Poll- Marriage Equality

[daws101]

The United States will break up but it won't be a civil war. Most likely the same way the Soviet Union broke up. There could well be isolated incidents of a breakdown in civil society. I can see incidents of neighborhoods warring and rioting against otherbneighborhoods.

You've seen way too many movies.

 

[Syriusly]

More people distrust the government than trust it. Once a civil war broke out it would be obvious which side the armed people(conservatives and libertarians)would be on...and the military would become impossible to maintain as most military are rightist and would refuse to follow orders to kill their friends and family.

People like you would be sitting targets. You'd be either deported or killed...your choice.

Sad little boys like OOM are always fantasizing about being able to kill Americans......

Wrong, killing "global citizens"... Yes. You're no american, you are on the side of the globalists.

Sad little boys like OOM are always fantasizing about being able to kill Americans

 

[Syriusly]

The actual question is whether you favor redefining the meaning of a word or not?

Words are redefined- or more accurately have additional content added quite regularly.

The question is really simple- do you believe in marriage equality or not?

I suppose your correct. It seems that the legal term "illegal alien" that describes a non-citizen who entered the country illegally is now a "racist" code word instead of a legal term. Or maybe the definition is all in a persons mind and they just create their own personal reality. Blue is white, hot is cold, wet is dry, marriage is two men, etc. I'm kind of digging this whole words have no static meaning. It's all fluid and can be redesigned to each individual's liking. For instance, I think you're "smart"......but you do realize the term has been redefined, correct?

Words don't have a static meaning. If you asked for a fag 200 years ago imagine your surprise when it didn't turn out to be a homosexual male. And if you described yourself as 'gay' 100 years ago you would be having a jolly (and likely heterosexual) time.

But if all of that confuses you, I have a solution for you- it is called a dictionary.

The two standards are the Merriam Webster and the Oxford English Dictionary- both have versions online and available to anyone who is confused as to the definitions of words.

If you asked for a fag 200 years ago you would get a stack of firewood. If you asked for a fag 100 years ago you would get a cigarette.

Almost correct .
Even into the 20th century the word faggot meant kindling not a stack wood but the small stick and twigs .
A fag English slang for a cigarette it began in the 1920's
In the 18th 19th century and earlier , homosexuals were called dandy's, fop's and pooves.

Lets not forget 'sodomites'

 

[Syriusly]

The United States will break up but it won't be a civil war. Most likely the same way the Soviet Union broke up. There could well be isolated incidents of a breakdown in civil society. I can see incidents of neighborhoods warring and rioting against otherbneighborhoods.

Or we will go on like we have for the last 150 years and be Americans rather than become the former Yugoslavia.

 

[Katzndogz]

There aren't that many people wanting to be Americans. At most they are willing to be hyphenated Americans. How many Russians thought the Soviet Union would break up?

 

[daws101]

There aren't that many people wanting to be Americans. At most they are willing to be hyphenated Americans. How many Russians thought the Soviet Union would break up?

Oh bullshit !
You Like most conservatives have an extremely narrow pov on what a America and americans "should"be and there's the rub as Shakespeare said.

 

[Syriusly]

There aren't that many people wanting to be Americans. At most they are willing to be hyphenated Americans. How many Russians thought the Soviet Union would break up?

Actually most Americans want to be Americans. That is how we identify ourselves. Most immigrants who come to America want to become Americans- because here is better than where they came from.

The Russians of the Soviet Union always considered themselves Russian- not Soviets- and quite distinct from the Ukrainians or the Turks of Turkmenistan.

 

[Katzndogz]

How quaint. You haven't changed your mind in 50 years.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

The results seem to be overwhelming.

 

[daws101]

How quaint. You haven't changed your mind in 50 years.

Posting to yourself?

 

[Tommy Tainant]

The big corporations need to know about this.

 

[Katzndogz]

Once we get to be majority immigrant muslim it will be raining gays. Let nature take its course.

 

[Katzndogz]

No such thing as equality in nature.

Marriage licenses were born out of racism, so why would the far left be for them?

marriage same sex or opposite sex does not exist in nature
your are wrong about equality in nature.
Does equality exist in nature? - Quora

Equality and Nature
Posted on September 30, 2010December 8, 2013 by The Big PIcture


Our values are shaped by our relation with other living beings and with the natural world. Equality means a relation between individuals that is not based on the use of force – not dominating another living being, and not being dominated by another being. The values of equality and freedom are intrinsic to each other, and reinforce each other. This is because inherent in the value of freedom is the idea that we must avoid restricting others, and others must avoid restricting us. By using force or dominating another living being we are restricting its freedom. We cannot genuinely have freedom without equality, and we cannot have equality without freedom.
Equality and Nature | The Big Picture

In reality equality and freedom cannot exist together. Equality has to be imposed by force, it doesn't arise naturally, not even among plants where the strong crowd out the weak.

 

[daws101]

No such thing as equality in nature.

Marriage licenses were born out of racism, so why would the far left be for them?

marriage same sex or opposite sex does not exist in nature
your are wrong about equality in nature.
Does equality exist in nature? - Quora

Equality and Nature
Posted on September 30, 2010December 8, 2013 by The Big PIcture


Our values are shaped by our relation with other living beings and with the natural world. Equality means a relation between individuals that is not based on the use of force – not dominating another living being, and not being dominated by another being. The values of equality and freedom are intrinsic to each other, and reinforce each other. This is because inherent in the value of freedom is the idea that we must avoid restricting others, and others must avoid restricting us. By using force or dominating another living being we are restricting its freedom. We cannot genuinely have freedom without equality, and we cannot have equality without freedom.
Equality and Nature | The Big Picture

In reality equality and freedom cannot exist together. Equality has to be imposed by force, it doesn't arise naturally, not even among plants where the strong crowd out the weak.

Since you know jackshit about equality and reality your are in no position to opine on either.

 

[Kosh]

Notice how the far left came in force to claim that equality exists in nature.

Mind you they have no proof, especially since they claim they believe in Evolution, but they will run their religious narratives at all costs.

Marriage Licenses were born from racism and now you see that the far left drones will defend racism at all costs.

They want a flag removed, but yet will accept a piece of paper born from racism,,

 

[daws101]

Notice how the far left came in force to claim that equality exists in nature.

Mind you they have no proof, especially since they claim they believe in Evolution, but they will run their religious narratives at all costs.

Marriage Licenses were born from racism and now you see that the far left drones will defend racism at all costs.

They want a flag removed, but yet will accept a piece of paper born from racism,,

You must enjoy being wrong all the time.

 

[kwc57]

It has been over 50 years since the Supreme Court told Virginia that the Lovings had the Constitutional right to marry each other despite the ban on inter-racial marriages.

It has been a year since the Supreme Court told multiple States that the Obergefells had the Constutional right to marry each other despite the ban on same gender marriages.

The question is- are you in favor of marriage equality in the United States- or against it?

The actual question is whether you favor redefining the meaning of a word or not?

Words are redefined- or more accurately have additional content added quite regularly.

The question is really simple- do you believe in marriage equality or not?

I suppose your correct. It seems that the legal term "illegal alien" that describes a non-citizen who entered the country illegally is now a "racist" code word instead of a legal term. Or maybe the definition is all in a persons mind and they just create their own personal reality. Blue is white, hot is cold, wet is dry, marriage is two men, etc. I'm kind of digging this whole words have no static meaning. It's all fluid and can be redesigned to each individual's liking. For instance, I think you're "smart"......but you do realize the term has been redefined, correct?

Words don't have a static meaning. If you asked for a fag 200 years ago imagine your surprise when it didn't turn out to be a homosexual male. And if you described yourself as 'gay' 100 years ago you would be having a jolly (and likely heterosexual) time.

But if all of that confuses you, I have a solution for you- it is called a dictionary.

The two standards are the Merriam Webster and the Oxford English Dictionary- both have versions online and available to anyone who is confused as to the definitions of words.

Ahhhh, you mean words that fall out of use over time and applied to different things over time? Not a word like marriage that has had the same meaning since pre-history. What you're describing is when a small minority want to redefine an already defined word to meet their own niche standard and impose it on the rest of society. Two different things.

 

[kwc57]

It has been over 50 years since the Supreme Court told Virginia that the Lovings had the Constitutional right to marry each other despite the ban on inter-racial marriages.

It has been a year since the Supreme Court told multiple States that the Obergefells had the Constutional right to marry each other despite the ban on same gender marriages.

The question is- are you in favor of marriage equality in the United States- or against it?

The actual question is whether you favor redefining the meaning of a word or not?

Words are redefined- or more accurately have additional content added quite regularly.

The question is really simple- do you believe in marriage equality or not?

I suppose your correct. It seems that the legal term "illegal alien" that describes a non-citizen who entered the country illegally is now a "racist" code word instead of a legal term. Or maybe the definition is all in a persons mind and they just create their own personal reality. Blue is white, hot is cold, wet is dry, marriage is two men, etc. I'm kind of digging this whole words have no static meaning. It's all fluid and can be redesigned to each individual's liking. For instance, I think you're "smart"......but you do realize the term has been redefined, correct?

Words don't have a static meaning. If you asked for a fag 200 years ago imagine your surprise when it didn't turn out to be a homosexual male. And if you described yourself as 'gay' 100 years ago you would be having a jolly (and likely heterosexual) time.

But if all of that confuses you, I have a solution for you- it is called a dictionary.

The two standards are the Merriam Webster and the Oxford English Dictionary- both have versions online and available to anyone who is confused as to the definitions of words.

If you asked for a fag 200 years ago you would get a stack of firewood. If you asked for a fag 100 years ago you would get a cigarette.

And if you spoke of marriage 2000 years ago or 1000 years ago or 1 year ago, it would have meant the same thing to people across all societies. A man and a woman. You're talking about the name of inanimate objects, not a social tradition, folkway or more. Very different things. It's kind of like calling your male child your dog instead of your son.

 

[Skylar]

The actual question is whether you favor redefining the meaning of a word or not?

Words are redefined- or more accurately have additional content added quite regularly.

The question is really simple- do you believe in marriage equality or not?

I suppose your correct. It seems that the legal term "illegal alien" that describes a non-citizen who entered the country illegally is now a "racist" code word instead of a legal term. Or maybe the definition is all in a persons mind and they just create their own personal reality. Blue is white, hot is cold, wet is dry, marriage is two men, etc. I'm kind of digging this whole words have no static meaning. It's all fluid and can be redesigned to each individual's liking. For instance, I think you're "smart"......but you do realize the term has been redefined, correct?

Words don't have a static meaning. If you asked for a fag 200 years ago imagine your surprise when it didn't turn out to be a homosexual male. And if you described yourself as 'gay' 100 years ago you would be having a jolly (and likely heterosexual) time.

But if all of that confuses you, I have a solution for you- it is called a dictionary.

The two standards are the Merriam Webster and the Oxford English Dictionary- both have versions online and available to anyone who is confused as to the definitions of words.

If you asked for a fag 200 years ago you would get a stack of firewood. If you asked for a fag 100 years ago you would get a cigarette.

And if you spoke of marriage 2000 years ago or 1000 years ago or 1 year ago, it would have meant the same thing to people across all societies. A man and a woman. You're talking about the name of inanimate objects, not a social tradition, folkway or more. Very different things. It's kind of like calling your male child your dog instead of your son.

Except for roughly 1/3 of the world that recognizes polygamy. With the Bible citing numerous examples of such.

 

[Syriusly]

Once we get to be majority immigrant muslim it will be raining gays. Let nature take its course.

Is that what you really yearn for?

Because I hate to disillusion you....but we will never be 'majority immigrant muslims'.