So a private citizen can’t pick and choose who they want to live with?

[JakeStarkey]

I think I have used that word maybe twice in my life, its a loaded term/word and very insulting, your use of it , is very fucked up. If just this, is what it takes to get you to throw it around, I honestly feel sorry for you, no, I pity you.

It's really not a sexist term, and you should not be offended by it. I mean that's what bigrebnc says when he uses the n-word, that it is not racist. There are some real morons on this Board that try to get away with being sexist and or racist, while saying they are not.

Ozmar, however, really means it, so Ozmar is being straight while being a loser.

Try using it with your neighbors wife, and see if she doesn't take it as a sexist term.

Meister, I was being sarcastic. Sorry you didn't get it. Yes, it was sexist and it was vile and it reveals Ozmar as character deficient.

 

[Ozmar]

It's really not a sexist term, and you should not be offended by it. I mean that's what bigrebnc says when he uses the n-word, that it is not racist. There are some real morons on this Board that try to get away with being sexist and or racist, while saying they are not.

Ozmar, however, really means it, so Ozmar is being straight while being a loser.

Try using it with your neighbors wife, and see if she doesn't take it as a sexist term.

Meister, I was being sarcastic. Sorry you didn't get it. Yes, it was sexist and it was vile and it reveals Ozmar as character deficient.

If you come to that conclusion from the colorful use of one word, it's no wonder your fragile sensitivities can grasp how wrong this whole thread is.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Ozmar, it has nothing to do with fragile. It has to do with character: yours is defunct.

 

[Ozmar]

Ozmar, it has nothing to do with fragile. It has to do with character: yours is defunct.

You know nothing about me, and let's leave it at that. When you get down to attacking character based on words exchanged in reference to a news item, you have gone too far.

 

[mudwhistle]

Typical right wing hypocrisy.

Right wing is more bible beleiving which God says marriage is between man and woman, anything else is an abomination. So it is not hypocrisy, it is the truth. Do not like it, too bad, get right in the head.

No, it's hypocrisy. The bible isn't the rule of law...and in another thread people are melting down over someone choosing a roommate.

The issues are somewhat alike and yet it is always amusing to watch rightwingers come down on opposite sides depending on the question.

Maybe because we're allowed to think for ourselves.

Liberals aren't. You ether tow the party-line or your ass is canned.

 

[camcooh2]

Ravi is indeed a halfwit.

 

[nraforlife]

Typical right wing hypocrisy.

two fags is not a marriage.

 

[manifold]

I tried to be civil about this but you had to take the low road. Ok. Fine with me.
OK Roger Ramjet......Here is over 150 years of legal precedent that supports the very thing you deny exists. .

Ok, stop right there artard (I certainly did).

I didnt' deny that the freedom exists fuckstain.

I did, and still deny that the EXACT FUCKING PHRASE appears in the text of The Constitution.

Do you REALLY not see the fucking difference? Really?

 

[Seawytch]

two fags is not a marriage.

My marriage license says differently.

 

[Navy1960]

When this nation is facing so many issues that need to be resolved this is far from one of them. Who cares honestly if people wish to execise through the Govt. a privledge granted through the state to get married. First of all it does not effect you personally, it is a matter of choice between the people doing it, and is a whole lot of noise about an issue that has little if anything to do with the overall direction of this nation. While I personally am on the side of marriage between a man and woman , that is my personal choice and as such it's not others. While a church is a private institution and cannot be told who to marry again its a non issue or should be, however the matter itself should be left to the states to decide for themselves on the matter and once done it's done.

 

[California Girl]

Typical right wing hypocrisy.

Right wing is more bible beleiving which God says marriage is between man and woman, anything else is an abomination. So it is not hypocrisy, it is the truth. Do not like it, too bad, get right in the head.

No, it's hypocrisy. The bible isn't the rule of law...and in another thread people are melting down over someone choosing a roommate.

The issues are somewhat alike and yet it is always amusing to watch rightwingers come down on opposite sides depending on the question.

I know this is difficult for you, Ravi, but.... to Christians, the Bible is as valid to how we live as the law of the land.

Having said that, I have no problem with gay marriage - as I have always said. On the understanding that the Churches are left to decide for themselves who they will or will not marry within their own faiths.

Personally, I don't see it as a federal government issue. Let each state decide for itself and go for it. Who cares?

 

[Vanquish]

I think it's hilarious that some of the conservatives in this thread want to scream about property rights.

Why?

Because you sat there and didn't oppose your conservative supreme court members when they rammed through the decision to let city governments TAKE private property through eminent domain to give it to other private interests. (Take from land owner to give to Wal-Mart for economic expansion)

Where is the common sense...where is the outrage...when shit like this happened under Bush and Scalia?

 

[thereisnospoon]

I tried to be civil about this but you had to take the low road. Ok. Fine with me.
OK Roger Ramjet......Here is over 150 years of legal precedent that supports the very thing you deny exists. .

Ok, stop right there artard (I certainly did).

I didnt' deny that the freedom exists fuckstain.

I did, and still deny that the EXACT FUCKING PHRASE appears in the text of The Constitution.

Do you REALLY not see the fucking difference? Really?

It always comes as no surprise when one is backed into a corner of their own doing they resort to insults and other vile crap.
Nice going. Here's your sign.

 

[thereisnospoon]

I think it's hilarious that some of the conservatives in this thread want to scream about property rights.

Why?

Because you sat there and didn't oppose your conservative supreme court members when they rammed through the decision to let city governments TAKE private property through eminent domain to give it to other private interests. (Take from land owner to give to Wal-Mart for economic expansion)

Where is the common sense...where is the outrage...when shit like this happened under Bush and Scalia?

So where's the link to that? I'd like to respond.

 

[thereisnospoon]

It has nothing to do with discrimination and everything about an attack on religion. Now people will think twice before writing a religion on a board; even a board in church. Just one more attack to get all mention of religion out of the public sector.

A church is a sanctuary AWAY from the public sector. You argument is a fail..
BTW the Constitution sates freedom OF religion. It does not state freedom FROM religion.
You'll never succed in chasing religion into the closet.
I know exactly what your angle is. Anti-Christian. If this was a mosque, a Hindu or bhudist temple or any other of the many PC protected classes, you wouldn't say shit.

 

[WillowTree]

I think it's hilarious that some of the conservatives in this thread want to scream about property rights.

Why?

Because you sat there and didn't oppose your conservative supreme court members when they rammed through the decision to let city governments TAKE private property through eminent domain to give it to other private interests. (Take from land owner to give to Wal-Mart for economic expansion)

Where is the common sense...where is the outrage...when shit like this happened under Bush and Scalia?

So where's the link to that? I'd like to respond.

Slam dunk! Thunk!

 

[thereisnospoon]

I think you should change your name to thereisnobrain.

Hit a nerve, didn't I?
It's not my problem that you have to send a fertility technician a father's day card. After all, he still has the petry dish from which you were formed.
Fuck off. Bone smuggler.

 

[thereisnospoon]

I think it's hilarious that some of the conservatives in this thread want to scream about property rights.

Why?

Because you sat there and didn't oppose your conservative supreme court members when they rammed through the decision to let city governments TAKE private property through eminent domain to give it to other private interests. (Take from land owner to give to Wal-Mart for economic expansion)

Where is the common sense...where is the outrage...when shit like this happened under Bush and Scalia?

So where's the link to that? I'd like to respond.

Slam dunk! Thunk!

Willow's post is bupkis without a link provided for disemination by others.

 

[George Costanza]

? Was the residence in question a private home, or a home paid for in part by the housing authority (secton 8)?

So WC confirms the Lefty Reality that if our lives are subsidized by the Feds, we have no Constitutional Rights.

Lefty here. I disagree with the situation described in the OP.

 

[Ravi]

I think you should change your name to thereisnobrain.

Hit a nerve, didn't I?
It's not my problem that you have to send a fertility technician a father's day card. After all, he still has the petry dish from which you were formed.
Fuck off. Bone smuggler.

Why would you slam children that were born in vitro?

What a scumbag you are.