|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: Landmark gay marriage trial starts today in California | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Artemis Entreri  Suspended Member (Idle past 4219 days) Posts: 1194 From: Northern Virginia Joined: |
are you equating people who are against the judge's desicion on prop 8 to genocidial dictators? I hope not, cause that would be funny logic on your part.
Well, we'll just ship them back to mexico and they can discriminate their own gheys.
The Mexicans and Mexican Americans have been in California since California WAS part of Mexico. Now if you want to give California back to Mexico, then I may agree with you, but shipping people who have lived in the area for hundreds of years, to a land to the south because the current land was stolen from the nation to the south seems a bit odd, especially after all these years.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Artemis Entreri  Suspended Member (Idle past 4219 days) Posts: 1194 From: Northern Virginia Joined: |
the black communities and mexican communities jump off a cliff who hits the ground first?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Artemis Entreri  Suspended Member (Idle past 4219 days) Posts: 1194 From: Northern Virginia Joined: |
Oh Joy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Artemis Entreri  Suspended Member (Idle past 4219 days) Posts: 1194 From: Northern Virginia Joined: |
What the Fuck are you talking about.
I said joy, as in I am HAPPY FOR THEM you want to talk about trolls, roflmfao. I say something positive and all you can see is red. sometimes i think you are retarded.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Artemis Entreri  Suspended Member (Idle past 4219 days) Posts: 1194 From: Northern Virginia Joined: |
Gollum is riverfolk, leave it to you to not even know what a troll looks like.
so ignorant
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Artemis Entreri  Suspended Member (Idle past 4219 days) Posts: 1194 From: Northern Virginia Joined: |
That's it? Something that has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with "the debate"? anytime you can slander the right or the republicans, it is ALWAYS on topic and acceptable here @ EvC. you should know that double standard by now.
She's a Republican. She's supposed to oppose same-sex marriage. That's her party-culture's requirement of her, if not her party's. But instead of being a typical party tool, she decided to be a Mensch, a genuine person. She spoke from her heart and her heart told her plainly and clearly that this hatred against love is wrong. i disagree, I don't think being a republican means you have to be against two people who love each other getting married.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Artemis Entreri  Suspended Member (Idle past 4219 days) Posts: 1194 From: Northern Virginia Joined: |
LOL when the truth comes out it's time to get into semantics.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Artemis Entreri  Suspended Member (Idle past 4219 days) Posts: 1194 From: Northern Virginia Joined: |
everywhere in most threads if you can't see it i doubt i can show it too you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Artemis Entreri  Suspended Member (Idle past 4219 days) Posts: 1194 From: Northern Virginia Joined: |
Unless we're talking about throwing rice at a gay wedding, I don't see how this is on topic. You mean like this post above?
Maybe you can find a thread dedicated to "liberal commie" bashing and take it there, m'kay? Or off topic like this post? Stop wasting space!!!! LOL
Theodoric writes: Link to original source. The problem with that data is that it is national. Marriage is a STATE issue, it always has been. What the majority of the population thinks across the country is irrelevant.
Theodoric writes:
Seriously?
Simply a lie. Please show an overwhelming vote against gay marriage.
Pink - Statute bans same-sex marriage (9 states) Red - Constitution bans same-sex marriage (8 states) Dark Red - Constitution bans same-sex marriage and some or all other kinds of same-sex unions (18) If you really want to I am sure I can look up polls and surveys in those 18 dark red states and find plenty of data where there is an overwhelming vote against gay marriage. While it is not overwhelming (I like how you used a word that you get to decide what it means), Here in Virginia we became a dark red state: http://www.washingtonpost.com/...11/05/10/AFIy0lhG_blog.html
A: This has to be either a poor attempt at you playing some sort of Devils Advocate or you're trolling. You've always seemed at least somewhat open-minded. LOLYou just can’t disagree with us and if you do then you are a troll and you are close minded!!! Does anyone else see the hilarity of the consequences of having a different opinion than hooah?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Artemis Entreri  Suspended Member (Idle past 4219 days) Posts: 1194 From: Northern Virginia Joined: |
Except when it isn't. See Loving vs. Virginia. Especially when it is. See: the Defense of Marriage Act.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Artemis Entreri  Suspended Member (Idle past 4219 days) Posts: 1194 From: Northern Virginia Joined: |
So you mention a federal law, defining how the federal government recognizes marriage, to support your claim that it's a state matter. Curious. I know its difficult for one such as yourself to understand but the federal law grants states their powers, as it is composed of the states. It's okay civics aint for everyone.
I suppose you were instead referring to that totally meaningless pandering part of the Destruction of Marriage Act where Congress purports to tell the states that they don't have to recognize marriages from other states that they don't like. That was meaningless because the Full Faith and Credit Clause doesn't require states to recognize acts of other states that contravene their public policy. It was also meaningless because Congress doesn't have the authority to restrict the effect of the Full Faith and Credit Clause in the first place. No I was talking about the whole thing. how it defines marriage as something that is not same sex, and reaffirm full faith and credit.
What's more, nothing in DOMA contradicts the fact that states are not free to enact statutes relating to marriage that are unconstitutional, which was my point when I mentioned Loving v. Virginia. funny then, that many states have it in their state constitutions, what the definition of marriage is. It is kind of hard to be unconstitutional when it is in your constitution.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Artemis Entreri  Suspended Member (Idle past 4219 days) Posts: 1194 From: Northern Virginia Joined: |
yeah I thought not.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Artemis Entreri  Suspended Member (Idle past 4219 days) Posts: 1194 From: Northern Virginia Joined: |
look at how y'all talk about the opposition, do you want to change hearts and minds or just tell people what to do? (the answer is obvious from reading this thread)
I know I know you are right about everything and those who disagree are morons. nothing new same old liberals.
nonukes writes: We still have politicians in power who believe that the civil rights act of 1964 should never have been enacted. well it is not constitutional as much as it is politically correct. The 1964 Act is significant because it marks a time were feel-good politically correct policies begin to outweigh the constitution, and no one cares. It is a catch 22, because in defending the constitution one becomes a racist. so what is more important, doing the right thing, or not being called names? Edited by Artemis Entreri, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Artemis Entreri  Suspended Member (Idle past 4219 days) Posts: 1194 From: Northern Virginia Joined: |
you don't either.
everything you accuse me of you are also guilty of, talk about telling.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Artemis Entreri  Suspended Member (Idle past 4219 days) Posts: 1194 From: Northern Virginia Joined: |
I thought that was because JFK?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024