Judge strikes down Pennsylvania law barring gay marriage

[rightwinger]

Actually, I don't give a fuck what people think of gay marriage. You should not get to vote on what rights others are allowed to have

Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for supper

I give a fuck about it when what they want to "have" involves access to adoptable orphans via the privelege of marriage in the various states. We default to the rights of children over the "rights" of gays to access the privelege of marrige and all that entails..:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/curre...to-celebrate-jerry-sandusky-s-equivalent.html

BTW, do you suppose every person in this crowd is a republican? [Geeze, these crowds were all over the US on that hot sweltering Fall day, those long lines and food running out when people made it to the counter.] That's some statement!

And if they're not all republicans but instead many middle democratic voters, how do you suppose they're going to vote this Fall in close races between GOP and dem candidates, providing they now know who the democratic party is adamantly tied at the hip to..who support activist judges removing the actual rights of their sovereign voters of their respective states?

I can hear the silent shuffling feet stepping to the right. Can you?

Why do you keep posting that picture? Do you think it impresses me?

What is that? 200 Fag haters?

 

[Silhouette]

Actually, I don't give a fuck what people think of gay marriage. You should not get to vote on what rights others are allowed to have

Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for supper

I give a fuck about it when what they want to "have" involves access to adoptable orphans via the privelege of marriage in the various states. We default to the rights of children over the "rights" of gays to access the privelege of marrige and all that entails..:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/curre...to-celebrate-jerry-sandusky-s-equivalent.html

BTW, do you suppose every person in this crowd is a republican? [Geeze, these crowds were all over the US on that hot sweltering Fall day, those long lines and food running out when people made it to the counter.] That's some statement!

And if they're not all republicans but instead many middle democratic voters, how do you suppose they're going to vote this Fall in close races between GOP and dem candidates, providing they now know who the democratic party is adamantly tied at the hip to..who support activist judges removing the actual rights of their sovereign voters of their respective states?

I can hear the silent shuffling feet stepping to the right. Can you?

Why do you keep posting that picture? Do you think it impresses me?

What is that? 200 Fag haters?

I liked my family friend who was molested as a boy, grew up complusively "gay" and confused, promiscuous, got HIV and died of AIDS. And I'm against gay marriage. So here is living proof that you can like a gay person and be against gay marriage.

Your generalizations are a bit bigoted. Are you a rationalaphobe?

 

[PaintMyHouse]

I give a fuck about it when what they want to "have" involves access to adoptable orphans via the privelege of marriage in the various states. We default to the rights of children over the "rights" of gays to access the privelege of marrige and all that entails..:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/curre...to-celebrate-jerry-sandusky-s-equivalent.html

BTW, do you suppose every person in this crowd is a republican? [Geeze, these crowds were all over the US on that hot sweltering Fall day, those long lines and food running out when people made it to the counter.] That's some statement!

And if they're not all republicans but instead many middle democratic voters, how do you suppose they're going to vote this Fall in close races between GOP and dem candidates, providing they now know who the democratic party is adamantly tied at the hip to..who support activist judges removing the actual rights of their sovereign voters of their respective states?

I can hear the silent shuffling feet stepping to the right. Can you?

Why do you keep posting that picture? Do you think it impresses me?

What is that? 200 Fag haters?

I liked my family friend who was molested as a boy, grew up complusively "gay" and confused, promiscuous, got HIV and died of AIDS. And I'm against gay marriage. So here is living proof that you can like a gay person and be against gay marriage.

Your generalizations are a bit bigoted. Are you a rationalaphobe?

So your totally irrational approach to this issue is a childhood thing? Well, that makes sense.

 

[Politico]

Another state where marriage is a joke now. Everyone update your lists of traitors.

I did that in the 80's. This state is whacko for a lot bigger reasons than this.

 

[Stephanie]

So now we have Politicians and Judges lording over us?

how frikken lovely and some applaud this

 

[rightwinger]

I give a fuck about it when what they want to "have" involves access to adoptable orphans via the privelege of marriage in the various states. We default to the rights of children over the "rights" of gays to access the privelege of marrige and all that entails..:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/curre...to-celebrate-jerry-sandusky-s-equivalent.html

BTW, do you suppose every person in this crowd is a republican? [Geeze, these crowds were all over the US on that hot sweltering Fall day, those long lines and food running out when people made it to the counter.] That's some statement!

And if they're not all republicans but instead many middle democratic voters, how do you suppose they're going to vote this Fall in close races between GOP and dem candidates, providing they now know who the democratic party is adamantly tied at the hip to..who support activist judges removing the actual rights of their sovereign voters of their respective states?

I can hear the silent shuffling feet stepping to the right. Can you?

Why do you keep posting that picture? Do you think it impresses me?

What is that? 200 Fag haters?

I liked my family friend who was molested as a boy, grew up complusively "gay" and confused, promiscuous, got HIV and died of AIDS. And I'm against gay marriage. So here is living proof that you can like a gay person and be against gay marriage.

Your generalizations are a bit bigoted. Are you a rationalaphobe?

One of the lamest posts I have ever read

Just pathetic

 

[JoeB131]

So now we have Politicians and Judges lording over us?

how frikken lovely and some applaud this

Uh, yeah, that's how it's kind of supposed to work. We have judges to make sure that everyone's rights are protected, not just the majorities.

 

[Seawytch]

So now we have Politicians and Judges lording over us?

how frikken lovely and some applaud this

No, actually you don't. You have politicians that craft the laws and judges that rule on them. Did you go to school? Too poor for Schoolhouse Rock? It's on the YouTubes...

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EISWIY9bG8&feature=kp"]Three Branches of Government[/ame]

 

[Crick]

Judge strikes down Pennsylvania law barring gay marriage

Judge strikes down Pennsylvania law barring gay marriage | Reuters

19 states now, falling like dominoes they are.

The ruling makes Pennsylvania the 19th U.S. state where gay marriage is allowed, a movement that has gained momentum since the Supreme Court ruled last June that legally married same-sex couples are eligible for federal benefits.

may this be an education in why you can vote peoples rights away.

May this be an education in why you can NOT vote peoples rights away.

 

[Crick]

Another state where marriage is a joke now. Everyone update your lists of traitors.

Ok. How do you spell your middle name?

 

[Crick]

Why not just swap the stars and stripes for the faggot rainbow already. Goddamn nation of queers on parade.

That's the thing, butt-pirates make up such an insignificant part of the population.

Just like the bunny huggers,

The Eco-Nazis,

The rug munchers,

The God haters,

The pinko commies,

The baby killers,

The dope heads,

The gun grabbers,

The vegidouches,

The occutards,

The Black Klan,

The HispaniKlan,

and of course the carpet pilots who insist that a 1400 year old cult who's radical members would love to slaughter almost everyone in the groups listed above is a "religion of peace" have teamed up together in a gagglefuck of mindless dipshits called democrats.

So in spite of all common sense, and even conflicting agendas, these assholes diligently work together to destroy what they all revile.

The United States of America.

If that is ever achieved of course the bloodbath between those factions would make satan cringe.

Hey Pete, what've you got against rug-munchers?

 

[Zoom-boing]

I give a fuck about it when what they want to "have" involves access to adoptable orphans via the privelege of marriage in the various states. We default to the rights of children over the "rights" of gays to access the privelege of marrige and all that entails..:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/curre...to-celebrate-jerry-sandusky-s-equivalent.html

BTW, do you suppose every person in this crowd is a republican? [Geeze, these crowds were all over the US on that hot sweltering Fall day, those long lines and food running out when people made it to the counter.] That's some statement!

And if they're not all republicans but instead many middle democratic voters, how do you suppose they're going to vote this Fall in close races between GOP and dem candidates, providing they now know who the democratic party is adamantly tied at the hip to..who support activist judges removing the actual rights of their sovereign voters of their respective states?

I can hear the silent shuffling feet stepping to the right. Can you?

Why do you keep posting that picture? Do you think it impresses me?

What is that? 200 Fag haters?

I liked my family friend who was molested as a boy, grew up complusively "gay" and confused, promiscuous, got HIV and died of AIDS. And I'm against gay marriage. So here is living proof that you can like a gay person and be against gay marriage.

Your generalizations are a bit bigoted. Are you a rationalaphobe?

I have friends who are gay, I have zero problem with it. Actually, I don't care if someone is gay, straight, white, black, fat, thin, etc. I care about the individual. Period.

Just because I believe that marriage is between m/w does not in any way mean that I am a "hater, bigot, homophobe". I've yet to see anyone from the 'other side' show any tolerance for this differing pov. They just scream 'homophobe!' (what a retarded word). They preach tolerance but don't give it.

 

[Seawytch]

Just because I believe that marriage is between m/w does not in any way mean that I am a "hater, bigot, homophobe". I've yet to see anyone from the 'other side' show any tolerance for this differing pov. They just scream 'homophobe!' (what a retarded word). They preach tolerance but don't give it.

What kind of "tolerance" would you like shown? You would like people to make whatever statements they want in public without suffering ANY consequences?

If a celebrity, CEO of a company or popular athlete made a tweet that said, about interracial couples "It is not only unnatural, but is always productive of deplorable results. Their children turn out generally effeminate and their relationship is productive of evil."

Would you expect them to suffer any repercussions from that?

 

[Zoom-boing]

Just because I believe that marriage is between m/w does not in any way mean that I am a "hater, bigot, homophobe". I've yet to see anyone from the 'other side' show any tolerance for this differing pov. They just scream 'homophobe!' (what a retarded word). They preach tolerance but don't give it.

What kind of "tolerance" would you like shown? You would like people to make whatever statements they want in public without suffering ANY consequences?

If a celebrity, CEO of a company or popular athlete made a tweet that said, about interracial couples "It is not only unnatural, but is always productive of deplorable results. Their children turn out generally effeminate and their relationship is productive of evil."

Would you expect them to suffer any repercussions from that?

I expect the "party of tolerance and diversity " to show tolerance and diversity. They don't. They do not accept any pov that disagrees with theirs.

The CEO of Mozilla was forced out for merely holding a differing pov on ssm by a company that explicitly claims "Our organizational culture reflects diversity and inclusiveness. We welcome contributions from everyone regardless of age, culture, ethnicity, gender, gender-identity, language, race, sexual orientation, geographical location and religious views. Mozilla supports equality for all."

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Just because I believe that marriage is between m/w does not in any way mean that I am a "hater, bigot, homophobe". I've yet to see anyone from the 'other side' show any tolerance for this differing pov. They just scream 'homophobe!' (what a retarded word). They preach tolerance but don't give it.

What kind of "tolerance" would you like shown? You would like people to make whatever statements they want in public without suffering ANY consequences?

If a celebrity, CEO of a company or popular athlete made a tweet that said, about interracial couples "It is not only unnatural, but is always productive of deplorable results. Their children turn out generally effeminate and their relationship is productive of evil."

Would you expect them to suffer any repercussions from that?

I expect the "party of tolerance and diversity " to show tolerance and diversity. They don't. They do not accept any pov that disagrees with theirs.

The CEO of Mozilla was forced out for merely holding a differing pov on ssm by a company that explicitly claims "Our organizational culture reflects diversity and inclusiveness. We welcome contributions from everyone regardless of age, culture, ethnicity, gender, gender-identity, language, race, sexual orientation, geographical location and religious views. Mozilla supports equality for all."

Mozilla does, he didn't, hence the problem but I don't know enough of that story to say whether they should have bounced him or not.

Tolerance stops at intolerance. We don't tolerate people burning witches or who think Jews are the devil much either. If you get shamed out of believing such things, good, society is working.

 

[Seawytch]

Just because I believe that marriage is between m/w does not in any way mean that I am a "hater, bigot, homophobe". I've yet to see anyone from the 'other side' show any tolerance for this differing pov. They just scream 'homophobe!' (what a retarded word). They preach tolerance but don't give it.

What kind of "tolerance" would you like shown? You would like people to make whatever statements they want in public without suffering ANY consequences?

If a celebrity, CEO of a company or popular athlete made a tweet that said, about interracial couples "It is not only unnatural, but is always productive of deplorable results. Their children turn out generally effeminate and their relationship is productive of evil."

Would you expect them to suffer any repercussions from that?

I expect the "party of tolerance and diversity " to show tolerance and diversity. They don't. They do not accept any pov that disagrees with theirs.

The CEO of Mozilla was forced out for merely holding a differing pov on ssm by a company that explicitly claims "Our organizational culture reflects diversity and inclusiveness. We welcome contributions from everyone regardless of age, culture, ethnicity, gender, gender-identity, language, race, sexual orientation, geographical location and religious views. Mozilla supports equality for all."

He didn't just "hold a line", he made public donations to an anti gay campaign. Replace any other minority with gays in the recent public outcries and you wouldn't really care would you because you would agree with the public's outcry. Because you don't agree with the public on this issue, you think the public is being intolerant. Yes, it is...intolerant of intolerance and that's a good thing.

 

[Zoom-boing]

What kind of "tolerance" would you like shown? You would like people to make whatever statements they want in public without suffering ANY consequences?

If a celebrity, CEO of a company or popular athlete made a tweet that said, about interracial couples "It is not only unnatural, but is always productive of deplorable results. Their children turn out generally effeminate and their relationship is productive of evil."

Would you expect them to suffer any repercussions from that?

I expect the "party of tolerance and diversity " to show tolerance and diversity. They don't. They do not accept any pov that disagrees with theirs.

The CEO of Mozilla was forced out for merely holding a differing pov on ssm by a company that explicitly claims "Our organizational culture reflects diversity and inclusiveness. We welcome contributions from everyone regardless of age, culture, ethnicity, gender, gender-identity, language, race, sexual orientation, geographical location and religious views. Mozilla supports equality for all."

He didn't just "hold a line", he made public donations to an anti gay campaign. Replace any other minority with gays in the recent public outcries and you wouldn't really care would you because you would agree with the public's outcry. Because you don't agree with the public on this issue, you think the public is being intolerant. Yes, it is...intolerant of intolerance and that's a good thing.

He supports ssm and contributed to that on his own, privately, years prior to Mozilla. He was booted for holding that belief by a company that specifically claims that they welcome contributions from "everyone, regardless ... we support equality for all". I call bullshit on that and on the left for espousing same. You are not the party of diversity and tolerance, you are the party that tolerates nothing less than acceptance.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

derp

You have a remarkable grasp of the irrelevant.

 

[Seawytch]

I expect the "party of tolerance and diversity " to show tolerance and diversity. They don't. They do not accept any pov that disagrees with theirs.

The CEO of Mozilla was forced out for merely holding a differing pov on ssm by a company that explicitly claims "Our organizational culture reflects diversity and inclusiveness. We welcome contributions from everyone regardless of age, culture, ethnicity, gender, gender-identity, language, race, sexual orientation, geographical location and religious views. Mozilla supports equality for all."

He didn't just "hold a line", he made public donations to an anti gay campaign. Replace any other minority with gays in the recent public outcries and you wouldn't really care would you because you would agree with the public's outcry. Because you don't agree with the public on this issue, you think the public is being intolerant. Yes, it is...intolerant of intolerance and that's a good thing.

He supports ssm and contributed to that on his own, privately, years prior to Mozilla. He was booted for holding that belief by a company that specifically claims that they welcome contributions from "everyone, regardless ... we support equality for all". I call bullshit on that and on the left for espousing same. You are not the party of diversity and tolerance, you are the party that tolerates nothing less than acceptance.

Campaign donations aren't private, your vote is. He could have voted for Prop 8 and no one would have ever been the wiser that he doesn't think gay people deserve equal rights. He made a public donation to an anti gay campaign. If a CEO had made a public donation to and organization against interracial marriage would you expect public outcry, yes or no?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I expect the "party of tolerance and diversity " to show tolerance and diversity. They don't. They do not accept any pov that disagrees with theirs.

The CEO of Mozilla was forced out for merely holding a differing pov on ssm by a company that explicitly claims "Our organizational culture reflects diversity and inclusiveness. We welcome contributions from everyone regardless of age, culture, ethnicity, gender, gender-identity, language, race, sexual orientation, geographical location and religious views. Mozilla supports equality for all."

He didn't just "hold a line", he made public donations to an anti gay campaign. Replace any other minority with gays in the recent public outcries and you wouldn't really care would you because you would agree with the public's outcry. Because you don't agree with the public on this issue, you think the public is being intolerant. Yes, it is...intolerant of intolerance and that's a good thing.

He supports ssm and contributed to that on his own, privately, years prior to Mozilla. He was booted for holding that belief by a company that specifically claims that they welcome contributions from "everyone, regardless ... we support equality for all". I call bullshit on that and on the left for espousing same. You are not the party of diversity and tolerance, you are the party that tolerates nothing less than acceptance.

Nonsense.

It’s conservatives and republicans who for the most part seek to deny gay Americans their civil liberties, with liberals advocating for the equal protection rights of same-sex couples.

And that’s been the case for 60 years – from Brown to Loving to Lawrence and most recently Windsor, in those cases and many more liberals have fought for the civil rights of all Americans, opposed every step of the way by conservatives.