Gay Marrige

Gay Marrige

Do you think that gay citizens should be able to get married?

Originally posted by Virusboy:

its more or less i forgot how to quick quote so i really just quoted the whole thing.

Not exactly what I was saying there ... you said:

Originally posted by Virusboy:

please everytime i read your post an innocent child offs themselves due to your stupidity.

If that's true, and you quote him, don't you kill another one?

You do know better than to quote offensive language - makes more work for us to remove it too - but I decided to point out if you really thought that then quoting him makes you guilty too.

Originally posted by rjhowie:

Well now johnnysaucepn re for women only and the mutter about it being challenged satirically as normal. Kind of equates with male to male queerdom. One each is the score!

*blinks* Beg pardon?

Originally posted by johnnysaucepn:

Originally posted by rjhowie:

Well now johnnysaucepn re for women only and the mutter about it being challenged satirically as normal. Kind of equates with male to male queerdom. One each is the score!

*blinks* Beg pardon?

Exactly!?

Originally posted by johnnysaucepn:

Originally posted by rjhowie:

Well now johnnysaucepn re for women only and the mutter about it being challenged satirically as normal. Kind of equates with male to male queerdom. One each is the score!

*blinks* Beg pardon?

He's always been projecting and it's a big, comfy closet he's got there

Maybe closer to home and family you have more knowledge about the closet situation. I don't hide anything just to remind. Judging by your style here you use the fall back of the best method of defence is attack?!

Originally posted by Smileyfaze:

Let Liberty & Justice have at it...if it floats that boat that is!

I think same sex marriage is fine, & should be legalized.....for women only.

Why, because they can give birth naturally---procreate naturally once a donation is secured, & their relationships are more culturally acceptable.

Congratulations on wanting to violate the Constitution yet again.

Originally posted by thedawgfan:

Congratulations on wanting to violate the Constitution ......

For the record I personally don't believe in same sex marriage at all, but just because I show a personal preference of if I were king for a day I'd prefer that women be permitted to marry doesn't make it Federally legal.

I don't carry that kind of weight, but I'm flattered that you may think so nonetheless

I'm acutely aware that if same sex marriages were to ever be codified by Federal law, then due to equal protection under the law, homophiles-----male & female-----would both have to be included.

That's why you will probably never see a Federal law enacted codifying same sex marriage in your lifetime. That is unless they redefine the meaning of marriage, & incorporate that into Federal Law somehow.

States are free to do whatever they wish in this matter, but because they do it does not mean that the Federal Government is obligated to follow suit.

Originally posted by Smileyfaze:

I'm acutely aware that if same sex marriages were to ever be codified by Federal law, then due to equal protection under the law, homophiles-----male & female-----would both have to be included.

Absolutely.

Originally posted by Smileyfaze:

For the record I personally don't believe in same sex marriage at all

Thing is, SF, it's not a matter of "believing in". It's a matter of whether or not you accept it or not.
This is what TP'ers fail to regognize. As you point out above, railing against homosexual "marriage" says that you hate the Constitution.
Perhaps you should spread this amongst your evangelical base of the TP?

Originally posted by Smileyfaze:

That's why you will probably never see a Federal law enacted codifying same sex marriage in your lifetime.

We'll see.

I frankly don't give a damn what it's called. Be it "marriage", "civil union", whatever, as long as the homos receive the same benefits a hetero couple would, things would be Constitutional.

Originally posted by Smileyfaze:

That is unless they redefine the meaning of marriage, & incorporate that into Federal Law somehow.

Originally posted by Smileyfaze:

States are free to do whatever they wish in this matter, but because they do it does not mean that the Federal Government is obligated to follow suit.

No, but if re-elected, I suspect a federal definition of marriage will be on the agenda for Obama.

Originally posted by thedawgfan:

....It's a matter of whether or not you accept it <homo marriage> or not. This is what TP'ers fail to regognize. As you point out above, railing against homosexual "marriage" says that you hate the Constitution...

Nothing of the sort. Your hatred of religion, & your excessive desire to vilify anything you personally deem religious, has hopelessly biased all your opinions relating to anything that you personally deem religious.

My personal reasoning is not based on religious grounds at all. It's based upon what is considered a legal marriage.

Say you had a beef because the local magistrate refused to accept the fact that you loved your dog & wanted to legally marry him, you'd be up against the same opposition. Men can't marry men, & women can't marry women, in the exact same way you can't marry your dog....you may have enough (maybe more) love to satisfy a desire to unite, but nevertheless it is unacceptable in the eyes of the law for understandable (maybe not to you) reasons.

If you succeed in having your desires to marry your dog codified in law through a redefinition of marriage, then the law will accept your status. Whether I, or anyone else, accepts your marital status at that point is absolutely immaterial.

My acceptance, or not, of that status has nothing whatsoever to do with my/our appreciation of the Constitution, & you saying so, has no weight whatsoever--& never ever will. Your are entitled to you opinions, but whether they actually matter to anyone but you is in your mind alone.

Originally posted by Smileyfaze:

Say you had a beef because the local magistrate refused to accept the fact that you loved your dog & wanted to legally marry him, you'd be up against the same opposition. Men can't marry men, & women can't marry women, in the exact same way you can't marry your dog....you may have enough (maybe more) love to satisfy a desire to unite, but nevertheless it is unacceptable in the eyes of the law for understandable (maybe not to you) reasons.

And this is where you lose the argument. Because you fail to understand the why marrying your dog is different from marrying a consenting human being.

Originally posted by Smileyfaze:

Your hatred of religion, & your excessive desire to vilify anything you personally deem religious, has hopelessly biased all your opinions relating to anything that you personally deem religious.

I never brought religion into this, you did SF. Read again if you don't believe me.

Originally posted by Smileyfaze:

My personal reasoning is not based on religious grounds at all.

I never said it was. Read what I wrote again.

Originally posted by Smileyfaze:

My acceptance, or not, of that status has nothing whatsoever to do with my/our appreciation of the Constitution, & you saying so, has no weight whatsoever--& never ever will.

Oh but it does.
Your nonsensical arguement about a man or woman and a dog trying to get married shows your lack of understanding on this issue.
A dog is not a human and cannot consent. A homosexual man or woman is a human being and can consent. Can you see the difference?

Originally posted by Smileyfaze:

Your are entitled to you opinions, but whether they actually matter to anyone but you is in your mind alone.

Correcting a long-running miscarriage of laws that violate the Constitution matters to a lot of people, more than you are probably aware of.
This particular issue is one that Libertarians have long fought, as no doubt you and the 'Baggers are aware of, being as how you all claim to be Libertarians.

Originally posted by thedawgfan:

This particular issue is one that Libertarians have long fought, as no doubt you and the 'Baggers are aware of, being as how you all claim to be Libertarians.

Really, your proof is.........Your facts are.......?

Until provided, you just lied through your teeth, I never claimed to be a Libertarian (like some ideas, but actually claimed to be one---that's a fer leap even for you oh split tongued one!).

Retract your statement, it's a lie (about me, & many many other ATPM Supporters unless you have proof of you ALL claim).

where oh where has the gay gene gone?

Is a gay libertarian a choice or were they born that way?

Are they offing themselves statistically more than a straight libertarian

And can a gay libertarian marry a straight Demo ?

Many questions to be answered in these new and troubled times.

Ah-ha, some skillfully neat ways of being bemusingly profound?!

Originally posted by rjhowie:

Ah-ha, some skillfully neat ways of being bemusingly profound?!

Or just profoundly bemusing?

Originally posted by Smileyfaze:

Really, your proof is.........

From you, SF:
http://my.opera.com/community/forums/topic.dml?id=401541

Originally posted by SmileyFaze:

The Movement is comprised of mostly citizens that would be considered as Right-of-Center…mostly Libertarian & Conservative...

I've long found that to be total nonsense, as all the local 'Baggers are Repubs from the Reagan era.

Originally posted by Smileyfaze:

Until provided, you just lied through your teeth

Unless you are a liar, I am absolutely right.

Originally posted by Smileyfaze:

Retract your statement, it's a lie

I'll do nothing of the sort until you admit that very few, if any, Libertarians are in the ATPM. You state it emphatically in the ATPM thread. Have you been lying to the board all along?

Originally posted by thedawgfan:

Originally posted by Smileyfaze:

Really, your proof is.........

From you, SF:
http://my.opera.com/community/forums/topic.dml?id=401541

Are you medicated?

Originally posted by thedawgfan:

Originally posted by SmileyFaze:

The Movement is comprised of mostly citizens that would be considered as Right-of-Center…mostly Libertarian & Conservative... <but surprisingly Citizens that describe themselves as outside this political spectrum have been drawn to The Movement in increasing numbers.>

I've long found that to be total nonsense, as all the local 'Baggers are Repubs from the Reagan era.

Again, your exaggerations do you in lil fella....your bordering on ignorant, & your repetitively deceiving & incorrect use of the word ALL...
ALL 'Baggers...ALL local 'Baggers are Repubs from the Reagan era.

Intellectually, you know better, or at least you should I would hope, otherwise all of mommy & daddy's hard earned money on your higher education was for naught.

Originally posted by thedawgfan:

This particular issue is one that Libertarians have long fought, as no doubt you and the 'Baggers are aware of, being as how you all claim to be Libertarians.

Originally posted by thedawgfan:

Originally posted by Smileyfaze:

Until provided, you just lied through your teeth

Unless you are a liar, I am absolutely right.

Read the statement,,,repeat,,,,repeat again....now where oh where did I say ALL??????

Of those that would be considered right of center, most are Libertarian & Conservative, but....read again....now again I ask that you use the brain your gene pool has given you....There were even non-libertarians & non-conservatives counted in that statement...or are you completely unable to comprehend a compound statement?

Now.....where, where....point it out....go ahead....please point it out....where did I ever say I was a Libertarian, & where did I ever say ALL the ATPM supporters were Libertarian......Find it...go ahead fella....find it!

Originally posted by Smileyfaze:

Retract your statement, it's a lie

Your retort....

Originally posted by thedawgfan:

I'll do nothing of the sort until you admit that very few, if any, Libertarians are in the ATPM....

Your condition is impossible if I tell the truth, but my request is not if you would consider doing the same.

Originally posted by thedawgfan:

...admit that very few, if any, Libertarians are in the ATPM...

Sorry, no can do.

Why? I honestly can't because I have personally met hundreds upon hundreds of ATPM supports, & many are...claim to be.... Libertarian. I've seen thousands upon thousands of questionnaires, I have seen many hundreds of hands shoot up during the many rallies I have attended & spoken at---in excess of 200 rallies & hall meetings..........so dawg, where do you come off thinking you know better than I about this?

Where?

Tell me please.

Oh....and please, please don't be telling me you're using a mere handful of local redneck hillbillys you may have personally glanced at once upon a time as your representation of ALL the supporters in the ATPM....I know you can't be that freekin' mentally challenged.

Sometimes, you just can't see the forest for the trees, can you.

Upon reflection I've come to a decision......No need for you to apologize, retract, or even admit that you may have erred due to your youthful exuberation if you don't want to.......I will not demand that of you.........I retract those demands I made for such, but know this in your heart, I will forgive you.........forgive you because I know from where you come..........I've been there, done that.

In the future, I will restrict all my discussion of ATPM related issues, unless unavoidable, in the ATPM thread where they belong.

Originally posted by Smileyfaze:

Intellectually, you know better, or at least you should I would hope, otherwise all of mommy & daddy's hard earned money on your higher education was for naught.

I pay for my own education out of my own pocket, thanks.

Originally posted by Smileyfaze:

I honestly can't because I have personally met hundreds upon hundreds of ATPM supports, & many are...claim to be.... Libertarian.

Of course they claim such. I could claim that I am secretly Bill Clinton and post stuff just to rouse you up because you hate Democrats so much, but that does not mean that I am the notorious William Jefferson Clinton posting under the alias "thedawgfan" now does it?

Originally posted by Smileyfaze:

I've seen thousands upon thousands of questionnaires, I have seen many hundreds of hands shoot up during the many rallies I have attended & spoken at---in excess of 200 rallies & hall meetings..........so dawg, where do you come off thinking you know better than I about this?

As one who has many Libertarian leanings, and has since 2007 when I became aware politically, I am aware of the 10 differen types of Libertarians. Those who claim such that you allege are Libertarians are probably not aware of the different types of Libertarians. You did not know there were 10 different types.

If you don't know your political position like you know your Social Security card, odds are, you may not be what you claim to be.
This is what I allege to your numerous people that claim such. If you get the inkling to, at your next meeting, I would politely request that you ask some of your fellow members exactly what type of Libertarian they are. (Paleo/Civil/Socialist/Neo/ etc). If they ask you what the heck you are talking about, you have your answer right there my friend!

Originally posted by Smileyfaze:

In the future, I will restrict all my discussion of ATPM related issues, unless unavoidable, in the ATPM thread where they belong.

I will attempt to do the same.

Originally posted by thedawgfan:

but that does not mean that I am the notorious William Jefferson Clinton posting under the alias "thedawgfan" now does it?

You mean the evil one that grew the economy without driving the deficit through ill-advised tax cuts that actually don't grow the economy. I hate you!

I do hope that thedawgfan is not him or the cry goes out for fathers to lock up their daughters.