Ummm...I think gays care. lol. That...
Posted By: sam on 2008-11-05
In Reply to: CA - katydid
being said..."it doesn't affect my paycheck.." is that your barometer for whether something matters to you? Just wondering.
And secondly...threw it on the ballot to manipulate voters? Manipulate them how? You don't have to vote for...or against...on everything on the ballot.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Ummm....ummm....nope, I'd best not touch that one. nm
x
Where did gays come from?
Answer: I don't know. Without starting world war 3, my PERSONAL belief is that it is a choice. Others would not agree. I do know that kids are great imitators and if they are raised by gays I expect they will see being gay as the "normal" way of life and that is against everything in nature. Again, my PERSONAL belief, if God had intended to have Adam and Steve He would not have created Adam and Eve.
You are the one who was agains the gays
Christ wasn't like that, so why call yourself a Christian?
Do I hate gays? No. Do I think I'm better
than a homosexual? No, again. Do I agree with their lifestyle? No. In the same regard, do I think I'm better than an alcoholic/drug addict/adulterer/etc? No. Do I agree with their lifestyle? No. My feelings about the rightness or wrongness of homosexuality are a personal conviction. I am a Christian, but I don't hate. I may not like what they do, what they believe in, but they still have a soul, and, as a Christian, the Bible commands me to love my neighbor as myself. No hate involved at all. Just a difference of beliefs. 
I don't think gays and lesbians are
second class citizens. What in the world is the big deal??? What is it they want? Look how many heterosexual couples live together without benefit of marriage. Well, maybe this push for gays and lesbians to be able to marry is instigated by some lawyers who see more dollars from divorce court. Next thing we know Mormon polygomists (sp?) will be demanding their rights to marry 500 women. Why don't we just go ahead and throw all morality right out the window.
Gays have a right to marry
I sincerely believe that all are equal on this planet. Why would we want to deprive them of happiness?
except that most gays are about INCLUSION, not
They believe in 'live and let live', NOT 'my way or the highway'.
Then gays and lesbians should do the same
--
It has never been a right for gays to marry....
--
Christians don't hate gays
but the Bible says it is a sin. We love gay people and hope that they come to know the Lord and in doing so will understand it's a sin. Marriage is for a man and a woman.
Please, if you don't really understand Christianity, don't speak about it. People make so many assumptions about what we believe.
Love the person, hate the sin. We are all sinners. Gays are no worse than us. My telling a little white lie is just as much of a sin as someone being gay which is just as much of a sin as someone killing a child. In God's eyes there are no "levels" of sin. That's why we need Jesus, to pay our sin debt, because all the good works in the world can't save us.
Flame away...
Nobody is denying the gays the right to assembly...
also, you really have no idea what this particular group of people feel about gays or anything else. There are Christians who are sympathetic to gay marriage. Not me, but that is beside the point. To be honest, I think that they should file the proper paperwork and follow the law, I just think your argument is flawed.
You hate blacks AND gays? You think Fox is the news..
I am not answering any more of your racist, rude dumb posts. Talk to yourself, all 3 or more of your selves that you are posting here so obviously.
Judge overturns Florida ban on adoption by gays
(CNN) -- A Florida circuit judge Tuesday struck down a 31-year-old state law that prevents gays and lesbians from adopting children, allowing a North Miami man to adopt two half-brothers he and his partner have raised as foster children since 2004.
"There is no question, the blanket exclusion of gay applicants defeats Florida's goal of providing dependent children a permanent family through adoption," Judge Cindy S. Lederman wrote in her 53-page ruling.
"The best interests of children are not preserved by prohibiting homosexual adoption."
The state attorney general's office has appealed the decision.
Lederman said there is no moral or scientific reason for banning gays and lesbians from adopting, despite the state's arguments otherwise. The state argued that gays and lesbians have higher odds of suffering from depression, affective and anxiety disorders and substance abuse, and that their households are more unstable.
Lederman said the ban violated children's right to permanency provided under the Florida statute and under the federal Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997. Whether the ban violated the state's equal protection clause by singling out gays and lesbians should be considered, she said.
Lederman's ruling paves the way for Martin Gill to legally adopt the two half-brothers, ages 4 and 8, whom he has cared for since December 2004, the American Civil Liberties Union said.
The two boys, who are referred to as John and James Doe in court documents, were removed from their homes on allegations of abandonment and neglect.
On that December evening, John and James left a world of chronic neglect, emotional impoverishment and deprivation to enter a new world, foreign to them, that was nurturing, safe, structured and stimulating," Lederman wrote.
In 2006, the children's respective fathers' rights were terminated, court documents said, and they remained in the care of Gill and his partner.
"Our family just got a lot more to be thankful for this Thanksgiving," Gill said Tuesday, according to the ACLU, which represented him.
Florida is the only state that specifically bans all "homosexual" people from adopting children, although it does allow them to be foster parents.
This month, Arkansas voters approved a ballot measure to prohibit unmarried partners -- same-sex or opposite-sex couples -- from adopting children or from serving as foster parents. The measure is similar to one in Utah, which excludes same-sex couples indirectly through a statute barring all unmarried couples from adopting or taking in foster children.
Mississippi allows single gays and lesbians to adopt, but prohibits same-sex couples from adopting.
Neal Skene, spokesman for the Florida Department of Children and Families, said the appeal was filed so a statewide resolution on the law could be determined by an appellate court. He noted that another Florida circuit judge declared the law unconstitutional this year but that ruling had not been appealed.
"We need a statewide determination by the appellate courts," he said.
Gill's adoption petition cannot be approved until the appeal process is finished, Skene said, but the children will remain in Gill's home.
"These are wonderful foster parents," Skene said. "It's just that we have a statute, [and] the statute is very clear on the issue of adoption."
Several organizations -- including the National Adoption Center, the American Medical Association, the American Psychological Association and the American Academy of Pediatrics -- have said that having gay and lesbian parents does not negatively affect children.
The Evan B. Donaldson Adoption Institute, a nonprofit organization that studies adoption and foster care, hailed the decision.
"This ban, which was the only one of its kind in the country, has done nothing but undermine the prospects of boys and girls in the foster care system to get permanent, loving homes," said Adam Pertman, the Adoption Institute's executive director, in a written statement.
"So this decision by Judge Lederman is a very important, hopeful ruling for children who need families."
But I thought you guys LOVED gays! Wassa matta you?!!? nm
who could possibly care? War, financial ruin, health care needs.
nm
Ummm...yes you did....
You said take it to the conservative board. And I do not see what in the post was bashing. It was stating an opinion, which anyone, no matter what their political affiliation is, still has the right to do on this board or any other to my knowledge. If you perceive the truth as bashing, that is your prerogative. And the truth IS, liberals continue to defend Clinton even though he was and is a morally corrupt individual who broke the law of the United States while a sitting President. He did it, that is the truth, there is no way around that. Yet your party continues to say it was about sex. I will try this one more time...perjury is perjury no matter what it is ABOUT. It is a felony. He broke the law and his oath of office. Never apologized for either. And took his last hours in office an opportunity to pardon all the crony crooks he could. And yet you continue to defend him as a great man. Pardon me if that seriously undermines the credibility of your party. That is NOT bashing. That is the TRUTH.
ummm
The way I read that is these units would be activated in case of natural or manmade diaster, not out on the streets everyday. Good greif.
Ummm, so maybe they can
Then the guilty can be punished, and the innocent prisoners who are not terrorists (or at least weren't when they were initially locked up) can be set free.
Kinda a no brainer, dontcha think?
Ummm....
source of the info and the fact that you "don't know anybody who would think it's right" yada yada yada, chances are you and the author are jumping to conclusions that are most likely a tad over-stated. It might be helpful to keep in mind that the "government" is not some block of concrete buildings or master computer somewhere. They are flesh and blood just like the rest of us and are not likely to be party to placing "control" of the heath care of themselves, their parents and their own children in the thoes of such a scheme. Sorry. Jury's still out on this.
Ummm....
source of the info and the fact that you "don't know anybody who would think it's right" yada yada yada, chances are you and the author are jumping to conclusions that are most likely a tad over-stated. It might be helpful to keep in mind that the "government" is not some block of concrete buildings or master computer somewhere. They are flesh and blood just like the rest of us and are not likely to be party to placing "control" of the heath care of themselves, their parents and their own children in the thoes of such a scheme. Sorry. Jury's still out on this.
Ummm...no....
Get over yourself. If you have something intelligent to say, I'm all ears, but until that time.....
Ummm....(sm)
So you don't think waterboarding is illegal -- even though it goes directly against at least 4 existing treaties? If we aren't going to be held accountable by treaties that WE agree to, what's the point of being in them?
This is actually where I do disagree with Obama. He doesn't want to make this into a partisan thing and is seemingly not too interested in prosecutions. My opinion is that its not partisan to enforce existing laws. As far as I'm concerned the whole bunch from the Shrub gang need to be prosecuted. Maybe we can just extradite them to Spain. That would work for me.
Ummm....(sm)
Doesn't this belong on the gab board? What's wrong....don't want to talk about your heros, Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld going down for torture?
Ummm....(sm)
I think I would go with conventional interrogation techniques...you know....the ones that actually worked on KSM before the waterboarding.
Ummm....(sm)
"what right does the government have to take MY money and give to an organization like ACORN to pass out to democratic candidates for their campaigns"
Well, that was straight out of O'Reilly's mouth. LOL. In fact, I'm pretty sure that's just about exactly what he said last night.
So you think that there is a direct funnel that takes our tax dollars and just hands them over to Acorn? Here's a news flash --- as the ladies noted last night on Billo's show, they are a nonprofit organization and have to apply and compete for grants and loans just like everyone else.
As for whether they are completely on the up and up, I have no idea, but I don't think I'll base that judgment on the commentary of a right-wing show host.
Ummm....(sm)
Exactly how is it that Fox's ratings prove that O'Reilly is not far right? LOL.. Ratings have absolutely nothing to do with the discussion.
However, since you mentioned Obama and fulfilling his promises, it may not turn out like you think. For the most part people who voted for him are pretty happy with how he's handling the economy and foreign affairs. However, there are a few things that have gotten to a lot of dems. For example, he hasn't gotten rid of "don't ask don't tell" yet. He hasn't fulfilled promises he made to the LGBT community. He's carrying on seemingly with "indefinite detention." He ran on a platform that promised these things would be fixed. Granted, he hasn't been there long and can still come around on these things. However, if he doesn't my guess is that the country will go even farther to the left than they did this time. Now that is what you should be worried about, not Fox ratings.
And just as a side note, if he gets healthcare reform through, it will be decades before a pub sets foot in the White House.
ummm.
Now who's making assumptions? You don't know what he paid for either. Secondly, I am fully aware of what is going on in this country. Spending, printing money, spending, printing money, etc., etc. Get over Bush He is gone. Obama has in four shorts months spent more money than the 43 presidents who preceded him COMBINED. So yeah, I worry about the cost of his date. Because it's just plain wrong. You want logic - you don't spend taxpayer money on a DATE in this failing economy. Logic would be to lead by example, not telling other people to sacrifice and then do something so excessive. Furthermore, who said I voted for Bush? You? Shows what you know. Next time don't vote in Obama and maybe free enterprise in this country will survive so we will all have jobs.
Ummm....(sm)
Obama has writtent 2 books ---- the first, "Dreams From My Father," was published in 1995. The second, "The Audacity of Hope," was published in 2006. --- Both before the election.
Ummm....actually it does...(sm)
The Declaration of Independence is not and was not a legal document. It simply stated the intent of the US to separate from Great Britian and why. It did not define any rules or regulations to be imposed in this nation.
Explain the Treaty of Tripoli that says "As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Musselmen; and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries."
Another note: Not everyone in this country is in the business of impressing your god and therefore has no need of any kind of "blessing" from your god. What if I were a pagan and told you that the sun god was going to scorch the US unless everyone prayed to him/her. Would you do it? That's what you expect everyone else to do to impress your god. Why? Because YOU don't want to be in the mix when your supposed wrath of god experience comes. I would put that in the category of trying to make others do something they don't agree with just to save your behind. Don't even bother with the "but we want to save you too" speech. Believe me, we don't want or need saving.
Ummm...no....(sm)
Your main point was what you initially stated, and that was that there was no mention in the MSM about this incident. Unfortunately for you, I can undoubtedly come up with even more proof of MSM coverage if you'd like, but that would only serve to embarass you further.
As far as Obama not saying much about it, I think that was a good choice. At the time he was only a couple days out from his speech in Cairo. --- That would be the speech where he is seeking to calm tensions between our religous nuts and their religious nuts. Yeah....that would have been just a perfect time to bring that up. How about using your brain for a change instead of just spitting out the right wing talking points.
Ummm....(sm)
I do believe I've more than proven I can take the heat on this board....LOL, even from the loons like you who just lurk around waiting for me to post something so you can jump on it, which is rather funny and pathetic all at the same time, as well as from the paranoid lunatics like Patty.
BTW, you can now take "paranoid lunatic" out of the insinuation box and put in the statement box......just so you don't get confused.
Ummm....(sm)
A gag order was issued:
http://www2.arkansasonline.com/news/2009/jun/08/gag-order-issed-shooting-case/
The whole point of the gag order (which the prosecutors asked for, btw) is so they can come up with a jury that has not been overexposed to the case. I guess Fixed Noise wants to ensure that everyone hears about this so we can have a really hard time prosecuting this guy. Way to go Fox! 
Ummm....no. The link says sm
it contains a malformed video id. That's what it says when you paste it into the address bar and it takes you to You Tube.
Ummm...Which America would that be?
nm
Ummm....they do, actually, just as they take issue with
and ran with it.
Ummm....for starters
managed to assemble more than a dozen transitional economic advisors in 3 days, and I am certain he will not confine himself to those guys before it's all over. He has a 15 cabinet positions, 6 cabinet-level administrations positions and 3 Level 1 Executive Schedule offices to consider.
He's not been sworn into office, so there is not a whole lot he can do directly except to articulate his intent. No time for ego for a man who is preparing to face one of the greatest challenges as president in the history of our country. BTW, the Office of the President Elect has been around since 1963...not O's idea.
Ummm, think we should be concering ourselves
nm
Ummm...you surely know!!
.
...jealous?...ummm....
asdf
Ummm, this may come as a surprise to you
There are between 1.3 and 1.6 BILLION Moslems in the world. Estimates of how many live in the US are widely disputed, but range between 2 and 7 million. Among them, only a very small percentage of them are extremist. That leaves about a BILLION of them, give or take, for Obama to "win over." Got it?
Ummm....it goes with the territory...
It is their responsibility to entertain ambassadors, foreign heads of state, etc., etc. Use you freaking brain box. At least they didn't REDECORATE.
Ummm....I have a question...(sm)
Exactly what is it that Obama is doing that causes fear?
Ummm..Martha my dear
Woo..Hoo..is this gonna be a **Martha Stewart moment**?
Ummm....let's see....Howard Wolfson....
Lannie Davis, Bob Beckel, Susan Estrich, Greta Van Susteren, Geraldo Rivera...all of those are Democrats and all of those are liberals. Greta was at CNN before Fox. There are many others, I can't remember all their names. Fox has had the highest ratings during the democratic convention and they have covered the whole thing...so much for never reporting on issues important to Democrats. They covered Obama and McCain equally during the campaign season, and while I realize that to please this poster a network would have to be all Obama all the time, THAT is the definition of bias. And decidedly UNDEMOCRATic.
Fox has the highest news ratings in the country by a pretty hefty margin, so I am thinking that while "many" Democrats "despise" Fox News, many others don't mind seeing both sides of an issue. Imagine that!
Ummm...my analogy refers to
I have looked beyond the pretty face. Problem is, I don't see a whole lot there, unless she is trying for her old position as PTA chairman. The depth of your analysis, as you insist on trying to deflect this away from the issue of her paper-thin resume and toward some sort of cat fight over "looks" demonstrates exactly what kind of follower she will attract. Do you think that slam about envy and being unattractive has any bearing on anything of substance? Trust me. These are not some isolated ramblings from an envious, malcontent, ugly, what's-her-name/Cindy McCain wannabe. You and she will have to be answering some really tough challenges from all those groups named in the previous post. Guess you missed that as your post disintegrated into name-calling that has absolutely nothing to do with the very serious issues at hand. In terms of her preparedness to lead this nation, she strikes me and many, many others as being a Bobo. My little post….just the tip of the iceberg. You'd better find some bigger guns than lipstick and nail files.
Ummm. Fox is changing its tone and now
"a problem with semantics," trying to slither out from under its legendary erroneous biased reporting.
Ummm... are you reading the same board
Ummm...if you are truly gaining comfort from an
may I suggest you to get some professional help...pronto.
Ummm....I am a concerned citizen. What he does now...
affects we the people directly. He HAS the job. Someone has to scrutinize him...his faithful certainly aren't going to. This choice just shows he intends to continue his Chicago connections. All that denial...little white lies? Now that he has the job...he doesn't care. So far not feeling really trustful toward the O.
Ummm, let's see here. You mention Obama
in the first and third person 9 times in a 12-line post and the word "timing" is completely absent. What in the world was JTBB thinking?
Your expansion on the OP is not terribly coherent either. If Israel were neutered by a sudden absence of funding, it certainly would affect the future of our nation, but not in the ways you would like to suggest. Israel would be standing ALL ALONE and would not be able to support this ungodly occupation for even 5 more minutes. The US would almost instantly regain some sort of respect and standing and all sorts of diplomatic channels would open up. A more intelligent, thoughtful and productive dialog would ensue and communication would normalize between the US, it allies AND its foes. Mutually beneficial solutions would be sought, a shameful past buried and a much brighter future would emerge.
You are wrong, wrong, wrong to suggest that the Palestinians are not entitled to be freed from the prisons of occupation and live in dignity on the land they have populated over the past 14 milleniums. If Israel ALWAYS prevails, please tell me why they are armed to the teeth, live in fear and cannot accomplish the tiniest hint of national security? Last time I looked, no matter what Israel tries to do, the Palestinians are STILL in Palestine. They are the ones who are not going anywhere.
Ummm, declaring war on the media
to try to gain sympathy and political traction is not the most inspired strategy if she ever wants to run for office in the lower 48. It will not serve her or her fringe fan club well.
If she can't figure out how to navigate the media, she's not ready for prime time in the halls of Congress and certainly should never go near the White House. She needs to take a big girl pill and get over herself. As for her supporters, whining will not win elections any more than media wars. Grow up for heaven's sake.
|
