Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 95
  1.    #1  


    You don't have to change that crowd just swap their signs for "No Interracial Marriage!" or "Seperate But Equal!"

    And yet another shining example, around the globe, of why religion should be distanced from politics.
  2. #2  
    Isnt this just another example of free speech??
    Well behaved women rarely make history
  3. #3  
    Quote Originally Posted by clairegrrl
    Isnt this just another example of free speech??

    You don't get to make that argument. That's reserved for liberals when you're oppressing THEM.

    This is from the same mold as Nudist's daily anti-Bush thread. Don't you get tired of posting the same "religion has no place in politics!" threads every day?
  4.    #4  
    Not suggesting their speech should be impeded. However did you come to that conclusion? I'm not the type that reacts with "Shut-Up" when I hear something I don't agree with.
  5. #5  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas


    You don't have to change that crowd just swap their signs for "No Interracial Marriage!" or "Seperate But Equal!"

    And yet another shining example, around the globe, of why religion should be distanced from politics.
    Was there an article with the picture? The religious connection is unclear from the link.
  6.    #6  
    Quote Originally Posted by shopharim
    Was there an article with the picture? The religious connection is unclear from the link.
    Ues, and I should have included it in the original post, sorry.


    Gay-marriage fight in state high court
  7. #7  
    yawn. zzzzzz. boring. wake me when this is over. this crap is stale. its the same ole bullsh3t over and over and over and over and over.............and over again.

    all these threads by nudist, dathomas, etc - its like that sh!tty toby mcguire rap song - they justreplay it over and over again.... cause its all in their heads"
  8. #8  
    From the looks of these women, I don't think they need to be worried about marriage at all! woof-woof!
    Make It Happen!!
    If you don't, who will?
  9. #9  
    Some people just have a hard time understanding that lots of people find homosexuality a disgusting behavior that doesn't deserve recognition. In fact, the majority of voters in a lot of Blue states have that opinion.
  10. #10  
    You mean like California?

    A state that hasn't voted for a Rep. President since Reagan? Has one of the most Liberal US Senators in Barbara Boxer, and a Moderate Democrat US Senator Dianne Feinstein? A state that failed to elect a single Republican to State Office (other than Ah-nold), in the last Statewide election?

    I thought only those Wascally Wepubwicans were "bigoted."
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  11.    #11  
    California's law barring same-sex marriage unconstitutional, judge rules

    SAN FRANCISCO — A judge ruled today that California's ban on gay marriage is unconstitutional, saying the state could no longer justify limiting marriage to a man and a woman.

    In the eagerly awaited opinion likely to be appealed to the state's highest court, San Francisco County Superior Court Judge Richard Kramer said that withholding marriage licenses from gays and lesbians is unconstitutional.

    "It appears that no rational purpose exists for limiting marriage in this state to opposite-sex partners," Kramer wrote.

    The judge wrote that the state's historical definition of marriage, by itself, cannot justify the denial of equal protection for gays and lesbians.

    "The state's protracted denial of equal protection cannot be justified simply because such constitutional violation has become traditional," Kramer wrote.

    Kramer ruled in lawsuits brought by the city of San Francisco and a dozen same-sex couples last March. The suits were brought after the California Supreme Court halted a four-week marriage spree that Mayor Gavin Newsom had initiated in February 2004 when he directed city officials to issue marriage licenses to gays and lesbians in defiance of state law.

    The plaintiffs said withholding marriage licenses from gays and lesbians trespasses on the civil rights all citizens are guaranteed under the California Constitution.

    Two legal groups representing religious conservatives joined with California Attorney General Bill Lockyer in defending the existing laws and had vowed to appeal if Kramer did not rule in their favor.

    Lockyer's office has said it expects the matter eventually will have to be settled by the California Supreme Court.

    A pair of bills pending before the California Legislature would put a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage on the November ballot. If California voters approve such an amendment, as those in 13 other states did last year, that would put the issue out of the control of lawmakers and the courts.
  12.    #12  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911sforever
    Some people just have a hard time understanding that lots of people find homosexuality a disgusting behavior that doesn't deserve recognition. In fact, the majority of voters in a lot of Blue states have that opinion.
    Yea, that's called being a bigot.
  13. #13  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    California's law barring same-sex marriage unconstitutional, judge rules
    Yep. That came down this afternoon. (No surprise to me.)

    However the point is that the Proposition was overwhelmingly passed (68% in favor to 32% oppossing the inititative.) It's not just Right Wing religous zealots who oppose it. Trust me, I live here, and I can tell you that 68% of the population of CA are not Right Wing Christians.
    MaxiMunK.com The Forum That Asks, "Are You Not Entertained?"

    Remember: "Anyone that thinks the Treo should just work right out of the box, shouldn't own a Treo..."
  14.    #14  
    Quote Originally Posted by Insertion
    Yep. That came down this afternoon. (No surprise to me.)

    However the point is that the Proposition was overwhelmingly passed (68% in favor to 32% oppossing the inititative.) It's not just Right Wing religous zealots who oppose it. Trust me, I live here, and I can tell you that 68% of the population of CA are not Right Wing Christians.
    Regardless, discrimination can't be voted for.
  15. #15  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    Yea, that's called being a bigot.
    "BIGOT-One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ."

    Do you accept the above definition, and if so do you claim any bigotry? How do you feel about evangelical christians? Republican voters? Corporate executives? I think your prolific use of words like "Redneck" on this forum proves your own bigotry. Hypocrite.
  16. #16  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    Regardless, discrimination can't be voted for.
    Certainly it can. Progressive taxation is a form of discrimination that is voted for regularly.
  17. #17  
    Quote Originally Posted by 1911sforever
    Some people just have a hard time understanding that lots of people find homosexuality a disgusting behavior that doesn't deserve recognition. In fact, the majority of voters in a lot of Blue states have that opinion.
    hmm from the way you worded this statement, it appears that these are your feelings as well?

    Do I win?
  18. #18  
    Don't you guys realize the only ones who are still allowed freedom of speech are liberals? Any time any one expresses any opinion contrary to liberalist ideas they are immediately attacked with outcries of "hate speech" or labels like "bigot". We must all accept anything and everything, even if we find it to be amoral or unethical, without speaking out against it in any negative manner. This is what "freedom" is in America today.
  19. #19  
    ouch, nice touch. As far as I can tell there are no biggots in the Democratic Party, even though California is heavily democratic. Get ready for some screaming for an answer.

    Quote Originally Posted by 1911sforever
    "BIGOT-One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ."

    Do you accept the above definition, and if so do you claim any bigotry? How do you feel about evangelical christians? Republican voters? Corporate executives? I think your prolific use of words like "Redneck" on this forum proves your own bigotry. Hypocrite.
  20. #20  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas
    California's law barring same-sex marriage unconstitutional, judge rules

    SAN FRANCISCO — A judge ruled today that California's ban on gay marriage is unconstitutional, saying the state could no longer justify limiting marriage to a man and a woman.

    In the eagerly awaited opinion likely to be appealed to the state's highest court, San Francisco County Superior Court Judge Richard Kramer said that withholding marriage licenses from gays and lesbians is unconstitutional.

    "It appears that no rational purpose exists for limiting marriage in this state to opposite-sex partners," Kramer wrote.

    The judge wrote that the state's historical definition of marriage, by itself, cannot justify the denial of equal protection for gays and lesbians.

    "The state's protracted denial of equal protection cannot be justified simply because such constitutional violation has become traditional," Kramer wrote.

    Kramer ruled in lawsuits brought by the city of San Francisco and a dozen same-sex couples last March. The suits were brought after the California Supreme Court halted a four-week marriage spree that Mayor Gavin Newsom had initiated in February 2004 when he directed city officials to issue marriage licenses to gays and lesbians in defiance of state law.

    The plaintiffs said withholding marriage licenses from gays and lesbians trespasses on the civil rights all citizens are guaranteed under the California Constitution.

    Two legal groups representing religious conservatives joined with California Attorney General Bill Lockyer in defending the existing laws and had vowed to appeal if Kramer did not rule in their favor.

    Lockyer's office has said it expects the matter eventually will have to be settled by the California Supreme Court.

    A pair of bills pending before the California Legislature would put a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage on the November ballot. If California voters approve such an amendment, as those in 13 other states did last year, that would put the issue out of the control of lawmakers and the courts.

    Well now I guess yu can go to CA to get married. You dont have to wait for Washington after all. How nice for you.
    “There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order.”
    — Ed Howdershelt
    "A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have."- Thomas Jefferson
Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions