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.
Why do we always have to compare race with gay issues?
Sorry, it's simply not the same thing.
This is the reason President Obama decided NOT to defend the unconstitutional DOMA...
Widow's $363,000 Tax Bill Led to Obama Shift on Marriage Act
Edith Windsor and Thea Spyer had a 40-year engagement and a two-year marriage, starting with a wedding in Canada recognized under the laws of New York, where they lived, and ending when Spyer died two years ago.
Her death triggered a $363,053 federal tax bill from which her widow would have been exempt had she been married to a man, because the federal Defense of Marriage Act bars the U.S. government from recognizing same-sex unions.
Wrong douchebag. Gays want RELIGIOUS Marriage. Civil Unions have been offered to Gays for some time now but the Gay Mafia insists that it's a CIVIL RIGHT to have RELIGIOUS Marriage.A few hundred years is "ancient"?
Timeline of civil marriage in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Marriage predates civilization, nitwit. Look at any primitive culture, and they will have an institution that we would call marriage.
Excuse me, douchebag, but gays and lesbians are fighting for equal access to legal, civil marriage, not religious marriage. We already have equal access to religious marriage.
We aren't comparing race with sexual orientation. You are being simplistic. What is compared is discrimination, period.
YOU feel justified in your discrimination against gays and lesbians do you not?
Defining marriage as a union between persons of the opposite sex isn't discrimination of any kind.
So if I were denied a driver's license because I'm gay, that wouldn't be discrimination?
Excuse me, douchebag, but gays and lesbians are fighting for equal access to legal, civil marriage, not religious marriage. We already have equal access to religious marriage.
Boehner hires lawyer to oppose gay rights wants to bill DOJ
House Republicans have hired a prominent conservative attorney to defend the federal Defense of Marriage Act in a pending lawsuit, legal sources say, and will make an effort to divert money from the Justice Department to fund its high-profile fight.
Not only are House Republican leaders defending the indefensible, theyve brought in a high-priced attorney to deny federal recognition to loving, married couples, said Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign. Speaker Boehner appears ready to go to great lengths, and the great expense of a high-power law firm, to try to score some cheap political points on the backs of same-sex couples
Boehner hires lawyer to oppose gay rights wants to bill DOJ « Eideard
Boehner seeks to divert funds for gay marriage fight
Boehner said he has directed the House's counsel and the House Administration Committee to ensure that there are "sufficient resources" and expertise to defend the law. Paul Clement, a former solicitor general for President George W. Bush, has been retained by Boehner and the Republicans to defend the Defense of Marriage Act, according to news reports.
Boehner seeks to divert funds for gay marriage fight - On Politics: Covering the US Congress, Governors, and the 2010 Election - USATODAY.com
-----------------------------------
Told ya.
Muslims, Hispanics, gays, nurses, teachers, women's rights.
Wanna bet it's because the "War on the Elderly" isn't going well?
Why do we always have to compare race with gay issues?
Sorry, it's simply not the same thing.
yes. under the definition of "equal protection", it is.
sorry, ollie. it just is. you can like that. you can not like that. but it is.
So if I were denied a driver's license because I'm gay, that wouldn't be discrimination?
Why do we always have to compare race with gay issues?
Sorry, it's simply not the same thing.
We aren't comparing race with sexual orientation. You are being simplistic. What is compared is discrimination, period.
YOU feel justified in your discrimination against gays and lesbians do you not?
How do you discriminate against something that has NEVER existed to time imemorium?
If you libs can show me an example of "gay marriage" in the past you will have your argument.
Even Ancient Greece which touted homosexuality as something wonderful NEVER had gay marriage.
This is something gays CONCOCTED only a few yeas ago as a POLITICAL MOVE to attack the traditional family and hetrosexuality.
We are not attacking gays, gays are attacking marriage.
How dare those for traditional marraive defend themselves! Geesh!
Most religious people I know have no problem with gay civil unions. But gays want to change the MEANING of marriage to include gays. THAT'S the issue.
Douchebag!
Wrong douchebag. Gays want RELIGIOUS Marriage. Civil Unions have been offered to Gays for some time now but the Gay Mafia insists that it's a CIVIL RIGHT to have RELIGIOUS Marriage.Marriage predates civilization, nitwit. Look at any primitive culture, and they will have an institution that we would call marriage.
Excuse me, douchebag, but gays and lesbians are fighting for equal access to legal, civil marriage, not religious marriage. We already have equal access to religious marriage.
Most religious people I know have no problem with gay civil unions. But gays want to change the MEANING of marriage to include gays. THAT'S the issue.
Douchebag!
)
Excuse me, douchebag, but gays and lesbians are fighting for equal access to legal, civil marriage, not religious marriage. We already have equal access to religious marriage.
Legal marriage exists for one purpose: to protect mothers and children. Since there's no possibility of children from two gays shacking up together, there's no reason to provide such an arrangement with any legal benefits or privileges.
Frankly, I don't think conventional marriages should receive any special provisions in the law, but there's even less excuse to provide them for gays shacking up together.
So if I were denied a driver's license because I'm gay, that wouldn't be discrimination?
Of course it would, just as it would be discrimination if you were denied a driver's license because you are a Republican. However, no one thinks it's a violation of anyone's right to keep them from voting in Republican primaries if they aren't registered as Republicans.
This is the reason President Obama decided NOT to defend the unconstitutional DOMA...
Widow's $363,000 Tax Bill Led to Obama Shift on Marriage Act
Edith Windsor and Thea Spyer had a 40-year engagement and a two-year marriage, starting with a wedding in Canada recognized under the laws of New York, where they lived, and ending when Spyer died two years ago.
Her death triggered a $363,053 federal tax bill from which her widow would have been exempt had she been married to a man, because the federal Defense of Marriage Act bars the U.S. government from recognizing same-sex unions.
The only reason Obama decided not to defend it is because he's a sleazy unscrupulous democrat who thinks he's free to ignore whatever laws are on the books he doesn't like even though defending those laws is his job.
This is far from the first time that Congress has stepped in to defend a law the administration decided not to defend. Once was when Ford elected not to defend the post Watergate campaign finance laws, another was when Reagan decided not to defend the independent counsel laws.
Wrong douchebag. Gays want RELIGIOUS Marriage. Civil Unions have been offered to Gays for some time now but the Gay Mafia insists that it's a CIVIL RIGHT to have RELIGIOUS Marriage.Marriage predates civilization, nitwit. Look at any primitive culture, and they will have an institution that we would call marriage.
Excuse me, douchebag, but gays and lesbians are fighting for equal access to legal, civil marriage, not religious marriage. We already have equal access to religious marriage.
Most religious people I know have no problem with gay civil unions. But gays want to change the MEANING of marriage to include gays. THAT'S the issue.
Defining marriage as a union between persons of the opposite sex isn't discrimination of any kind.
So if I were denied a driver's license because I'm gay, that wouldn't be discrimination?
Who said you can't get a driver's license?
The only reason Obama decided not to defend it is because he's a sleazy unscrupulous democrat who thinks he's free to ignore whatever laws are on the books he doesn't like even though defending those laws is his job.
Excuse me, douchebag, but gays and lesbians are fighting for equal access to legal, civil marriage, not religious marriage. We already have equal access to religious marriage.
Legal marriage exists for one purpose: to protect mothers and children. Since there's no possibility of children from two gays shacking up together, there's no reason to provide such an arrangement with any legal benefits or privileges.
Frankly, I don't think conventional marriages should receive any special provisions in the law, but there's even less excuse to provide them for gays shacking up together.
I gotta admit, this is pretty stupid move by Boehner. Not that I don't agree with the political idea behind it. It's just that we have FAR greater things to worry about.
If our country goes bankrupt, the fags won't have the $$ to buy a marriage license anyway.
fags?
A Fag was commonly referred in the 16th and 17th century as a bundle of sticks. Later, in the 1960's, a fag was a term used for a single cigarette.....
A Fag was used as the term for a servant/slave in the Victorian era onwards in private and public school boarding establishments in England. The elder upper class students would have a younger child fag for them. .......i thought you were educated?.....
Really?
What part of the country doesn't get broadcast TV, cable, or internet?
This was back in 2009:
Study: 8.5 Million Households Face Poor DTV Reception
Converting Analog Television to Digital TV Not Working for Millions of Americans
Since America went "digital", there are many people who simply can't afford the converters or a new TV. There are people who live in areas where the digital range simply isn't "far enough". There are people who live in Alaska, the desert in Nevada, in Appalachia who don't have access to cable and the new digital signal is too poor to allow them much TV.
For all these people, the radio is there best source of reliable news, information and even entertainment.
I visited relatives outside of Gabbs, Nevada and was surprised they were without TV for exactly those reasons. I've always taken it for granted.
this is the same government you think should be in charge of health care, and now you are pointing out they cannot even get TV right.
I really don't know what planet you are from, but there is not a single household in this country that is dependent on NPR as its only source of news.
