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.
false! that would be you...the FF knew the constitution would of necessity be amended, provisions changed to fit a ever changing world.can you say the word dodge?I knew you could..
yea dodged . a couple of congressmen comment that the senate was better off under THE ORIGINAL PROVISIONS of the Constitution. no legislation was passed. excuse me, no legislation was even introduced. Spin a little more you partisan hack. you have no frigging argument at all.
oh no !not the no mind of their own or it's twin thinking for yourself ploys!The House and the Senate were controlled by the GOP, as you well know.
And things have changed in more than 15 years. Good on that.
so you are saying the 118 democratic congressmen who voted for it have no mind of their own? the president has no mind of his own?
it's been my experience that people who use those "phrases" lack the use of each.
call the waaaaabulance.Yup, that law that our GOP congress forced on the president and the American people.
Look up the latest polling, particularly for those under forty.
Heterosexual only marriage is dead man walking.
with the help of the majority of the democrats in both the house and senate
again that would be you...the 2nd amendment ploy is irreverent to this debate..false! that would be you...the FF knew the constitution would of necessity be amended, provisions changed to fit a ever changing world.yea dodged . a couple of congressmen comment that the senate was better off under THE ORIGINAL PROVISIONS of the Constitution. no legislation was passed. excuse me, no legislation was even introduced. Spin a little more you partisan hack. you have no frigging argument at all.
which is why they included wording like SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED, CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW AGAINST. It's why they provided a provision for a civilian militia to combat the regular army should the federal government every try to oppress the people .
you still got nothing
no you just wish that was the case..oh no !not the no mind of their own or it's twin thinking for yourself ploys!so you are saying the 118 democratic congressmen who voted for it have no mind of their own? the president has no mind of his own?
it's been my experience that people who use those "phrases" lack the use of each.
so you are saying the democratic congressmen aren't representing the people who elected them, they are doing the bidding of the republicans? man you have lost it
really? how's that? as I'm the one with the facts ...you on the other hand are rationalizing as fast as you can....call the waaaaabulance.with the help of the majority of the democrats in both the house and senate
we had better because you can't deal with the facts. the democrats sold you out lol
again that would be you...the 2nd amendment ploy is irreverent to this debate..false! that would be you...the FF knew the constitution would of necessity be amended, provisions changed to fit a ever changing world.
which is why they included wording like SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED, CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW AGAINST. It's why they provided a provision for a civilian militia to combat the regular army should the federal government every try to oppress the people .
you still got nothing
your freedom of speech and religion has not been abridged that's also irrelevant to this debate!
that's your fantasy not mine.again that would be you...the 2nd amendment ploy is irreverent to this debate..which is why they included wording like SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED, CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW AGAINST. It's why they provided a provision for a civilian militia to combat the regular army should the federal government every try to oppress the people .
you still got nothing
your freedom of speech and religion has not been abridged that's also irrelevant to this debate!
what is relevant to this debate is overwhelming democratic support right up to the president for what you try to claim was a republican only initiative. oooooh the republicans did it. waaaaaaaaah. those evil republicans
really? how's that? as I'm the one with the facts ...you on the other hand are rationalizing as fast as you can....call the waaaaabulance.
we had better because you can't deal with the facts. the democrats sold you out lol
that's your fantasy not mine.again that would be you...the 2nd amendment ploy is irreverent to this debate..
your freedom of speech and religion has not been abridged that's also irrelevant to this debate!
what is relevant to this debate is overwhelming democratic support right up to the president for what you try to claim was a republican only initiative. oooooh the republicans did it. waaaaaaaaah. those evil republicans
almost seventy 70 in the House voted against it 1 GOP voted against it
22 dems in the Senate voted against it 1 Pub and 1 Indie voted against in the Senate
DOMA - Defense of Marriage Act - 1996
Human rights, I dig. Gay and "rights" go together like military and intelligence . Gay is a politicized made up word for broken sexuality. Homosexuality is a dysfunction, a handicap , it's not the optimal function of human physiology. Most of us know it isn't equitable to heterosexuality. Perhaps I am not addressing the topic on this board, I am addressing a broader and more important point: homosexuality isnt the same as heterosexuality.
almost seventy 70 in the House voted against it 1 GOP voted against it
22 dems in the Senate voted against it 1 Pub and 1 Indie voted against in the Senate
DOMA - Defense of Marriage Act - 1996
from your link. as usual the numbers don't quite match your claim. what is it with liberals and facts that create such problems?
and then the House passed the bill, 342-67, on 12 July; two abstained and 22 did not vote. The Senate passed the bill, 85-14, on 10 September; one did not vote
oh and your democratic president signed it too
almost seventy 70 in the House voted against it 1 GOP voted against it
22 dems in the Senate voted against it 1 Pub and 1 Indie voted against in the Senate
DOMA - Defense of Marriage Act - 1996
from your link. as usual the numbers don't quite match your claim. what is it with liberals and facts that create such problems?
and then the House passed the bill, 342-67, on 12 July; two abstained and 22 did not vote. The Senate passed the bill, 85-14, on 10 September; one did not vote
oh and your democratic president signed it too
You better count again. An overwhelmingly GOP bill passed and a complacent Democratic president signed it.
And in almost 20 years that has all changed.
Now our GOP says it's a state matter. I opposed our party then and I oppose its hypocrisy now.
In the long run, this isn't about 'marriage equality'...
It's about legitimizing and mainstreaming homosexuality...
Those who already understand this oppose it...
Those who do not yet understand it will eventually come to that understanding...
Mostly after they've had children of their own...
And contemplate grandchildren...
And reach the conclusion that they don't want that degenerate shit around their kids, either...
And come to the sad conclusion that Mom and Dad were right about such depravity, after all...
No, it's really about marriage equality...and bigotry like yours is the minority.
Nope, most people don't find anything wrong with homosexuality at all.
Human rights, I dig. Gay and "rights" go together like military and intelligence…. “Gay” is a politicized made up word for broken sexuality. Homosexuality is a dysfunction, a handicap , it's not the optimal function of human physiology. Most of us know it isn't equitable to heterosexuality. Perhaps I am not addressing the topic on this board, I am addressing a broader and more important point: homosexuality isn’t the same as heterosexuality.
In the long run, this isn't about 'marriage equality'...
It's about legitimizing and mainstreaming homosexuality...
Those who already understand this oppose it...
Those who do not yet understand it will eventually come to that understanding...
Mostly after they've had children of their own...
And contemplate grandchildren...
And reach the conclusion that they don't want that degenerate shit around their kids, either...
And come to the sad conclusion that Mom and Dad were right about such depravity, after all...
No, it's really about marriage equality...and bigotry like yours is the minority.
He most certainly is not the minority on the Gay Marriage issue - the fact that most jurisdictions have to bypass the ballot box and get SSM forced upon the people by Judicial or legislative modes is an indication of that . To quote one of your little perverted cohorts
Our civil rights are not subject to the 'will of the people.'
PS: OT - Hows that Nose Job working out for you ?
Nope, most people don't find anything wrong with homosexuality at all.
Where'd you get that horse shit from ?
Human rights, I dig. Gay and "rights" go together like military and intelligence . Gay is a politicized made up word for broken sexuality. Homosexuality is a dysfunction, a handicap , it's not the optimal function of human physiology. Most of us know it isn't equitable to heterosexuality. Perhaps I am not addressing the topic on this board, I am addressing a broader and more important point: homosexuality isnt the same as heterosexuality.
Why be so polite ?
Homosexuals are a demented , devious pack of rabid,degenerate,nauseating, arrogant disease infested, parasitc perverts.
might wanna rethink thatI don't reacall republicans trying to change the constitution
well except for things like giving blacks rights and freedoms and stuff like that
Ever since President Obama entered office, Republicans have called for constitutional freedoms of our constitutional government to be repealed by amendment. A few examples:
1. REPEALING CITIZENSHIP: Numerous GOP lawmakers, including their Senate leader and the most-recent Republican candidate for president, are backing a review of the 14th Amendments grant of citizenship to virtually all persons born within the United States.
2. REPEALING CONGRESS POWER TO RAISE MONEY: Tea Party Republicans are calling for a full repeal of the 16th Amendment, the amendment which enables the INCOME TAX. Wouldn't it be impossible to function as a nation if America lacked the power to raise the money it needs to pay our armed forces, for example.
3. REPEALING CONGRESS POWER TO SPEND MONEY: The Constitution gives Congress power to provide for the common defense and general welfare, which means, in my view, the authority to create federal spending programs such as Social Security. For example, Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK), recently called upon the Supreme Court to rewrite the Constitutions clear language and repeal parts of the budget he doesnt like. A Texas GOP even went so far as to claim that the federal highway system is unconstitutional.
4. REPEALING EQUALITY: The Constitution entitles all persons to equal protection of the laws, This in my opinion include the rights of Gay Marriage and until it is ruled illegal like Polygamy, it should be noted.
5. REPEALING ELECTION OF SENATORS: A number of GOP candidates have come out in favor of repealing the 17th Amendment, the provision of the Constitution which requires direct election of senators.
please, how many years did this country not only exist but expand and succeed with out an income tax? what the tea party is saying which you are obviously clueless about is the abusive spending and misuse of tax dollars.
republicans never tried to repeal equality. they have always agreed with the constitution on equality as it applies to marriage. it clearly defines that the rights belong to the states to decide. and yes that gives individual state the right to determine if they will support rights of gays to marry in their state. loud and clear the State has the right to decide. when the republicans got involved it was after courts defied the constitution and over ruled State decisions to prohibit. same sex marriage.
I see you have joined the ranks of a liberal spin doctor on this one.
Nobody willing to answer my question, eh?
