"Lamont Cranston" <Lamont.Cranston@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in crayon...
>VRWC Destruction Machine wrote:
>> fargo116 <fargo116@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in crayon...
>>
>>>On May 19, 6:55 am, VRWC Destruction Machine <Right...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>>wrote:
>>>> fargo116 <fargo...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in crayon...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> >On May 17, 1:23 pm, VRWC Destruction Machine <Right...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>>> >wrote:
>>>> >> "Lamont Cranston" <Lamont.Crans...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
>>>> >> crayon...
>>>>
>>>> >> >VRWC Destruction Machine wrote:
>>>> >> >> fargo116 <fargo...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in crayon...
>>>>
>>>> >> >>>On May 15, 11:31 am, The Pope Wears Prada
>>>> >> >>><The_Pope@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>> >> >>>> Winston Smith, American Patriot wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >> >>>> > What does America think about? God, gays, and guns.
>>>>
>>>> >> >>>> > This ruling of the court is going to hurt Obama for
>>>> >> >>>> > November.
>>>>
>>>> >> >>>> How will this ruling by a *conservative* California Supreme
>>>> >> >>>> Court possibly hurt Obama in November?
>>>>
>>>> >> >>>> > Too many Americans still believe that homo***uality is a
>>>> >> >>>> > chosen rather
>>>> >> >>>> > than innate/instinctive behavior, and thus subject to
>>>> >> >>>> > moral judgment.
>>>>
>>>> >> >>>> > McCain will express indignation, maybe outrage, at the
>>>> >> >>>> > court's decision, while Obama will applaud it or at least
>>>> >> >>>> > remain silent about it. It's your call.
>>>>
>>>> >> >>>> > ============
>>>>
>>>> >> >>>> > California Supreme Court Overturns Gay Marriage Ban
>>>>
>>>> >> >>>> > By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
>>>> >> >>>> > Published: May 15, 2008
>>>>
>>>> >> >>>> > SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- The California Supreme Court has
>>>> >> >>>> > overturned a ban on gay marriage, paving the way for
>>>> >> >>>> > California to become the second state where gay and
>>>> >> >>>> > lesbian residents can marry.
>>>>
>>>> >> >>>> > The justices released the 4-3 decision Thursday, saying
>>>> >> >>>> > that domestic partner****ps are not a good enough
>>>> >> >>>> > substitute for marriage in an opinion written by Chief
>>>> >> >>>> > Justice Ron George.
>>>>
>>>> >> >>>> > The cases were brought by the city of San Francisco, two
>>>> >> >>>> > dozen gay and lesbian couples, Equality California and
>>>> >> >>>> > another gay rights group in March 2004 after the court
>>>> >> >>>> > halted San Francisco's monthlong same-*** wedding march
>>>> >> >>>> > that took place at Mayor Gavin Newsom's direction.
>>>>
>>>> >> >>>>
>http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-CA-GayMarriage.html-Hide
>>>> >> >>>> >quoted text -
>>>>
>>>> >> >>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>>
>>>> >> >>>Winston, nobody really gives a damn about homo***uals
>>>> >> >>>marrying except maybe the Crazies in the South who are going
>>>> >> >>>to be too busy sitting on their hands to vote for Gramps.
>>>> >> >>>They are more concerned about losing their house, losing
>>>> >> >>>their job, affortding a tank of gas and affording to go to
>>>> >> >>>the doctor right about now. Never mind thousands of their
>>>> >> >>>kids getting killed and more than half a trillion dollars of
>>>> >> >>>their money thrown away.
>>>>
>>>> >> >>>S. Olson
>>>>
>>>> >> >> Oh. Does 60% of the electorate live in the South?
>>>>
>>>> >> >Uh, no. Why do you ask?
>>>>
>>>> >> Did you read the post I was responding to?
>>>>
>>>> >> >> Is California part
>>>> >> >> of the South?
>>>>
>>>> >> >Uh, no. Why do you ask?
>>>>
>>>> >> Did you read the post I was responding to?
>>>>
>>>> >> >> 62% of Californian voters voted against homo***ual
>>>> >> >> marriages.
>>>>
>>>> >> >62% of California voters were just told that they have no right
>>>> >> >to deny homo***uals the right to marry.
>>>>
>>>> >> By four judges. Judicial activism is at work.
>>>>
>>>> >> >> What does queer nuptials have to do with gas, jobs, homes,
>>>> >> >> health insurance or the Iraq War?
>>>>
>>>> >> >Fargo already told you. There are people in this country,
>>>> >> >primarily in the South, who consider same *** marriage to
>>>> >> >threaten their well being more than gas prices, job losses,
>>>> >> >home losses, the absence of health insurance, and the Iraq war.
>>>>
>>>> >> That why I responded to Fargo with his inane post. He didn't
>>>> >> respond and your response lacks substance.
>>>>
>>>> >You really didn't 'respond' WC. Except maybe to pretend you're a
>>>> >fool because there seems to be this weird idea going around in
>>>> >connie circles that pretending to be stupid makes you look smart.
>>>>
>>>> >Newsflash: It just makes you look stupid.
>>>>
>>>> >S. Olson
>>>>
>>>> Your comment I was responding to was idiotic.
>>>>
>>>> >>nobody really gives a damn about homo***uals marrying except
>>>> >>maybe the Crazies in the South
>>>>
>>>> That line was just stupid. I asked if California was in the South
>>>> because 62% of the voters voted against homo***ual marriages. What's
>>>> wrong do you have short term memory loss that you don't remember
>>>> what you wrote?
>>>
>>>Give us a break, WC. We all know you wrote it because you think
>>>pretending to be stupid makes you look smart, a weird freaking notion
>>>the connies have adopted because they pretend not to understand irony.
>>>At least for all out sakes I HOPE they are pretending.
>>>
>>>For example, how come you never point out that that 62% figure was
>>>before the collapse of the housing market, before we lost more than
>>>4,000 kids in Iraq, before the Drunken Frat Boy wasted more than half
>>>a trillion bucks in the wrong country and before we went into a
>>>recession?
>>>
>>>> Health care and the war in Iraq has nothing to do queers getting
>>>> married.
>>>
>>>Only in that more people care about such things than people who care
>>>about homo***uals getting married. They simply do. You wanna ride such
>>>a platform, go ahead. See how many GOP cocksuckers outside of the
>>>South it gets elected.
>>>
>>>It always amazes me how GOP cocksuckers can scream "leave us alone,"
>>>on one hand and decree which consenting adults can get married on the
>>>other. Typical.
>>>
>>>S. Olson
>>>
>> Marriage is between a man and a woman.
>
>Not in Mass. and Cal.
The California State Supreme Court changed the California
Constitution. They twisted the Constitution to fit their girly-man
agenda. The California Constitution forbids discrimination on the
basis of "***, race, creed, color, or national or ethnic origin." It
does not include ***ual orientation. The justices ruled that ***ual
orientation is covered in the discrimination clause. Wrong. For that,
an amendment to California's Constitution is needed to define ***ual
orientation.
California already has a domestic partner****p law. The justices did
homo***uals a disservice by usurping the Constitutional rights of the
California voter. There's a movement now to amend the California
Constitution next November. Twenty-six states have approved
constitutional amendments banning same-*** marriage. Courts in New
York, Maryland and Wa****ngton state have refused to allow gay
marriage. New Jersey’s highest court gave the state lawmakers the
option of establi****ng civil unions as an alternative.
Hollyweird will have to put any plans for a Gay Newlywed Game on hold
until the next election.
-
I thank God I am not a liberal because I hate Kool Aid.
|
