can’t see how they can score even 10 pts on Bama. Both are 1-2 nationally in defense but ND is 76th nationally in offense while Bama is 20th nationally in offense. Plus Bama plays in the big, bad, rough and tumble, physical SEC. Notre Dame not so much.
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
8:37 pm
Good lord that was bad bro. Still damn funny. But bad.
RF
December 8th, 2012
8:38 pm
“I am artist by nature, proportion is everything.”
Look: I’m with ya!! The unnatural “enhancement” just doesn’t do it for me. I think if God gave it to you, use it. If not, be VERY talented with what you have. As a hetero female friend of mine once said, “hell yeah, size matters. Anything beyond seven inches is gonna be out in the cold!!”
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
8:38 pm
“If you’re like me, whenever I need to feel inadequate, I always watch a porno flick.”
If you are like me, if I ever think I want to change careers….
josef
December 8th, 2012
8:38 pm
RF
But they won’t…and all WE’RE left with is idle speculation….
LOOK
The boa is the feather one…it’s a long running joke that started between me and DDR and once RF came on board, we had to agree that he was indeed welcome to share the boa…
indigo
December 8th, 2012
8:38 pm
Doggone/GA – “and is the mattress under your bed comfortable”
????????????????????????????????????????
I just might have to find you what you’re drinking and order me a case.
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
8:40 pm
Lord Bro!
I knew clicking that link would hurt and it did.
Will never be able to watch reruns of the Cosby show again.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 8th, 2012
8:40 pm
td, so far all that has been posted to counter it is some feeling pull from the butt of the garbage driver of the clown car.
So here’s a tip. If you want to counter it by challenging credibility of the evidence, you need to do more than just pull out a claim of saying “it’s [whatever]“. One way to do that is to have credible counter evidence. Another is to demonstrated with credible evidence a flaw in the methodology.
josef
December 8th, 2012
8:41 pm
BROSEPHUS
You gonna have to answer for that one on judgment day!
Vashtai
December 8th, 2012
8:41 pm
“And I’m saying let them live their private lives in private without having to redefine traditional values to try and support their abhorrent behavior….” Judge not lest you be judged.
I love hearing the so called conservatives bring the Bible into this discussion. When the appeal of Prop 8 went to trial, the only reasons the proponents could come up with was, “it’s in the Bible,” and “it’s always the way we’ve done it.” Their main argument is, “gay sex is icky.” Hardly good reasons for blocking marriage equality.
SCOTUS knows they were sullied when they imposed their decision on the 2000 presidential election. Roberts was the swing vote on upholding the so-called Obamacare. He didn’t want to be on the wrong side of history. I think he will feel the same way regarding marriage equality. I think they will vote 6-3 in favor of marriage equality.
So all you people who love that your religion is imposed into our laws, enjoy your last hurrah.
The Gay Agenda Moves Forward. After we get full marriage equality, we and our minions will start the grassroot efforts to remove the tax exempt status churches have saddled the people with. The Deficit would evaporate if churches paid their fair share of taxes. We are the Borg. Resistance is futile. Bwahahahaha!
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
8:41 pm
“I just might have to find you what you’re drinking and order me a case”
I would suggest you stop now, before you end up under the table
RF
December 8th, 2012
8:42 pm
@Bro 8:35- if I ever thought about being curious about the straight life, you just ended that!! LOL That was tooooo funny. Scary thing is, there are those who wouldn’t care one bit about the face.
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
8:42 pm
“Perhaps part of the angst over all this is due to some fear that the white, heteosexual male may be, in fact, losing his dominance in the world.”
Won’t happen anytime soon. And lets hope not. The white male dominated nations of Europe and North America are the most civilized and modernized nations on earth. And what’s more is that they treat women and minorities in their nations much better than the men in Africa, Asia, or Latin America treat women and minority groups in those nations. Just an uncomfortable truth but an uncomfortable truth that bothers people nonetheless. Especially the ones who wake up every day looking to be mad at white males.
DebbieDoRight -- Minister Of Propaganda
December 8th, 2012
8:45 pm
josef @ 6:26 — yes and NO. We are both right and both wrong on one salient point. Slavery was given a nod in the south because of the Electoral College votes/Representation like i said; but if the North would’ve allowed the south to count their ’slaves” as a full person, then slavery would’ve been gone a lot sooner.
Recall that in the “Great Compromise,” it was determined that representation in the House of Representatives would be based on the population of each state. After the convention approved the Great Compromise, Madison wrote: “It seems now to be pretty well understood that the real difference of interests lies not between the large and small but between the northern and southern states. The institution of slavery and its consequences form the line of discrimination.” This division over slavery led to the “3/5 Compromise.”
Of the 55 Convention delegates, about 25 (almost half!) owned slaves. The delegates from Southern (slave) states wanted to counts slaves as part of their population. This would give the Southern states additional representatives in the U.S. House of Representatives
Delegates from the Northern (Free) states strongly opposed this, arguing that if slaves had no rights to vote (or any other rights of citizenship) then the South should not be given additional representatives in the House. Also, the North feared that counting slaves as part of the South’s population would allow the South to have enough representatives in the House to out-vote the North on issues regarding slavery. The South likewise feared that not counting slaves as part of their population would give the South too few representatives in the House, thus allowing the North to out-vote the South on issues regarding slavery. The compromise they reached would arbitrarily count each slave as 3/5 of a person. Thus, neither North nor South fully got their way, as slaves were counted in part toward population when determining how many representatives the free whites should have in the House of Representatives. Hence the name “3/5 compromise.” Not wanting to put the word “slave” in the Constitution, the delegates agreed the Constitution would state that population would be determined by counting the number of “free Persons . . . plus three-fifths of all other Persons . . .” Of course, if one is an “other person” rather than a free person, obviously the “other person” must be “not free”; in other words, a slave.
The North and South also divided over whether the new national legislature (Congress) would be able to regulate (and thus perhaps outlaw) slavery. The North wanted the legislature to be able to regulate slavery, and of course the South did not want the legislature to have this power.
http://www.ucs.louisiana.edu/~ras2777/amgov/slavery2.html
MC
December 8th, 2012
8:47 pm
If I were gay, I would console myself with the fact that I didn’t have to get married.
indigo
December 8th, 2012
8:47 pm
Brosephus
I’m not saying this man/boy thing will be legal anytime soon. And, it’s true our society, at this time, would never condone such a thing. And, I would march in the streets to stop it, like most people would.
However, there was a time when a lot of people said “never” when it came to school integration, women’s right to vote and gays openly out of the closet.
It’s just a matter of time until some politician, realizing his district is loaded with pedofiles and politically correct voters, makes the first move in this direction. And, before you say “that won’t happen”, remember politicians will do and say anything to get elected.
(you don’t really think all the politicians in these states allowing gay marriage actually approve of it, do you?)
josef
December 8th, 2012
8:47 pm
RF
Thass funny!
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
8:49 pm
Jeez. Is that little sandflea still nipping at my ankle. He’s a pesky little flea he is.
RF
December 8th, 2012
8:49 pm
“And what’s more is that they treat women and minorities in their nations much better than the men in Africa, Asia, or Latin America”
I might have to give you some on that point, but I feel certain that might be a bit of a broad statement. I agree with the general notion though. But let’s face it, in this country, the white population isn’t reproducing as fast as others and will be a statistical minority in not too many years. But then there is always apartheid- the British made that work for an impressive period of time.
josef
December 8th, 2012
8:50 pm
DDR
Kind of interesting from the cultural history and legal points of view that we are still there…even if the 13th Amendment DID settle that question, eh?
getalife
December 8th, 2012
8:51 pm
morsy caved.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
8:51 pm
“However, there was a time when a lot of people said “never” when it came to school integration, women’s right to vote and gays openly out of the closet”
Sometimes “never” is relative, not absolute
josef
December 8th, 2012
8:51 pm
DDR
BTW, thanks for that read…
josef
December 8th, 2012
8:53 pm
getalife
He did? That’s a positive (sort of) bit of news…
DebbieDoRight -- Minister Of Propaganda
December 8th, 2012
8:53 pm
I am artist by nature, proportion is everything.
Oooh I like that………. sounds kinda kinky!
Is that a proportionally correct item in your pocket, or are you just happy to see me?
td
December 8th, 2012
8:53 pm
Keep Up the Good Fight!
Just as creditable as your source of evidence.
http://www.grtl.org/docs/roevwade.pdf
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
8:54 pm
@josef
Thanks for clearing that up.
So, let me get this straight (NPI), you are a gay, jewish, coon’ass, hillbilly, feather boa wearing lib?
Absolutely NO offense meant in that query. But I am a data geek/freak – we live to categorize – Think Big Bang Theory meets Oracle.
RF
December 8th, 2012
8:55 pm
“It’s just a matter of time until some politician, realizing his district is loaded with pedofiles”
Okay, we lived that period of history before age of consent laws. Read above for that discussion. If there were a district “loaded with pedophiles”, I think you’d also have a district loaded with prisons. That is a ridiculous argument, and I’m sure you know it. Just another straw to grasp at, and a short one to boot.
(you don’t really think all the politicians in these states allowing gay marriage actually approve of it, do you?)
They don’t have to approve of it, but the do have to represent voters who might. And if enough of them do, it is the job of the representative to know that and vote accordingly. If not, then his constituents have the authority to vote him out of office, as many do.
Brosephus™
December 8th, 2012
8:55 pm
Re my 8:35 post:
I figured everybody here needed to laugh for a minute or two. These kinds of discussions tend to get heated. Sometimes, you have to stop and laugh at life. Someone scarred my brain with that image, and I wouldn’t be Brosephus if I had not shared that image with friends.
————————-
indigo
I’ll say it again. I understand where you’re coming from. Most any other area, and I would agree with you. When it comes to children though, I think it would be a long, long time before any legislator attempted to think about possibly submitting legislation that would open that door.
Example 1: The UN Disability thing that just blew up in the news. Given that the UN modeled their resolution based on our own Disabilies Act, and the treaty is worded and designed so that it would not be enforceable over our law, there were still people too skittish at the “idea” that the UN would somehow control people with disabilities here.
If legislators go beast mode crazy with something like that, what do you think they would do to something that would remotely lead to possible harm being done to children?
josef
December 8th, 2012
8:56 pm
Vashtai
Where did you get that handle…? Fill me in…I have my own reason for asking…
getalife
December 8th, 2012
9:00 pm
Johnny Heisman.
SEC!
He beat Alabama but could not beat LSU!
RF
December 8th, 2012
9:00 pm
“So, let me get this straight (NPI), you are a gay, jewish, coon’ass, hillbilly, feather boa wearing lib?”
The most interesting kind!!
The only thing more challenging is being a gay Southern Baptist…you have to hide the boas.
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
9:00 pm
I just read a book with a character named Vashtai…. eerie.
josef
December 8th, 2012
9:01 pm
LOOK
“you are a gay, jewish, coon’ass, hillbilly, feather boa wearing lib?”
Not a coona33, French, but not Cajun…but gay, Jewish, hillbilly feather boa wearing Plantation Liberal delusional lickspittle…
DebbieDoRight -- Minister Of Propaganda
December 8th, 2012
9:02 pm
Won’t happen anytime soon. And lets hope not. The white male dominated nations of Europe and North America are the most civilized and modernized nations on earth
Right now I’m watching, on the history channel, Mankind the story of all of us, and they’ve proven that theory to be a lie.
When Europeans made contact with other civilizations, the Egyptians, the Chineese, the Muslims and the Aztecs, this is when they became civilized.
========================
josef: BTW, thanks for that read…
NP! I love the law, history, and the history of laws! Makes me hot!
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 8th, 2012
9:03 pm
Well td, congrats you are beginning to understand evidence.
But grasshopper, the “pulled from the butt” clown claimed that there were few illegal abortions. I countered with evidence to contradict that unsupported claim. Now you cite to a group that claims to question the evidence but they do not show their work. Here’s a second tip: Just because its on the internet does not mean that it is true. But I invite you actually counter the information with an analysis that is more than just “we don’t think its right”.
getalife
December 8th, 2012
9:04 pm
josef,
He canceled the order.
He caved.
josef
December 8th, 2012
9:04 pm
LOOK
It was my paternal grandmother’s name (she spelled it Vashti). She named two of her own daughters Yael and Lillith…
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 8th, 2012
9:04 pm
Legislative history is DDR’s porn? oh how very sad.
Jimmy Foley
December 8th, 2012
9:05 pm
You ignorant people that have never been around gay folks think they choose to be the way they are. You people that follow the bible completely ignore all of the murdering and pillaging in the name of “God” that goes on in the Bible and only choose to follow what you’ve been trained to follow. I am a straight man and don’t particularly care to be around gay people, but I am smart enough to know that they did not choose to like the same sex they just do. So, if marriage is such an institution why does the more Christian leaning south have the highest divorce rate in the country? Marriage between a man and a woman has not been treated with much respect for a long time in this country so why not let two men or women get hitched if they want to. The guy that cuts my hair has been with his husband longer than most straight couples I know.
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
9:06 pm
@josef
Merci pour l’insight. Excusez moi pour mon mauvais français, il a été de nombreuses années, depuis que j’ai eu à parler.
getalife
December 8th, 2012
9:06 pm
I should add the morsy power grab after a dictator was one of the dumbest moves I have seen since mitt said facts don’t matter and hid his taxes.
Just dumb.
josef
December 8th, 2012
9:07 pm
getalife
Aw right!!
DDR
Excellent program…
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
9:11 pm
Sandflea thinks he countered with evidence. Um. No. He did not. He countered with some complete BS from planned parenthood and some other abortion rights groups that is blatantly biased. How damn dumb can this assclown possibly be??? Jeez.
Also if you read td’s article its from an anti abortion group. But their research comes from govt data such as the center for vital statistics and govt stats on the number of women who died from maternity related deaths. Somehow or another assclown doesn’t understand the difference between a kook left group making up their own stats and a conservative group using govt stats to make their case. God save us from assclowns like this.
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
9:12 pm
“The only thing more challenging is being a gay Southern Baptist…you have to hide the boas”
I suspect Cosmo’s don’t go over real well at Wednesday night social either.
As one who was once a member of the SBC, if ur are gay, why do you stay?
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
9:14 pm
“I should add the morsy power grab after a dictator was one of the dumbest moves I have seen since mitt said facts don’t matter and hid his taxes”
No kidding! It’s easy to forget history…but that’s got to be some kind of record
josef
December 8th, 2012
9:16 pm
LOOK
Ce n’était pas mal … ma famille est française des deux côtés et nous l’avons appris dans l’enfance (ouais, hillbilly français!) La maman de mon papa était en française de la Nouvelle-Orléans.
josef
December 8th, 2012
9:17 pm
oops
était UNE française
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 8th, 2012
9:18 pm
doomclown, grown ups are talking here. Why don’t you trot on over to the clown car and drive it over to Kyle’s where they believe buffoonery like yours.
josef
December 8th, 2012
9:22 pm
getalife
Boy, he sure blew that political capital gained in Gaza in one fell swoop, didn’t he?
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 8th, 2012
9:23 pm
…”Doomy can be quite a blog jackass sometimes. OK maybe many times…”
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
9:23 pm
“Right now I’m watching, on the history channel, Mankind the story of all of us, and they’ve proven that theory to be a lie.”
“When Europeans made contact with other civilizations, the Egyptians, the Chineese, the Muslims and the Aztecs, this is when they became civilized.”
Very true. 5 centuries ago the Chinese had a higher standard of living than the Europeans and were more “civilized”. During Europe’s dark ages the Arabs were going through their golden age and excelled in science and mathematics and gave us the numeral system, algebra, astronomy, etc. European society was revolutionized in part by getting the printing press from the Chinese and the numeral system from the Arabs which was superior to the cumbersome Roman numeral system.
The Sub Saharan Africans have always been backwards ass not because they are naturally stupid but because they had less interaction with other cultures which enables a culture to advance in terms of ideas and technology. Africa’s main water systems outside of the Nile also mostly travel east and west and may be seasonable, thus making inland navigation and trade more difficult and reducing contact with the outside world. Africa also has few natural harbors which also made for a continent that for the most part did not consist of seafaring peoples- except for North Africa. The reasons for advancement have more to do with geography and exchanges with other cultures and peoples than anything else.
But I’m not talking about history. I’m talking about here and now. And here and now in today’s world the white male dominated European nations are the most enlightened, the most civilized, and the most tolerant towards minorities and women’s rights relative to the rest of the world. And that ma’am is not debatable.
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
9:24 pm
@Thulsa
The stats don’t back me up and if we were to wager money I would want odds.
But my gut tells me that ND is hungrier and AL is just a bit too cocky.
My 5 pt guess is the totally unpredictable safety netted against ND, on their own 20, down 2 with 2nd and 13 and 1:37 on the clock and a 53 yd heave to the left outside corner.
Next play with hurry up offensive is a right slant to get to FG range – bad coverage and a blown tackle, ND marches into the end zone.
If I am gonna be wrong, let it be said I predicted details.
DebbieDoRight -- Minister Of Propaganda
December 8th, 2012
9:26 pm
josef – yeah its great!! Now their doing the history of commodities trading. Who knew it started with tulips in the Neatherlands? This is some great stuff!
Keep: Legislative history is DDR’s porn? oh how very sad
Well – I also like gay porn! I even like the dominatrix stuff! But history is the best ever — cause it really happened. Not like those stories out of playboy.
The Day I Banged The Hot Teen Cheerleader:
Dear Playboy she took one look at me and tore my clothes off and then her and her equally hot friend Bambi……………
getalife
December 8th, 2012
9:27 pm
josef,
Yes, he did.
I doubt it will stop the protests.
They want him gone.
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
9:27 pm
Just when I thought sandflea’s meltdown couldn’t get any worse. Don’t worry sandflea- you will always be endeared to me as my favorite toy.
josef
December 8th, 2012
9:28 pm
THULSA
“The Sub Saharan Africans have always been backwards ass”
Always? Timbuktu, Songhai, Ethiopia, Zimbabwe…?
RF
December 8th, 2012
9:29 pm
“I should add the morsy power grab after a dictator was one of the dumbest moves I have seen since mitt said facts don’t matter and hid his taxes”
I thought so too, but I figured he had to try, just to see what would happen. The move to real democratic government, while appealing, isn’t an easy or sudden one. It takes time, and there will be those who promise it but never really intend to deliver. I think he might have learned that perhaps the citizens were really serious about democracy. Time will tell if he really accepts that fact, I suppose.
“As one who was once a member of the SBC, if ur are gay, why do you stay?”
Well, it has a lot to do with being raised in that church and the suspicion the preach about the rest. That and the fact that those who are the most uptight generally tend to be a LOT of fun when you get to finally admit their real interests…but I digress!
Seriously, I think you tend to stick with what is traditional in your life. Even if it doesn’t agree with your current beliefs, there’s something appealing about the nostalgia of the place itself, if not the ideology of those within it. I love going back to the small church I was raised in, and a cousin of mine is the preacher. I can walk in that building and still remember the smell of the place. Many of my kin are buried in the cemetery outside, and that was where I was baptized. I don’t like the views folks there have on my lifestyle, but an inexorable part of who I am was formed there.
Look before I leap...
December 8th, 2012
9:31 pm
@josef
Thank you that was kind.
I was a bit bemused to learn, after 9 years of studying French, that LA French (and it got worse the further North I went) is very different than what they speak in N.O.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 8th, 2012
9:31 pm
And here and now in today’s world the white male dominated European nations are the most enlightened, the most civilized, and the most tolerant towards minorities and women’s rights relative to the rest of the world. And that ma’am is not debatable.
That situation is not because of conservatives. it is owing to progressive ideas and laws. It is because progressives are defending those rights against the onslaught of GOP’s regressive laws and misguided conservatives. We also see what happens in Africa as a result of the “white man” conservative action plans in Nigeria. A sad and very debatable point.
josef
December 8th, 2012
9:31 pm
DDR
The tulips? I knew that…and they came from Turkey…
Did you ever catch any of James Burke’s “Connections?” If not, check it out…here’s a link to the first episode…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OcSxL8GUn-g
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
9:36 pm
“Did you ever catch any of James Burke’s “Connections?” If not, check it out…here’s a link to the first episode”
Loved that series! And the books are even better, because they’re more detailed.
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
December 8th, 2012
9:36 pm
Headline (ABC): “Gay Marriage: Will Justices Follow Popular Opinion?”
Let’s hope not or our Republic form of government will have become a pure democracy which is what our founding fathers most feared.
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
9:36 pm
Look before I leap,
I’ll respect your opinion but with all due respect it sounds to me like you haven’t seen ND play much. Their offense is horrific for the most part. They simply will not be able to move the ball on the Bama D and certainly not with any consistency. I honestly wonder if they can score against Bama.
Their defense is incredibly tough in the front 7 but with Bama pounding on them all day with our O-line eventually we will break them just like we broke Georgia. My guess is that they will begin to really wilt in the 3rd qtr and in the 4th qtr they will be fully broken.
As for Bama being cocky that’s just our fans. The team itself is going to be focused. You don’t want to face Nick Saban when he’s had 40 days to get ready for you. Just ask LSU last year in the title game. They just got stomped on like a bug in the rematch.
Bottom line is that ND simply does not have the firepower to move the ball with any consistency against the Bama D. And that will ultimately be their undoing as we work on that defense all game long. We’ve got the nation’s no. 2 guy in passing efficiency I think in McCarron and not one but 2 1,000 yard rushers. We’ve got 3 O-lineman that are all Americans and all 3 are projected to go 1st round or early 2nd round at the latest. This one has the potential to get ugly.
RF
December 8th, 2012
9:36 pm
“And here and now in today’s world the white male dominated European nations are the most enlightened, the most civilized, and the most tolerant towards minorities and women’s rights relative to the rest of the world”
Dominated how? In numbers? That is changing, and has a number of those white males very, very worried. Which would explain their zeal for passing all sorts of far-right legislation in many states of late. Other than that, there aren’t as many countries left that the whites outnumber the rest in the numbers they even one generation ago. One might interject here that you sound a wee bit like the Fuhrer in your belief that the white male dominated countries somehow have a monopoly on civility and fairness to all.
DebbieDoRight -- Minister Of Propaganda
December 8th, 2012
9:38 pm
First off, I won’t even BEGIN to go into African History, Timbuktu, Mali empire, Songhali, Cote de Ivorie, Sudan or Ethiopia. I’ll just let you believe what you want about those.
But i WILL hash out this point that you brought up:
But I’m not talking about history. I’m talking about here and now. And here and now in today’s world the white male dominated European nations are the most enlightened, the most civilized, and the most tolerant towards minorities and women’s rights relative to the rest of the world. And that ma’am is not debatable
Firstly, the “truly” European countries are very small and not that white anymore. Denmark comes to mind…………
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
9:39 pm
“We also see what happens in Africa as a result of the “white man” conservative action plans in Nigeria. A sad and very debatable point.”
Aaaah. The blame whitey and blame America first crowd at work again. It never do get old do it cockaroacha.
josef
December 8th, 2012
9:43 pm
LOOK
When Le Conseil pour le développement du français en Louisiane was formed to protect, preserve and develop French in the state, the biggest problem they ran into was WHICH French. It was finally decided that for education purposes, while all the dialects would be taught in the French immersion schools, the language of instruction would be the academic standard. The problem was, very few people spoke it as the language of daily discourse and even fewer were prepared to teach using it. Thus, they had to “import” teachers from abroad.
td
December 8th, 2012
9:44 pm
Here is a secular educated argument about why it is not a valid state interest to support gay marriage.
” But do all people have the right to marry whomever they want already, with the exception of same-sex couples? No; states have laws regulating marriage, forbidding first cousins from marrying, brothers and sisters from marrying, parents and offspring from marrying, and people from marrying animals, inanimate objects, or multiple other individuals.”…
“Why is marriage regulated by the government at all? In fact, not only are there restrictions on certain types of marriages, but there are incentives for heterosexuals (not falling into the categories above) to marry. Why should the government encourage — through tax breaks and other benefits — some types of marriages while banning others? The rationale is that males and females, when married, are more likely to procreate, thus ensuring the continuation of American society. It is certainly to America’s advantage to have citizens, so there exists a compelling state interest justifying government subsidization of heterosexual marriage. The banned types of marriage are similarly rationalized; offspring from family members who marry are significantly more likely to be sterile, thus unable to continue the proliferation of society, or otherwise impaired. It is therefore not in the interest of government to encourage these types of marriages.”….
“It should be obvious, by this point, which category gay marriage falls into. Same-sex couples are unable to procreate, meaning that there is no compelling interest to subsidize their marriages. At this point, many would argue that the happiness of same-sex couples would be enhanced by gay marriage, thus providing a compelling interest. This, in fact, is not the case. The government has already shown through prohibiting certain types of marriage that it does not view enhanced happiness as a compelling enough interest to encourage marriage of any kind. After all, if “enhanced happiness” was a compelling interest, it could be used to justify government subsidization of chocolate, which is proven to increase happiness through the release of certain endorphins. In fact, one could argue that the government should subsidize anything and everything that makes someone happy. Thus, “enhanced happiness” can clearly not be considered a compelling enough interest to justify the recognition and, therefore, subsidization of gay marriage.”
http://tech.mit.edu/V131/N29/normandin_cp.html
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
December 8th, 2012
9:44 pm
Debbie:
You left out “West Virginia”.
getalife
December 8th, 2012
9:44 pm
scout,
Our President won so they will probably approve it.
What does it got to do with you?
Are you gay wanting to get married?
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
9:45 pm
“Firstly, the “truly” European countries are very small and not that white anymore. Denmark comes to mind…………”
Nope. Most countries in Europe are still considered Caucasian. Now of course they aren’t as dominant as they used to be with the expanding Muslim populations that are blowing shyte up but they are and will remain caucasian for a long time to come. And if there ever comes a day when say the Muslims outnumber the French in France for example well that would just be too bad for France. They would go back in time to the repressive, brutal, and hateful type of dictatorships that we see all over Africa and the Middle east. And the people that would suffer the most-women.
FSUbRaVe
December 8th, 2012
9:46 pm
doesnt matter how many americans agree with gay marriage, that doesnt mean they are right…it is more proof of society collapsing….there is hope homosexuals and others caught in sexual sin…
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
December 8th, 2012
9:47 pm
td:
Nice try but it will fall on deaf ears.
In any case, gays/lesbians have exactly the same marriage rights as I do.
A male gay can marry a female lesbian !
What they really want is “additional” rights.
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
9:47 pm
“The blame whitey and blame America first crowd at work ”
Looks like someone is feeling insecure in their whiteness
They BOTH suck
December 8th, 2012
9:48 pm
getalife
It would probably baffle the mind to know the “activities” of some of those who have fought and will continue to fight this issue………..
getalife
December 8th, 2012
9:48 pm
White powder!
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
December 8th, 2012
9:48 pm
getalife:
“Our President won so they will probably approve it.”
You mean the Supreme Court should make its decisions based on which president wins?
What civics course did you take in high school or college ?
Brosephus™
December 8th, 2012
9:49 pm
Well – I also like gay porn! I even like the dominatrix stuff!
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 8th, 2012
9:49 pm
Doggone, yep…the poor persecuted white man.
And one that tries to take credit for progressiveness as if only the “white man” is responsible for it. 
getalife
December 8th, 2012
9:51 pm
scout,
Deal with it.
Majority rules.
They BOTH suck
December 8th, 2012
9:51 pm
get
seems some will fight like hell to keep their own “activities” in the “closet”
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
9:52 pm
“Doggone, yep…the poor persecuted white man”
Doesn’t your heart just bleed for them?
josef
December 8th, 2012
9:53 pm
DDR
Speaking of the layers of history…are you familiar with Fisher v Allen?
DebbieDoRight -- Minister Of Propaganda
December 8th, 2012
9:54 pm
Did you ever catch any of James Burke’s “Connections?” If not, check it out…here’s a link to the first episode
LOVE IT!! Thank you than you thank you!! You always hip me to the bestest stuff!!
getalife
December 8th, 2012
9:54 pm
Both,
More self defeatism.
They BOTH suck
December 8th, 2012
9:55 pm
Will check back in tomorrow, maybe someone will have posted a reasonable response as to how & why gay marriage would change their life , belief and what they teach in their home if it were made legal nation wide tomorrow without going to the slippery slopes bull crap posted here today and many other times in the past…………….
peace
josef
December 8th, 2012
9:55 pm
DDR
And you me…!
RF
December 8th, 2012
9:55 pm
“but they are and will remain caucasian for a long time to come”
Considering the rate of reproduction, I’d say it will change vastly in the next generation or two, and then whatever will the white males do? It doesn’t help that a fair percentage of them are gay…
“In any case, gays/lesbians have exactly the same marriage rights as I do.”
If there were a dumba$$ statement of the day’s thread award, that would have won it. If that were true, then this debate today wouldn’t have been happening, and you know it.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 8th, 2012
9:57 pm
doggone, especially as they try to claim some moral high ground, ignoring past history and the overall fact that others have had to drag them toward the light and their current efforts to crawl back into the dark. But hey, I am sure the woman suffrage movement was about the persecuted conservative white male.
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
9:58 pm
“That is changing, and has a number of those white males very, very worried.”
Nope. That is your imagination speaking and how you assume other people think. I will say though that the one fear that whites do have is that a less white America would politically reflect more of the 3rd world with its rampant corruption. I think there is a fear that if we resembled say Mexico that we would descend into the kind of corruption and chaos that Mexico has constantly experienced. In other words that we would regress to 3rd world status and 3rd world politicing. Otherwise I feel your views are misplaced. You think white males are worried just to be worried.
“Which would explain their zeal for passing all sorts of far-right legislation in many states of late.”
And what would be these “far-right legislative” extremes that you speak of? For example is it extreme to expect our national borders to be protected?
“Other than that, there aren’t as many countries left that the whites outnumber the rest in the numbers they even one generation ago.”
There’s plenty- North America, Europe, Australia, etc. You seem to want to act like the reduced influence of white males around the globe is somehow a good thing. I don’t see how given that our nations are far more tolerant than in the rest of the world.
“One might interject here that you sound a wee bit like the Fuhrer in your belief that the white male dominated countries somehow have a monopoly on civility and fairness to all.”
I didn’t say we have a monopoly on civilized behavior. Japan and several of the East Asian nations are modern, civilized nations to be admired.
I think you bringing in the Fuhrer reference is just more of the Nazi crap libs like to make up off the top of their head. You should read up on Godwin’s law and learn why it makes you look foolish with that reference.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin’s_law
All I’m saying is that some of you libs seem to take delight in hoping to see diminished influence of the white male in the world. My question is why given that the white male dominated nations are the most tolerant?
Doggone/GA
December 8th, 2012
9:59 pm
“doggone, especially as they try to claim some moral high ground, ignoring past history”
Yeah, I ran into something like that same attitude in my parents when I took them to see “Unto These Hills” – they were more than a bit upset at the portrayal of the White people.
DebbieDoRight -- Minister Of Propaganda
December 8th, 2012
10:01 pm
OMG! Now they’re chronicling the advent of how Shah Jahan made the Taj Mahal!
To go inside is on my bucket list.
However, i found out, through PBS, that ever since 9/11 and the threats to various world treasures, it’s closed to the public.
to me, the story of the taj mahal is one of the most romantic in all the world….
============
SoCoBro – Hey, so I have a dark side……… (shrug & a smile)
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 8th, 2012
10:02 pm
Vaginas are going to protect our borders? Hmmmmm… chafing is now morphing into border defense. Its Jurassic Park meets Terminator all over again.
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
10:03 pm
“Considering the rate of reproduction, I’d say it will change vastly in the next generation or two, and then whatever will the white males do? It doesn’t help that a fair percentage of them are gay…”
Nope. I think we had this discussion and I believe it said that by 2050 that whites will achieve a 49% minority for the first time.That’s about 2 generations away and you don’t know if those birth rates will hold. As the immigrants become more successful by their 2nd and 3rd generations they too will then experience lower birth rates. Demographics do change you know. Doesn’t matter though. We will still be the biggest of several minority groups. But again. Why do you and other libs seem to take delight in waning white male influence considering that white male societies are the most advanced and the most tolerant societies on earth?
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
10:07 pm
“But hey, I am sure the woman suffrage movement was about the persecuted conservative white male.”
Gawd the sandflea says some damn ignorant things. Womans suffrage was achieved decades and decades ago. Lemme know when women achieve equal rights in places like Saudi Arabia where its illegal for them to drive. Lemme know when men in Brazil can no longer get away with murdering adulterous lives by using the “honor killing” defense because the woman’s adultery offended his honor. And learn to live in the present sandflea instead of droning on about when women couldn’t vote numerous decades ago. gawd you are stupid.
josef
December 8th, 2012
10:12 pm
I’m always a bit amused when it comes to this “white minority” thingie. Excepting my three years in the Pacific Northwest, I have never lived in an environment where whites were more than 60% of the local demographic…most have been less than 50%.
The hardest thing for me to get used to up in the Northwest was the fact that being blond, fair complexioned, and green eyed didn’t make me “stop and take a second look” special!
RF
December 8th, 2012
10:12 pm
“I think you bringing in the Fuhrer reference is just more of the Nazi crap libs like to make up off the top of their head.”
Well, when someone promotes white male supremacy, the reference does come to mind…
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
10:14 pm
Its time! Doomy headed out to do some drinking at the local bar. Been fun but I gotta let sandflea and some of the libs get on with their Saturday night kookapalooza of blaming the white male for all of our social ills. hee hee. Night night sandflea. You be a good toy and I’ll play with you again. I promise!
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 8th, 2012
10:14 pm
now now doomclown… calling posters stupid will get you a red card. But I understand you cannot handle any challenges to your pompous butt fedora with actual information. Again: I can explain it to you by a post but I can not understand it for you.
DebbieDoRight -- Minister Of Propaganda
December 8th, 2012
10:15 pm
scout:You left out “West Virginia”.
Explain — I don’t get it.
josef: nope, but I’m ‘googling’ it now.
Doom: I will say though that the one fear that whites do have is that a less white America would politically reflect more of the 3rd world with its rampant corruption.
HUH? I don’t get that. For one our government IS corrupt. Citizens United v. Hillary Clinton was one step. Corporations are people, was another. And the biggie of course, is the whole Con Agra thing. All that is corrupt legislature; the majority of this legislature/veridicts are brought on by white males. Not all, but a big majority. So, corruption comes in all colors.
josef
December 8th, 2012
10:15 pm
DDR
I’ve never had any real desire to go to India, but the Taj Mahal is one of my dream spots…
josef
December 8th, 2012
10:17 pm
DDR
What’s the old line? The dollar is green…
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
10:17 pm
RF,
Gotta go but before show me where I promoted white male “supremacy”. I simply asked you to provide a reason why you think waning white male influence is such a good thing given the fact that the white male led societies of Europe and North America are generally the most tolerant societies in the world. Just explain why you seem to delight in this. I’ll check back tomorrow. Gotta go. My bar stool be calling my name and the crowd I’m sure is chanting and clamoring for Doomy.
Thulsa Doom
December 8th, 2012
10:19 pm
sandflea,
You started off the evening calling me garbage which is a red card. How quickly you forget. Gawd you are stupid. Toodles!!!!
RF
December 8th, 2012
10:20 pm
“Nope. I think we had this discussion and I believe it said that by 2050 that whites will achieve a 49% minority for the first time.”
And if, as you posit, other cultures will see declining birth rates as they become more “successful”, and that takes more than a generation or two I’d say, then what happens to us white folks in the meantime? If we continue to decline, then by the time the rest see a similar drop, we’ll be a much smaller minority according to your timeline. The only hope is hanging to political power for as long as possible. The shift will be much like South Africa, and probably much more hard fought. In the meantime, there does seem to be quite a bit of frenzy in those states that have a nice conservative majority to push through legislation (like anti-union laws) that favor the rich, white elite.
RF
December 8th, 2012
10:23 pm
“I simply asked you to provide a reason why you think waning white male influence is such a good thing”
I didn’t say it was good OR bad, just a reality that the wise will adjust to and learn to deal with, in my opinion. There just seems to be a frantic nature about the traditional white male leaders of late that seems to be motivated by fear that very soon the women and the minorites might hold as many, if not more, positions of power, and they don’t seem to be accepting it very well.
RF
December 8th, 2012
10:28 pm
DDR @10:15- and I’d bet the farm that Mittens was talking to a room full of those “people” when he made the now infamous 47% comments. Between Citizens United and the 2012 campaign, I think conservative “values” have proven themselves. They won the court’s blessing in one and lost over 50% of voters in the other.
Jm
December 8th, 2012
10:28 pm
Liberals are so dumb
“So do your worst, Justice Scalia”
Who’s to say Scalia won’t vote in favor of gay marriage?
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
December 8th, 2012
10:35 pm
Debbie:
“West Virginia”.
Just being sarcastic ………… W.Va. as a European country.
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
December 8th, 2012
10:36 pm
getalife:
“Majority rules.”
Of course a majority of Supreme Court justices ruling on a case makes it the law of the land.
But they don’t do that based on who just won the presidency.
Geez !
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 8th, 2012
10:46 pm
awwwwh poor wittle doomsy claims I called him garbage…
I guess he demonstrates the stupidity of his comprehension. But he’s welcome to prove that I did…you know after his little Perry Mason diatribe. Drinking and posting don’t work for you child.
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
December 8th, 2012
10:50 pm
Good Fight:
“Drinking and posting don’t work for you child.”
Maybe you can help getalife too.
getalife
December 8th, 2012
10:50 pm
scout,
Good luck beating Ted Olson.
DebbieDoRight -- Minister Of Propaganda
December 8th, 2012
10:52 pm
Between Citizens United and the 2012 campaign, I think conservative “values” have proven themselves. They won the court’s blessing in one and lost over 50% of voters in the other.
Word.
scout – OOOOHHH! Now i get it!
josef — Just the STORY behind the Taj Mahal is the most romantic thing EVAH!! To love some one so much that you’d not only want the world to know of that love, but you want to leave a monument to it so that everyone will see it forever…………Sigh……………… Makes you feel like Veronica!
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 8th, 2012
11:00 pm
Now now Senior Digits, bearing false witness is a sin. Not very honorable of you. We know that Doom has blogged here drunk a few times.
Fred ™
December 8th, 2012
11:04 pm
Well I see Keep is still here. He counts as a real person lol. As do Scout and Debbie…… getalife. i guess I asked my question too soon. Sorry.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 8th, 2012
11:09 pm
Fred, doomclown left so you can cross off one of those non-real persons you were asking about (I wont use the term you used because the poor child will cry again, but it fits).
Edward
December 8th, 2012
11:14 pm
It is truly amazing that the people here crowing about their superior morality actually demonstrate nothing of the sort. When did it become the conservative mantra to spew lie after lie, obfuscate and deceive, while claiming to be vanguards of truth and decency? You people are truly disgusting, but so typical of “white” Georgia.
Orange12
December 8th, 2012
11:22 pm
Edward,
You sound as if some “white” person just beat your ass. With people like you, racism will never end.
ld
December 8th, 2012
11:29 pm
I’ve forgotten what comic said it but I recall that one asserted that gays should have an equal right to be miserable, too.
It is truly sad that the Republican party I once supported no longer exists — it has abandoned indivdiual liberty for women (opposes women’s right to make their own personal, medical and reproductive choices) and it has abandoned equal right under law for all that do not choose a lifestyle that is not view with favor by the zealots without whose votes the minority rich (who are the actual owners of the GOP brand) would have no voter clout.
Paddy O
December 9th, 2012
2:58 am
this is a tricky decision; especially considering past statements made by SC jurists. It appears that federalism would mandate that states make this decision; and since some states have decided to allow gay marriage, then any law which precludes gays from equal rights on the federal level with non-gay married couples would fail the equal protection clause. Most of DOMA will most likely be found unconstitutional.
Paddy O
December 9th, 2012
3:00 am
individual liberty for women? that is ruse for abortionists. does freedom/liberty mean the freedom to kill the inconvenient? dogs usually are given this protection; why not fetuses? and, individual liberty should not mean somebody else paying for your birth control, cheap or expensive.
Paddy O
December 9th, 2012
3:01 am
edward – you must be one of those Al Sharpton kind of bozos.
Willis
December 9th, 2012
7:12 am
If the Justices believe in freedom of thought and choice, of liberty, and equal treatment under the law the decision will be unanimous to rule against the Federal law and the California Prop 8. But of course we know that Scalia, Thomas, Alito and perhaps Roberts will be against these principles.
Should young people really count?
December 9th, 2012
7:13 am
“Young people support the right by over 60%”
Should we really care what young people believe? They are typically way too impressionable based on emotional issues, not positions of fact, another overwhelming reason this population voted for big ears dumbo!
Cherokee
December 9th, 2012
7:20 am
“big ears dumbo!”
While you, of course, on the other hand, are a clear eyed realist, always basing your thoughts on facts; never letting your emotions influence your thoughts and expressed opinions.
Laughable…
Jack ®
December 9th, 2012
7:22 am
Bookman usually leaves the scene of his crime on Friday covering his tracks with some music recommendations: this time he could not resist replaying the old same-sex song one more time for his fade out. It has to be some rather heavy-duty stuff for him to work overtime.
Orange12
December 9th, 2012
7:26 am
“But of course we know that Scalia, Thomas, Alito and perhaps Roberts will be against these principles.”
Not necessarily. After all. Roberts is a “closet Liberal”.
AU Liberal in ATL
December 9th, 2012
7:31 am
I don’t really care too much about this “sin” talk. It’s silly.
Sin is so easily defined. It’s mistreating others…period.
Those who are so absolutely certain that they know the mind of God are dangerous. Think Taliban.
Corbin Sharpe. I think, therefore I am...I think
December 9th, 2012
8:01 am
“Those who are so absolutely certain that they know the mind of God are dangerous. Think Taliban.”
…and Talibaptist…
James T. Kirk
December 9th, 2012
8:10 am
Interesting….
In all my travels, I’ve never seen a group as Hades bent on religious dogma as the: Southern Baptist.
Reviewing the posts by Conservative Christian, anyone who sees religion from a different view is ignorant and/or stupid. Not exactly the warm glowing acceptance of all men and women that you would expect.
As far as gay marriage, fine with me.
Gay people raising children in a positive caring environment? Fine too.
Simply look at the numbers of “lost” kids that come our of heterosexual homes that were uncaring or abusive. We are seeing the results of generational welfare and failed government social engineering.
Corbin Sharpe. I think, therefore I am...I think
December 9th, 2012
8:12 am
But still, all in all, it’s still…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJIYON42QzE
Wait a minute
December 9th, 2012
8:19 am
Your ignorance of Justice Scalia’s judicial philosophy is overwhelming. He sits on the bench and (over and over) rules that it is not the role of 9 judges to make laws, it is the peoples’ right and duty (why should nine people determine law in this country, we’ll leave that to countries run by dictators, mullahs, etc.). How about asking the more pertinent question (as your polls suggest) to liberals…can you avoid the itch to play God and let people vote on things and determine through the ballot box, expressing their opinion and will?
So you are in favor of Supreme Court decisions as long as they agree with your philosophy only? The most important decision the Supreme Court made in this century was stopping the attempted coup by Gore in 2000 to continue to change the rules until under some interpretation he might win. Thank God (er, Supreme Being, Creator)
Do your worst, it is NOT MARRIAGE!!!
December 9th, 2012
8:26 am
Calll it whatever you libs want but it is NOT MARRIAGE in meaning or purpose. End of discussion!!
Marriage is the intimate union and equal partnership of a man and a woman. It comes to us from the hand of God, who created male and female in his image, so that they might become one body and might be fertile and multiply (See Genesis chapters 1 and 2).
PressedOn
December 9th, 2012
8:34 am
If you live in a state that does not recognize common law marriage, there is no way to form a common law marriage, no matter how long you live with your partner. There is one catch: if you spend time in a state that does recognize common law marriage, “hold yourself out as married,” and then return or move to a state that doesn’t recognize it, you are still married (since states all recognize marriages that occurred in other states).
A logical approach for those not wanting to dance in the spotlight.
Ditto to NOT MARRIAGE
December 9th, 2012
8:35 am
…What are called ‘homosexual unions,’ because they do not express full human complementarity and because they are inherently nonprocreative, cannot be given the status of marriage,” …..
indigo
December 9th, 2012
8:46 am
DebbieDoRight
It’s really not that hard to identify humanities’ cream of the crop.
Just look at all the people who have won the Nobel Prize.
Then, determine what color most of them are.
Vashtai
December 9th, 2012
9:00 am
Call it whatever you libs want but it is NOT MARRIAGE in meaning or purpose. End of discussion!!
Luckily you old farts are dying out very quickly, much to the relief of intelligent people everywhere.
Josef, Vashtai is a family name. IIRC, Jane Withers character in the movie “Giant” was also named Vashtai.
Corbin Sharpe. I think, therefore I am...I think
December 9th, 2012
9:09 am
Do your worst and Ditto are prime example of what “Religion” does to our society. Religions are a man made entity that only promotes intolerance, narrow mindedness, and hatred for anyone not like them in beliefs. God is not of one religion. Religions, especially Christian ones, are at best, social clubs and at worst cabals. God made us all, gay and straight, and He made us of many colors. Why do you think that is? To teach us tolerance of others, understanding of those not like us and acceptance of their ways,, which will all lead to love of mankind regardless of differences. God save us from religions.
Doggone/GA
December 9th, 2012
9:14 am
“God save us from religions.”
As someone said: you know you’ve made God in your image when your God hates the same people you do
Corbin Sharpe. I think, therefore I am...I think
December 9th, 2012
9:24 am
Doggone/GA
December 9th, 2012
9:14 am
Word.
what “Religion” does to our society.
December 9th, 2012
9:29 am
The Ten Commandments are the succinct summary of God’s law given to humanity for righteous living. They represent God’s law, which is higher than any man-made law. Without a recognition of higher law there are no limits on man’s behavior. God and His law restrain both governments and the people governed. Posting the Ten Commandments reminds both the government and the governed of this higher law and, by implication, it reminds them of God.
The first table of the law—the first four commandments—are the duties humans owe to God and we should only be accountable to Him for keeping or breaking them. The second table of the law—the final six commandments—are the duties humans owe to each other and we may be held accountable by society in various ways for failures to keep them. This division is important for understanding the proper reach of government over people’s lives, especially as it pertains to their relationship with God.
Much of the law in America is based directly on the Ten Commandments themselves or principles derived therefrom.
Doggone/GA
December 9th, 2012
9:29 am
Corbin – it’s really sad, the number of people who use their religion of the “Prince Of Peace” to justify hatred, fear and loathing.
Doggone/GA
December 9th, 2012
9:34 am
“Much of the law in America is based directly on the Ten Commandments themselves or principles derived therefrom”
Try again. The first 4 commandments direct worship…where in our laws is that codified? And the reamining commandments are simply common sense directives codified in virtually every book of laws ever written…both from before and after Christianity spread.
td
December 9th, 2012
9:49 am
Doggone/GA
December 9th, 2012
9:34 am
Your hate of Religion is shinning bright. Go ahead and keep your head in the sand and not believe that our laws are based on our Christian heritage. Just shows how really uneducated you are.
Doggone/GA
December 9th, 2012
9:54 am
“Your hate of Religion is shinning bright”
And your knowledge of my attitude towards religion is non-existent. You are mistaking my attitudes towards those who SAY they are believers, but who don’t ACT like they are…for my opinion of the religion they profess, but don’t follow.
Zinc
December 9th, 2012
9:57 am
If straight couples would stop having gay offspring, then we wouldn’t have to worry about gay marriage.
JamVet
December 9th, 2012
9:57 am
Brother Corbin @ 9:09, preach it!
You are a voice of reason and sanity to counteract those of the religious deviants here, who hide behind their Jesus while advocating their hatred of other religions and the non-religious.
Gays and jays won in this last election. And the haters on the right lost. This will continue.
Keep on rockin’ America…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PH93dtrCiZ4
Corbin Sharpe. I think, therefore I am...I think
December 9th, 2012
10:00 am
td,
You are another prime example of religious intolerance. This attitude will be Christianities undoing.
You don’t need religion to worship The Maker.
Corbin Sharpe. I think, therefore I am...I think
December 9th, 2012
10:04 am
Well, I’m off with my mate to find appropriate gifts for our Winter Solstice celebration. See all y’all later
Doggone/GA
December 9th, 2012
10:05 am
And I’m out too…got a lunch date with some relatives I haven’t seen in a long time
PressedOn
December 9th, 2012
10:22 am
To teach us tolerance of others, understanding of those not like us and acceptance of their ways,, which will all lead to love of mankind regardless of differences.
Zoophiles? Pedophiles? Murderers? Thieves? Rapists?
RF
December 9th, 2012
10:23 am
“If straight couples would stop having gay offspring, then we wouldn’t have to worry about gay marriage”
LOL
As long as they’re birthing babies, chances are some of them will be gay. What some can’t accept is that there is nothing that can be done about that fact, so they turn instead to deligitimizing them by denying them legal rights. The thought is, “I can’t stop you from being gay, so I’ll just do everything I can to keep you from being a whole person in the eyes of the law.”
Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)
December 9th, 2012
10:26 am
Well, I can’t figure out why them Gays never hit on me. I mean, seeing as how they pinch Thelma and such. I got to be better looking than a guy that’s got a belly that hangs down over his Speedos. Maybe it’s my combover or something like that. Or maybe I need to take a bath more than once a month. Anyway it kind of hurts my feelings. Not that I want to be hit on, you understand.
Anyway, have a good Sabbath everybody.
Brosephus™
December 9th, 2012
10:30 am
Doggone
Why you hatin’ on Jesus an’em??
That was good for a laugh this morning.
PressedOn
December 9th, 2012
10:32 am
The dark side of sexual freedom: American ‘zoophiles’ take on the language of equality
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/timstanley/100108943/the-gay-rights-movement-has-emboldened-americas-bestiality-advocates/
When it all comes to pass, gays will be held responsible.
RF
December 9th, 2012
10:32 am
“Zoophiles? Pedophiles? Murderers? Thieves? Rapists?”
People used to think that allowing interracial marriage would encourage the same things. Actually, the law has become tougher on crimes against children, and there are plenty of laws on the book about murder, theft, rape, etc. It’s conservatives, if you recall, who recently took on the totally disastrous discussion of “legitimate rape.” They would have made it much easier for rapists to get away with it than current law allows. Zoophiles…yeah, that’s as likely to become “legal” as pedophelia, but you can keep dreaming.
Your view of homosexuality is clear when you and many like you choose to link the debate of gay marriage to what are clearly, according to law, illegal activities. I recall studying a lengthy period of our history where we denied those of African descent the basic rights belonging to human beings in this country, and that was as wrong as this issue is. The country survived racial integration without going to pieces. I don’t think allowing gay couples the legal rights given in marriage is going to undo the seams of society either, and you can’t prove otherwise.
stands for decibels
December 9th, 2012
10:38 am
…What are called ‘homosexual unions,’ because they do not express full human complementarity and because they are inherently nonprocreative, cannot be given the status of marriage,” …..
…already covered, earlier.
You lost. Find a way to deal with it, because marriage inequality ain’t coming back.
Brosephus™
December 9th, 2012
10:43 am
Zoophiles???
Welcome to “Slippery Slope Sunday: Bookman Edition”.
RF
December 9th, 2012
10:43 am
Pressed: Tim Stanley wrote a biography of Pat Buchanan….and you expect anyone here to take him seriously- NOT!!
If you look, pretty much every state has very specific laws about the whole animal sex thing. They word it differently, and many states rewrote their laws in the last decade to be MORE specific. In the cases your “article” discusses, the laws on the books were unclear and were subsequently rewritten. So, all your “information” does is point out the fact that such behavior, which pretty much every society on the planet doesn’t allow, has been more clearly defined by law and is now more directly punishable.
Anything else, or do you have some sort of particular interest in this subject?
TM
December 9th, 2012
10:47 am
I am glad I get the AJC right there on page A2 a NY Times article that says that families making more than 250K per year will see an average tax increase of $6000 next year to fund Obama care that is before Obama increases the rates on them. I guess we can still pay a little more.
RF
December 9th, 2012
10:48 am
“When it all comes to pass, gays will be held responsible.”
Well, considering we make up about 10% of the population, and our representation in legislative bodies is much less, then it would take a whole lot of heterosexual politicians to pass any vote to make any of the already illegal activities you mention legal. Technically, that would make heterosexuals responsible to a far, far greater degree. Care to check the numbers?
indigo
December 9th, 2012
10:54 am
Brosephus – “zoophiles”
That’s what I was talking about yesterday.
I know it sound absurd now.
But, twenty years ago, how did “gay marriage rights” sound?
Be ready for anything.
indigo
December 9th, 2012
11:01 am
Do your worst – 8:26
We don’t have the slightest clue as to actually wrote Genesis.
In fact, we are clueless as to the true authorship of the entire Old and New Testaments.
Nor do we have any proof whatsover that God even exists.
Therefore, you beliefs about the absolute nature of marriage and God because of what’s written in Genesis is profoundly ignorant almost beyond comprehension.
RF
December 9th, 2012
11:10 am
@indigo: if you had asked sixty years ago, the idea of black children attending school with white children and black people voting in the South would have sounded absolutely absurd…but it happened, and the world hasn’t stopped spinning as a result. Do you realize what it would take to repeal laws against zoophilia? Do you seriously think any legislature in the country would even bring up the idea? To bring that into this discussion is exactly the kind of ignorant fear-mongering that many tried to bring up during the Civil Rights era, and it didn’t work. Perhaps you think we should go back to the “good old days” of the 1950’s to save our world?
Homosexuality is a fact. It’s also a fact that couples in that lifestyle will still commit to each other regardless of the law. Attempting to deligitimize the commitment by denying them legal marriage rights won’t stop them from being gay and being in long-term, committed relationships. Giving them the right to a legally recognized marital contract won’t suddenly legitimize anything else, and you know it.
Gale
December 9th, 2012
11:17 am
Good morning all. I am always amused at the vitriol displayed by some on this issue. Really? Homosexuals make up 10% (more or less) of the population and of those, how many actually want to marry? Of the couples that want to marry, many are already in long term committed relationships, often with children. That this small population of newlyweds would change the fabric of society is laughable. For the record, I am in a 20 year relationship and want to marry.
Edward
December 9th, 2012
11:18 am
BTW, Paddy O and others, I am a gay white southern male, born and raised in the south, so your ignorant aspersions are inaccurate, at best. Thankfully, people like td and recon are the last of their kind, dying wails that won’t be missed by the rest of the world. The south is their last bastion, but it, too, will eventually be free of the “talibangelical” ignorance.
Brosephus™
December 9th, 2012
11:19 am
indigo
People have been screwing animals for as long as we have recorded history. Same as your other argument, who will be the infamous legislator who introduces the bill to make it legal?
middle of the road
December 9th, 2012
11:29 am
We make laws to protect society as a whole and members of society from certain acts. How does gay marriage threaten either society or members of society? Gays are not hurting anyone else. If they get “married”, either God approves or not – that is between them and God. The other side of marriage is just a legal definition that gives certain rights. The rights of heteroseuals are not infringed by giving those same rights to homosexuals.
Please quote me a quote from Jesus where he addresses gay marriage?
And if you quote Leviticus, please be sure to quote ALL of it – including the lamb sacrifices and kosher eating required.
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
December 9th, 2012
12:04 pm
Matthew 19
“Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,’ For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’. ”
At that time homosexual acts were an abomination to the Jews and Jesus did nothing to correct that point then nor for future generations.
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
December 9th, 2012
12:05 pm
Brosephus:
The next issue will be polygamy.
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 9th, 2012
12:06 pm
BUT, BUT, BUT
My German Shepherd is cute
http://www.akc.org/breeds/german_shepherd_dog/index.cfm
indigo
December 9th, 2012
12:06 pm
RF – 11:10
1. I do NOT think zoophilia is a good idea. Nothing I said in my post suggested that.
2. I do NOT think we should go back to the “good old days” of the 50’s. Nothing I said in my post suggested that.
3. You say, correctly, that 60 years ago the ideas of integration and voting rights in the South sounded absolutely absurd. Then you say, correctly, that it actually happened. Then, you turn around and say that an equally absurd idea, zoophillia, could never happen.
4. Then, somehow, you say my simple idea that we just don’t know what lawmakers 40 or 50 years might do is “ignorant fear-mongering”.
You post is one of the worst cases of convoluted thinking and lack of reading comprehinsion I’ve ever seen.
PressedOn
December 9th, 2012
12:10 pm
RF, I’m not arguing against gay marriage. I’m revealing the hypocrisy among leftists like you.
When it comes to income, you leftists argue that you’re entitled to what isn’t yours. If we are to acknowledge alternative lifestyles (sexual in nature) then ALL should be recognized.
With the pursuit of those lifestyles following on the heels of equal rights for gays, are gays going to say “Screw you, we’ve got ours.”
You are equally as guilty of what you accuse conservatives of. It’s that simple.
Selective hypocrites.
indigo
December 9th, 2012
12:30 pm
Brosephus – 11:19
For some reason, you just don’t seem to understand what I’m trying to say.
We take for granted today things like integration, civil rights, women in high political offices and the idea of gay marriage.
50 years ago, this was not the case.
Therefore, we have no way of knowing what lawmakers will decide 50 or 60 years from now.
Why is this so hard for you to understand?
Brosephus™
December 9th, 2012
12:34 pm
Scout
I don’t think we’ll have to worry about that for a long time. Legislators can’t figure out that long term jobs would do more to ease our fiscal issues than any single piece of legislation they could ever write. Congress or any state legislature has about the same chance of successfully legislating polygamy as I have of winning the Dayton 500.
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
December 9th, 2012
12:45 pm
When it comes to income, you leftists argue that you’re entitled to what isn’t yours.
There’s your sign.
Brosephus™
December 9th, 2012
12:48 pm
We take for granted today things like integration, civil rights, women in high political offices and the idea of gay marriage.
50 years ago, this was not the case.
I understand exactly what you’re saying. You’ve made that argument more than once on this thread. I’ll reply the same way I did before. There is a difference between legislating things between consenting adults, which is what happened between the 50s, 60s, and today versus attempting to legislate things that will affect kids. Since the child labor laws were repealed, this country has been very protective of it’s children. Look at how we keep registered sex offenders away from areas that MIGHT be frequented by children.
I never say never, but when it comes to legislating something that could potentially be detrimental towards kids, there will have to be epic subterfudge of the likes we have never witnessed before in order to get legislation like that passed.
Does that help you understand why I don’t agree with you? Hopefully, I’ve made it clearer for you to understand.
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 9th, 2012
12:50 pm
And if lawmakers wish to do something different 50 years from now that is the right of a representative govt. Why I daresay that when the 13th and 14th amendments were passed, the counter argument was “well legislators 50 years from now may allow interracial marriage, so we can’t do this”?
Brosephus™
December 9th, 2012
12:51 pm
It’s almost kickoff time, so I’ll check back later to see how Slippery Slope Sunday: Bookman Edition™ progresses through the day. I imagine there will be everything from Crisco to Baby Oil poured down those slopes to get them nice and slippery…
Keep Up the Good Fight!
December 9th, 2012
12:56 pm
Brosephus, don’t forget your snowboard when you come back. We may even put in a Moral Cliff Jump
John Roberts, fmr. reliable conservative
December 9th, 2012
1:00 pm
I am busy at work reviewing the briefs in this gay marriage case. And when I find the word ‘penalty’ that’ll be all she wrote. My job is so easy now that I know a ‘penalty’ is really a tax.
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 9th, 2012
1:04 pm
Bro
I imagine there will be everything from Crisco to Baby Oil poured down those slopes to get them nice and slippery…
—————————————————————————
Are you advocating for the Mazola Oil Party
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
December 9th, 2012
1:05 pm
Brosephus:
“I don’t think we’ll have to worry about that for a long time.”
I hear you but we used to say that about gay marriage.
It’s always just one generation away ………… and the downhill slide continues.
Fred ™
December 9th, 2012
1:05 pm
Damn Bro, we should have met up for the game………. it’s your turn to buy.
getalife
December 9th, 2012
1:07 pm
Pacman got knocked out in the 6th round.
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 9th, 2012
1:08 pm
Fred
That’s why Bro didn’t call you. The cheapskate LOL
j/k
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
December 9th, 2012
1:08 pm
Regarding my 12:04 post, it’s amazing to me that people always ask for a verse from Jesus condemning homosexual acts when they wouldn’t believe that anymore than they believe what He said about Himself.
“I am the way the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father but through Me.”
getalife
December 9th, 2012
1:09 pm
scout bends over and slobbers on the wealthy.
Is that a form of homosexuality?
indigo
December 9th, 2012
1:16 pm
Brosephus
It’s taken some time, but now I understand, all too clearly, what you’re really saying.
It’s entirely possible that, if gay marriage becomes the law of the land, a slipery slope really will emerge and things we now consider sexual perversions(as being “queer” was once thought of), will eventually become law. Your ultra liberal heart just won’t allow any acknowledgement of this since saying gay marriage will lead to pedophile marriage and God knows what else is just to much for your liberalism to bear.
I don’t like this possibility any more than you but, unlike you, I’m not just going to ignore it and hope it will go away.
It won’t.
clem
December 9th, 2012
1:24 pm
repubs at their dirty work again:
http://firedoglake.com/2012/12/09/of-cancer-and-crony-capitalism/
getalife
December 9th, 2012
1:25 pm
indigo,
Sure, if there is a movement to get the American people to support it.
That will never happen.
Fred ™
December 9th, 2012
1:26 pm
Your ultra liberal heart just won’t allow any acknowledgement of this since saying gay marriage will lead to pedophile marriage and God knows what else is just to much for your liberalism to bear.
Wow, that is stupid, even for you. Less than 100 years ago in THIS Country, what you call “pedophile marriage” was the norm you silly little man. 200 years a go a “woman” of 17 was considered an “old maid” if she was unmarried.
You really don’t possess much in the department of logical thinking and critical writing abilities do you?
middle of the road
December 9th, 2012
1:31 pm
50 years ago it was against the law for a white person and a black person to get married – at least in some states. I guess that was a threat to society.
middle of the road
December 9th, 2012
1:34 pm
As far as I know, Jesus did not comment one way or another about gay marriage. But he was quite specific about divorce. So which one do you think should be a priority. This is if you belive government should legislate theology.
“Render unto Ceasar that which is Ceasar’s and render unto God that which is God’s” (I hope I got that quote right).
Welcome to the Occupation
December 9th, 2012
1:37 pm
PressedOn: “When it comes to income, you leftists argue that you’re entitled to what isn’t yours”
No, we leftists point out the ways that capitalists appropriate what isn’t theirs through the exploitation of the labor of others.
By making this charge, you’re no doubt referring to taxation as an illegitimate form of wealth redistribution, but your error is in failing to see that income “earned” (appropriated) through the free market is already redistributed, namely through the asymmetry in wealth between those who benefit from state protection (owners, capitalists) and those who have to rely on selling their labor to eat (the vast majority, the 99%, the workers, etc.).
middle of the road
December 9th, 2012
1:37 pm
My point about the Bible is that people quote only the parts they want to in order to support what they want to support. If they want to support war (or revenge) they quote the Old Testament “an eye for an eye” rather than the New Testament “if a man should strike you on one cheek, then turn and offer the other cheek ” (again, I apologize if the quote is not exact).
They BOTH suck
December 9th, 2012
1:46 pm
Scout
and you have yet to post a direct quote from Jesus regarding homosexuality?
So why would it “amaze” you?
All the inference and intrepreation( which you do on a frequent basis to meet your narrative) doesn’t make something so?
Have you been able to provide a reasoned answer as to why and your your personal life would change if gays were able to marry? Of course that is without your never ending slippery slopes and deflections.
They BOTH suck
December 9th, 2012
1:50 pm
indigo and scout
Can you provide stats and studies for countries that have legalized gay marriage that have went down all the slippery slopes you project?
Brosephus™
December 9th, 2012
1:58 pm
Scout: I hear you but we used to say that about gay marriage.
It’s always just one generation away ………… and the downhill slide continues.
Well, by the time the next generation is here, you’ll be gone. You won’t have to witness whether it happens or not.
————————-
Fred
Consider it an open invitation on Sunday. My in-laws are always over to watch Washington whenever they play on Sunday. You’re more than welcome to come and join us.
————————–
indigo: It’s taken some time, but now I understand, all too clearly, what you’re really saying.
[...] Your ultra liberal heart just won’t allow any acknowledgement of this since saying gay marriage will lead to pedophile marriage and God knows what else is just to much for your liberalism to bear.
Why is it that, whenever someone challenges your thinking, people like you have to resort to trying to label people? You don’t know enough about me to know whether I am liberal, conservative, or just don’t give a f**kative
You obviously DON’T understand what I’m saying by trying to cheapen your argument like that. Let me break it down to you so that even my 4 year old would understand.
Americans will not let anything bad happen to children on purpose. Do you understand that much so far? As such, any attempt to legislate anything that may have a negative effect on kids would not pass muster with the American people. It has nothing to do with being heterosexual, homosexual, gay, straight, Black, White, Native, natural born citizen, or even a naturalized citizen.
We protect kids in this country. You can choose to wallow in your cesspool of fear worrying about “what if’s”. I choose to live my life daily protecting those who need protecting to ensure “fears” don’t happen. And, if that makes me have an “ultra liberal heart”, then I will take having that 10 times out of 10 if your heart is representative of the conservative heart.
Now I know why I loathe “Conservatives” so damned much. When they can’t debate points, they have to label people to belittle them in order to make their microscopic selves feel better.
Oh well…. Back to football.
They BOTH suck
December 9th, 2012
1:59 pm
why and how
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
December 9th, 2012
2:10 pm
BOTH
The what, when, why and how.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pOwdPNI4tI
indigo
December 9th, 2012
2:10 pm
Brosephus
I am talking about whay MAY happen many years from now.
You may wax as eloquently as possible about how we “protect kids in this country”, conviently ignoring the thousands of cases of child abuse that occur every year here. “Americans will never let anything bad happen to children on purpose”. I dare you to go face to face with a DEFAX worker and say that. He/she will set you straight in a hurry about how politicians don’t even halfway give them the funding they need to do even a barely adequate job.
America is going downhill. Any fool can see that.
I expect the worse to happen, because it usually does.
indigo
December 9th, 2012
2:16 pm
Fred – 1:26 “You really don’t posess much in the department of logical thinking”
This from the dork that can’t even answer a simple question – namely, provide scientific proof that your God exists.
It is spoiled snot-nosed brats like you that, trying to play grown-up here, only succeed in showing how ignorant they are.
Please take your childish foolishness somewhere else, and stop bothering intelligent people, you little pencil neck geek.
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
December 9th, 2012
2:17 pm
Tick…tick…tick….
Just sayin’.
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
December 9th, 2012
2:21 pm
Middle of the Road:
“As far as I know, Jesus did not comment one way or another about gay marriage. But he was quite specific about divorce. So which one do you think should be a priority. This is if you belive government should legislate theology.”
1) Jesus may have commented about a lot of things that we do not have a record of.
“Jesus did many other things as well. If every one of them were written down, I suppose that even the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.” John 21:25
2) Many things He did not comment about probably because they were so accepted in His day that there was no need. For example, we have no record of His commenting on pedophilia.
3) Government does regulate divorce/theology. Every state has multiple laws and regulations regarding divorce including grounds and time frames before one can divorce.
Why can’t people just go out and divorce? If marriage is just a “moral” thing then so should divorce be ………. but the state realizes for the good of both parties, the public and the state that it must be regulated.
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
December 9th, 2012
2:23 pm
Brosephus:
“Well, by the time the next generation is here, you’ll be gone. You won’t have to witness whether it happens or not.”
I’m sure you also have children and grandchildren. The type of society we leave to them is important to me.
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
December 9th, 2012
2:25 pm
Middle of the Road:
Regarding my 2:21 post, item #2, by “accepted” I mean so generally accepted as totally immoral that there was no need to specifically mention it.
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
December 9th, 2012
2:25 pm
Time to watch the Falcons game.
Everyone be nice.
getalife
December 9th, 2012
2:29 pm
Falcons are getting beat.
The newt said if Hillary runs in 16, she will win.
He finally got something right.
TaxPayer
December 9th, 2012
2:31 pm
Jesus may have commented about a lot of things that we do not have a record of.
Jesus was overheard in one of his exchanges:
“Gay marriage you ask. Well, judge not lest ye be judged and if that still isn’t good enough for you then let thee who is without sin cast the first stone given the fact that I said you are all sinners. Go for it. Make my day.”
getalife
December 9th, 2012
2:34 pm
Tax,
No, I heard Jesus say, “Front and back, 20 dollars”
He does a heck of a job too.
Brosephus™
December 9th, 2012
2:40 pm
indigo
I have friends and family members who work for DFACS. Where is the legislation that makes that abuse legal? You’re completely naive and clueless if you think we can stop all abuse. This country is too vast and too protective of our individual freedoms to be able to police away ALL abuse.
You will worry yourself sick by focusing on what MAY happen. If that’s what makes you feel better, then you do what you feel is necessary. I tend to train my focus on what’s LIKELY to happen instead.
getalife
December 9th, 2012
2:40 pm
I am going to call out the cons on morals like Vice President Biden called out the gop on doing something for the middle class.
Show us.
Talk is cheap.
DebbieDoRight - A Do Right Woman
December 9th, 2012
2:43 pm
W.A.M.: Your ignorance of Justice Scalia’s judicial philosophy is overwhelming. He sits on the bench and (over and over) rules that it is not the role of 9 judges to make laws, it is the peoples’ right and duty (why should nine people determine law in this country, we’ll leave that to countries run by dictators, mullahs, etc.).
I only have two things to say to your above misinformed comment: Civics 101.
Thanks!
Welcome to the Occupation
December 9th, 2012
2:46 pm
indigo: “It’s entirely possible that, if gay marriage becomes the law of the land, a slipery slope really will emerge and things we now consider sexual perversions(as being “queer” was once thought of), will eventually become law”
But what exactly is the “perversion” here, if it becomes the norm? In one sense one could say that as it becomes the norm it by definition ceases to become a perversion, does it not? (one of the definitions of a perversion being something that violates a socially established taboo)
But that in and of itself does not mean that the practice should not become normalized. After all, there are plenty of examples of them, starting with the racist taboos that entrenched a system of injustice in the 19th C, just to name one example.
getalife
December 9th, 2012
2:48 pm
So, I challenge you cons on morals to address income inequality. I expect you to take the moral high ground and call greed a sin and fight to lower the gap.
Also, when your party and media tell you a blatant lie, call them out.
If your party tries to cheat, call them out.
Lets see you cons prove you have any morals.
DannyX
December 9th, 2012
2:51 pm
indigo and scout
Can you provide stats and studies for countries that have legalized gay marriage that have went down all the slippery slopes you project?
_____________________
Scout didn’t get one thing right when the debate was about gays serving openly in the military.
He said it wouldn’t happen, of course it did.
He said most in the military wouldn’t accept it, most do.
He said there would be a mass exodus, there wasn’t.
He said it would hurt recruiting, it didn’t.
He said it would hurt morale, it didn’t.
Brosephus™
December 9th, 2012
2:51 pm
Scout
I have a daughter, and my job is to prepare her to deal with whatever issues she faces. I don’t have the hubris to think I can foresee every possible problem. Therefore, I feel better at teaching her about decision making. She will have the skills and ability to deal with whatever she faces.
indigo
December 9th, 2012
2:53 pm
Brosephus
I try to focus, like you, on what’s likely to happen now and in the more or less immediate future.
Actually, I don’t worry too much about what might be 50 or 100 years from now.
The only point I’m trying to make is that the dim and distant future is utterly unknown to us.
DebbieDoRight - A Do Right Woman
December 9th, 2012
2:56 pm
Scout: 3) Government does regulate divorce/theology. Every state has multiple laws and regulations regarding divorce including grounds and time frames before one can divorce.
OUR government does NOT regulate religion and it STOPPED regulating divorces, (meaning the types of ways you can sue for divorce), a couple of decades back. Now we just have a one size fits all “no fault” divorce. No matter if your husband was a bigamist, (which is a LEGAL matter), your divorce is still “no fault”.
Why can’t people just go out and divorce? If marriage is just a “moral” thing then so should divorce be ………. but the state realizes for the good of both parties, the public and the state that it must be regulated.
Divorces aren’t regulated — where are you getting that from?
=================
Indigo — I love to help people, and when i was young and naive, i was a social worker. I LOVED my job, up until a client was killed when i told my supervisor if they sent her back to that abusive home she would be. No one listened; the child died and my supervisor was given a “demotion” and was allowed to retire with her full benefits.
There are plenty of cracks in our social service system — but here’s the kicker, there aren’t enough people to fill in those cracks. there aren’t enough people who care enough, who are willing to take a sh##t job, for sh$$##5t pay, and sh@*8!!@#$%ty hours. If we have 2K children in trouble, but only 10 people to help them, there aren’t that many hours in a day that those 10 people can work to meet the needs of every one of those children.
Our society, mostly, looks down on people who go into Social Service Careers, yet uphold people who are bankers, brokers, and wall street execs. So, it easy to see why a lot of Teachers, Social Service Workers, etc. quit their jobs or are burned out within a few years.
They’re over worked, under paid, and vastly unappreciated.
indigo
December 9th, 2012
2:57 pm
Welcome – 2:46
That’s quite right. What’s “perverse” today may become accepted behavior tommorow.
I think the problem is in how fast these things change. Many people in their 70’s and 80’s think America has changed so much as to make them feel they’re living in another country.
Adjustments can be hard.
getalife
December 9th, 2012
2:59 pm
Lets count how many time our cons have been right in the last decade.
indigo
December 9th, 2012
3:00 pm
Debbie
100% correct about social workers and all the sh*t they have to put up with. I honestly don’t know how they cope. I think a job like that would make me eventually just go jump off a cliff.
The chickens have long since come back to roost on this but those in charge just don’t seem to care.
DebbieDoRight - A Do Right Woman
December 9th, 2012
3:08 pm
getalife – two. They were right about electing and re-electing Dumbya. I honestly didn’t think that people would be fooled by him twice; but who woulda thunk it?
indigo — not so much that the bosses don’t care, it’s that they STOPPED caring for their own sanity. a job like that is something that, for your own survival, you have to learn to disassociate yourself from a lot of things, (sorta like an emergency room surgeon who knows that she’ll probably loose 25% of her patients before months end); if you don’t learn to do that you can drive yourself crazy.
I COULDN’T do it. I still grieve for the ONE CHILD that i lost who was in my care. I still try to find and/or keep in contact with the ones who have since “aged out” of the system. I’ve managed to find a few, 2 of them are dead, (1 from an overdose, 1 from prostitution); 4 of them are in school (either college, JC, or JobCorps); and 5 joined the military. The others i have not found yet.
Ive tried to channel my “Helpful” gene into things that i can do for my community or things that I can do for veterans or homeless single mothers; stuff like that. Thats the best that i can do, i can NEVER, for my own sanity, work for DFACS again.
Welcome to the Occupation
December 9th, 2012
3:10 pm
indigo: “Many people in their 70’s and 80’s think America has changed so much as to make them feel they’re living in another country.”
And not just people in their 70s-80s either.
But yeah, no doubt, and for good reason, both for the better and worse.
Doggone/GA
December 9th, 2012
3:34 pm
“indigo: “Many people in their 70’s and 80’s think America has changed so much as to make them feel they’re living in another country.” ”
Of course they feel that way. It has changed. It will change. It always has, and it always will.
Brosephus™
December 9th, 2012
3:44 pm
The only point I’m trying to make is that the dim and distant future is utterly unknown to us.
It’s not completely unknown. We shape the future based on the actions we take now. We also have history on our side as we can learn from past mistakes to avoid doing the same thing over and over. We might not accurately be able to predict specific events our changes, but our actions now will determine things in the future.
————————-
DDR
I’ve heard some stories from people I know with DFACS that have left me speechless. I don’t know if I have the temperament necessary to do that job. I tip my hat to those who put in the hours doing that as well as those who’ve spent time doing it.
Cherokee
December 9th, 2012
3:44 pm
Kind of hard to believe that someone who is a Christian would bring up divorce. Jesus specifically condemned divorce and remarriage, calling it adultery. Paul later said that adulterers would not enter the Kingdom of Heaven.
On the other hand, Jesus said nothing about gay marriage.
Yet the rosters of evangelical churches are filled with those who have divorced and remarried – even as they condemn the relationships of their gay brothers and sisters and children.
So, Scout, and Recon, and whoever, don’t toss out prohibitions from Leviticus when you’re unwilling to listen to Jesus Christ.
indigo
December 9th, 2012
4:09 pm
Brosephus
That’s exactly correct.
However, the question is – will we learn from our mistakes or be like the philosopher who said “those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it”?
indigo
December 9th, 2012
4:11 pm
Cherokee
Jesus did condemn divorce, except for adultery.
josef
December 9th, 2012
4:25 pm
Wow! Here we are at nearly 1000 and still pretty much on topic…funny what will grab and hold the attention of the social malcontents and curmudgeons of the Imam’s front verandah…
Anyway…scanning back over, I DO have one comment. What for some is a downhill slide is for others an uphill climb…looks like we’re sorta meeting in passing here…
indigo
December 9th, 2012
4:35 pm
Debbie – 3:08
I hope you’re not carrying around any guilt for what happned in your social services career. Working for DFACS is like jumping into a large briar patch. No matter how careful you are, painful wounds are bound to happen. I know you did everything humanily possible to help those in your care and I personally thank you for doing the kind of work I could never do.
God bless.
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 9th, 2012
4:36 pm
Josef
As long as those on their downhill slide don’t grab onto those who are on the uphill climb.
RF
December 9th, 2012
4:39 pm
“When it comes to income, you leftists argue that you’re entitled to what isn’t yours.”
Prove any “leftie” on here has ever argued for income they didn’t earn. Many of us do believe in helping those with the least, and that includes helping them learn to provide for themselves. Personally I believe wholeheartedly in the power of capitalism, but I also believe in the rights of workers to expect reasonable compensation and benefits. I also believe than any “handout” without some requirement for work is useless. I applaud the welfare to work laws and don’t think anyone who is physically able should be given a free ride. Help along the way until they can earn it on their own…absolutely.
As to the issue at hand, we’re talking about the right of two consenting ADULTS to enter into a legal contract of marriage. That simply cannot be connected in any way to crimes against children or animals, and you know it. There is simply no logical progression from one to the other, and you know as well as I do that no legislature in the forseeable future will change that. It is a desperate attempt by those who just can’t accept homosexuality as a lifestyle who would consider it a positive step for this country to deny them that one basic right as LEGAL ADULTS. You can try to dispute that all day long, and all you achieve is appearing to be much, much more narrow-minded and hypocritical than we ever could be. The whole notion of “liberty and justice for ALL” for many on your side means “all who we consider worthy”.
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
December 9th, 2012
4:44 pm
That simply cannot be connected in any way to crimes against children or animals, and you know it.
All available evidence suggests otherwise.
RF
December 9th, 2012
4:45 pm
“I think the problem is in how fast these things change. Many people in their 70’s and 80’s think America has changed so much as to make them feel they’re living in another country.
Adjustments can be hard.”
I remember my grandparents saying the same thing back in the 60’s, and I hear my dad saying it now in his 70’s. Every generation feels left behind in some way by the technology and social patterns of the one following it. My parents lived in a generation where a woman wore her hat and gloves to town and wouldn’t be caught dead in public in pants. I’ve seen some in my generation go to a show at the Fox in shorts and flip-flops. My mother was aghast at that in her dress and pearls. Adjustments are hard, but we make them and the basic foundation of the country survives. I think we’ll continue that positive momentum going forward, and we might just survive some minor changes like marriage equality without falling into anarchy and chaos.
The other half of your brain.
December 9th, 2012
4:45 pm
getalife
December 9th, 2012
2:59 pm
Lets count how many time our cons have been right in the last decade.
What will you do when you get to 10.
RF
December 9th, 2012
4:46 pm
“All available evidence suggests otherwise.”
Wanna ’splain that one to me?
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
December 9th, 2012
4:52 pm
RF
Four years of posting here and at the now defunct Cynthia Tucker’s next door and every time this subject has come up, the zoophilia and pedophilia card are invariably played.
No matter how many times it has been pointed out that neither animals nor minor children can enter into a legal contract (which is what marriage is), they always exclaim that allowing teh gheys to marry will lead to zoophilia and pedophilia.
Common Sense isn't very Common
December 9th, 2012
4:53 pm
The other half of your brain.
Lets count how many time our cons have been right in the last decade.
What will you do when you get to 10.
————————————————————————————————-
Considering we haven’t got to 1 yet, no worries
The other half of your brain.
December 9th, 2012
4:56 pm
RF
December 9th, 2012
4:45 pm
“I think the problem is in how fast these things change. Many people in their 70’s and 80’s think America has changed so much as to make them feel they’re living in another country.
Adjustments can be hard.”
I remember my grandparents saying the same thing back in the 60’s, and I hear my dad saying it now in his 70’s. Every generation feels left behind in some way by the technology and social patterns of the one following it. My parents lived in a generation where a woman wore her hat and gloves to town and wouldn’t be caught dead in public in pants. I’ve seen some in my generation go to a show at the Fox in shorts and flip-flops. My mother was aghast at that in her dress and pearls. Adjustments are hard, but we make them and the basic foundation of the country survives. I think we’ll continue that positive momentum going forward, and we might just survive some minor changes like marriage equality without falling into anarchy and chaos.
RF, If you do a search on crime stats from the 60’s to 2011, which I just did, you may realize why people of my age group feel the way we do.
If you haven’t lived in the 50’s till now then you won’t realize what we are talking about.
getalife
December 9th, 2012
4:58 pm
“What will you do when you get to 10.”
List them con.
josef
December 9th, 2012
5:15 pm
Just an observation, but whatever the Supremes do decide, it won’t be based on theological dogma. So, much of what the zealots have had to say here is just so much background noise. Entertaining and even somewhat informative, but not very pertinent to the actual matter at hand.
The other half of your brain.
December 9th, 2012
5:20 pm
getalife
December 9th, 2012
4:58 pm
“What will you do when you get to 10.”
List them con.
GetaClue, I was refering to the number of digits that you have on your hands, guess it flew over your little head.
Brosephus™
December 9th, 2012
5:24 pm
However, the question is – will we learn from our mistakes or be like the philosopher who said “those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it”?
Only time will tell. I’d suggest everyone brush up on their Gibbon as a starter.
getalife
December 9th, 2012
5:25 pm
The cons exist to fight change because change scares the old poor things.
I would like to see change in the job sector.
Lets get back to full employment .
getalife
December 9th, 2012
5:26 pm
half brain,
List them or zip it.
josef
December 9th, 2012
5:27 pm
BROSEPHUS
Gibbon. Yep.
Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
December 9th, 2012
5:33 pm
GetaClue, I was refering to the number of digits that you have on your hands, guess it flew over your little head.
When you got nuthin’, deflect.
Morality?
December 9th, 2012
5:40 pm
Jay takes our mind off of the fact that we are going over the fiscal cliff with this tripe.
Welcome to the Occupation
December 9th, 2012
5:41 pm
Morality? “Jay takes our mind off of the fact that we are going over the fiscal cliff with this tripe.”
We’re not going over any fiscal “cliff”.
josef
December 9th, 2012
5:43 pm
Morality
Tripe? I guess we can call this a gut issue, then?
getalife
December 9th, 2012
5:49 pm
“When you got nuthin’, deflect.”
Yep.
Welcome to the Occupation
December 9th, 2012
5:51 pm
By the way, it’s not just here in the states that this issue is controversial. It’s in the UK, too. Cameron is all in, but he has critics.
http://twitpic.com/bkl92k
Plus in France, there have been anti-gay marriage demonstrations.
josef
December 9th, 2012
5:56 pm
Welcome
On the other hand…
http://www.english.rfi.fr/france/20121206-gay-friendly-mosque-stirs-controversy-france’s-Muslims
Tundra Dude
December 9th, 2012
5:59 pm
Holy Cow…1000 comments…
Time to start exchanging recipes…
josef
December 9th, 2012
6:00 pm
Tundra
Wonder if Morality has one for tripe?
St Simons - he-ne-ha
December 9th, 2012
6:04 pm
My accounting mtgs are getting exciting.
Today I saw a subliminal advertising executive, but only for a split second
Brosephus™
December 9th, 2012
6:05 pm
Jay takes our mind off of the fact that we are going over the fiscal cliff with this tripe.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9U4Ha9HQvMo
*Language Alert!!
josef
December 9th, 2012
6:07 pm
He-ne-ha
If you missed it on FNM…Unmentionable wanted your take on her drummer…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYEDA3JcQqw
Brosephus™
December 9th, 2012
6:09 pm
Roman-Style Tripe Trippa alla Romana
—————————
Deep Fried Tripe
“Similar to deep fried calamari, crispy strips of tripe make an unusual, but delicious appetizer.” — Chef Prentice
Tundra Dude
December 9th, 2012
6:09 pm
Josef:
Wonder if Morality has one for tripe?
Good Wun!!
(if he thinks he’s going off the cliff, there’s still time to practice cliff-diving)
Stevie Ray..Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right..here I am...
December 9th, 2012
6:10 pm
So I’m missing why this whole fiscal cliff is such a big deal. We cut 109 bln per year..57% from military and the balance from wasteful spending on entitlements then add $80 bln a year in new revenue socking it to the rich…president trillions achieves his political “holy grail” being able to tell his money folks he stuck the rich…the GOP get cuts..
The middle of the current dance is basically the above which tacitly was agreed to in various campaign promises by BO…..cuts plus new revenue from those evil rich folks..
Silly the way things are panning out…the sky won’t fall and we will have to take some short term medicine…so what?
Oh i forgot, not matter what, we can’t seem to stop spending on new programs already promised…like HC debacle…interesting that the HC bill considers a family making up to 88k worthy of premium credits. BO will get 3.8% tax from most others…
Is Obama concerned that he won’t be able to increase spending if this comes out as outlined above?
St Simons - he-ne-ha
December 9th, 2012
6:13 pm
josef, sounds kinda aggresive, like them sioux, don’t it?
stands for decibels
December 9th, 2012
6:13 pm
George Will & Mary Matalin appear to get it.
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/12/09/george-will-the-opposition-to-gay-marriage-is-dying-its-old-people/
Will on Sunday suggested that it was not a coincidence that the court decided to hear the cases just a month after voters in Maine, Maryland and Washington backed marriage equality.
“It could make them say, ‘It’s not necessary for us to go here,’” Will explained. “They don’t want to do what they did with abortion. The country was having a constructive accommodation on abortion, liberalizing abortion laws. The court yanked the subject out of democratic discourse and embittered the argument.”
He continued: “On the other hand, they can say it’s now safe to look at this because there is something like an emerging consensus. Quite literally, the opposition to gay marriage is dying… it’s old people.”
Republican strategist Mary Matalin, who has previously said that marriage equality is not a civil right, asserted that polls now show Americans support same sex marriage because they know it’s not a “threat to the civil order.”
“Well, because Americans have common sense,” she explained. “There are important constitutional, biological, theological, ontological questions relative to homosexual marriage. People who live in the real world say, the greater threat to the civil order are the heterosexuals who don’t get married and are making babies. That’s an epidemic in crisis proportions. That is irrefutably more problematic for our culture than homosexuals getting married.”
josef
December 9th, 2012
6:16 pm
BROSEPHUS
And who says the Imam’s crew ain’t on the cutting edge..
That was hilarious…
St Simons - he-ne-ha
December 9th, 2012
6:17 pm
I’m filling out this year’s health ins renewals.
It says “In Case of Emergency Notify _____”
I said, “a Doctor” – duh
Stevie Ray..Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right..here I am...
December 9th, 2012
6:19 pm
Also, I still don’t know why the transaction tax isn’t being considered…you’d think that Wall Street would be fighting this…heres’ the fun part…..20 of the largest, too big to fail (thanks obama) players, including the ubiquitous Goldman Sachs, signed a memo in support of this…I’m sure there is something I’m missing as a downside to taxes on stock trades and more risky speculative ventures but I’ve not come across it yet..
Has anyone? Get the 109Bln cuts and 80 bln increased revenues…then add a meager tax on the mega trillions traded annually in market…net say $200 billion a year…we go something….
Stevie Ray..Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right..here I am...
December 9th, 2012
6:20 pm
I’m also confused about the gay rights stuff…it’s coming no matter what…just a timing issue…everyone wants what they want when they want it…just like SCOTUS..
josef
December 9th, 2012
6:23 pm
He ne ha…
Don’t it just…I did some checking on him…he’s the son of gospel great Timothy Wright…
josef
December 9th, 2012
6:29 pm
SFD
Yeah. Maybe straight folks in opposition ought to tidy up their own house before telling me what’s wrong in mine…
getalife
December 9th, 2012
6:29 pm
” said, “a Doctor” – duh”
Or 911.
stevie is confused all the time…
Welcome to the Occupation
December 9th, 2012
6:30 pm
What really stands out to me on that one, josef, is this rationale: “French Imams say that a gay mosque is counter to Islam, as it excludes others”.
Now that’s a novel take! I oppose these mosques which are non-exclusive because they don’t preserve the exclusions we prefer! Though it’s not a gay mosque per se, it’s labeled as such simply by being open to gays and then is dubbed “exclusive”. Amazing.
josef
December 9th, 2012
6:37 pm
BROSEPHUS
Wonder if there one for refried tripe… our specialty here…
WELCOME
Yeah, I thought that was, as you said, a novel approach! Sounds like some of the convoluted logic going on on this topic, eh?
barking frog
December 9th, 2012
6:38 pm
Recipe for cookies that can be cooked by guys who can’t cook.
1 cup peanut butter
1 cup sugar
1 egg
stir all together in bowl
take out of bowl by spoonful and
drop on ungreased cookie sheet
preheat oven to 350 degrees and
bake for 12 min on middle rack.
buy bigger pants.
Fred ™
December 9th, 2012
6:42 pm
Brosephus™
December 9th, 2012
1:58 pm
Fred
Consider it an open invitation on Sunday. My in-laws are always over to watch Washington whenever they play on Sunday. You’re more than welcome to come and join us.
++++++++++++++++++++++
Do you let Black folks in your house? If so I’d like to bring my brother, Brother O. He lives on my way to your house. Best thing is that he doesn’t drink much beer any more lol.
Fred ™
December 9th, 2012
6:43 pm
indigo
December 9th, 2012
2:16 pm
Fred – 1:26 “You really don’t posess much in the department of logical thinking”
This from the dork that can’t even answer a simple question – namely, provide scientific proof that your God exists.
It is spoiled snot-nosed brats like you that, trying to play grown-up here, only succeed in showing how ignorant they are.
Please take your childish foolishness somewhere else, and stop bothering intelligent people, you little pencil neck geek.
+++++++++++++++++++++
I don’t need to put up with your insults and name calling because you lack the wit to answer a question intelligently. As to your silly”prove God Exists” nonsense? Prove he doesn’t.
Welcome to the Occupation
December 9th, 2012
6:45 pm
josef: “Yeah, I thought that was, as you said, a novel approach! Sounds like some of the convoluted logic going on on this topic, eh? ”
It’s how entrenched privilege always works. Hide the arbitrariness of its own exclusionary founding moves, then when challenged try to pass them off as universally valid, etc. (”why is everybody ganging up on us now, these principles have always been respected!”), then try to smear the challengers as being the one who are arbitrarily asserting an exclusion in trying to exclude the exclusionary ones. Always the same.
Brosephus™
December 9th, 2012
6:48 pm
josef
I’m good for a laugh or two nowadays. I’m tired of the bitter old grumbly sh*t. My goal is to find at least one thing to laugh at everyday for the rest of my life. I don’t care how bad a day I’ve had. My wife thinks I’m nuts because of some of the stuff I come across, but I get my laughs in.
barking frog
December 9th, 2012
<6:49 pm