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.
WASHINGTON - Mike Huckabee, a possible Republican presidential candidate in 2012, says the effort to allow gays and lesbians to marry is comparable to legalizing incest, polygamy and drug use.
Republicans are generally for "traditional values". Some folks need to stay in the democrat tent, like NAMBLA members as an example.
Poor Huckabee, stupid as a box of rocks. Another one that thinks the dinosaurs walked with man on earth in the last 6,000 years. He and Palin can sell ignorance on Fox.
Remember when he lost 100 pounds and was running every day? He gained it all back.
<Crickets>Republicans are generally for "traditional values". Some folks need to stay in the democrat tent, like NAMBLA members as an example.
Could you kindly point out where NAMBLA members are welcome in the Democrat tent? I look forward to your prompt response.
Poor Huckabee, stupid as a box of rocks. Another one that thinks the dinosaurs walked with man on earth in the last 6,000 years. He and Palin can sell ignorance on Fox.
Remember when he lost 100 pounds and was running every day? He gained it all back.
Which....if you were to go by the marriage philosophy of "If it disgusts me, it shouldn't be allowed"...how come obese people are allowed to marry? Ugh...
Anyone care to point out how he's wrong instead of simply calling him names?
The definition of marriage has changed drastically over the centuries.I agree with Huckabee's opinion. I also support his stance when he says, "I do not believe we should change the traditional definition of marriage."
My guess of how things will evolve is that eventually marriage will be looked upon in a purely religious sense and the government through its laws will deal with "civil unions", of which marriage will be but one classification.
Republicans are generally for "traditional values". Some folks need to stay in the democrat tent, like NAMBLA members as an example.
Could you kindly point out where NAMBLA members are welcome in the Democrat tent? I look forward to your prompt response.
Anyone care to point out how he's wrong instead of simply calling him names?
YOu are right...the NAMBLA comment is totally justified, ain't it?
Poor Huckabee, stupid as a box of rocks. Another one that thinks the dinosaurs walked with man on earth in the last 6,000 years. He and Palin can sell ignorance on Fox.
Remember when he lost 100 pounds and was running every day? He gained it all back.
Poor Huckabee, stupid as a box of rocks. Another one that thinks the dinosaurs walked with man on earth in the last 6,000 years. He and Palin can sell ignorance on Fox.
Remember when he lost 100 pounds and was running every day? He gained it all back.
Which....if you were to go by the marriage philosophy of "If it disgusts me, it shouldn't be allowed"...how come obese people are allowed to marry? Ugh...
The definition of marriage has changed drastically over the centuries.I agree with Huckabee's opinion. I also support his stance when he says, "I do not believe we should change the traditional definition of marriage."
My guess of how things will evolve is that eventually marriage will be looked upon in a purely religious sense and the government through its laws will deal with "civil unions", of which marriage will be but one classification.
In the early Bible days, some of the Godliest kings, such as David and Solomon, had multiple wives. So, ONE man and ONE woman hasn't always existed, even in the theocracy of Israel where God was recognized. Incest was allowed, as well, until after the Great Flood or so.The definition of marriage has changed drastically over the centuries.I agree with Huckabee's opinion. I also support his stance when he says, "I do not believe we should change the traditional definition of marriage."
My guess of how things will evolve is that eventually marriage will be looked upon in a purely religious sense and the government through its laws will deal with "civil unions", of which marriage will be but one classification.
Source?
Anyone care to point out how he's wrong instead of simply calling him names?
