Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Stop your whining!
Oh the contradictions. like you guys whine about everything Obama does.
How you can post such thing and not be embarrassed with yourself is beyond me. Just further supports many of the things said against people like you
If I criticize Obama I will back it up with facts not rhetoric. For example the fact that Obama lied during the SOTU speech when he said the Supreme Court's decision would allow foreign corporations to spend in U.S. elections.
Neither are conservatives. Gay marriage is legal in every state, and no conservative has ever said they shouldn't be able to get married. Denying state recognition is not denying the act.
What excatly does anyone give up by sharing a right with anyone else? You imply that people are somehow giving up their rights in order for someone or a group of people to have that right. A corporation or a union having the right to speak, in no way infringes on anyone elses rights. Are you or anyone else going to be censored by the government just because a corporation can buy a TV ad?
That's a joke, right?
You're the joke. Name one state where police will come and throw gay people in jail for getting married.
The government cannot interfere with a religious ceremony of marriage. Thus, gay marriages are completely "legal". The whole "gay marriage" debate is actually a debate on whether or not the people/government would recognize that as a real marriage. And guess what, society does not recognize it as a real marriage.
That's a joke, right?
You're the joke. Name one state where police will come and throw gay people in jail for getting married.
The government cannot interfere with a religious ceremony of marriage. Thus, gay marriages are completely "legal". The whole "gay marriage" debate is actually a debate on whether or not the people/government would recognize that as a real marriage. And guess what, society does not recognize it as a real marriage.
As I am sure you have found, people on here find themselves debating things they know absolutely nothing about.
They think they know as they watch the news...but they have not yet realized that the news cherry picks what it deems worthy of people knowing about.
That's a joke, right?
You're the joke. Name one state where police will come and throw gay people in jail for getting married.
The government cannot interfere with a religious ceremony of marriage. Thus, gay marriages are completely "legal". The whole "gay marriage" debate is actually a debate on whether or not the people/government would recognize that as a real marriage. And guess what, society does not recognize it as a real marriage.
Gay marriage is not recognized, they are not afforded the rights heterosexual married couples get. So that's the issue, the rights afforded to hetero married couples not given to homosexual couples.
YOu can't be this stupid, can you?
Oh the contradictions. like you guys whine about everything Obama does.
How you can post such thing and not be embarrassed with yourself is beyond me. Just further supports many of the things said against people like you
If I criticize Obama I will back it up with facts not rhetoric. For example the fact that Obama lied during the SOTU speech when he said the Supreme Court's decision would allow foreign corporations to spend in U.S. elections.
that's hysterical, most I hear from you is rhetoric. And the OP backed up what he was talking about. Sorry, can't deflect away from this blaring contradiction
Look at the titles to the threads against Obama. Obama. Why I want him impeached, Obamas Depression, Soft treatment of Obama, Damn Obama, Obama lies, and none of those are even in the Flame Zone.
For 8 years, Republicans turned America into a Money Party. Cutting taxes on the wealthiest, skimming money off insurance policies, sending young Americans off to die and no one can still explain that one. Refusing to rebuild after Katrina. Letting Bin Laden go.
They left every government organization in shambles:
Justice Department
EPA
Even the Supreme Court has been packed with hard right extremists who overturn century old laws for a buck.
And look how they go after Obama. They take not a bit of responsibility for what theyve done. 8 years of damaging the country and they refuse to take any responsibility.
Worse, they constantly attempt to shift the blame for their mess to Obama. How can that be?
I wonder for how long America will have to put up with this awful and dangerous political party before the country takes them to task?
It is because they are liars, cheats, thieves, perverts, crooks, and devil ridden myth followers that believe that anything is justifiable just by saying GAWD SAID. The problem is, there really are not that many REAL Republicans anymore, that party died when they went out of thier way to whore for votes, took in the likes of the dixiecrats, and went "whites only." And no having two or three "black" neo-CONS doesn't make it "inclusive." What once was a great political party is now a home for the most ignorant trash in the country. What once was the Republican Party is actually now a corpse inhabited by the kind of bugs that feed on their own putrescence.
If I criticize Obama I will back it up with facts not rhetoric. For example the fact that Obama lied during the SOTU speech when he said the Supreme Court's decision would allow foreign corporations to spend in U.S. elections.
that's hysterical, most I hear from you is rhetoric. And the OP backed up what he was talking about. Sorry, can't deflect away from this blaring contradiction
OldandTired schooled the OP and shown that he was giving opinions and not facts. But you wouldn't know the difference.
You're the joke. Name one state where police will come and throw gay people in jail for getting married.
The government cannot interfere with a religious ceremony of marriage. Thus, gay marriages are completely "legal". The whole "gay marriage" debate is actually a debate on whether or not the people/government would recognize that as a real marriage. And guess what, society does not recognize it as a real marriage.
Gay marriage is not recognized, they are not afforded the rights heterosexual married couples get. So that's the issue, the rights afforded to hetero married couples not given to homosexual couples.
YOu can't be this stupid, can you?
You are correct, they are not recognized. Which is completely different than saying gay marriage is "illegal" or "banned". That's all I was saying.
However, gays already have the same rights as anyone else. Any male can get married to a female and get all the privileges that come with it, regardless of whether or not one or both is homosexual or heterosexual.
Neither are conservatives. Gay marriage is legal in every state, and no conservative has ever said they shouldn't be able to get married. Denying state recognition is not denying the act.I don't see liberals telling gay people they can't get married.
What excatly does anyone give up by sharing a right with anyone else? You imply that people are somehow giving up their rights in order for someone or a group of people to have that right. A corporation or a union having the right to speak, in no way infringes on anyone elses rights. Are you or anyone else going to be censored by the government just because a corporation can buy a TV ad?I don't see liberals telling people they must share their political rights with inanimate corporations.
Oh the contradictions. like you guys whine about everything Obama does.
How you can post such thing and not be embarrassed with yourself is beyond me. Just further supports many of the things said against people like you
If I criticize Obama I will back it up with facts not rhetoric. For example the fact that Obama lied during the SOTU speech when he said the Supreme Court's decision would allow foreign corporations to spend in U.S. elections.
LIE?
Moveon.org spent money for ads against John McCain.
Swift boat Veterans spent on ads against Kerry.
US corporations owned by foreigners can now do the same thing, only with a lot more money.
You don't have to "give" a candidate money to support him. But believe me, that candidate will know who put him in office.
That is what the Supremem Court did.
You're the joke. Name one state where police will come and throw gay people in jail for getting married.
The government cannot interfere with a religious ceremony of marriage. Thus, gay marriages are completely "legal". The whole "gay marriage" debate is actually a debate on whether or not the people/government would recognize that as a real marriage. And guess what, society does not recognize it as a real marriage.
As I am sure you have found, people on here find themselves debating things they know absolutely nothing about.
They think they know as they watch the news...but they have not yet realized that the news cherry picks what it deems worthy of people knowing about.
speaking about yourself apparently
that's hysterical, most I hear from you is rhetoric. And the OP backed up what he was talking about. Sorry, can't deflect away from this blaring contradiction
OldandTired schooled the OP and shown that he was giving opinions and not facts. But you wouldn't know the difference.
So you say, doesn't make it so. Plus, I'm talking about you, not old and tired.
Neither are conservatives. Gay marriage is legal in every state, and no conservative has ever said they shouldn't be able to get married. Denying state recognition is not denying the act.I don't see liberals telling gay people they can't get married.
What excatly does anyone give up by sharing a right with anyone else? You imply that people are somehow giving up their rights in order for someone or a group of people to have that right. A corporation or a union having the right to speak, in no way infringes on anyone elses rights. Are you or anyone else going to be censored by the government just because a corporation can buy a TV ad?I don't see liberals telling people they must share their political rights with inanimate corporations.
Actually, what I hear and have hear conservatives arguing for are Civil Unions which would be recognized by the state and against marriage, not because of state recognition, but because of religious issues.
OldandTired schooled the OP and shown that he was giving opinions and not facts. But you wouldn't know the difference.
So you say, doesn't make it so. Plus, I'm talking about you, not old and tired.
You can talk about me all you want. Fact is you're wrong and I'm right.
Gay marriage is not recognized, they are not afforded the rights heterosexual married couples get. So that's the issue, the rights afforded to hetero married couples not given to homosexual couples.
YOu can't be this stupid, can you?
You are correct, they are not recognized. Which is completely different than saying gay marriage is "illegal" or "banned". That's all I was saying.
However, gays already have the same rights as anyone else. Any male can get married to a female and get all the privileges that come with it, regardless of whether or not one or both is homosexual or heterosexual.
that's just a dishonest spin to the law. If the law was you could only marry homosexuals, would you want to get married to another man? NO. Heteros can marry who they want and are attracted to and in love with , and get legal rights, while homosexuals can't.
Neither are conservatives. Gay marriage is legal in every state, and no conservative has ever said they shouldn't be able to get married. Denying state recognition is not denying the act.
What excatly does anyone give up by sharing a right with anyone else? You imply that people are somehow giving up their rights in order for someone or a group of people to have that right. A corporation or a union having the right to speak, in no way infringes on anyone elses rights. Are you or anyone else going to be censored by the government just because a corporation can buy a TV ad?
Actually, what I hear and have hear conservatives arguing for are Civil Unions which would be recognized by the state and against marriage, not because of state recognition, but because of religious issues.
It's semantics anyway, since plenty of people are married and not in churches. But everything should be "civil unions" than, since the state doesn't recognize church marriage, people married there still need to get a marriage certificate from the state.
You are correct, they are not recognized. Which is completely different than saying gay marriage is "illegal" or "banned". That's all I was saying.
However, gays already have the same rights as anyone else. Any male can get married to a female and get all the privileges that come with it, regardless of whether or not one or both is homosexual or heterosexual.
that's just a dishonest spin to the law. If the law was you could only marry homosexuals, would you want to get married to another man? NO. Heteros can marry who they want and are attracted to and in love with , and get legal rights, while homosexuals can't.
Maybe the gay community should respect the word marriage and how many religions view it and stop asking religions to change the meaning of a tradition and religious rite.
Maybe the gay community should simply ask for it to be called.....murriage....or merriage.
Something tells me they will find a lot less resistance.
ANd please....a "lot less resistance" does not open the door to petroleum jelly jokes.
People are claiming they are against the use of "marriage" because of religious purposes, but marriage in the church is not what is recognized, but the marriage certificate filed with the state and benefits given by the state is the issue at hand. Hence why I said that.Actually, what I hear and have hear conservatives arguing for are Civil Unions which would be recognized by the state and against marriage, not because of state recognition, but because of religious issues.
It's semantics anyway, since plenty of people are married and not in churches. But everything should be "civil unions" than, since the state doesn't recognize church marriage, people married there still need to get a marriage certificate from the state.
Why?
Actually it appears you are the one arguing over a word. What rights are present in 'marriage' that are missing in a civil union? In fact, as far as the state is concerned, the rights granted by 'marriage' are the same, no?that's just a dishonest spin to the law. If the law was you could only marry homosexuals, would you want to get married to another man? NO. Heteros can marry who they want and are attracted to and in love with , and get legal rights, while homosexuals can't.
Maybe the gay community should respect the word marriage and how many religions view it and stop asking religions to change the meaning of a tradition and religious rite.
Maybe the gay community should simply ask for it to be called.....murriage....or merriage.
Something tells me they will find a lot less resistance.
ANd please....a "lot less resistance" does not open the door to petroleum jelly jokes.
All over a word, and you don't see how stupid that is? Who cares what its called. I guess people not married in a church are also considered civil unions?
I really don't think they will find opposition, many in the anti-gay crowd just uses semantics to try and claim they are not against gays getting the same rights. \They will just make up some other stupid reason why they oppose it, all while we all know why, its their bigotry
