Gay Marriage to the Rescue!

Well, genius, I spend my time neither in coffee houses nor at DU (which it seems only you guys on the right pay attention to, btw). And the only people I've seen who really have issues with this are the folk of the radical Christian right and the odd homophobe, and they sure aren't a majority of Americans. In fact, people 40 and under don't care at all, so at least in the future, your type will be largely extinct.

Maybe you should get around more and stop listening to what your fellow homophobes tell you. RAFLMAO!

(BTW, RAFLMAO is correct... it means Rolling Around Floor Laughing My Ass Off... there might be other ways to say it, dearie, but you sure as heck don't hold a patent and aren't really equipped to correct either my grammar or my use of vernacular).

Cheers.

Back to work... some of us actually have to work for a living. :halo:

Honey i'm under 40, most everybody I know are under 40 and every single one of them which number in the hundreds are against gay marriage. Methinks you are the one making up the pseudos.

Yes I do have a patent, look it up, and I am certainly more qualified to correct grammar than any lawyer is.
 
Honey i'm under 40, most everybody I know are under 40 and every single one of them which number in the hundreds are against gay marriage. Methinks you are the one making up the pseudos.

Yes I do have a patent, look it up, and I am certainly more qualified to correct grammar than any lawyer is.


I do believe that should have said under 30. My bad.

But do read and learn, dearie... you are rather far from being a majority...and losing ground every day.

http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=273
 
Gay marriage and the prohibition thereof was on a dozen or more stat ballots in '04, it passed with flying colors in all of them.

After the civil war, many states passed "Jim Crowe" laws enforcing segregation, but they were later found to be unconstitutional. It's only a matter of time. Hatred and intolerance always wilt when the light of the Constitution is shown on them.
 
After the civil war, many states passed "Jim Crowe" laws enforcing segregation, but they were later found to be unconstitutional. It's only a matter of time. Hatred and intolerance always wilt when the light of the Constitution is shown on them.

Problem with that is you cant find constitutional amendments unconstitutional.
 
Problem with that is you cant find constitutional amendments unconstitutional.

True. But your chances of getting such an amendment are nil. Besides how would the right get their vote out without the twin bogeymen of reproductive choice and gays?

Oh right... you'd still have furriners creeping over the border. lol...

Just as an aside, you are aware that the Constitution was intended to protect individual liberties and constrain the powers of government, right?

Do you know how many times in our history a Constitutional Amendment has abridged rights?
 
After the civil war, many states passed "Jim Crowe" laws enforcing segregation, but they were later found to be unconstitutional. It's only a matter of time. Hatred and intolerance always wilt when the light of the Constitution is shown on them.

How many fucking times do I have to explain this to libs? Segregation bad because Blacks are born that way, they cannot change their skin color. Queers choose to be and therefore a constitutional amendment will not be found unconstitutional because it is a..........choice to live that way.

Anyway that argument is also a loser too because many of the states that passed laws banning queer marriage have already had constitutional challenges to the law brought before the courts and each time the laws has been upheld, even in lib states like New York.

You argument is a loser as proven by recent history.
 
True. But your chances of getting such an amendment are nil. Besides how would the right get their vote out without the twin bogeymen of reproductive choice and gays?

Oh right... you'd still have furriners creeping over the border. lol...

Just as an aside, you are aware that the Constitution was intended to protect individual liberties and constrain the powers of government, right?

Do you know how many times in our history a Constitutional Amendment has abridged rights?

Honey we are leaving it up to the states and it is passing with flying colors.
 
Well you need a line in the sand, gay marriage proponents on here long ago accepted the proposition of putting it to a vote, it was on several states ballots in '04, each one passed on average 75-25, i'd say that qualifies as most agreeing with our view, wouldn't you?
Agreeing with your view? Absolutely. Correct? Not necessarily. Popular opinion does not dictate correctness (thank the Lord).
 
You have got to be one of the dumbest people I have ever met on a messageboard - and I've met some doozies! You make Sitarro look like a brain surgeon - and that's saying something. I'm done and dusted with you. I got mroe important things to do, like watch the grass grow - well, might get more intelligence out of a blade of grass than a fool like you. Ciao dork.

run away little boy. Come back when you grow some hair.
 
After the civil war, many states passed "Jim Crowe" laws enforcing segregation, but they were later found to be unconstitutional. It's only a matter of time. Hatred and intolerance always wilt when the light of the Constitution is shown on them.

Well, you always know when someone is getting their ass handed to them, they start bringing up the "its only a matter of time, jim crowe laws used to be lega"

Sorry, but you guys just dont get it. Comparing civil rights denied to a person based on their race or gender simply isnt comparable to giving someone special privledges because they like packing the fudge with each other.
 

Forum List

Back
Top