Rightwingers, of whom I'm one, let the gay shit go

[sfcalifornia]

Gay marriage also lost at every level for over 100 years. It's only a matter of time until you Dumbocrats appoint the next unqualified, unhinged idiot to the Supreme Court who believes their job is not to uphold the Constitution, but rather to advance the liberal agenda of collapsing society and then collapsing the U.S. (I would say "justice", but you buffoons actually appointed Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court and that troll had never been a judge in her life ).

By the way, you sound like an idiot screaming "strawman" in every post like someone with Tourette's. You're a hypocrite. Be a big girl and own it.

LOL

Yup!

Rotten's gonna be butthurt over the DOMA and Prop 8 ruling for a long, loooong time!

You need to read the ruling because it doesn't say what you think it does

tapatalk post

Gay men and women are getting married again in California.

Your "perspective" on the ruling means jack shit.

 

[sfcalifornia]

Gay marriage also lost at every level for over 100 years. It's only a matter of time until you Dumbocrats appoint the next unqualified, unhinged idiot to the Supreme Court who believes their job is not to uphold the Constitution, but rather to advance the liberal agenda of collapsing society and then collapsing the U.S. (I would say "justice", but you buffoons actually appointed Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court and that troll had never been a judge in her life ).

By the way, you sound like an idiot screaming "strawman" in every post like someone with Tourette's. You're a hypocrite. Be a big girl and own it.

LOL

Yup!

Rotten's gonna be butthurt over the DOMA and Prop 8 ruling for a long, loooong time!

[MENTION=34247]sfcalifornia[/MENTION] is so dumb, even after I posted a link (from CNN no less) to it, she still hasn't figured out that the Supreme Court refused to rule on Prop 8...

And here we go again: your "perspective" on the ruling means jack shit.

Gay men and women are getting married in California again. Precedent has been set and future lawsuits in other states will be based on the Supreme Court allowing the judgment of the lower court to stand.

You can split hairs all you want loser but the plain fact remains: gay marriage is here to stay.

You lost. Game over.

 

[Faun]

If a civil union gave gay couples EXACTLY THE SAME rights as a man/woman marriage, would that be satisfactory? yes or no. No rhetoric, just a yes or no.

No problem with that....but all those laws (Federal, state, local) and statutes will have to have their language changed from "married" and "marriage" to "civil unions". Do you think that is necessary?

So as Iceman said, its all about the word. you want forced social acceptance of your aberrant lifestyle. You want the government to engage in mandatory thought control with penalties for anyone who dares stray and express a contradictory view----Duck Dynasty is the latest example of punishment for anyone who does not express complete acceptance of gays as normal. The first amendment no longer exists.

For the umpteenth time, what you call, "forced social acceptance," is in fact, seeking equal protection of the laws.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Gay men and women are getting married again in California.

Your "perspective" on the ruling means jack shit.

Yes.

The people of California spoke loud and clear, but the counter-culture said "fuck the will of the people" and used an unelected judge to dictate law to their liking in direct contradiction to the legally established law.

What a win for democracy - you thugs must be so proud.

 

[BillyZane]

LOL

Yup!

Rotten's gonna be butthurt over the DOMA and Prop 8 ruling for a long, loooong time!

[MENTION=34247]sfcalifornia[/MENTION] is so dumb, even after I posted a link (from CNN no less) to it, she still hasn't figured out that the Supreme Court refused to rule on Prop 8...

And here we go again: your "perspective" on the ruling means jack shit.

Gay men and women are getting married in California again. Precedent has been set and future lawsuits in other states will be based on the Supreme Court allowing the judgment of the lower court to stand.

You can split hairs all you want loser but the plain fact remains: gay marriage is here to stay.

You lost. Game over.

Wrong.

Texas , or Louisiana, or Florida, or whatever is not bound by precedent set in CA.

lower federal courts have no jurisdiction over state courts. Well actually the SCOTUS itself doesn't even have such.

 

[deltex1]

Quack, Quack!! Thats all I have to say.

 

[Redfish]

No problem with that....but all those laws (Federal, state, local) and statutes will have to have their language changed from "married" and "marriage" to "civil unions". Do you think that is necessary?

So as Iceman said, its all about the word. you want forced social acceptance of your aberrant lifestyle. You want the government to engage in mandatory thought control with penalties for anyone who dares stray and express a contradictory view----Duck Dynasty is the latest example of punishment for anyone who does not express complete acceptance of gays as normal. The first amendment no longer exists.

For the umpteenth time, what you call, "forced social acceptance," is in fact, seeking equal protection of the laws.

NO, its not. Equal protection under the law can be obtained for gay couples by legalizing civil unions and making them equal in all respects to a man/woman marriage.

What you want is for the government to force the rest of us to accept your lifestyle as equivalent to normal human sexuality. Thats why you insist on the word "marriage". You think that calling a gay union a marriage somehow makes it acceptable to everyone.

Its not about equality, its abour forced social acceptance. You know it, we know it, everyone knows it.

You actually might do better if you were honest about your agenda.

 

[Faun]

Yeah...all gay threads are started by Lefties...and gay lefties at that.

I don't know who starts threads on this board. All I know is in real life the left is obsessed with bringing homosexuality into ever aspect of life.

homosexuality and infanticide--------the platfom of the left.

Great, more lies from the right.

infanticide is the act of killing infants. Infants are not infants until they're born. infanticide is not a platform of the left, as you falsely claimed. The left does support the availability of abortion, if that's what you meant? But abortion is not infanticide. So if your goal was to vilify abortion by calling it something worse than it is, then you failed miserably since words do have meaning.

 

[bodecea]

Let me Put this in another way then when I say minority I don't mean a minority in the country I mean a minority on the planet. The reason for that is because homosexuality is not the norm. Your obsession to be seen as normal is absurd. I personally don't understand it I am normal it is prettty f****** boring.

tapatalk post

Again....how does my being a minority change anything?

Simple question.

Would you be happy if the government just dropped the use of the term marriage or any version of it from any official use and you were free to do whatever you wanted in terms of marriage (within the bounds of consent of course?)

Yes or no?

After you answer my question.....How does my being a minority change anything?

 

[Redfish]

I don't know who starts threads on this board. All I know is in real life the left is obsessed with bringing homosexuality into ever aspect of life.

homosexuality and infanticide--------the platfom of the left.

Great, more lies from the right.

infanticide is the act of killing infants. Infants are not infants until they're born. infanticide is not a platform of the left, as you falsely claimed. The left does support the availability of abortion, if that's what you meant? But abortion is not infanticide. So if your goal was to vilify abortion by calling it something worse than it is, then you failed miserably since words do have meaning.

If the child is viable outside the womb then abortion is infanticide. Prior to that time its simply murder.

It always amazes me that liberals who claim to love everyone, are so anxious to terminate the lives of the innocent.

 

[Faun]

So as Iceman said, its all about the word. you want forced social acceptance of your aberrant lifestyle. You want the government to engage in mandatory thought control with penalties for anyone who dares stray and express a contradictory view----Duck Dynasty is the latest example of punishment for anyone who does not express complete acceptance of gays as normal. The first amendment no longer exists.

For the umpteenth time, what you call, "forced social acceptance," is in fact, seeking equal protection of the laws.

NO, its not. Equal protection under the law can be obtained for gay couples by legalizing civil unions and making them equal in all respects to a man/woman marriage.

What you want is for the government to force the rest of us to accept your lifestyle as equivalent to normal human sexuality. Thats why you insist on the word "marriage". You think that calling a gay union a marriage somehow makes it acceptable to everyone.

Its not about equality, its abour forced social acceptance. You know it, we know it, everyone knows it.

You actually might do better if you were honest about your agenda.

No, that's not equal protection. The law cannot provide a marriage certificate to some but not others; and then call that equal protection.

 

[Redfish]

Again....how does my being a minority change anything?

Simple question.

Would you be happy if the government just dropped the use of the term marriage or any version of it from any official use and you were free to do whatever you wanted in terms of marriage (within the bounds of consent of course?)

Yes or no?

After you answer my question.....How does my being a minority change anything?

being in a minority means you are not in the majority, and like it or not, in civilized societies the majority view prevails.

The majority wants you to have equal rights, the majority does not view homosexuality as a normal human condition.

 

[Redfish]

For the umpteenth time, what you call, "forced social acceptance," is in fact, seeking equal protection of the laws.

NO, its not. Equal protection under the law can be obtained for gay couples by legalizing civil unions and making them equal in all respects to a man/woman marriage.

What you want is for the government to force the rest of us to accept your lifestyle as equivalent to normal human sexuality. Thats why you insist on the word "marriage". You think that calling a gay union a marriage somehow makes it acceptable to everyone.

Its not about equality, its abour forced social acceptance. You know it, we know it, everyone knows it.

You actually might do better if you were honest about your agenda.

No, that's not equal protection. The law cannot provide a marriage certificate to some but not others; and then call that equal protection.

How exactly does the use of the word "marriage" on your certificate give you more rights?

Admit it, its not about rights-------its about having the government force the rest of us to calll your gay union a marriage.

YOU HAVE EQUAL RIGHTS, WHAT YOU WANT IS SPECIAL RIGHTS.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Great, more lies from the right.

infanticide is the act of killing infants. Infants are not infants until they're born. infanticide is not a platform of the left, as you falsely claimed. The left does support the availability of abortion, if that's what you meant? But abortion is not infanticide. So if your goal was to vilify abortion by calling it something worse than it is, then you failed miserably since words do have meaning.

Actually, your god put his support behind infanticide while a Illinois state Senator.

When Obama Voted For Infanticide | National Review Online

The left has contempt for life, infanticide is one of many manifestations of that contempt.

 

[sfcalifornia]

[MENTION=34247]sfcalifornia[/MENTION] is so dumb, even after I posted a link (from CNN no less) to it, she still hasn't figured out that the Supreme Court refused to rule on Prop 8...

And here we go again: your "perspective" on the ruling means jack shit.

Gay men and women are getting married in California again. Precedent has been set and future lawsuits in other states will be based on the Supreme Court allowing the judgment of the lower court to stand.

You can split hairs all you want loser but the plain fact remains: gay marriage is here to stay.

You lost. Game over.

Wrong.

Texas , or Louisiana, or Florida, or whatever is not bound by precedent set in CA.

lower federal courts have no jurisdiction over state courts. Well actually the SCOTUS itself doesn't even have such.

More hair splitting.

You're forgetting: SCOTUS struck down DOMA.

Face it. Gay marriage is here to stay. It's only a matter of time before backwater states like Texas and Louisiana start recognizing gay marriages too.

 

[Faun]

homosexuality and infanticide--------the platfom of the left.

Great, more lies from the right.

infanticide is the act of killing infants. Infants are not infants until they're born. infanticide is not a platform of the left, as you falsely claimed. The left does support the availability of abortion, if that's what you meant? But abortion is not infanticide. So if your goal was to vilify abortion by calling it something worse than it is, then you failed miserably since words do have meaning.

If the child is viable outside the womb then abortion is infanticide. Prior to that time its simply murder.

It always amazes me that liberals who claim to love everyone, are so anxious to terminate the lives of the innocent.

What a pity you don't get to redifine words, eh? Infancy begins at birth. Viability inside the womb has nothing to do with it. Too bad for you, you're stuck with that definition. Abortion is neither infanticide nor will it be just because you're too ignorant to know any better.

 

[sfcalifornia]

Gay men and women are getting married again in California.

Your "perspective" on the ruling means jack shit.

Yes.

The people of California spoke loud and clear, but the counter-culture said "fuck the will of the people" and used an unelected judge to dictate law to their liking in direct contradiction to the legally established law.

What a win for democracy - you thugs must be so proud.

Awww.... more whining and crying from the losing side.

Don't like it? Then go change the Constitution.

 

[bodecea]

Simple question.

Would you be happy if the government just dropped the use of the term marriage or any version of it from any official use and you were free to do whatever you wanted in terms of marriage (within the bounds of consent of course?)

Yes or no?

After you answer my question.....How does my being a minority change anything?

being in a minority means you are not in the majority, and like it or not, in civilized societies the majority view prevails.

The majority wants you to have equal rights, the majority does not view homosexuality as a normal human condition.

So...marriage rights are a question for the majority to decide on? Other rights are a question for the majority to decide on? Seriously? This is where you want to go?

 

[Redfish]

Great, more lies from the right.

infanticide is the act of killing infants. Infants are not infants until they're born. infanticide is not a platform of the left, as you falsely claimed. The left does support the availability of abortion, if that's what you meant? But abortion is not infanticide. So if your goal was to vilify abortion by calling it something worse than it is, then you failed miserably since words do have meaning.

If the child is viable outside the womb then abortion is infanticide. Prior to that time its simply murder.

It always amazes me that liberals who claim to love everyone, are so anxious to terminate the lives of the innocent.

What a pity you don't get to redifine words, eh? Infancy begins at birth. Viability inside the womb has nothing to do with it. Too bad for you, you're stuck with that definition. Abortion is neither infanticide nor will it be just because you're too ignorant to know any better.

For those of us who believe that life begins at conception, then abortion is murder no matter when it takes place. Partial birth abortion (voted for by Obama) is clearly infanticide even by your definition.

Why is abortion as birth control such a big issue with you libs? What is it about destroying life (or potential life) that you find so necessary?

 

[bodecea]

And here we go again: your "perspective" on the ruling means jack shit.

Gay men and women are getting married in California again. Precedent has been set and future lawsuits in other states will be based on the Supreme Court allowing the judgment of the lower court to stand.

You can split hairs all you want loser but the plain fact remains: gay marriage is here to stay.

You lost. Game over.

Wrong.

Texas , or Louisiana, or Florida, or whatever is not bound by precedent set in CA.

lower federal courts have no jurisdiction over state courts. Well actually the SCOTUS itself doesn't even have such.

More hair splitting.

You're forgetting: SCOTUS struck down DOMA.

Face it. Gay marriage is here to stay. It's only a matter of time before backwater states like Texas and Louisiana start recognizing gay marriages too.

I look forward to my wife and I filing joint federal tax returns this year as well as joint state returns like we've been doing for 5 years. Gay couples all over the US will be doing the same.