Clint Eastwood Signs Brief Supporting Same-Sex Marriage

[Cowman]

This is hysterical!
Bunch of hypocrites I see here.

You hated Eastwood for his empty chair routine, the horrible things that were said about him, shame on you!

Now you love him!

Eastwood is not lock step and has supported Dems and Reps.

"Eastwood is also a supporter of gun control laws. "I've always supported a certain amount of gun control. I think it's very important that guns don't get in the wrong hands; It's very important to keep them out of the hands of felons or anyone who might be crazy with it"

Where the heck is rdean?

I think you're an idiot, mistaking "love" with "pointing out that the conservative all of you conservatives can't seem to stop talking about whenever he does something stupid, isn't who you thought he was".

Woo boy, people better be careful around you with your ridiculous notions of love.

This story doesn't make me "love" or "like" Clint Eastwood at all. It just demonstrates that he's not as ass fucking backwards as he seems to be, and as you people would like for him to be.

He's still a god damn idiot loon, through and through.

 

[Katzndogz]

Ignorance? Pick up a history book. Do you really think this is new? Gays have never been accepted before? Do you really think that?

Gays have absolutely had exactly the kind of acceptance they want it just has never lasted for very long. Eventually the culture that accepted same sex relationships are overcome by a culture that does not. It always ends the same way.

Yes, it did end that way with Native Americans.
White folk ended their culture where for thousands of years gays were accepted.

And many of the others you are exactly right.
RELIGIOUS REASONS is why it went back to folks not accepting them.

You state the same thing twice but the first time you state you do not hate gays for religious reasons and then you make this point that gay acceptance will not last with the facts being that societies used RELIGIOUS REASONS each and every time they persecuted gay folks.

Who are you trying to shit here? You come across loud and clear.

Religious reasons? And which religion would that be? And are you honestly claiming that all religions reject homosexuality no matter how pagan that religion might be? Or are you just admitting that all major religions have a common morality that rejects homosexuality.

After considering the matter seriously, that societies collapse shortly after they accept the normalcy of homosexuality has nothing to do with homosexuality at all. It's not a cause, it's a symptom of a culture already quite sick. These societies fell, the Egyptians, Romans, Greeks, over and over again, the same thing. It's not because gays suddenly got married or could openly practice their romance. It's that by the time that culture got to the point where they accepted homosexuality, they were already rotted out. If they weren't already degraded, they would never have accepted homosexuality in the first place.

 

[Cowman]

[
If being a douche-bag makes you a bad president why do you like Clinton and Obama?

As much as I hate feeding the trolls...

Not a fan of Clinton, but I'd LOVE to have his economy back.

Not much of a fan of Obama, either, but he was preferable to the Weird Mormon RObot you guys were trying to foist on the country.

You want to cut government spending by 40%? I am write there with you.

What is this co-authorship bullshit?

 

[bodecea]

Ignorance? Pick up a history book. Do you really think this is new? Gays have never been accepted before? Do you really think that?

Gays have absolutely had exactly the kind of acceptance they want it just has never lasted for very long. Eventually the culture that accepted same sex relationships are overcome by a culture that does not. It always ends the same way.

Yes, it did end that way with Native Americans.
White folk ended their culture where for thousands of years gays were accepted.

And many of the others you are exactly right.
RELIGIOUS REASONS is why it went back to folks not accepting them.

You state the same thing twice but the first time you state you do not hate gays for religious reasons and then you make this point that gay acceptance will not last with the facts being that societies used RELIGIOUS REASONS each and every time they persecuted gay folks.

Who are you trying to shit here? You come across loud and clear.

Religious reasons? And which religion would that be? And are you honestly claiming that all religions reject homosexuality no matter how pagan that religion might be? Or are you just admitting that all major religions have a common morality that rejects homosexuality.

After considering the matter seriously, that societies collapse shortly after they accept the normalcy of homosexuality has nothing to do with homosexuality at all. It's not a cause, it's a symptom of a culture already quite sick. These societies fell, the Egyptians, Romans, Greeks, over and over again, the same thing. It's not because gays suddenly got married or could openly practice their romance. It's that by the time that culture got to the point where they accepted homosexuality, they were already rotted out. If they weren't already degraded, they would never have accepted homosexuality in the first place.

Really? What societies had THAT happen? List them.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

First, the First Amendment is just as much about freedom FROM religion

My free posting advice of the day.

If you start your post off with total bullshit no intelligent, well informed, person is going to pay any attention to anything you say. If you want to make a totally absurd point you should wait until you actually present something that sounds halfway like an intelligent point, then come in with the crap.

And you’ll be taking your own advise, when?

Aren't you the guy that has said that the Supreme Court writes the Constitution?

 

[Gadawg73]

Ignorance? Pick up a history book. Do you really think this is new? Gays have never been accepted before? Do you really think that?

Gays have absolutely had exactly the kind of acceptance they want it just has never lasted for very long. Eventually the culture that accepted same sex relationships are overcome by a culture that does not. It always ends the same way.

Yes, it did end that way with Native Americans.
White folk ended their culture where for thousands of years gays were accepted.

And many of the others you are exactly right.
RELIGIOUS REASONS is why it went back to folks not accepting them.

You state the same thing twice but the first time you state you do not hate gays for religious reasons and then you make this point that gay acceptance will not last with the facts being that societies used RELIGIOUS REASONS each and every time they persecuted gay folks.

Who are you trying to shit here? You come across loud and clear.

Religious reasons? And which religion would that be? And are you honestly claiming that all religions reject homosexuality no matter how pagan that religion might be? Or are you just admitting that all major religions have a common morality that rejects homosexuality.

After considering the matter seriously, that societies collapse shortly after they accept the normalcy of homosexuality has nothing to do with homosexuality at all. It's not a cause, it's a symptom of a culture already quite sick. These societies fell, the Egyptians, Romans, Greeks, over and over again, the same thing. It's not because gays suddenly got married or could openly practice their romance. It's that by the time that culture got to the point where they accepted homosexuality, they were already rotted out. If they weren't already degraded, they would never have accepted homosexuality in the first place.

You dance around the subject like a monkey on fire.
Every single society that left gays "swinging from the lamp posts" did so because OF RELIGIOUS REASONS.

There is NO evidence that accepting homosexuality "rotted out" societies.
It is a well documented fact that Rome fell because of massive debt from the massive empire they conquered and then had to train and control their people to run things the Roman way.
As hard as you try you just can not polish your turd.

 

[Gadawg73]

Accepting people that fall in love with folk of the same sex is because folks are sick.

Only a fucking idiot believes that bull shit.
I do not actually believe KatznDog believes that.
Talking points he made up as he goes and his visits to WBC.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

First, the First Amendment is just as much about freedom FROM religion as Freedom OF religion. You really can't have one without the other. Otherwise you just have a dominate religion and others that are tolerated.

On this point I disagree, the First Amendment in no way is about Freedom FROM Religion (Establishment Clause), the First Amendment is about freedom from government imposed religion though the actions of respecting one religious perspective over another.

There is no protection about being exposed through the media, print, internet, or signage to aspects of religion when performed by private individuals or organizations in public.


>>>>

The Establishment Clause prohibits the government from promoting religion, citizens are thus free from religion in that the state may not use its secular authority to compel adherence to religious doctrine and dogma.

The Free Exercise Clause disallows the state from forbidding the practice of a given faith.

That one is exposed to religion as a consequence of daily life was never at issue, as the First Amendment applies to lawmaking entities only.

But it’s perfectly accurate to say one has a right to be free from religion: children may not be compelled to pray in public school, for example, just as religious tests are forbidden with regard to applying for public office or government services.

 

[WorldWatcher]

First, the First Amendment is just as much about freedom FROM religion as Freedom OF religion. You really can't have one without the other. Otherwise you just have a dominate religion and others that are tolerated.

On this point I disagree, the First Amendment in no way is about Freedom FROM Religion (Establishment Clause), the First Amendment is about freedom from government imposed religion though the actions of respecting one religious perspective over another.

There is no protection about being exposed through the media, print, internet, or signage to aspects of religion when performed by private individuals or organizations in public.


>>>>

The Establishment Clause prohibits the government from promoting religion, citizens are thus free from religion in that the state may not use its secular authority to compel adherence to religious doctrine and dogma.

The Free Exercise Clause disallows the state from forbidding the practice of a given faith.

That one is exposed to religion as a consequence of daily life was never at issue, as the First Amendment applies to lawmaking entities only.

But it’s perfectly accurate to say one has a right to be free from religion: children may not be compelled to pray in public school, for example, just as religious tests are forbidden with regard to applying for public office or government services.

Which supports what I said. People are free from the government imposition of religion, that is very different. Take your example above.


A public school (i.e. the government) cannot compel a child to pray.

On the other hand the childs parents can compel a child to pray.

Therefore the child does not have a right to Freedom From Religion, the child as a right to Freedom From Government Compelled Religion.




Two very different things.

>>>>

 

[JoeB131]

[
If being a douche-bag makes you a bad president why do you like Clinton and Obama?

As much as I hate feeding the trolls...

Not a fan of Clinton, but I'd LOVE to have his economy back.

Not much of a fan of Obama, either, but he was preferable to the Weird Mormon RObot you guys were trying to foist on the country.

Very telling that you avoid mention of Obama's economy

:

You mean the economy he inherited from Bush?

The worst economic catastrophe in 80 years that he managed to keep the country from going completely over the cliff?

That economy.

Yeah, no point talking to you about that... in your own reality, Obama crashed the economy right after he sank the Titanic and kidnapped the Lindberg Baby...

He has his own personal TARDIS where he's causing all this trouble.

 

[JoeB131]

Now you're getting it!

^ complete imbecile.

To Joe everyone that makes $99,999.99 and under a year earned it and is a "working man".
Everyone that makes $100,000.00 and over stole every cent they made from the guys that make $99,999.99 and under.

My cutoff would be closer to 250K, and it would kind of depend on what they did for aliving, wouldn't it...

But that's okay, man, I know you need to feel really good about the dirty pictures.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Yes, it did end that way with Native Americans.
White folk ended their culture where for thousands of years gays were accepted.

And many of the others you are exactly right.
RELIGIOUS REASONS is why it went back to folks not accepting them.

You state the same thing twice but the first time you state you do not hate gays for religious reasons and then you make this point that gay acceptance will not last with the facts being that societies used RELIGIOUS REASONS each and every time they persecuted gay folks.

Who are you trying to shit here? You come across loud and clear.

Religious reasons? And which religion would that be? And are you honestly claiming that all religions reject homosexuality no matter how pagan that religion might be? Or are you just admitting that all major religions have a common morality that rejects homosexuality.

After considering the matter seriously, that societies collapse shortly after they accept the normalcy of homosexuality has nothing to do with homosexuality at all. It's not a cause, it's a symptom of a culture already quite sick. These societies fell, the Egyptians, Romans, Greeks, over and over again, the same thing. It's not because gays suddenly got married or could openly practice their romance. It's that by the time that culture got to the point where they accepted homosexuality, they were already rotted out. If they weren't already degraded, they would never have accepted homosexuality in the first place.

You dance around the subject like a monkey on fire.
Every single society that left gays "swinging from the lamp posts" did so because OF RELIGIOUS REASONS.

There is NO evidence that accepting homosexuality "rotted out" societies.
It is a well documented fact that Rome fell because of massive debt from the massive empire they conquered and then had to train and control their people to run things the Roman way.
As hard as you try you just can not polish your turd.

Are you claiming that the Soviet Union was religious, or are you just so stupid you did not know they persecuted homosexuals?

 

[hortysir]

As much as I hate feeding the trolls...

Not a fan of Clinton, but I'd LOVE to have his economy back.

Not much of a fan of Obama, either, but he was preferable to the Weird Mormon RObot you guys were trying to foist on the country.

Very telling that you avoid mention of Obama's economy

:

You mean the economy he inherited from Bush?

The worst economic catastrophe in 80 years that he managed to keep the country from going completely over the cliff?

That economy.

Yeah, no point talking to you about that... in your own reality, Obama crashed the economy right after he sank the Titanic and kidnapped the Lindberg Baby...

He has his own personal TARDIS where he's causing all this trouble.

No.
Actually, I mean THIS economy.
THIS stagnate and stalling economy that just saw it's citizenry taxed harder,,,,the whole while bitching about dialing back spending increases.
THIS economy that's stuck at 8% unemployment.
THIS economy that has seen our gas prices double since Obama took office.
THIS economy that would rather buy bloody oil from Saudi princes than Texans or Alaskans.

 

[Gadawg73]

^ complete imbecile.

To Joe everyone that makes $99,999.99 and under a year earned it and is a "working man".
Everyone that makes $100,000.00 and over stole every cent they made from the guys that make $99,999.99 and under.

My cutoff would be closer to 250K, and it would kind of depend on what they did for aliving, wouldn't it...

But that's okay, man, I know you need to feel really good about the dirty pictures.

I have no opinion on you bouncing your bobo while looking at dirty pictures.
If looking at dirty pictures is your thing to get you off, go for it.

 

[Gadawg73]

Religious reasons? And which religion would that be? And are you honestly claiming that all religions reject homosexuality no matter how pagan that religion might be? Or are you just admitting that all major religions have a common morality that rejects homosexuality.

After considering the matter seriously, that societies collapse shortly after they accept the normalcy of homosexuality has nothing to do with homosexuality at all. It's not a cause, it's a symptom of a culture already quite sick. These societies fell, the Egyptians, Romans, Greeks, over and over again, the same thing. It's not because gays suddenly got married or could openly practice their romance. It's that by the time that culture got to the point where they accepted homosexuality, they were already rotted out. If they weren't already degraded, they would never have accepted homosexuality in the first place.

You dance around the subject like a monkey on fire.
Every single society that left gays "swinging from the lamp posts" did so because OF RELIGIOUS REASONS.

There is NO evidence that accepting homosexuality "rotted out" societies.
It is a well documented fact that Rome fell because of massive debt from the massive empire they conquered and then had to train and control their people to run things the Roman way.
As hard as you try you just can not polish your turd.

Are you claiming that the Soviet Union was religious, or are you just so stupid you did not know they persecuted homosexuals?

The Soviet Union consisted of how many states?
15 and I bet you did not know that and can not name half of them.
And the majority of the citizens in all of those states were very religious.
The State policy against homosexuals was not only against them.
They carried out harsh penalties against everyone and anyone that dared to question their authority.
More people to persecute means more people to send to Siberia to work in forced labor camps.
And in a country that was ruled by a select few that were atheists the best way to control a majority religious population is to appeal to their bigotry and shift the blame to them.
Just like Hitler did.
Nothing to with selective persecution of gays and everything to do with control and power of the state.
And you claim I AM STUPID.
You need a basic history course in Soviet style communism.

 

[tap4154]

If he personally accepts or supports it.. good for him... if Bigot Joe Schmoe don't... good for him... all part of freedom... but sign no law that infringes upon that freedom for people to discriminate against behavior, choice, and action of others that they don't like or agree with

BO opposed it, until it became politically-expedient before last November. Then he "evolved".

BFD

 

[Quantum Windbag]

You dance around the subject like a monkey on fire.
Every single society that left gays "swinging from the lamp posts" did so because OF RELIGIOUS REASONS.

There is NO evidence that accepting homosexuality "rotted out" societies.
It is a well documented fact that Rome fell because of massive debt from the massive empire they conquered and then had to train and control their people to run things the Roman way.
As hard as you try you just can not polish your turd.

Are you claiming that the Soviet Union was religious, or are you just so stupid you did not know they persecuted homosexuals?

The Soviet Union consisted of how many states?
15 and I bet you did not know that and can not name half of them.
And the majority of the citizens in all of those states were very religious.
The State policy against homosexuals was not only against them.
They carried out harsh penalties against everyone and anyone that dared to question their authority.
More people to persecute means more people to send to Siberia to work in forced labor camps.
And in a country that was ruled by a select few that were atheists the best way to control a majority religious population is to appeal to their bigotry and shift the blame to them.
Just like Hitler did.
Nothing to with selective persecution of gays and everything to do with control and power of the state.
And you claim I AM STUPID.
You need a basic history course in Soviet style communism.

Interesting trivia. Unfortunately, for your narrative, the persecution of homosexuals in the Soviet Union was sanctioned by the Central Committee. Blaming religion for the actions of open atheists is like blaming Bush for 9/11.

 

[JoeB131]

No.
Actually, I mean THIS economy.
THIS stagnate and stalling economy that just saw it's citizenry taxed harder,,,,the whole while bitching about dialing back spending increases.
THIS economy that's stuck at 8% unemployment.
THIS economy that has seen our gas prices double since Obama took office.
THIS economy that would rather buy bloody oil from Saudi princes than Texans or Alaskans.

Okay, let's look at these retarded Right Wing Talking points straight from Hate Radio.

Taxes- yeah, the thing is, we finally bit the bullet and realized that we can't keep cutting taxes, because supply side doesn't work and never well. We have never gotten out of a recession without massive infusions of government spending, but the attitude of the Right has been to cut government spending.

The reason why we are stuck at 8% unemployment is for every job the private sector creates now, we cut one in government. Had we maintained the public payroll at 2008 levels, we'd be at 6% unemployment right now.

I say the same thing about gas price increases now that I did under Bush. When you don't invest in alternative energy and mass transit, you are going to be victim to the cost of gasoline. Gasoline is going up because China and India are increasing their demands. And generally, despoiling the last few acres of land in ths country won't change that.

 

[JoeB131]

To Joe everyone that makes $99,999.99 and under a year earned it and is a "working man".
Everyone that makes $100,000.00 and over stole every cent they made from the guys that make $99,999.99 and under.

My cutoff would be closer to 250K, and it would kind of depend on what they did for aliving, wouldn't it...

But that's okay, man, I know you need to feel really good about the dirty pictures.

I have no opinion on you bouncing your bobo while looking at dirty pictures.
If looking at dirty pictures is your thing to get you off, go for it.

No, come on man, that's how you make your money, spying on people who really don't need you sticking your nose in their business. When you get an honest job, let me know.

 

[Gadawg73]

My cutoff would be closer to 250K, and it would kind of depend on what they did for aliving, wouldn't it...

But that's okay, man, I know you need to feel really good about the dirty pictures.

I have no opinion on you bouncing your bobo while looking at dirty pictures.
If looking at dirty pictures is your thing to get you off, go for it.

No, come on man, that's how you make your money, spying on people who really don't need you sticking your nose in their business. When you get an honest job, let me know.

I have no idea what you are talking about Joe. I do not spy on anyone or take any dirty pictures.
But if you need more as your old ones are stuck together or messed maybe I can find some and send them to you.