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.
[
And now that there are so many more who will be drawing Social Security benefits that come as part of marriage, Obama will be overjoyed to double the Social Security tax that comes out of our checks each month, and cut our benefits in half! WOOOOOO HOOOOOOO CELEBRATE~!
]
The next ACLU suit----------bigamists and polygamists are being discriminated against by the federal and state governments. We demand equal marriage rights for multi-person marriages.
Don't laugh, its the next logical step now that man/man and woman/woman marriage is legal.
Watch, it will be with us very soon.
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Explain why this causes you so much misery.
Married filing jointly.
That's as good as it gets.
Dependents? It's the turkey baster, sperm bank, or the adoption agency.
Or... Gay foster parents. Pile on those deductions!
Well done, if only Australia could get with the times and follow - gay marriage is now legal in the ACT, but the Federal government is going to court to overturn the ruling. Homophobes.
Noomi, I know we have had out difference, but I am glad you bring an international opinion to this board. That said, I wouldn't put down Australia, they have much going for them and much to envy. I have a buddy who left the States for Australia's oil industry and he isn't coming back. But I digress.
I live in IL and welcome this law, however, it ignorant to say that the people against it are homophobes (some are, but most aren't). In fact the vast majority of IL legislators voted for civil unions just last years, which gave gays all the legal protections and tax benefits that marriage offers. They were just opposed to the religious part of the union, which I think they have incorrect, but I do see their point.
Actually, I don't care who you screw. It is the financial aspect that I find troublesome. Our SS system was not designed for the extra people. We better be recruiting more illegals to pay into it.
As an Illinois Conservative, I remember that the Governor won 3 out of 102 counties in his last election!
That means most of the state geographically do not support the liberal jerk!
For queers, I had no big problem with "civil Unions" other than it would be a stepping-stone to "marriage" which I don't like!
Why do conservatives always bring up how much land voted for a candidate? Land doesn't vote, people do.
As an Illinois Conservative, I remember that the Governor won 3 out of 102 counties in his last election!
That means most of the state geographically do not support the liberal jerk!
For queers, I had no big problem with "civil Unions" other than it would be a stepping-stone to "marriage" which I don't like!
Why do conservatives always bring up how much land voted for a candidate? Land doesn't vote, people do.
That's obvious, but it does point out the benefit of the MSM in the Metro/ghetto areas for dimocrats.
Sorry ass ignorant clueless queers.
Your nightmare is only just beginning...
Sounding like a bit of sour grapes, isn't it?
Nah, just drunk.
at 7:44 in the MORNING? Seriously?
As an Illinois Conservative, I remember that the Governor won 3 out of 102 counties in his last election!
That means most of the state geographically do not support the liberal jerk!
For queers, I had no big problem with "civil Unions" other than it would be a stepping-stone to "marriage" which I don't like!
Why do conservatives always bring up how much land voted for a candidate? Land doesn't vote, people do.
As an Illinois Conservative, I remember that the Governor won 3 out of 102 counties in his last election!
That means most of the state geographically do not support the liberal jerk!
For queers, I had no big problem with "civil Unions" other than it would be a stepping-stone to "marriage" which I don't like!
Why do conservatives always bring up how much land voted for a candidate? Land doesn't vote, people do.
Why do conservatives always bring up how much land voted for a candidate? Land doesn't vote, people do.
That's obvious, but it does point out the benefit of the MSM in the Metro/ghetto areas for dimocrats.
Well, maybe instead of complaining how they vote, you could give then a good reason to vote for you?
Naw... too simple.
As an Illinois Conservative, I remember that the Governor won 3 out of 102 counties in his last election!
That means most of the state geographically do not support the liberal jerk!
For queers, I had no big problem with "civil Unions" other than it would be a stepping-stone to "marriage" which I don't like!
Why do conservatives always bring up how much land voted for a candidate? Land doesn't vote, people do.
Because they harken back to the 1820s.
Why do conservatives always bring up how much land voted for a candidate? Land doesn't vote, people do.
Because they harken back to the 1820s.
You and the truth are far apart!
The cities have most of the population in this is why democrats win.
And people wonder why so many bad things are happening in this nation, for allowing this vile shameful crap to happen. But that Illinois
Why do conservatives always bring up how much land voted for a candidate? Land doesn't vote, people do.
Because they harken back to the 1820s.
You and the truth are far apart!
I think that makes Illinois the 15th state to legalize gay marriage.
Because they harken back to the 1820s.
You and the truth are far apart!
People do vote
People live within cities and most people within cities want a little government.
