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.
The constitution is not being ignored. I'm going to guess that you are, at best indifferent to equality and are just using a twisted interpretation of the Constitution to claim that you something other than what you are.,Who cares?!! Now you are just getting stupid! Obviously you don't know what you're talking about. If you dismiss the issue of adoption, it's even more obvious that your claim of being for equality is bogus.Bull! States like Alabama? Mississippi? Are you serious. The Federal court fulfilled it's proper role and function. Here is another example. A year after Obergefell, Mississippi was still resisting adoption by same sex couples: HRC Condemns Mississippi Gov. Phil Bryant’s Statement of Support for LGBT Adoption BanYou seem to be residing in some alternate reality where the things that you THINK should be ARE in reality the way it is. NOT SO. The fact is that before Obergefell, many states were not recognizing same sex marriages from other states. The Defense of Marriage Act exempted states from having to do so and the full faith and credit clause of the constitution was never tested in court with respect to marriage. Quicker in most states......? Another fantasy.
I'm sure if advocates went the legislative route, they would have gotten far more States in that column. Instead, for the past decade or so, they went for the easy button, the court route. But again, it isn't about anything but forcing your will on others for you people, using the least democratic method possible.
Why convince the people when you can convince un-elected lawyers?
Who cares? as long as they were required to recognize out of State marriages, then the issue is solved.
Mississippi is going to be Mississippi. How about we force NYC to follow Mississippi's gun laws?
Being for equality doesn't mean thinking the constitution can be ignored to achieve it.
The constitution is not being ignored. I'm going to guess that you are, at best indifferent to equality and are just using a twisted interpretation of the Constitution to claim that you something other than what you are.,Who cares?!! Now you are just getting stupid! Obviously you don't know what you're talking about. If you dismiss the issue of adoption, it's even more obvious that your claim of being for equality is bogus.Bull! States like Alabama? Mississippi? Are you serious. The Federal court fulfilled it's proper role and function. Here is another example. A year after Obergefell, Mississippi was still resisting adoption by same sex couples: HRC Condemns Mississippi Gov. Phil Bryant’s Statement of Support for LGBT Adoption BanI'm sure if advocates went the legislative route, they would have gotten far more States in that column. Instead, for the past decade or so, they went for the easy button, the court route. But again, it isn't about anything but forcing your will on others for you people, using the least democratic method possible.
Why convince the people when you can convince un-elected lawyers?
Who cares? as long as they were required to recognize out of State marriages, then the issue is solved.
Mississippi is going to be Mississippi. How about we force NYC to follow Mississippi's gun laws?
Being for equality doesn't mean thinking the constitution can be ignored to achieve it.
Go 'debate' with your latest 'bum-boy'.I debate facts . I debate the law. I do not debate nonsense and mythology. It has no place in a discussion of civil rights.OMG! The beast? Biblical references? Now I know what we are dealing with here. . We are totally done here!Who says a moral code doesn't apply to business dealings? Where is that written?
The “beast” spoken of in Revelation 13:17 says that, and those who are on his side agree…
And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
It is becoming apparent to me that this “mark” is not a physical or visual mark, but an ideological one. We are seeing the beginning of a time in which refusing to go along with the evil and madness that the Beast wishes to force on us will be punished by disallowing us from engaging in necessary commerce.
It's interesting that for some reason you just can't seem to debate and automatically dismiss with people of a religious persuasion.
Bigot.
No actual harm? That is exactly where your so called argument fails pathetically, and where you are exposed for what you are:The constitution is not being ignored. I'm going to guess that you are, at best indifferent to equality and are just using a twisted interpretation of the Constitution to claim that you something other than what you are.,Who cares?!! Now you are just getting stupid! Obviously you don't know what you're talking about. If you dismiss the issue of adoption, it's even more obvious that your claim of being for equality is bogus.Bull! States like Alabama? Mississippi? Are you serious. The Federal court fulfilled it's proper role and function. Here is another example. A year after Obergefell, Mississippi was still resisting adoption by same sex couples: HRC Condemns Mississippi Gov. Phil Bryant’s Statement of Support for LGBT Adoption Ban
Who cares? as long as they were required to recognize out of State marriages, then the issue is solved.
Mississippi is going to be Mississippi. How about we force NYC to follow Mississippi's gun laws?
Being for equality doesn't mean thinking the constitution can be ignored to achieve it.
I am a strict constructional federalist, with libertarian (small "l") leanings. I have never claimed to be anything else.
Government is not there to declare one form of butt hurt more equal than another form of butt hurt where there is no actual harm.
Children raised by gay or lesbian couples benefit when their parents are allowed to marry, America’s top pediatrics group said Thursday in support of same-sex marriage.
“If a child has two living and capable parents who choose to create a permanent bond by way of civil marriage, it is in the best interest of their child(ren) that legal and social institutions allow and support them to do so, irrespective of their sexual orientation,” the American Academy of Pediatrics said in a policy statement.
Dr. Ellen Perrin, co-author of the policy statement, says marriage gives children of same-sex couples the same advantages of any married couple’s children.
“Marriage provides permanence and security for children, and those are extremely important for children’s well-being,” said Perrin, a professor at Tufts University School of Medicine who specializes in the developmental behavior of children. “(Marriage) allows them to grow up in an environment in which they’re confident of the solidity of their family and the fact that their family is just like every other family of kids they know in school.”
http://thechart.blogs.cnn.com/2013/03/21/no-evidence-same-sex-marriage-harms-children-docs-say/
How fucking perfect!No actual harm? That is exactly where your so called argument fails pathetically, and where you are exposed for what you are:The constitution is not being ignored. I'm going to guess that you are, at best indifferent to equality and are just using a twisted interpretation of the Constitution to claim that you something other than what you are.,Who cares?!! Now you are just getting stupid! Obviously you don't know what you're talking about. If you dismiss the issue of adoption, it's even more obvious that your claim of being for equality is bogus.Who cares? as long as they were required to recognize out of State marriages, then the issue is solved.
Mississippi is going to be Mississippi. How about we force NYC to follow Mississippi's gun laws?
Being for equality doesn't mean thinking the constitution can be ignored to achieve it.
I am a strict constructional federalist, with libertarian (small "l") leanings. I have never claimed to be anything else.
Government is not there to declare one form of butt hurt more equal than another form of butt hurt where there is no actual harm.
Children raised by gay or lesbian couples benefit when their parents are allowed to marry, America’s top pediatrics group said Thursday in support of same-sex marriage.
“If a child has two living and capable parents who choose to create a permanent bond by way of civil marriage, it is in the best interest of their child(ren) that legal and social institutions allow and support them to do so, irrespective of their sexual orientation,” the American Academy of Pediatrics said in a policy statement.
Dr. Ellen Perrin, co-author of the policy statement, says marriage gives children of same-sex couples the same advantages of any married couple’s children.
“Marriage provides permanence and security for children, and those are extremely important for children’s well-being,” said Perrin, a professor at Tufts University School of Medicine who specializes in the developmental behavior of children. “(Marriage) allows them to grow up in an environment in which they’re confident of the solidity of their family and the fact that their family is just like every other family of kids they know in school.”
http://thechart.blogs.cnn.com/2013/03/21/no-evidence-same-sex-marriage-harms-children-docs-say/
No actual harm? That is exactly where your so called argument fails pathetically, and where you are exposed for what you are:The constitution is not being ignored. I'm going to guess that you are, at best indifferent to equality and are just using a twisted interpretation of the Constitution to claim that you something other than what you are.,Who cares?!! Now you are just getting stupid! Obviously you don't know what you're talking about. If you dismiss the issue of adoption, it's even more obvious that your claim of being for equality is bogus.Who cares? as long as they were required to recognize out of State marriages, then the issue is solved.
Mississippi is going to be Mississippi. How about we force NYC to follow Mississippi's gun laws?
Being for equality doesn't mean thinking the constitution can be ignored to achieve it.
I am a strict constructional federalist, with libertarian (small "l") leanings. I have never claimed to be anything else.
Government is not there to declare one form of butt hurt more equal than another form of butt hurt where there is no actual harm.
Children raised by gay or lesbian couples benefit when their parents are allowed to marry, America’s top pediatrics group said Thursday in support of same-sex marriage.
“If a child has two living and capable parents who choose to create a permanent bond by way of civil marriage, it is in the best interest of their child(ren) that legal and social institutions allow and support them to do so, irrespective of their sexual orientation,” the American Academy of Pediatrics said in a policy statement.
Dr. Ellen Perrin, co-author of the policy statement, says marriage gives children of same-sex couples the same advantages of any married couple’s children.
“Marriage provides permanence and security for children, and those are extremely important for children’s well-being,” said Perrin, a professor at Tufts University School of Medicine who specializes in the developmental behavior of children. “(Marriage) allows them to grow up in an environment in which they’re confident of the solidity of their family and the fact that their family is just like every other family of kids they know in school.”
http://thechart.blogs.cnn.com/2013/03/21/no-evidence-same-sex-marriage-harms-children-docs-say/
What does the "Q" stand for? I'm getting way behind on my alternative lifestyles.
It's just an anti-LGBT acronym, then? Not for real?What does the "Q" stand for? I'm getting way behind on my alternative lifestyles.
Q stands for 'queer'. Its a catch all for intersex folks, allies of the community, and the like.
It's just an anti-LGBT acronym, then? Not for real?What does the "Q" stand for? I'm getting way behind on my alternative lifestyles.
Q stands for 'queer'. Its a catch all for intersex folks, allies of the community, and the like.
It's just an anti-LGBT acronym, then? Not for real?What does the "Q" stand for? I'm getting way behind on my alternative lifestyles.
Q stands for 'queer'. Its a catch all for intersex folks, allies of the community, and the like.
No, that the LGBT community generated acronym. Apparently so many letters had been added that it was getting ridiculous. I think before they added the 'q' it was up to LGBTQIAPK. They just lumped everything after T into 'Q'.
No actual harm? That is exactly where your so called argument fails pathetically, and where you are exposed for what you are:The constitution is not being ignored. I'm going to guess that you are, at best indifferent to equality and are just using a twisted interpretation of the Constitution to claim that you something other than what you are.,Who cares?!! Now you are just getting stupid! Obviously you don't know what you're talking about. If you dismiss the issue of adoption, it's even more obvious that your claim of being for equality is bogus.Who cares? as long as they were required to recognize out of State marriages, then the issue is solved.
Mississippi is going to be Mississippi. How about we force NYC to follow Mississippi's gun laws?
Being for equality doesn't mean thinking the constitution can be ignored to achieve it.
I am a strict constructional federalist, with libertarian (small "l") leanings. I have never claimed to be anything else.
Government is not there to declare one form of butt hurt more equal than another form of butt hurt where there is no actual harm.
Children raised by gay or lesbian couples benefit when their parents are allowed to marry, America’s top pediatrics group said Thursday in support of same-sex marriage.
“If a child has two living and capable parents who choose to create a permanent bond by way of civil marriage, it is in the best interest of their child(ren) that legal and social institutions allow and support them to do so, irrespective of their sexual orientation,” the American Academy of Pediatrics said in a policy statement.
Dr. Ellen Perrin, co-author of the policy statement, says marriage gives children of same-sex couples the same advantages of any married couple’s children.
“Marriage provides permanence and security for children, and those are extremely important for children’s well-being,” said Perrin, a professor at Tufts University School of Medicine who specializes in the developmental behavior of children. “(Marriage) allows them to grow up in an environment in which they’re confident of the solidity of their family and the fact that their family is just like every other family of kids they know in school.”
http://thechart.blogs.cnn.com/2013/03/21/no-evidence-same-sex-marriage-harms-children-docs-say/
No actual harm? That is exactly where your so called argument fails pathetically ...
Oh please is that the best that you can do? You're just playing idiotic and childish word games now because you have nothing better.No actual harm? That is exactly where your so called argument fails pathetically ...
Not helping someone isn't the same as harming them.
The most recent discussion has been about actual marriage and adoption......but you knew that, so cut out the crapNo actual harm? That is exactly where your so called argument fails pathetically, and where you are exposed for what you are:The constitution is not being ignored. I'm going to guess that you are, at best indifferent to equality and are just using a twisted interpretation of the Constitution to claim that you something other than what you are.,Who cares?!! Now you are just getting stupid! Obviously you don't know what you're talking about. If you dismiss the issue of adoption, it's even more obvious that your claim of being for equality is bogus.
Being for equality doesn't mean thinking the constitution can be ignored to achieve it.
I am a strict constructional federalist, with libertarian (small "l") leanings. I have never claimed to be anything else.
Government is not there to declare one form of butt hurt more equal than another form of butt hurt where there is no actual harm.
Children raised by gay or lesbian couples benefit when their parents are allowed to marry, America’s top pediatrics group said Thursday in support of same-sex marriage.
“If a child has two living and capable parents who choose to create a permanent bond by way of civil marriage, it is in the best interest of their child(ren) that legal and social institutions allow and support them to do so, irrespective of their sexual orientation,” the American Academy of Pediatrics said in a policy statement.
Dr. Ellen Perrin, co-author of the policy statement, says marriage gives children of same-sex couples the same advantages of any married couple’s children.
“Marriage provides permanence and security for children, and those are extremely important for children’s well-being,” said Perrin, a professor at Tufts University School of Medicine who specializes in the developmental behavior of children. “(Marriage) allows them to grow up in an environment in which they’re confident of the solidity of their family and the fact that their family is just like every other family of kids they know in school.”
http://thechart.blogs.cnn.com/2013/03/21/no-evidence-same-sex-marriage-harms-children-docs-say/
So not being able to get the exact cake you want from the exact baker you want is going to stop a wedding?
Oh please is that the best that you can do? You're just playing idiotic and childish word games now because you have nothing better.No actual harm? That is exactly where your so called argument fails pathetically ...
Not helping someone isn't the same as harming them.
The issue on the tables was about harm to children when parents are not able to marry and adopt them. You are avoiding that for obvious reasons.Oh please is that the best that you can do? You're just playing idiotic and childish word games now because you have nothing better.No actual harm? That is exactly where your so called argument fails pathetically ...
Not helping someone isn't the same as harming them.
Not at all. It's fundamental to the discussion, and to a broader conception of what rights mean in the first place. It's the same discussion that comes up in every effort to establish a "right" to someone else's service. It's the same discussion that comes up with the so-called "right" to healthcare. If not having a cake baked for you is harming you, who is guilty of inflicting that harm? Everyone who didn't bake you a cake that day?
I didn't use the word "living" in the OFFICIAL STATEMENT!!!!!!Oh please is that the best that you can do? You're just playing idiotic and childish word games now because you have nothing better.No actual harm? That is exactly where your so called argument fails pathetically ...
Not helping someone isn't the same as harming them.
