Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Gay marriage is a catnip issue for the crazies, but you can't win the general by listening by listening to the Tea Party and putting a government bureaucrat at the foot of every bed.
The dems have the market cornered now with govt in the bedrooms.
Well - on THIS issue - the Dems are getting government OUT of the bedroom. Only the far right want to regulate relationships.
But did you just post that sarcastically?
Gay marriage is a catnip issue for the crazies, but you can't win the general by listening by listening to the Tea Party and putting a government bureaucrat at the foot of every bed.
The dems have the market cornered now with govt in the bedrooms.
Well - on THIS issue - the Dems are getting government OUT of the bedroom. Only the far right want to regulate relationships.
But did you just post that sarcastically?
President Christie...learn to say it; you may need to practice it seems.
Gay marriage is a catnip issue for the crazies, but you can't win the general by listening by listening to the Tea Party and putting a government bureaucrat at the foot of every bed.
The dems have the market cornered now with govt in the bedrooms.
Well - on THIS issue - the Dems are getting government OUT of the bedroom. Only the far right want to regulate relationships.
But did you just post that sarcastically?
Gay marriage is a catnip issue for the crazies, but you can't win the general by listening by listening to the Tea Party and putting a government bureaucrat at the foot of every bed.
The dems have the market cornered now with govt in the bedrooms.
Well - on THIS issue - the Dems are getting government OUT of the bedroom. Only the far right want to regulate relationships.
But did you just post that sarcastically?
The dems have the market cornered now with govt in the bedrooms.
Well - on THIS issue - the Dems are getting government OUT of the bedroom. Only the far right want to regulate relationships.
But did you just post that sarcastically?
Please tell us how the right regulates relationships...
Gay marriage is a catnip issue for the crazies, but you can't win the general by listening by listening to the Tea Party and putting a government bureaucrat at the foot of every bed.
The dems have the market cornered now with govt in the bedrooms.
Well - on THIS issue - the Dems are getting government OUT of the bedroom. Only the far right want to regulate relationships.
But did you just post that sarcastically?
The dems have the market cornered now with govt in the bedrooms.
Well - on THIS issue - the Dems are getting government OUT of the bedroom. Only the far right want to regulate relationships.
But did you just post that sarcastically?
Please tell us how the right regulates relationships...
The dems have the market cornered now with govt in the bedrooms.
Well - on THIS issue - the Dems are getting government OUT of the bedroom. Only the far right want to regulate relationships.
But did you just post that sarcastically?
Seriously? You are seriously going to argue that empowering the government to regulate same sex relationships is getting the government out of the bedroom?
You realize that same sex couples have absolutely nothing regulating their relationships right now except in the states that so called same sex marriage exists, right?
Or are you really so completely naive that you think regulating a relationship is getting government out of it?
If same sex couples don't want the government in their relationships, they wouldn't be pushing to change the laws to regulate those relationships. They would simply determine their own relationship status between each other.
We truly live in a messed up world where people think government regulation of a relationship is getting government out of it.
Well - on THIS issue - the Dems are getting government OUT of the bedroom. Only the far right want to regulate relationships.
But did you just post that sarcastically?
Seriously? You are seriously going to argue that empowering the government to regulate same sex relationships is getting the government out of the bedroom?
You realize that same sex couples have absolutely nothing regulating their relationships right now except in the states that so called same sex marriage exists, right?
Or are you really so completely naive that you think regulating a relationship is getting government out of it?
If same sex couples don't want the government in their relationships, they wouldn't be pushing to change the laws to regulate those relationships. They would simply determine their own relationship status between each other.
We truly live in a messed up world where people think government regulation of a relationship is getting government out of it.
The government will now regulate gay marriages IDENTICALLY to how it regulates heterosexual marriages. They will have the same advantageous regulations that hetoros have demanded exclusively for themselves. Tax breaks, Social Security survivor benefits, etc., etc., etc., etc.
And that is all same sex married people want. The same advantages we gave ourselves.
You people are being deliberately obtuse.
Well - on THIS issue - the Dems are getting government OUT of the bedroom. Only the far right want to regulate relationships.
But did you just post that sarcastically?
Please tell us how the right regulates relationships...
If you don't have kids, you are penalized with higher taxes. If you don't marry someone of the right gender, you are penalized with higher taxes. If you don't marry someone of the right gender, you don't get Social Security survivor benefits.
There are over a thousand other such examples.
That's some serious government social engineering right there, vehemently defended by the Right.
Well - on THIS issue - the Dems are getting government OUT of the bedroom. Only the far right want to regulate relationships.
But did you just post that sarcastically?
Please tell us how the right regulates relationships...
If you don't have kids, you are penalized with higher taxes. If you don't marry someone of the right gender, you are penalized with higher taxes. If you don't marry someone of the right gender, you don't get Social Security survivor benefits.
There are over a thousand other such examples.
That's some serious government social engineering right there, vehemently defended by the Right.
STRAIGHT: I want the government to give us straight people free lollipops.
GAY: We would like free government lollipops, too.
STRAIGHT: The fags want special privileges! They want the government in their bedroom!
STRAIGHT: I want the government to give us straight people free lollipops.
GAY: We would like free government lollipops, too.
STRAIGHT: The fags want special privileges! They want the government in their bedroom!
Please tell us how the right regulates relationships...
If you don't have kids, you are penalized with higher taxes. If you don't marry someone of the right gender, you are penalized with higher taxes. If you don't marry someone of the right gender, you don't get Social Security survivor benefits.
There are over a thousand other such examples.
That's some serious government social engineering right there, vehemently defended by the Right.
Even in Ancient Greece, where homosexuality was open and socially accepted, there was no homosexual marriage.
And when Nero married two males on two different occasions, it was not legally recognized in the Roman Law of conubium other than through the incredible personal power of the Emporer himself.
Overturning 5,000 years of history, 5,000 years of social practice, should be done only if necesary and only upon close examination.
Not saying I'm totally against it, just not sure if it's been examined closely enough yet.
Also.... I always keep something in mind -- A lot of practices from the Ancient World that found their way into modern life have to do with the prevention of diseases.
Ever wonder why Muslims and Jews refuse to eat pork?
Simple, it's called 'trichinosis'. No cure for it until recently.
Same with a lot of the old morals. Like sleeping around, casual sex, etc.
You don't really think that STD's were just invented for your personal pleasure do you?
And before antibiotics, how do you think they cured them?
They didn't.
And most homosexuals have a serious disdain for sexual fidelity. If you don't know that, you need to.
Most people think of the average homo like Mitch and Cam on Modern Family.
Not. Not even close. Many are, many aren't. Some of them are just downright -- sick.
If Homos want to get married...? I guess, maybe, we should let them. I don't know.
I just think it's totally wrong that people think they're being treated unfairly.
They're not. Not at all. Not in the least.
But there's so many of them these days, they're in such high positions in the DISGUSTING FILTH of the LSM and in politics that it's not worth the fight anymore.
Let them marry. I don't care anymore. You want it, you can have it.
Just wait until we start hearing the ugly homosexual divorce stories and suits for custody and support.
"We've always done it that way" is the excuse used by every oppressor in history. They had slaves in ancient Greece, too, you know.
As for the reasons for the Jewish and Muslim ban on pork, you are wrong.
