| Name: |
GoneFishin
- 
|
|
| Subject: |
CLINT and I Agree
|
|
Date:
|
9/20/2012 8:49:52 PM
|
Wow gay marriage and Clint Eastwood............too bad the Right wants individual freedoms as long as they can define those freedoms. Bunch of hypocrites.
Clint Eastwood isn’t exactly for gay marriage, but he isn’t exactly against it either. The Hollywood legend told Ellen Degeneres yesterday that who you marry should be none of the government’s business.
Eastwood said: “It’s a part of the libertarian idea: Leave everybody alone!”
The actor-director went on to say that the United States is facing some serious problems right now and that politicians are wasting too much time discussing gay marriage.
Eastwood said: “The condition of society right now with the high unemployment rates, and the tremendous debt increasing, and the government spending, you’d think there’d be a lot to think about, except worrying about what gay marriage is about.”
OBAMA 2012
|
| Name: |
MrHodja
-
|
|
| Subject: |
CLINT and I Agree
|
|
Date:
|
9/20/2012 9:54:59 PM
|
"Eastwood said: “The condition of society right now with the high unemployment rates, and the tremendous debt increasing, and the government spending, you’d think there’d be a lot to think about, except worrying about what gay marriage is about.”
Typical liberal idiotic post. Gloss over the three lions in the room and celebrate the single pissant. You go, goofy.
|
| Name: |
wix
-
|
|
| Subject: |
You seem obsessed by the gay marriage issue
|
|
Date:
|
9/20/2012 10:15:07 PM
|
Something you wanna tell us?
ABO 2012
|
| Name: |
GoneFishin
-
|
|
| Subject: |
You seem obsessed by the gay marriage issue
|
|
Date:
|
9/20/2012 10:25:33 PM
|
What do you want to know? You always seem to be afraid to ask the real question. Kinda like always hiding under your mom's apron. Go for it stud.
|
| Name: |
GoneFishin
-
|
|
| Subject: |
[Message deleted by author]
|
|
Date:
|
9/20/2012 10:25:34 PM (updated 9/20/2012 10:26:03 PM)
|
|
| Name: |
MartiniMan
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Not a flip flopper like your Messiah
|
|
Date:
|
9/21/2012 8:43:12 AM
|
At least he wasn't for gay marriage before he was against gay marriage before he was for gay marriage like TOTUS. Honestly GF, what we oppose is the activist homosexual movement USING the federal government and the courts to change the definition of marriage. There is nothing hypocritical about that my friend. I, like most conservatives, could could less what 2% of the population do in the privacy of their bedrooms. But when they march on the streets, bully or bribe politicians and use the federal courts to jam their demented agenda down our throats we are dang sure going to fight back. And that fight is in the federal arena because that's where the gays took it, just like the abortion issue.
Your ignorance of issues like this and their genesis is really frightening.
|
| Name: |
Summer Lover
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Who
|
|
Date:
|
9/21/2012 9:48:55 AM
|
Do you think is granted the right to define marriage, and why do they have that right? The Government should not be involved in telling adults how to live if their way of life does not impact others. The "alternative lifestyle" community is a very small percentage of our population, how do they impact the rest of us? If your answer is "economically; because WE would have to pay more out in benefits", where do you draw the line on who SHOULD be allowed to receive those bennies?
|
| Name: |
Summer Lover
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Are you
|
|
Date:
|
9/21/2012 9:55:55 AM
|
Gay, straight, bi, transgender, a cross-dresser, someone like Clinton who smoked but did not swallow or just a super freak? How about that? Personally, what you do is not our business - but fear is a big driver (so to speak) for those who do not tolerate people who are not like them. Of course, there are many straight people who have their blinders on and do not see anything anyway...
|
| Name: |
MartiniMan
-
|
|
| Subject: |
God defined the term marriage
|
|
Date:
|
9/21/2012 10:16:41 AM
|
and a small percentage of our population that adheres to an alternate lifestyle is trying to change that definition. And they are trying to use the power of the government to enforce that change on the rest of us. So we have to fight them in the arena of their choosing. This is a fight started by someone else and for some reason, and we all know what that is, it is falsely claimed to be somehow our fault.
|
| Name: |
Summer Lover
-
|
|
| Subject: |
God defined the term marriage
|
|
Date:
|
9/21/2012 11:03:28 AM
|
If God defined marriage, then the Christians are ALREADY forcing their definition of marriage on everyone else, how is striking that interference to be viewed as anything other than the proper thing to do? We are supposed to have freedom of and from religion in this country, and yet you advocate letting that freedom slide?
|
| Name: |
MartiniMan
-
|
|
| Subject: |
God defined the term marriage
|
|
Date:
|
9/21/2012 12:36:02 PM
|
On this note you are both right and wrong. When I refer to the definition of marriage I am not referring to Christianity. I am referring to natural law. In every society marriage, or whatever they called it, was the union of one man and one woman. This is written on our hearts by our Creator. No one but gay activists are forcing anyone to accept anything. We are responding to an attack on the institution in the arena of the opponents choosing (federal level). You really need to see this as the battle that it is and recognize that it is a defensive action and not an offensive one. How about asking the gay activists why in fact they are trying to force upon society their desires, especially since they represent less than 3% of the population?
This whole canard about Christians wanting to get into the bedroom of gays is completely false. They are trying to reorder society and mankind's history in order to satisfy their disordered desire for acceptance, even forced acceptance at the point of a gun of they could get their way.
|
| Name: |
GoneFishin
-
|
|
| Subject: |
God defined the term marriage
|
|
Date:
|
9/21/2012 12:50:23 PM
|
“But when they march on the streets, bully or bribe politicians and use the federal courts to jam their demented agenda down our throats we are dang sure going to fight back.”
This is 2012 not 1964. The Constitution is designed to direct government in what it can and can't do and not to limit peoples freedoms. The primary goal of Government is to protect the freedoms of the people, not restrict and segment populations' rights.
Guess in your view it only protects the freedoms that you approve. A rather myopic view of our great form of government.
|
| Name: |
MartiniMan
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Complete hogwash
|
|
Date:
|
9/21/2012 1:14:06 PM
|
Your distortion of what I am saying is complete nonsense. Apparently you are not only math challenged but literacy challenged as well. My point is that gay activists are using the power of the federal government through whatever means and those of us that support marriage for what it is are forced to engage in the battle in the arena of their choice. I could care less what they do but to cast their actions in the light of some virtue and opponents in the light of intolerance and hatred is complete and abject crap.
There is no virtue in what they want. They want to force every person to accept their bizarre sexual attraction and to somehow gain legitimacy by recasting it as something it can never be, And they do so by all the means I described and they are free to do so. But don't tell me I can't do likewise and to do so I am forcing my beliefs on them. It is the other way around and only the intellectually vapid could not see that is the case.
|
| Name: |
Summer Lover
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Well
|
|
Date:
|
9/21/2012 1:19:36 PM
|
"In every society marriage, or whatever they called it, was the union of one man and one woman."
Not quite - I seem to recall hearing about a small group of people; a religion actually; that condones a marriage that includes more than two people - and with very few exceptions, most citizens are either male or female. I also believe that if there is a God or gods, that there are some people who are hardwired to be a member of that 3%, and that it would be very difficult for them to pretend to be straight. Our laws are driven by religious/moral beliefs, not natural law anyway.
|
| Name: |
Summer Lover
-
|
|
| Subject: |
I guess
|
|
Date:
|
9/21/2012 1:29:29 PM
|
You would have stood next to Gov. Wallace on the steps of "The University". The fight of the gays today is no different than the battles that faced blacks in the sixties, or women fighting for suffrage early this century. I do not think they are fighting for any special privileges, just equality.
|
| Name: |
MartiniMan
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Well
|
|
Date:
|
9/21/2012 2:06:17 PM
|
A small group of people does not constitute a culture. You are wrong about natural law and religious beliefs. How else can you explain the concept of marriage between one man and one woman existing in every culture for all of recorded history, even pagan cultures? Yes there are temporal and geographic deviations and there always will be. But that is the natural order and deviations cannot and will not ever change that natural order.
As for the hard wired comment, that of course opens up a whole can of worms that there is not enough forum ink to cover. But there are any number of studies that have found a correlation between homosexuality and other factors outside of genetics. And frankly lets hope they never find the gene because if they do it will create a whole new moral hazard.
|
| Name: |
MartiniMan
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Huh?!?!?
|
|
Date:
|
9/21/2012 2:16:06 PM
|
Hmmmm, I usually get this from libtards like Archie et al. when they realize that they can no longer handle my logic and reason. You should know better that the desire for homosexuals to redefine the definition of marriage has absolutely no correlation to the civil rights movement and for you to accuse me of being a fellow traveler with someone like Wallace is offensive and blatantly false. How about this idea, you go into a black church that believes in the traditional definition of marriage and tell them they are a bunch of George Wallace bigots. I suspect the reception will not be all that friendly.
That comparison is offensive to me and everyone that has a principled and legitimate opposition to gays redefining the term marriage. If you want to debate the merits I am all for it but resorting to ad hominum attacks lowers you to the level of the left wing nuts and I would never want to have you seen as a fellow traveler with them.
|
| Name: |
Summer Lover
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Sorry
|
|
Date:
|
9/21/2012 2:29:58 PM
|
You can stop throwing stuff now... As far as Wallace is concerned, I seem to recall that all was forgiven before he left office - the usual pandering tactic. Do you have friends that YOU will admit are gay - if so, maybe you should just talk to them, if not, maybe you need to look more closely.
|
| Name: |
MartiniMan
-
|
|
| Subject: |
No worries....
|
|
Date:
|
9/21/2012 2:37:17 PM
|
I have gay friends, gay employees and gay relatives. I get along with all of them because they know my views and they know that while I don't agree with their lifestyle choices I treat everyone the same and with respect. And you would be surprised how many gay people do not want to redefine marriage. They actually respect the intellectual basis for my opposition and disagree with the activist agenda. But like Muslims they are reluctant to speak out because they are attacked and demonized, much like pretty much every black conservative.
|
| Name: |
ecstasypoint
-
|
|
| Subject: |
No worries....
|
|
Date:
|
9/21/2012 3:40:44 PM
|
Do your "gay friends" feel respected when you inform them that their choice of lifepartner is a bizarre sexual perversion? Do they feel respected when you explain that your lifepartner is entitled to your social security benefits but theirs is not? I agree that some actvitists have miscast their cause by defining it as "marriage." What they should say is every person in this country should have the same rights regarding their life partners and children, even if that is no special rights for the hetero-normative majority in religious "marriage" arrangements. I have noted that those who get themselves the most wadded about gay partners having the same rights as straight partners are either on a power binge or they are a closet case. They usually readily admit that their God made some people gay. They know and "love" these people despite the fact that they use their most personal relationships as a jump board to spout their own superiority.
|
| Name: |
MartiniMan
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Sigh.......
|
|
Date:
|
9/21/2012 4:02:20 PM
|
Yet another ad hominum attack of someone that believes in the traditional meaning of marriage. Really small minded and intellectually vapid.
Well here's some news to you, given their sexual tastes they actually find mine bizarre as well. The difference is I am in the 97% to 98% and not the 2% to 3%. The intellectually honest gays understand this as well. But heck, why let a simple truth get in the way of a good insult?
Oh and I love the closet homo implication. Nice........ In my experience those that accuse others of being one are usually one themselves. How does that feel? I know, I have no basis for making this statement....I just made it up to insult you......but I learned it from the master...
Honestly, libtards are just so predictable and boring.......
|
| Name: |
ecstasypoint
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Sigh.......
|
|
Date:
|
9/21/2012 4:14:59 PM
|
yes, I am the master. I just thought you were on your usual power binge. haha. BTW I am neither a lib nor a tard. You are playing right into obama's hand. He knows the economy is in ruins and no one can say he has been a truly good president. But people with a sense of fairness and decency will still lean towards equality for all when it comes to a toss up between two terrible choices. I still don't think I can vote for him. But lots of independents have to give him that one point for at least giving air time to one of the defining issues of our time.
|
| Name: |
MartiniMan
-
|
|
| Subject: |
Right....
|
|
Date:
|
9/21/2012 4:27:17 PM
|
I know, you voted for Bush twice and you always agree with everything Rush Limbaugh says, but.......
I don't think you understand, I and every other American that loves this country and has a brain is not falling for anything. We wouldn't vote for TOTUS with a gun to our head.....oops, I should not have given the left wing nuts that idea....... Yes, their entire convention was about gay marriage, abortion, whacking OBL and anything else that could distract from their failed presidency. But we are not fooled. How else do you explain a virtual tie at this point in the game? Here's some bad news for you and the other Messiah sycophants (which includes 95% of the mainstream media), on average the challenger does 3%-4% better and the incumbent 1%-2% worse than polls of registered voters taken the month before the election. Hmmm...that puts Romney at 51 and Oblamer at 45% and still leaves the libertarians their 4% wasted votes.
Of course I still believe the Messiah has a better than even chance of being reelected but given his being an incumbent it is truly pathetic but totally understandable that it is so close. He will get his 47% and the morons in the middle that vote for him because of the abortion, gay marriage issues will have only themselves to blame when after another four years of his incompetence they are out of a job, seeing their net worth continuing to decline, their taxes go up....oh wait a second, they don't actually pay federal taxes so that can't happen....., etc.
|
|
New Post
Search
Off-Topic Forum
Reply
»
Alabama Lakes
»
Lake Martin
Login
|
Home
