Is gay marriage the most important issue in the USA?

[PaintMyHouse]

Teachers are treated like shit here. Just ask them.

And educated people are ignored, just eggheads. That is why this country is getting its ass handed to it.

Wrong. Education fails because most educators are liberal.

Education is a Liberal thing. We invented it.

Simply wrong. Saying liberals or conservatives invented education is just stupid. Shows your level of education.

Liberals did invent education. Look it up.

Wrong. Claiming someone invented it is ignorant. It was developed over a loooonnnggg time. Give me a link or make a decent argument.

More education for you: Trivium - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Liberals teach because liberals invented the idea.

 

[SUPERMAN1929]

You are simply yelling, Superman, because Marriage Equality is a fact.

Throw all the mud you want, doesn't matter.

Yelling would be bold or caps.

I agree it is happening but that doesn't mean it is right. Just because most people think homos should be able to get married means nothing to me.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

All people of good will use Marriage Equality for all marriages, straight or gay. That you can't accept that this is happening means nothing at all.

It's not marriage unless it's between a man and woman. That's the fact and the way it was forever up until very recent history where liberal fags decided to attempt to redefine it. If you deny that then you're a fag.

Your feelings define nothing, kid.

It's not feelings. It's fact. Find gay marriages a long time ago. They didn't exist because no one ever thought that culture would become this immoral. It's so disgusting that no one even thought about it or considered it.

Have fun learning history: History of same-sex unions - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

While it is a relatively new practice that same-sex couples are being granted the same form of legal marital recognition as commonly used by mixed-sexed couples, there is some history of recorded same-sex unions around the world

That's my point.

It's not new. Neither is marrying, and fucking, your little sister. It's human history.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Teachers are treated like shit here. Just ask them.

And educated people are ignored, just eggheads. That is why this country is getting its ass handed to it.

Wrong. Education fails because most educators are liberal.

Education is a Liberal thing. We invented it.

Simply wrong. Saying liberals or conservatives invented education is just stupid. Shows your level of education.

Liberals did invent education. Look it up.

Wrong. Claiming someone invented it is ignorant. It was developed over a loooonnnggg time. Give me a link or make a decent argument.

You have been asked to do so and have failed.

 

[Pop23]

Then why does your side argue for it?

It is you that is arguing for it. If any two can marry then that means any two eh?

Yep, no compelling government interest in denying them.

Go ahead, express the compelling state interest in denying same sex siblings from marriage.

You won't, you can't.

Doesn't bother me, what I can't figure out is why you are opposed? There doesn't seem to be any compelling reason against SSSM that I can see. You got one, or not?

Just glad I'm not the Justice who's legacy will have to be:

A. Granting gays greater access to marriage than straights

Or

B. Legalizing incest.

WHAT?

This is nuts.

A. Gays don't want, are not asking for, won't get "greater access to marriage than straights".

B. Completely unrelated and vile that you would even suggest it.

Really, 2 is vile? Good, I'm glad we agree. Now state the Governments compelling interest in denying a couple of same sex brothers the right to marry if the USSC rules in favor of SSM.

 

[JakeStarkey]

You are simply yelling, Superman, because Marriage Equality is a fact.

Throw all the mud you want, doesn't matter.

Yelling would be bold or caps. I agree it is happening but that doesn't mean it is right. Just because most people think homos should be able to get married means nothing to me.

You can yell without bold or caps. Continued trolling is similar to trolling. What you feel or like does not matter.

 

[Pop23]

Oh I do, it leads to a legal paradox that opens the door to same sex sibling marriage, and since that discriminates againt heterosexuals (based on their ability to procreate) a good chance that all sibling marriage become legal.

Nope, don't like it.

Oh and by the way, should SSM become law, the arguments for it would be EXACTLY the same all along the line.

So, your only reason is, I Don't Like It? Well, not enough for the courts or society at large. Guess that puts you out in the cold my friend.

I think I went into a bit more detail. That's ok coming from someone who approves of incest

What difference does someone fucking their sister make to me, or you? Oh right, none. You should learn to be rational and objective.

It's good to see you coming out in favor of incest.

Neither for nor against, but there is only one valid argument against, potential defective children, which isn't saying much.

Only effects opposite sex couples, never same sex.

 

[SUPERMAN1929]

Wrong. Education fails because most educators are liberal.

Education is a Liberal thing. We invented it.

Simply wrong. Saying liberals or conservatives invented education is just stupid. Shows your level of education.

Liberals did invent education. Look it up.

Wrong. Claiming someone invented it is ignorant. It was developed over a loooonnnggg time. Give me a link or make a decent argument.

More education for you: Trivium - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Liberals teach because liberals invented the idea.

Liberalism - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

When I use the term liberal I speak of American liberals/democrats. That group does not associate with a true liberal. They are anti liberal in so many ways it is ridiculous. I'm a liberal by definition but I don't like the term because it associates me with all the fags/socialists which are not in fact real liberals. Read what a real liberal is and then you will realize it is a completely different group from US liberals.

 

[JakeStarkey]

It is you that is arguing for it. If any two can marry then that means any two eh?

Yep, no compelling government interest in denying them.

Go ahead, express the compelling state interest in denying same sex siblings from marriage.

You won't, you can't.

Doesn't bother me, what I can't figure out is why you are opposed? There doesn't seem to be any compelling reason against SSSM that I can see. You got one, or not?

Just glad I'm not the Justice who's legacy will have to be:

A. Granting gays greater access to marriage than straights

Or

B. Legalizing incest.

WHAT?

This is nuts.

A. Gays don't want, are not asking for, won't get "greater access to marriage than straights".

B. Completely unrelated and vile that you would even suggest it.

Really, 2 is vile? Good, I'm glad we agree. Now state the Governments compelling interest in denying a couple of same sex brothers the right to marry if the USSC rules in favor of SSM.

That is your challenge to get the government to recognize that no compelling argument exists.

 

[SUPERMAN1929]

You are simply yelling, Superman, because Marriage Equality is a fact.

Throw all the mud you want, doesn't matter.

Yelling would be bold or caps. I agree it is happening but that doesn't mean it is right. Just because most people think homos should be able to get married means nothing to me.

You can yell without bold or caps. Continued trolling is similar to trolling. What you feel or like does not matter.

It actually does matter. It would be a liberal's idea to restrict freedom of speech...

 

[JakeStarkey]

When I use the term liberal I speak of American liberals/democrats. That group does not associate with a true liberal. They are anti liberal in so many ways it is ridiculous. I'm a liberal by definition but I don't like the term because it associates me with all the fags/socialists which are not in fact real liberals. Read what a real liberal is and then you will realize it is a completely different group from US liberals.

So you don't know what is a liberal or liberalism, obviously.

 

[JakeStarkey]

You are simply yelling, Superman, because Marriage Equality is a fact.

Throw all the mud you want, doesn't matter.

Yelling would be bold or caps. I agree it is happening but that doesn't mean it is right. Just because most people think homos should be able to get married means nothing to me.

You can yell without bold or caps. Continued trolling is similar to trolling. What you feel or like does not matter.

It actually does matter. It would be a liberal's idea to restrict freedom of speech...

No one is restricting your speech to utter feelings that absolutely do not matter.

 

[SUPERMAN1929]

You are simply yelling, Superman, because Marriage Equality is a fact.

Throw all the mud you want, doesn't matter.

Yelling would be bold or caps. I agree it is happening but that doesn't mean it is right. Just because most people think homos should be able to get married means nothing to me.

You can yell without bold or caps. Continued trolling is similar to trolling. What you feel or like does not matter.

It actually does matter. It would be a liberal's idea to restrict freedom of speech...

No one is restricting your speech to utter feelings that absolutely do not matter.

They do. I can vote and lobby.

 

[SUPERMAN1929]

When I use the term liberal I speak of American liberals/democrats. That group does not associate with a true liberal. They are anti liberal in so many ways it is ridiculous. I'm a liberal by definition but I don't like the term because it associates me with all the fags/socialists which are not in fact real liberals. Read what a real liberal is and then you will realize it is a completely different group from US liberals.

So you don't know what is a liberal or liberalism, obviously.

I do know. Liberals want freedom and equality. Democrats/modern liberals want to take people's money and redistribute it. They also want to restrict religious freedom and really kill religion as a whole.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Now your senseless comments simply make you look simple. What you think does not matter in the sum of things about Marriage Equality.

I like it how libs use the term "Marriage Equality" whenever marriage is between a man and a woman. The truth is giving homo fags tax breaks. That's what they want and that's how they should present it.

All people of good will use Marriage Equality for all marriages, straight or gay. That you can't accept that this is happening means nothing at all.

It's not marriage unless it's between a man and woman. That's the fact and the way it was forever up until very recent history where liberal fags decided to attempt to redefine it. If you deny that then you're a fag.

Your feelings define nothing, kid.

It's not feelings. It's fact. Find gay marriages a long time ago. They didn't exist because no one ever thought that culture would become this immoral. It's so disgusting that no one even thought about it or considered it.

Wrong. They not only existed, they were condoned by the church.

You're also wrong that homosexuality is somehow new. It has been a fact since humans first had sex.

 

[Pop23]

Yep, no compelling government interest in denying them.

Go ahead, express the compelling state interest in denying same sex siblings from marriage.

You won't, you can't.

Doesn't bother me, what I can't figure out is why you are opposed? There doesn't seem to be any compelling reason against SSSM that I can see. You got one, or not?

Just glad I'm not the Justice who's legacy will have to be:

A. Granting gays greater access to marriage than straights

Or

B. Legalizing incest.

WHAT?

This is nuts.

A. Gays don't want, are not asking for, won't get "greater access to marriage than straights".

B. Completely unrelated and vile that you would even suggest it.

Really, 2 is vile? Good, I'm glad we agree. Now state the Governments compelling interest in denying a couple of same sex brothers the right to marry if the USSC rules in favor of SSM.

That is your challenge to get the government to recognize that no compelling argument exists.

That would be the same sex siblings challenge, not mine at all and since the arguments that pushed same sex marriage would have equal validity, they have equal merit.

That is unless you can come up with an argument that weakens their case.

The question remains

Can you

 

[Luddly Neddite]

So, your only reason is, I Don't Like It? Well, not enough for the courts or society at large. Guess that puts you out in the cold my friend.

I think I went into a bit more detail. That's ok coming from someone who approves of incest

What difference does someone fucking their sister make to me, or you? Oh right, none. You should learn to be rational and objective.

It's good to see you coming out in favor of incest.

Neither for nor against, but there is only one valid argument against, potential defective children, which isn't saying much.

Only effects opposite sex couples, never same sex.

Jeeez but you DO come up with some weird OPINIONS and then call them facts.

 

[SUPERMAN1929]

I like it how libs use the term "Marriage Equality" whenever marriage is between a man and a woman. The truth is giving homo fags tax breaks. That's what they want and that's how they should present it.

All people of good will use Marriage Equality for all marriages, straight or gay. That you can't accept that this is happening means nothing at all.

It's not marriage unless it's between a man and woman. That's the fact and the way it was forever up until very recent history where liberal fags decided to attempt to redefine it. If you deny that then you're a fag.

Your feelings define nothing, kid.

It's not feelings. It's fact. Find gay marriages a long time ago. They didn't exist because no one ever thought that culture would become this immoral. It's so disgusting that no one even thought about it or considered it.

Wrong. They not only existed, they were condoned by the church.

You're also wrong that homosexuality is somehow new. It has been a fact since humans first had sex.

No it wasn't... Maybe you can find isolated incidents but it has never been truly recognized until recent history.

 

[Kondor3]

I like it how libs use the term "Marriage Equality" whenever marriage is between a man and a woman. The truth is giving homo fags tax breaks. That's what they want and that's how they should present it.

All people of good will use Marriage Equality for all marriages, straight or gay. That you can't accept that this is happening means nothing at all.

It's not marriage unless it's between a man and woman. That's the fact and the way it was forever up until very recent history where liberal fags decided to attempt to redefine it. If you deny that then you're a fag.

Your feelings define nothing, kid.

It's not feelings. It's fact. Find gay marriages a long time ago. They didn't exist because no one ever thought that culture would become this immoral. It's so disgusting that no one even thought about it or considered it.

Wrong. They not only existed, they were condoned by the church.

You're also wrong that homosexuality is somehow new. It has been a fact since humans first had sex.

Well, maybe the second time, anyway...

 

[Londoner]

Did you not see the statistics that most poor people vote democrat? Also most poor people are uneducated so that completely derails the ignorant theory saying that educated people vote democrat. The truth is that educated people which pursue pointless careers are the ones who vote democrat. Not functioning members of society.

The GOP doesn't need all the poor & working class voters that were once a part of the New Deal Coalition - they just need to capture enough of those voters in key regions, mainly in the South and Heartland. As I said, they use conservatism to convince certain voters in places like Mississippi, Louisiana, Alabama, Georgia and Kentucky that Republican nominees care about religion, tradition and patriotism (rather than the narrow interests of the corporations and donors who fund their candidates and draft policy through lobbying pressure).

But obviously, to win the presidency you need more than outreach programs to rural conservatives, which is why Republicans have different communication patterns for wealthy libertarians (who are more concerned with tax, trade & regulatory policy than with the construction of a Big Moral Government which puts a bureaucrat at every bedside to save the souls of consenting adults who refuse to love each other in government sanctioned ways).

Please pay attention this time.

Both parties market themselves to their rich & poor constituencies, but the GOP's strategic use of conservatism (which went into overdrive w/Reagan & the Moral Majority) allowed them to attract enough poor working voters in the South and Heartland to tip the scales. Many of the poor working class voters who defected from FDRs original New Deal Coalition were and are functioning members of society. Do you remember the Reagan Democrats, many of whom were northern catholic union workers in the rust belt? These were hard working people who were "turned off" by the Left's 60s anti-war, bra-burning, secularist, collectivist hippiedom. [The problem with discussin

Your point about the Left's support amongst welfare recipients is well taken, but you need to credit the Reagan Revolution's brilliance in using conservatism to peel off a huge number of disaffected working class democrats. These are not just "Red State Takers" who want government's hands off their medicare, but include a broader coalition of white lower income religious voters who supported the Left prior to its sixties transformation.