waldo Posted February 5, 2012 Report Posted February 5, 2012 "SANTORUM" as defined by Dan Savage and hysterically supported by his like-minded fellow gays is their breakfast, lunch, dinner and snacks.No wonder they know so much about it. hysterical? Like-minded fellow gays? Is yours a personal anecdote; one sprinkled with your own familiarity? You know what they say about those who criticize the most/loudest...do tell. what do ted haggard and larry craig say?What Ted Haggard and Larry Craig says does not matter. Ask the person whose opinion DOES matter, the lover of brown sausages, Barney Frank.Or more locally, Scott Bryson or Svend Robinson. no, yours is the opinion being questioned and focused upon... yours is the opinion that, as you say, DOES matter. Again, you know what they say about those who criticize the most/loudest. Just come out, Yukon Jack... free yourself... unburden your feelings. Sure you can! Quote
-TSS- Posted February 11, 2012 Report Posted February 11, 2012 What man wouldn't wanna marry a younger woman? It's only human nature. Just like gay sex right? You guys should be more open-mined! Our president-elect here in Finland has a wife who is 29 years younger than him. He won the election beating a candidate who is gay and has a registered partnership with a man 20 years younger than him and coming from Ecuador. Quote
punked Posted February 11, 2012 Report Posted February 11, 2012 (edited) What man wouldn't wanna marry a younger woman? It's only human nature. Just like gay sex right? You guys should be more open-mined! Who wouldn't want to divorce his first wife while she has a cancer she will later die from and is on her death bed while your two children wait in the car right? Comparing Newt's marriages and his heartless cruel divorces to gay marriage is offensive to gay couples every where. Edited February 11, 2012 by punked Quote
-TSS- Posted February 11, 2012 Report Posted February 11, 2012 Indeed, I dislike Gingrich for his politics and everything he represents and stands for but if one wishes to dislike him for further reasons than that it is not difficult to find those reasons to dislike him. Actually, it is terrifying that there are millions of people who really think he'd make the best president of the alternatives on offer. Quote
Shady Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 Once again, I'm proven right. Federal judge allows polygamous family’s lawsuitA federal judge has ruled there’s sufficient evidence to allow a polygamous family made famous by a reality TV show to pursue a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of Utah’s bigamy law. Washington Post Like I said. If you're going to change the definition of marriage related to sex. Then there's no logical defense as to why it can't be changed further. Quote
waldo Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 Once again, I'm proven right. you were arguing with yourself, so... you'd always be right! by hey now, can this highlight on Utah, polygamy and Mormonism be good for your boy Mitt? Really? Quote
Yukon Jack Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 I agree polygamists face an uphill battle, but its not because of logic. They are swimming against the currents of prevailing social morality, and that morality often has nothing to do with logic. I personally find that most of the people against polygamy, dont really mind the concept of three concenting adults living together as a family... they are more concerned with the practical implications and the fact this arrangement seems to foster child abuse and spousal abuse. Anyhow youre certainly right that they have a much bigger hill to climb. My argument was more that the whole idea of "logic" as a driver of civil rights is flawed. Polygamy is THE wedge issue that Muslims can and almost certainly WILL use to hasten their quest to impose Sharia Law on an unsuspecting, or perhaps more correctly, a blind and tolerant North America. Polygamy is OK under Islam. Opposing any aspect of Islam is politically incorrect racism/xenophobia/anti-Islamism. Therefore, opposing polygamy is racist, xenophobic and anti-Islam, which can not be tolerated. Follow the logic. Expect the marriage laws change one more time. Then get the band saws ready to amputate the hand(s) of some hungry bum who stole a loaf of bread. Quote
Yukon Jack Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 (edited) Well, first, the courts don't make law. They interpret law, and they're an equal branch of government, not above them. And second, so you're saying that because the definition has been changed, in some states, regarding race, and now more recently regarding sex, that no further changes can be made? Why not? On what basis? In 1973 the Supreme Court of the United States made Roe vs. Wade a law. 50 million babies were legally butchered since then. Some of them may have become potential Einsteins, Mozarts, Shakespeares, Rubens's, or even Obama's. And let us not forget, taxpayers. You know, people to contribute towards the rapidly diminishing fund for Social Security. Edited February 13, 2012 by Yukon Jack Quote
Black Dog Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 In 1973 the Supreme Court of the United States made Roe vs. Wade a law. 50 million babies were legally butchered since then. Some of them may have become potential Einsteins, Mozarts, Shakespeares, Rubens's, or even Obama's. Or Hitlers, John Wayne Gacys or Yukon Jacks! What a terrible argument. Quote
waldo Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 Polygamy is OK under Islam. Opposing any aspect of Islam is politically incorrect racism/xenophobia/anti-Islamism.Therefore, opposing polygamy is racist, xenophobic and anti-Islam, which can not be tolerated. I trust your bogeyman will remain but a far-off imaginary projection of your own pent-up hostility Quote
Yukon Jack Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 Or Hitlers, John Wayne Gacys or Yukon Jacks! What a terrible argument. All of the above is better than Black Dog. Apologies to all legitimate black dogs. Quote
jbg Posted February 13, 2012 Author Report Posted February 13, 2012 Once again, I'm proven right. Like I said. If you're going to change the definition of marriage related to sex. Then there's no logical defense as to why it can't be changed further. I actually took the trouble to read the decision. What is really troubling is that Utah has 30,000 polygamous families and none are being prosecuted.The decision was solely on the issue of whether Kody Brown had the standing to challenge Utah's polygamy law's constitutionality. The Court did not decide there was enough evidence; only that Kody Brown was sufficiently threatened by prosecution that he could challenge the law. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
jbg Posted February 13, 2012 Author Report Posted February 13, 2012 All of the above is better than Black Dog. Apologies to all legitimate black dogs. Most breeds of "black dogs" such as Newfoundlands and Labrador Retrievers are extremely dangerous. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Black Dog Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 All of the above is better than Black Dog. Apologies to all legitimate black dogs. To think of all the innocent braincells that were aborted to make that post. A tragedy. Quote
Yukon Jack Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 I trust your bogeyman will remain but a far-off imaginary projection of your own pent-up hostility waldo, I have no pent-up hostility. The only time I swung a fist was when my fist held a hammer, doing volunteer work for Habitat for Humanity. But being a peaceful and content retiree does not preclude opinions and fears based on 73 years of life experience. Quote
Yukon Jack Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 Most breeds of "black dogs" such as Newfoundlands and Labrador Retrievers are extremely dangerous. I would like to believe that your claim that black Newfoundland dogs and Labrador retrievers are "extremely dangerous" was made in good natured jest. Quote
jbg Posted February 13, 2012 Author Report Posted February 13, 2012 In 1973 the Supreme Court of the United States made Roe vs. Wade a law.That was a Court decision, not a law. Unless you are intellectually challenged.50 million babies were legally butchered since then. Some of them may have become potential Einsteins, Mozarts, Shakespeares, Rubens's, or even Obama's.Those, by and large, are fetuses. There is a huge difference. Abortion before "quickening" was allowed at common law. I can see a problem with a termination at 36 or even 30 weeks. But at 12 weeks or less, give me a break. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Yukon Jack Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 To think of all the innocent braincells that were aborted to make that post. A tragedy. Thanks for your sympathy. I will make an effort to survive such tragedy. Quote
jbg Posted February 13, 2012 Author Report Posted February 13, 2012 I would like to believe that your claim that black Newfoundland dogs and Labrador retrievers are "extremely dangerous" was made in good natured jest. When have you seen one that wasn't? They attack with their tails as well as their teeth. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Black Dog Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 Thanks for your sympathy. I will make an effort to survive such tragedy. There can't be many left, best marshal your forces wisely. Quote
Yukon Jack Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 That was a Court decision, not a law. Unless you are intellectually challenged. Those, by and large, are fetuses. There is a huge difference. Abortion before "quickening" was allowed at common law. I can see a problem with a termination at 36 or even 30 weeks. But at 12 weeks or less, give me a break. Both of your comments are just picking at semantics. Good Bye! Quote
jbg Posted February 13, 2012 Author Report Posted February 13, 2012 (edited) Thanks for your sympathy. I will make an effort to survive such tragedy. Both of your comments are just picking at semantics. Good Bye! As shown by your posts on abortion you are either overwrought or a fundamentalist idiot. Edited February 13, 2012 by jbg Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Yukon Jack Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 As shown by your posts on abortion you are either overwrought or a fundamentalist idiot. I acquiesce! You are RIGHT!!! I am both! Thanks for the badge of honor you gave me! Perhaps next time you may make an effort to be less personally abusive. Quote
Yukon Jack Posted February 13, 2012 Report Posted February 13, 2012 There can't be many left, best marshal your forces wisely. I marshal all my forces wisely, answer all my detractors with polite courtesy and when you don't hear from me again I let you sink into your delusion that you won. Quote
jbg Posted February 13, 2012 Author Report Posted February 13, 2012 Perhaps next time you may make an effort to be less personally abusive. I apologize for the edge. Having a full day of work and a terminally ill close family member puts a bit of a strain on things. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.