Why gay marriage is wrong!

[bripat9643]

Of course I don't support slavery, you stupid asshole. That doesn't mean Lincoln was justified in invading Virginia. They have slavery right now in multiple countries in Africa and the Middle East. Why aren't morons like you calling for the government to invade them? If you don't, then you must support slavery. That's your dumbass argument, isn't it?

You're not making any sense.
How can you say that nothing is more American than what the Confederacy fought for, if you don't support the very unAmerican principles that would have continued if the Confederacy won? What don't you understand about this?

Slavery was as American as apple pie in 1860. Since the Union didn't allow women to vote, your logic would dictate that the Union was unAmericana.

I don't know if you're stupid or just too cowardly to admit your true feelings. Either way, you're a pitiful example of a 'strong conservative'.

Another liberal imbecile accusing me of supporting slavery. How unusual. Do you morons have any other tricks up your sleeve? This argument seems to be the only arrow you have in your quiver. No matter what is said, the response is always "but the South practiced slavery!" You believe that trumps all other arguments or facts.

Liberals have all the intellectual fire-power of a BB gun.

 

[Skylar]

Slavery was as American as apple pie in 1860. Since the Union didn't allow women to vote, your logic would dictate that the Union was unAmericana.

You said there's nothing more American than what the Confederacy fought for. And the confederacy fought for slavery.

What am I missing?

 

[bripat9643]

Nut up or shut up, bro. Stand by your principles. You said you thought there was nothing more American than what the Confederacy fought for, yet won't say whether you would support the continued slavery that would have resulted in their win.

Stand by what you believe and don't be such a doormat. I may not agree with you, but I at least want to be able to respect you.

Of course I don't support slavery, you stupid asshole. That doesn't mean Lincoln was justified in invading Virginia. They have slavery right now in multiple countries in Africa and the Middle East. Why aren't morons like you calling for the government to invade them? If you don't, then you must support slavery. That's your dumbass argument, isn't it?

The South fired first and got their asses whipped (tho it took awhile). You'd think that Lincoln shouldn't have done all he could to win a war the other guy started.

They fired on Union trespassers, something they had every right to do.

Lincoln started the war.

LOL....now you are reduced to stomping your feet.

You are supporting states that rebelled from the United States in order to protect their legal right to own slaves.

And you are also a homophobic bigot.

Not a mere coincidence.

Bripat is a complex guy, don't sell him short!

He supports states that rebelled from the United States in order to protect their legal right to own slaves, but he doesn't support the act of slavery

(or if he does support it, he's too cowardly to admit it. He's such a doormat.)

You're just another in long line of liberal morons.

 

[bripat9643]

Slavery was as American as apple pie in 1860. Since the Union didn't allow women to vote, your logic would dictate that the Union was unAmericana.

You said there's nothing more American than what the Confederacy fought for. And the confederacy fought for slavery.

What am I missing?

The Confederacy fought for all the principles Lincoln mentioned in the Gettysburg address. The union fought to impose hegemony on people that wanted no part of it. Ending slavery definitely was not one of the reason Lincoln invaded Virginia. No matter how may times that is pointed out, it just goes right over the heads of all you liberal imbeciles.

 

[Skylar]

Slavery was as American as apple pie in 1860. Since the Union didn't allow women to vote, your logic would dictate that the Union was unAmericana.

You said there's nothing more American than what the Confederacy fought for. And the confederacy fought for slavery.

What am I missing?

The Confederacy fought for all the principles Lincoln mentioned in the Gettysburg address. The union fought to impose hegemony on people that wanted no part of it. Ending slavery definitely was not one of the reason Lincoln invaded Virginia. No matter how may times that is pointed out, it just goes right over the heads of all you liberal imbeciles.

The confederacy fought for slavery. Specifically and by name. That wasn't a principle that Lincoln lauded in the Gettysburg address.

 

[bripat9643]

Not required, asshole. That's just another way of saying a state can't leave.

Nut up or shut up, bro. Stand by your principles. You said you thought there was nothing more American than what the Confederacy fought for, yet won't say whether you would support the continued slavery that would have resulted in their win.

Stand by what you believe and don't be such a doormat. I may not agree with you, but I at least want to be able to respect you.

Of course I don't support slavery, you stupid asshole. That doesn't mean Lincoln was justified in invading Virginia. They have slavery right now in multiple countries in Africa and the Middle East. Why aren't morons like you calling for the government to invade them? If you don't, then you must support slavery. That's your dumbass argument, isn't it?

The South fired first and got their asses whipped (tho it took awhile). You'd think that Lincoln shouldn't have done all he could to win a war the other guy started.

They fired on Union trespassers, something they had every right to do.

Lincoln started the war.

LOL....now you are reduced to stomping your feet.

You are supporting states that rebelled from the United States in order to protect their legal right to own slaves.

And you are also a homophobic bigot.

Not a mere coincidence.

They seceded - something they have every right to do. Their reasons are immaterial. The bottom line is that Lincoln made war on fellow Americans and slaughtered them by the hundreds of thousands.

 

[bripat9643]

Slavery was as American as apple pie in 1860. Since the Union didn't allow women to vote, your logic would dictate that the Union was unAmericana.

You said there's nothing more American than what the Confederacy fought for. And the confederacy fought for slavery.

What am I missing?

The Confederacy fought for all the principles Lincoln mentioned in the Gettysburg address. The union fought to impose hegemony on people that wanted no part of it. Ending slavery definitely was not one of the reason Lincoln invaded Virginia. No matter how may times that is pointed out, it just goes right over the heads of all you liberal imbeciles.

The confederacy fought for slavery. Specifically and by name. That wasn't a principle that Lincoln lauded in the Gettysburg address.

Most Confederates fought to protect their homes from Yankee invaders. However, it doesn't matter what reason they fought, Lincoln is the one who invaded. Only his motives and rationalizations need to be examined.

You're right that Lincoln didn't mention slavery in the Gettysburg address, which just goes to prove that ending it had nothing to do with his motive for invading Virginia.

How many times do I have to point this out before it penetrates your thick skull?

 

[Skylar]

Nut up or shut up, bro. Stand by your principles. You said you thought there was nothing more American than what the Confederacy fought for, yet won't say whether you would support the continued slavery that would have resulted in their win.

Stand by what you believe and don't be such a doormat. I may not agree with you, but I at least want to be able to respect you.

Of course I don't support slavery, you stupid asshole. That doesn't mean Lincoln was justified in invading Virginia. They have slavery right now in multiple countries in Africa and the Middle East. Why aren't morons like you calling for the government to invade them? If you don't, then you must support slavery. That's your dumbass argument, isn't it?

The South fired first and got their asses whipped (tho it took awhile). You'd think that Lincoln shouldn't have done all he could to win a war the other guy started.

They fired on Union trespassers, something they had every right to do.

Lincoln started the war.

LOL....now you are reduced to stomping your feet.

You are supporting states that rebelled from the United States in order to protect their legal right to own slaves.

And you are also a homophobic bigot.

Not a mere coincidence.

They seceded - something they have every right to do. Their reasons are immaterial. The bottom line is that Lincoln made war on fellow Americans and slaughtered them by the hundreds of thousands.

The right to secede is throughly debatable. As the constitution has no provisions for secession. With any alteration of US State count requiring a majority vote of existing states. You disagree. Why should I care?

And even following your assumption, the attack on Ft. Sumter was an act of war. Just as the US military invaded Mexico and conquered huge swaths, so too could the US invade and conquer the 'confederacy'.

Rebellion or invasion, either is as legit as the other.

 

[-S-]

Another liberal imbecile accusing me of supporting slavery.

One does not support the Confederacy unless one supports the Confederacy's policies, i.e. slavery.
They are a packaged deal, bro.

Figure out what you believe, and then post it with conviction. Quit flip flopping like a MittRomney in a skillet. Grow a pair and say what you truly feel, not just what is 'politically correct'.

"There's nothing more American than what the Confederacy fought for...", followed by this pussed up "Of course I don't support slavery" crap.

Those two statements are conflicting as

Pick a side, bro, and stand by it. Quit pussy footin' around. Play time's over, time to be a man.

 

[Skylar]

Slavery was as American as apple pie in 1860. Since the Union didn't allow women to vote, your logic would dictate that the Union was unAmericana.

You said there's nothing more American than what the Confederacy fought for. And the confederacy fought for slavery.

What am I missing?

The Confederacy fought for all the principles Lincoln mentioned in the Gettysburg address. The union fought to impose hegemony on people that wanted no part of it. Ending slavery definitely was not one of the reason Lincoln invaded Virginia. No matter how may times that is pointed out, it just goes right over the heads of all you liberal imbeciles.

The confederacy fought for slavery. Specifically and by name. That wasn't a principle that Lincoln lauded in the Gettysburg address.

Most Confederates fought to protect their homes from Yankee invaders. However, it doesn't matter what reason they fought, Lincoln is the one who invaded. Only his motives and rationalizations need to be examined.

Not when we're discussing 'what the confederacy fought for'. Which we are. And confederate states made it explicit that they were fighting for slavery.

You can ignore this fact. But you can't make us ignore it.

 

[Syriusly]

Of course I don't support slavery, you stupid asshole. That doesn't mean Lincoln was justified in invading Virginia. They have slavery right now in multiple countries in Africa and the Middle East. Why aren't morons like you calling for the government to invade them? If you don't, then you must support slavery. That's your dumbass argument, isn't it?

You're not making any sense.
How can you say that nothing is more American than what the Confederacy fought for, if you don't support the very unAmerican principles that would have continued if the Confederacy won? What don't you understand about this?

Slavery was as American as apple pie in 1860. .

No- just another lie on your part.

In 1860, Americans were very conflicted about slavery- not so much Apple Pie.
In 1860, there were no states that Apple Pie was illegal.
In 1860, the Presidential race didn't revolve around the issue of Apple Pie abolition- it revolved around the issue of Slavery Abolition.

The majority of Americans were opposed to legal slavery in 1860- but most- like Lincoln- were not willing to go to war to stop legal slavery.

But the Americans who did want legal slavery- the part of the Country you agree with was correct in 1860- went to war because they feared their legal right to own slaves would be taken away.

 

[G.T.]

It is a form of evil to be anti gay marriage.

 

[Syriusly]

Slavery was as American as apple pie in 1860. Since the Union didn't allow women to vote, your logic would dictate that the Union was unAmericana.

You said there's nothing more American than what the Confederacy fought for. And the confederacy fought for slavery.

What am I missing?

The Confederacy fought for all the principles Lincoln mentioned in the Gettysburg address..

Revisionist history- feel free to point out what part the Confederacy was fighting for


Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.

Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate -- we can not consecrate -- we can not hallow -- this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us -- that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion -- that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain -- that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

Abraham Lincoln
November 19, 1863

Now if you really want to hear what the Confederate States themselves said that they were seceding for:

I have already pointed out that South Carolina identified slavery as the immediate cause for secession- here is Mississippi:

A Declaration of the Immediate Causes which Induce and Justify the Secession of the State of Mississippi from the Federal Union.


In the momentous step which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course.


Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin.


That we do not overstate the dangers to our institution, a reference to a few facts will sufficiently prove.


The hostility to this institution commenced before the adoption of the Constitution, and was manifested in the well-known Ordinance of 1787, in regard to the Northwestern Territory.


The feeling increased, until, in 1819-20, it deprived the South of more than half the vast territory acquired from France.


The same hostility dismembered Texas and seized upon all the territory acquired from Mexico.


It has grown until it denies the right of property in slaves, and refuses protection to that right on the high seas, in the Territories, and wherever the government of the United States had jurisdiction.


It refuses the admission of new slave States into the Union, and seeks to extinguish it by confining it within its present limits, denying the power of expansion.


It tramples the original equality of the South under foot.


It has nullified the Fugitive Slave Law in almost every free State in the Union, and has utterly broken the compact which our fathers pledged their faith to maintain.


It advocates negro equality, socially and politically, and promotes insurrection and incendiarism in our midst.

The Southern States were very clear why they were seceding- and ultimately why they fought.

 

[Syriusly]

Nut up or shut up, bro. Stand by your principles. You said you thought there was nothing more American than what the Confederacy fought for, yet won't say whether you would support the continued slavery that would have resulted in their win.

Stand by what you believe and don't be such a doormat. I may not agree with you, but I at least want to be able to respect you.

Of course I don't support slavery, you stupid asshole. That doesn't mean Lincoln was justified in invading Virginia. They have slavery right now in multiple countries in Africa and the Middle East. Why aren't morons like you calling for the government to invade them? If you don't, then you must support slavery. That's your dumbass argument, isn't it?

The South fired first and got their asses whipped (tho it took awhile). You'd think that Lincoln shouldn't have done all he could to win a war the other guy started.

They fired on Union trespassers, something they had every right to do.

Lincoln started the war.

LOL....now you are reduced to stomping your feet.

You are supporting states that rebelled from the United States in order to protect their legal right to own slaves.

And you are also a homophobic bigot.

Not a mere coincidence.

They seceded - something they have every right to do. Their reasons are immaterial. The bottom line is that Lincoln made war on fellow Americans and slaughtered them by the hundreds of thousands.

'Their reasons are immaterial'?

Yeah I can see why you don't like to discuss you are advocating on behalf of states fighting to protect their rights to own slaves.

 

[bodecea]

Slavery was as American as apple pie in 1860. Since the Union didn't allow women to vote, your logic would dictate that the Union was unAmericana.

You said there's nothing more American than what the Confederacy fought for. And the confederacy fought for slavery.

What am I missing?

The Confederacy fought for all the principles Lincoln mentioned in the Gettysburg address. The union fought to impose hegemony on people that wanted no part of it. Ending slavery definitely was not one of the reason Lincoln invaded Virginia. No matter how may times that is pointed out, it just goes right over the heads of all you liberal imbeciles.

That is correct. Lincoln invaded Virginia because the U.S. had been attacked. I guess you prefer the U.S. learn to just roll over.

 

[bripat9643]

Of course I don't support slavery, you stupid asshole. That doesn't mean Lincoln was justified in invading Virginia. They have slavery right now in multiple countries in Africa and the Middle East. Why aren't morons like you calling for the government to invade them? If you don't, then you must support slavery. That's your dumbass argument, isn't it?

The South fired first and got their asses whipped (tho it took awhile). You'd think that Lincoln shouldn't have done all he could to win a war the other guy started.

They fired on Union trespassers, something they had every right to do.

Lincoln started the war.

LOL....now you are reduced to stomping your feet.

You are supporting states that rebelled from the United States in order to protect their legal right to own slaves.

And you are also a homophobic bigot.

Not a mere coincidence.

They seceded - something they have every right to do. Their reasons are immaterial. The bottom line is that Lincoln made war on fellow Americans and slaughtered them by the hundreds of thousands.

The right to secede is throughly debatable. As the constitution has no provisions for secession. With any alteration of US State count requiring a majority vote of existing states. You disagree. Why should I care?

Hmmmm, wrong. Where does the Constitution say that ANY ALTERATION of the US state count requires a vote? It only discusses admitting states to the Union, not states leaving the Union.

And even following your assumption, the attack on Ft. Sumter was an act of war. Just as the US military invaded Mexico and conquered huge swaths, so too could the US invade and conquer the 'confederacy'.

Then you would have to admit that Lincoln was nothing more than some tyrant bent on expanding his empire - no better than Napoleon or Hitler.

Rebellion or invasion, either is as legit as the other.

Invasion is a legit excuse for invasion? Don't you belong to the gang that whines about the invasion of Iraq because it was supposedly unprovoked? You just threw all your claims of moral superiority in

 

[G.T.]

Bripat. Shut the fuck up. Youre clueless.

The end.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Marriage is the Joining of One Man and One Woman.

 

[bripat9643]

Of course I don't support slavery, you stupid asshole. That doesn't mean Lincoln was justified in invading Virginia. They have slavery right now in multiple countries in Africa and the Middle East. Why aren't morons like you calling for the government to invade them? If you don't, then you must support slavery. That's your dumbass argument, isn't it?

The South fired first and got their asses whipped (tho it took awhile). You'd think that Lincoln shouldn't have done all he could to win a war the other guy started.

They fired on Union trespassers, something they had every right to do.

Lincoln started the war.

LOL....now you are reduced to stomping your feet.

You are supporting states that rebelled from the United States in order to protect their legal right to own slaves.

And you are also a homophobic bigot.

Not a mere coincidence.

They seceded - something they have every right to do. Their reasons are immaterial. The bottom line is that Lincoln made war on fellow Americans and slaughtered them by the hundreds of thousands.

'Their reasons are immaterial'?

Yeah I can see why you don't like to discuss you are advocating on behalf of states fighting to protect their rights to own slaves.

And you are advocating on behalf of states who wanted to force other states to pay exorbitant tariffs purely to enrich the manufacturers in the former and impoverish the later.

Lincoln did not invade Virginia to end slavery, so all your sanctimonious whining about it is a non-issue.

 

[-S-]

The South fired first and got their asses whipped (tho it took awhile). You'd think that Lincoln shouldn't have done all he could to win a war the other guy started.

They fired on Union trespassers, something they had every right to do.

Lincoln started the war.

LOL....now you are reduced to stomping your feet.

You are supporting states that rebelled from the United States in order to protect their legal right to own slaves.

And you are also a homophobic bigot.

Not a mere coincidence.

They seceded - something they have every right to do. Their reasons are immaterial. The bottom line is that Lincoln made war on fellow Americans and slaughtered them by the hundreds of thousands.

The right to secede is throughly debatable. As the constitution has no provisions for secession. With any alteration of US State count requiring a majority vote of existing states. You disagree. Why should I care?

Hmmmm, wrong. Where does the Constitution say that ANY ALTERATION of the US state count requires a vote? It only discusses admitting states to the Union, not states leaving the Union.

And even following your assumption, the attack on Ft. Sumter was an act of war. Just as the US military invaded Mexico and conquered huge swaths, so too could the US invade and conquer the 'confederacy'.

Then you would have to admit that Lincoln was nothing more than some tyrant bent on expanding his empire - no better than Napoleon or Hitler.

Rebellion or invasion, either is as legit as the other.

Invasion is a legit excuse for invasion? Don't you belong to the gang that whines about the invasion of Iraq because it was supposedly unprovoked? You just threw all your claims of moral superiority in

...You're trolling, right? You don't honestly side with the Confederacy over the United States of America, do you?



You are the perfect storm of the STUPID/WEAK/COWARDLY trinity.