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.
Well St. Mike, why else would Kamala Harris, knowing that because the title of the proposed statute must include its intent (to revise the death penalty) and it is invalid therefore, profess to not be able to do anything about it? She's participating in the ruse for political advantage for her pet cause: rule of California with a rainbow-iron fist. I suspect if you trace her campaign finance money backwards, you'll find the rainbow-alliance behind it.
Haven't you been paying attention? That's what I've argued all along. I know this lawyer is plugging for the fag militia.
Except that AG Harris simply nullified the CA initiative law describing marriage and refused to clarify that illegal act (the law is still in the Constitution there) to the county clerks of CA when they petitioned her to.
Silhouette has trotted out this story, and built on it for years now.
The last version I remember he saying is that he was such a 'good friend' that he never told her about being molested, never told her that he was promiscuous, never told her that he was having any vendetta...
His brother told my brother after he had died. His sordid tale was not something even close friends shared with each other. It was a source of shame for his family.
I see a huge difference between wanting to make sodomy illegal and wanting to execute gay people. But even so, the opinion that sodomy should still be prosecuted is a minority opinion even among conservatives. Most of us simply don't care what you do in your own bedroom. Ask as many conservatives as you like and you'll see this is true.
Now Silhouette has a different issue going where he thinks I'm playing a role, that I'm pitching anti gay rhetoric for the same reason as this lawyer, to garner sympathy for gays. He's mentally disturbed in a way that it wouldn't surprise me in the least to see him throw his weight behind any proposition that gays be terminated; a rare and special kind of evil. While most conservatives like me are sick of the whole debate consuming American politics, he seems to have a hard on for gays (no pun intended) that approaches antagonistic levels and is indicative of hidden, unresolved psychological issues.
...Because a good family friend died of AIDS..
Your buddies have read why I've thrown myself behind this. My friend was molested as a boy, became "gay" (mentally injured sexually by habituation), went on a self-destructive rampage of unprotected promiscuous gay sex, predictably came down with HIV and then died years later of AIDS. But not before he went out and continued to have tons of unprotected sex with other guys to complete his vendetta against "those that did this to him".
And his is unfortunately not an isolated case within the gay male community:f
Silhouette has trotted out this story, and built on it for years now.
The last version I remember he saying is that he was such a 'good friend' that he never told her about being molested, never told her that he was promiscuous, never told her that he was having any vendetta.
No- supposedly this 'good family friend' told his brother- who supposedly told Silhouette- who claims to be upset not because her 'good family friend' ended up being a supposed serial killer- but for some bizarre reason blames homosexuals for his supposed crime spree.
What is the truth?
Who knows- we know Silhouette plays fast and furious with the facts- so this story is doubtful.
We do know that most children who are molested do not go on to become serial killers. And usually the friends of those who are molested don't end up attacking all homosexuals because some child molester sexually assaulted a boy or a girl.
You're throwing rocks in a glass house. Keep in mind when that you've made claims about your family and personal life too, just like I have. You want to say she's lying? That's one bomb you can't throw far enough to escape the fallout.
Haven't you been paying attention? That's what I've argued all along. I know this lawyer is plugging for the fag militia.Well St. Mike, why else would Kamala Harris, knowing that because the title of the proposed statute must include its intent (to revise the death penalty) and it is invalid therefore, profess to not be able to do anything about it? She's participating in the ruse for political advantage for her pet cause: rule of California with a rainbow-iron fist. I suspect if you trace her campaign finance money backwards, you'll find the rainbow-alliance behind it.
Except that AG Harris simply nullified the CA initiative law describing marriage and refused to clarify that illegal act (the law is still in the Constitution there) to the county clerks of CA when they petitioned her to.
More accurately the federal judiciary overruled Prop 8, finding it unconstitutional. Laws that violate the constitution are invalid and unenforceable. Thus, Prop 8 is invalid and unenforceable.
You can ignore this fact. But your willful ignorance changes nothing.
I see we've changed the subject away from the topic...again...
Why won't AG Kamala Harris of CA call on the legislature to reject the proposed initiative since it's about two issues and fails to state one of those in the title? Grounds for dismissal. Yet Harris professes impotence. That's fishy as hell..
I see we've changed the subject away from the topic...again...
Why won't AG Kamala Harris of CA call on the legislature to reject the proposed initiative since it's about two issues and fails to state one of those in the title? Grounds for dismissal. Yet Harris professes impotence. That's fishy as hell..
No. Wrong. It's about keeping gay propaganda away from kids in school AND about changing the death penalty in California. That last bit had to be included in the title, which it was not. So it is an invalid proposed initiative. AG Harris knows this.It's not about "two issues", it's about "Suppressing Sodomites". That's only one issue.
The fact that the initiative would modify more than one state statute doesn't disqualify it. Almost every initiative put for a vote in California affects more than one law.
I see we've changed the subject away from the topic...again...
Why won't AG Kamala Harris of CA call on the legislature to reject the proposed initiative since it's about two issues and fails to state one of those in the title? Grounds for dismissal. Yet Harris professes impotence. That's fishy as hell..
No. Wrong. It's about keeping gay propaganda away from kids in school AND about changing the death penalty in California. That last bit had to be included in the title, which it was not. So it is an invalid proposed initiative. AG Harris knows this.It's not about "two issues", it's about "Suppressing Sodomites". That's only one issue.
The fact that the initiative would modify more than one state statute doesn't disqualify it. Almost every initiative put for a vote in California affects more than one law.
Haven't you been paying attention? That's what I've argued all along. I know this lawyer is plugging for the fag militia.Well St. Mike, why else would Kamala Harris, knowing that because the title of the proposed statute must include its intent (to revise the death penalty) and it is invalid therefore, profess to not be able to do anything about it? She's participating in the ruse for political advantage for her pet cause: rule of California with a rainbow-iron fist. I suspect if you trace her campaign finance money backwards, you'll find the rainbow-alliance behind it.
Because...well that is the only explanation you can come up with for this blatant display of Christian inspired Old Testament style 'justice'.
Frankly he sounds just like Keyes.
Do you think all of Keyes rants are 'plugging for the fag militia' as you so colorfully call it?
I see we've changed the subject away from the topic...again...
Why won't AG Kamala Harris of CA call on the legislature to reject the proposed initiative since it's about two issues and fails to state one of those in the title? Grounds for dismissal. Yet Harris professes impotence. That's fishy as hell..
Well St. Mike, why else would Kamala Harris, knowing that because the title of the proposed statute must include its intent (to revise the death penalty) and it is invalid therefore, profess to not be able to do anything about it? She's participating in the ruse for political advantage for her pet cause: rule of California with a rainbow-iron fist. I suspect if you trace her campaign finance money backwards, you'll find the rainbow-alliance behind it.Haven't you been paying attention? That's what I've argued all along. I know this lawyer is plugging for the fag militia.
And the AG's stance? Do you believe Kamala Harris when she throws her hands up in the air and claims there isn't a thing she can do about a two-subject initiative without either clearly stated in the title? (Both grounds for rejection on the ballot)..
Christians don't believe in executing gays or that the Old Testament tells us to. That's your warped delusion and invincible ignorance. But don't enter it into the discussion as a fact because it isn't.
Well St. Mike, why else would Kamala Harris, knowing that because the title of the proposed statute must include its intent (to revise the death penalty) and it is invalid therefore, profess to not be able to do anything about it? She's participating in the ruse for political advantage for her pet cause: rule of California with a rainbow-iron fist. I suspect if you trace her campaign finance money backwards, you'll find the rainbow-alliance behind it.Haven't you been paying attention? That's what I've argued all along. I know this lawyer is plugging for the fag militia.
And the AG's stance? Do you believe Kamala Harris when she throws her hands up in the air and claims there isn't a thing she can do about a two-subject initiative without either clearly stated in the title? (Both grounds for rejection on the ballot)..
Yes, because unlike you, I understand California law. There really is nothing she can do under the California Constitution.
Christians don't believe in executing gays or that the Old Testament tells us to. That's your warped delusion and invincible ignorance. But don't enter it into the discussion as a fact because it isn't.
Controversial Ariz. Pastor Sparks Anger by Saying Gays Should Be Executed
Christians do not endorse the modern day application of Old Testament laws or executing gay people.
