Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 101

Thread: McCain Conceds.

  1. #81
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Sacramento, ca
    Posts
    2,426
    Images
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by x[flamer] View Post
    And lonewolf....I understand how why you voted yes on prop 8, but how did you vote on prop 22 in 2000? (22 was the other gay marriage ban, right?)
    I didn't vote in 2000.


    It just baffles me that the same people who presumably read their history books and say, "Wow, people sure were ass backwards back then! Slavery? Codified second class citizenship? What were they thinking?" can in the next moment ignore everything our society has learned to willfully support the oppression of another group of people
    This is an interesting comment. What about people and their pets? You know there are people out there that love their dogs terribly and would love to be married to them. Should we grant them this right? If so, then would dogs be able to get insurance, vote, make healthcare decisions regarding their spouse...etc? It is a stretch I know, but homosexuality is a deviation of the norm. Just like beastiality, pedophelia, or necrophelia...how would it be if we allowed someone to marry a corpse that they fell in love with? What if your neighbor fell in love with the tree in your front yard. By your reasoning, all these people should get these rights.

    You are going to have to draw the line somewhere, draw the line against the deviation, otherwise there is no end. Society has chosen to draw the line of the definition of marriage at a man and a woman. And as I said earlier, we are a nation built on the laws of the people. Once we start disregarding the will of the people, then all is moot.
    "....everyone wants to come to my house to RAGE."

  2. #82
    Quote Originally Posted by x[con] View Post
    Typical liberal condescention. Assuming a self superior attitude, then proceeds to "educate" people who don't agree with you instead of carrying on a rational debate with different view points. Same behavior we can observe from the religious fundamentalists.
    Sorry for pointing out the complete lack of logical thought in your argument.
    Well, maybe concealed carry law should be universally recognized under the constitution. That way you can get your homo marriage universally recognized. I think it's a fair trade.
    So, as long as you can have your gunzz you're okay with forcing new laws on neighboring states?
    Was it overturned by a single judge or was it by the legislature?
    If it corrects a heinous injustice, does it matter?
    It's easy to do that. No one is against civil unions with all the rights as marriages.
    Really? No one? Including full adoption rights? My guess is that the people of Arkansas, who just passed a ban on adoptions by "unmarried couples" (read: gays) might contest your assertion.
    I don't see the connection between interracial marriage and homo marriage. Interracial marriage is between a man and a woman. It satisfies the definition of marriage. Homo marriage does not satisfy the definition of marriage. You are welcome to try to change the definition.
    The fact that states are having to pass laws and amendments defining marriage as between one man and one woman would suggest that in many (if not most) places that is not the current legal definition.

    Again, you do realize that black slaves were once legally defined as property, yes? Legal definitions are subject to change, and as you've suggested the legal definition of marriage will be changed or defined nationally to reflect gay unions within 20 years, probably less.
    I want to claim "African American" on government forms. Can I do that? My ancestors came out of Africa too, just a few hundred thousand years before the recent slaves. You do believe Africa is the cradle of humanity, right? We all came out of Africa. Some of us earlier than others.
    What does this have to do with anything? You can start a new thread if you want to discuss PC ethnic terms.
    I agree. Times change. But the people have spoken, twice, on homo marriage. Shouldn't those different opinions count for something? To have a single judge throw out 2 legislative processes is what we call "tyranny of the minority."
    Hey, if the people want to discriminate, that's fine. The judicial branch will overrule them as they should, and history will look back on the people the same way we all look back on pre-civil rights era America -- with a certain amount of shame, disbelief, and disgust.

    p.s. keep calling it "homo marriage," it sounds especially tolerant.

  3. #83
    Quote Originally Posted by x[lonewolf] View Post
    This is an interesting comment. What about people and their pets? You know there are people out there that love their dogs terribly and would love to be married to them. Should we grant them this right? If so, then would dogs be able to get insurance, vote, make healthcare decisions regarding their spouse...etc? It is a stretch I know, but homosexuality is a deviation of the norm. Just like beastiality, pedophelia, or necrophelia...how would it be if we allowed someone to marry a corpse that they fell in love with? What if your neighbor fell in love with the tree in your front yard. By your reasoning, all these people should get these rights.
    My, what a slippery slope! Why do people still use this argument?

    - An animal cannot enter into a legally binding agreement
    - An inanimate object cannot enter into a legally binding agreement
    - A dead person cannot enter into a legally binding agreement
    - A child cannot enter into a legally binding agreement

    Did I miss any?
    You are going to have to draw the line somewhere, draw the line against the deviation, otherwise there is no end. Society has chosen to draw the line of the definition of marriage at a man and a woman. And as I said earlier, we are a nation built on the laws of the people. Once we start disregarding the will of the people, then all is moot.
    Societal norms are in constant flux. It was once considered a criminal deviation from the norm for white people to have sexual relationships with black people. Gay sex was once (and recently) considered a criminal deviation from the norm. Now both concepts are considered fairly mainstream.

    Society once "drew the line" at interracial marriage, and it was the courts, not the people, who corrected it. Do you have a problem with that? Or would you have rather seen another 10-20 years go by until society came around on its own?

  4. #84
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Sacramento, ca
    Posts
    2,426
    Images
    22
    good points, yet....if its only about a legally binding agreement then a civil union would suffice, yes?
    and why can't a dog enter into a binding agreement? Are you saying that animals can't love? they can put their paw to paper, they can show affection and love....
    Do you want me to think up something that isn't human that someone can enter into a legally binding contract with? Seems arbitrary, but ok.
    How about a corporation? They can enter into a legally binding contract. What if a person and a corporation want to get married? We can pick at each other all day long, and I really hope you have a better arguement than that. You are right, OH MY! what a slippery slope. You let one in and you have to let them all. It is a good argument, and it is still waiting on a valid counterpoint.

    The terms of a "legally binding agreement" are written by man and as you constantly point out, can be changed.

    The truth of the matter is is that the gay community is a large minority, and the only reason any of this is coming to light is because they have the finances and the lobbyists to back them up. The smaller/less wealthy minorities (not specifically races) will still be oppressed. It is how it is, it is how it has always been and always will be. We will never live in a place where a minority isn't oppressed, whether it be by race, sexual orientation, height, weight, age.....fucking whatever.

    The people with the biggest stick and most funding always get heard and their cause always becomes the most righteous
    Last edited by x[lonedub]; 11-12-2008 at 11:42 PM. Reason: another thought...
    "....everyone wants to come to my house to RAGE."

  5. #85
    Quote Originally Posted by x[lonewolf] View Post
    good points, yet....if its only about a legally binding agreement then a civil union would suffice, yes?
    No, it wouldn't, which I've already explained multiple times. Gay couples want full equality. You say, if they're the same why can't they be called something different? To which I would say, if they are the same thing, why shouldn't we call them the same name? You are forcing a distinction where one need not exist.
    and why can't a dog enter into a binding agreement? Are you saying that animals can't love? they can put their paw to paper, they can show affection and love....
    Give me a call when dogs as a species can show clear intent and are competent to stand trial.
    Do you want me to think up something that isn't human that someone can enter into a legally binding contract with? Seems arbitrary, but ok.
    How about a corporation? They can enter into a legally binding contract. What if a person and a corporation want to get married?
    A corporation is a legally-recognized entity which represents a person's or people's enterprise. If I make an agreement with a corporation, I am making an agreement with a person or group of people. The concept of "Wal*Mart" isn't going to prosecute me on its own if I'm stealing DVDs from its stores.

    We can pick at each other all day long, and I really hope you have a better arguement than that. You are right, OH MY! what a slippery slope. You let one in and you have to let them all. It is a good argument, and it is still waiting on a valid counterpoint.
    You still have yet to give a valid example of who "them all" is.

    The terms of a "legally binding agreement" are written by man and as you constantly point out, can be changed.
    You're right, I can definitely foresee a day where after dropping a rock off a cliff I'm standing trial for rock murder, apologizing to a pile of rocks for the senseless slaying of their kin.

    The truth of the matter is is that the gay community is a large minority, and the only reason any of this is coming to light is because they have the finances and the lobbyists to back them up. The smaller/less wealthy minorities (not specifically races) will still be oppressed. It is how it is, it is how it has always been and always will be. We will never live in a place where a minority isn't oppressed, whether it be by race, sexual orientation, height, weight, age.....fucking whatever.

    The people with the biggest stick and most funding always get heard and their cause always becomes the most righteous
    Uh oh, finiancial backing and lobbyists! It's all a vast left wing conspiracy!

    You show me another minority group that has a valid claim of legal oppression (I can't think of any off the top of my head) and I'll support their cause too.

  6. #86
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Fountain Valley, CA
    Posts
    518
    Images
    14
    How many African Americans voted YES on prop 8? And how many African Americans voted for Obama?

    Sounds like there might of been a problem there.

    Is it just me or does it seem that now after the election is over things are seeming more scary by the day with Obama getting ready for office?

    I read about his bad ass universal health care plan. Sounds awesome that by the year 2018 we will be paying 1 trillion a year on it. That's a RAD plan.

    Before people would have to get a job and work for their benefits for them and their family. Which in turn helps the economy build a stronger work force.

    I thought we wanted change? Clinton's old adviser? CHANGE?! Didn't that already happen.. I don't really blame him for that because he does face a fucked up economy. But still I think America was looking for fresh meat.

    I'm just sayin.. I'm no pro at this and I'm sure some Billy bad ass will call me a retard for having a opinion.

    P.S.

    trying to stray away from all the gay talk.. it's over.
    Signature

  7. #87
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    1,282
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by x[codered] View Post
    How many African Americans voted YES on prop 8? And how many African Americans voted for Obama?

    Sounds like there might of been a problem there.

    Is it just me or does it seem that now after the election is over things are seeming more scary by the day with Obama getting ready for office?

    I read about his bad ass universal health care plan. Sounds awesome that by the year 2018 we will be paying 1 trillion a year on it. That's a RAD plan.

    Before people would have to get a job and work for their benefits for them and their family. Which in turn helps the economy build a stronger work force.

    I thought we wanted change? Clinton's old adviser? CHANGE?! Didn't that already happen.. I don't really blame him for that because he does face a fucked up economy. But still I think America was looking for fresh meat.

    I'm just sayin.. I'm no pro at this and I'm sure some Billy bad ass will call me a retard for having a opinion.

    P.S.

    trying to stray away from all the gay talk.. it's over.
    Code's advice to a person going through cancer treatment that doesn't have health insurance: "Just get a job! It will build a stronger work force!"

  8. #88
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Fountain Valley, CA
    Posts
    518
    Images
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by x[flamer] View Post
    Code's advice to a person going through cancer treatment that doesn't have health insurance: "Just get a job! It will build a stronger work force!"
    Yep, cause we don't help those people with our current plan. /sarcasm


    Edit: before you come back with another smart ass remark. I had cancer with no benefits, guess what happened with that?
    Last edited by x[codered]; 11-13-2008 at 01:54 PM.
    Signature

  9. #89
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Mission Bay Park
    Posts
    1,822
    Images
    35
    YES!!

    An Intelligent man as president!

    FUCK YEAH!!!!!

  10. #90
    57 states in the union....


    I just punched a hurricane! WOOOOO!!!!

  11. #91
    Quote Originally Posted by x[ninjax] View Post
    57 states in the union....
    I've been having a great time this election cycle watching Drudge, Hannity, Rush, Bill-O, and the x[clan] right-wingers grasp at straws and flail around trying to find something to get worked up over.

  12. #92
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Fountain Valley, CA
    Posts
    518
    Images
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by cosyg View Post
    I've been having a great time this election cycle watching Drudge, Hannity, Rush, Bill-O, and the x[clan] right-wingers grasp at straws and flail around trying to find something to get worked up over.

    You left wingers don't get worked up at all.....
    Signature

  13. #93
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    DPRK, Democratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    4,297
    Images
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by cosyg View Post
    Sorry for pointing out the complete lack of logical thought in your argument.
    There it is again. Those who don't agree with you lack logic. You aren't interested in a debate or discussion. You are out to impose your will on other people. Why go through the charade of an election? Just admit that you would like to rule by decree, to hell with the people.

    Quote Originally Posted by cosyg View Post
    So, as long as you can have your gunzz you're okay with forcing new laws on neighboring states?
    Yep.

    Quote Originally Posted by cosyg View Post
    If it corrects a heinous injustice, does it matter?
    Not everyone thinks it's a heinous injustice.

    Quote Originally Posted by cosyg View Post
    Really? No one? Including full adoption rights? My guess is that the people of Arkansas, who just passed a ban on adoptions by "unmarried couples" (read: gays) might contest your assertion.
    I thought we're talking about California? Now we're talking about Arkansas?

    I bet if you put forth a legislation that says civil unions for homos have all the rights under the law as marriages for heteros, it will pass overwhelmingly in California. I am not against such a measure.

    Quote Originally Posted by cosyg View Post
    The fact that states are having to pass laws and amendments defining marriage as between one man and one woman would suggest that in many (if not most) places that is not the current legal definition.

    Again, you do realize that black slaves were once legally defined as property, yes? Legal definitions are subject to change, and as you've suggested the legal definition of marriage will be changed or defined nationally to reflect gay unions within 20 years, probably less.
    Then change the definition. We had a legislative process that defined marriage as between a man and a woman. People voted on it. And it was reaffirmed. You can't just have a judge throw out the will of the people. What kind of democracy is this? Why bother with a vote if we know what the outcome is already?

    Quote Originally Posted by cosyg View Post
    What does this have to do with anything? You can start a new thread if you want to discuss PC ethnic terms.
    It has to do with the "definition" of the term. Especially when we're talking about a state issued marriage license. That carries weight in the courtrooms. Words have meanings. A legal definition has to be very definite and very precise.

    Have you ever been on a jury? Before deliberation, the judge passes out a packet defining all the terms in very precise legal definition. Marriage is a legal term. It is defined in the books, right now, as a union between a man and a woman. You can't just apply your own view to it. If you don't agree with it, change it through legal process. We have the process in place. The same process that defined it as it is right now.

    Quote Originally Posted by cosyg View Post
    Hey, if the people want to discriminate, that's fine. The judicial branch will overrule them as they should, and history will look back on the people the same way we all look back on pre-civil rights era America -- with a certain amount of shame, disbelief, and disgust.
    Then let them. At least we should adhere to our process. Anything else you might as well just rule by decree. You of all people should be open-minded about other people's view points. So far it looks like you have your mind made up already.

    Just out of curiosity, have you ever changed your view points on any issues at all in your lifetime? If not, are you as open-minded as you think you are? Right now you sound like the catholic church, ruling over medieval Europe by decree. What the pope says, goes. To hell with the people's wishes.

    Hell, even the church changed a doctrine recently. It finally admitted that the earth goes around the sun.

    Quote Originally Posted by cosyg View Post
    p.s. keep calling it "homo marriage," it sounds especially tolerant.
    Homo marriage as in homo sexual marriage. Homo is not a derogatory term. It means "the same." We are homo sapiens. I don't use gay because the word means "happy," not homo sexual.

    You will never hear me refer to Obama as black. I will never refer to Jesse Jackson as African American.

    Words have meanings. I am very careful with the words I choose.
    Trust me. I know what I am doing.

    -- Sledge Hammer

  14. #94
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Fountain Valley, CA
    Posts
    518
    Images
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by x[con] View Post
    There it is again. Those who don't agree with you lack logic. You aren't interested in a debate or discussion. You are out to impose your will on other people. Why go through the charade of an election? Just admit that you would like to rule by decree, to hell with the people.
    That's exactly the way I've seen it all election long, not just with with him but all the democrats who posted on these boards.
    Signature

  15. #95
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Sacramento, ca
    Posts
    2,426
    Images
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by x[codered] View Post
    That's exactly the way I've seen it all election long, not just with with him but all the democrats who posted on these boards.

    second.
    "....everyone wants to come to my house to RAGE."

  16. #96
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Vista, CA
    Posts
    2,134
    Images
    2
    Welcome to partisan politics!
    Most discussions result in personal attacks... from both sides.
    x[dmitri]
    Why are we here?
    Because we are here.
    Roll the bones.

  17. #97
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Sacramento, ca
    Posts
    2,426
    Images
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by x[dmitri] View Post
    ....from both sides.

    just the way ninjax's mom likes it
    "....everyone wants to come to my house to RAGE."

  18. #98
    Quote Originally Posted by x[lonewolf] View Post
    just the way ninjax's mom likes it
    wtf


    I just punched a hurricane! WOOOOO!!!!

  19. #99
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Sacramento, ca
    Posts
    2,426
    Images
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by x[ninjax] View Post
    wtf
    rofl
    "....everyone wants to come to my house to RAGE."

  20. #100
    hahahh your avatar is so pale. to bad you cant make him red, so he would look more like u.


    I just punched a hurricane! WOOOOO!!!!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Loooong McCain article
    By x[fragnome] in forum Political / Religious B.S.
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-13-2008, 11:10 AM
  2. An Ugly Fact About McCain
    By x[adambomb] in forum Political / Religious B.S.
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 10-03-2008, 10:28 AM
  3. If McCain Wins... USA is pretty fuxed, IMO
    By Hydrus in forum Political / Religious B.S.
    Replies: 110
    Last Post: 08-17-2008, 11:09 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •