NationStates Jolt Archive

I thnk Al Franken is the most tasteless. They are all bomb-throwers who love to se hate and strife flowing out on the airways.

I thnk Al Franken is the most tasteless. They are all bomb-throwers who love to se hate and strife flowing out on the airways.

I love Al!

I need to get his book. :D

I'd equate Franken with Rush in terms of truth-stretching and lies, and Moore is next to Coulter in my book of Bat-Sh*t insans people.

The other two aren't nearly as bad as Savage or O'Reily

Michael Moore makes me sick. He's a propoganda-slut, who will take any chance to voice his views obnoxiously. I'm a left-winger, and I never like the way he goes about representing some of our views.

They all suck, But none of them can hold a candle to BackwoodsSquatches, he is just awful.

Michael Moore makes me sick. He's a propoganda-slut, who will take any chance to voice his views obnoxiously. I'm a left-winger, and I never like the way he goes about representing some of our views.

He annoys me because he makes enough good points without having to prop it up with other bullshit.

They all suck, But none of them can hold a candle to BackwoodsSquatches, he is just awful.

You flame too much. Use some facts to back up this flaming, please.

They all suck, But none of them can hold a candle to BackwoodsSquatches, he is just awful.

You flame too much. Use some facts to back up this flaming, please.


Just read his posts, That is prove enough. :)

They all suck, But none of them can hold a candle to BackwoodsSquatches, he is just awful.

You flame too much. Use some facts to back up this flaming, please.


Just read his posts, That is prove enough. :)

I do not care. I want to hear something to back up your stance. Just because he is wrong and cannot defend his views properly (I do not agree with that, but I am saying it just to give him that little point, I love you BS!) does not mean you are automatically correct. So please, prove something.

They all suck, But none of them can hold a candle to BackwoodsSquatches, he is just awful.

You flame too much. Use some facts to back up this flaming, please.


Just read his posts, That is prove enough. :)

I do not care. I want to hear something to back up your stance. Just because he is wrong and cannot defend his views properly (I do not agree with that, but I am saying it just to give him that little point, I love you BS!) does not mean you are automatically correct. So please, prove something.


I already have proved my points with facts, he just doesn't care to listen. You want more, go find some transcripts of the factor, that will shut you both up.

Now I will not talk about this any further.

You know--much as I like Air America, I will say that of the people on there, Randi Rhodes is my least favorite. I'm just not wild about her schtick--she's too much like Limbaugh but from a different perspective. Franken still gets sidetracked a little too easily for my taste, but he's improving, and I love Janeane Garafalo--she's the smartest and best prepared on the list.

Oh--and Cappa da Latta? You've been beaten down so badly it's sad. You've proven nothing and refused to look at contrary evidence. If you were in my class, I'd fail you.

mike moore sux.

You know--much as I like Air America, I will say that of the people on there, Randi Rhodes is my least favorite. I'm just not wild about her schtick--she's too much like Limbaugh but from a different perspective. Franken still gets sidetracked a little too easily for my taste, but he's improving, and I love Janeane Garafalo--she's the smartest and best prepared on the list.

Oh--and Cappa da Latta? You've been beaten down so badly it's sad. You've proven nothing and refused to look at contrary evidence. If you were in my class, I'd fail you.

:lol:


I have not been beaten down, I whooped both your asses. I add you and Squatch to my Liberal hitlist,which is rather large.

Bye Bye, I am sure somebody believes your propaganda.

mike moore sux.


Very true.

I have not been beaten down, I whooped both your asses. I add you and Squatch to my Liberal hitlist,which is rather large.

Bye Bye, I am sure somebody believes your propaganda.I refer you to the right-wing commentator list where even Raysia admits you took a beating. Must be the concussion that's making you so loopy right now. :lol:

I have not been beaten down, I whooped both your asses. I add you and Squatch to my Liberal hitlist,which is rather large.

Bye Bye, I am sure somebody believes your propaganda.I refer you to the right-wing commentator list where even Raysia admits you took a beating. Must be the concussion that's making you so loopy right now. :lol:


Not really, I know i was right. BS must be pretty pissed his lies didn't work.

it should be:

Al "I'm good enough, I'm smart enough, and Gosh-Darnit, people like me!" Franken :)

And Gorafolo never makes sense... "A vot for bush is a vote for terrorism"... what an idiot... stick to comedy

I have not been beaten down, I whooped both your asses. I add you and Squatch to my Liberal hitlist,which is rather large.

Bye Bye, I am sure somebody believes your propaganda.I refer you to the right-wing commentator list where even Raysia admits you took a beating. Must be the concussion that's making you so loopy right now. :lol:


Not really, I know i was right. BS must be pretty pissed his lies didn't work.Oh no--trust me. Squatches and SD and I are all still laughing at you. Not near you--at you.

I have not been beaten down, I whooped both your asses. I add you and Squatch to my Liberal hitlist,which is rather large.

Bye Bye, I am sure somebody believes your propaganda.I refer you to the right-wing commentator list where even Raysia admits you took a beating. Must be the concussion that's making you so loopy right now. :lol:


Not really, I know i was right. BS must be pretty pissed his lies didn't work.

From what I've seen, you're just a rw version of BS. Just another person to ignore.

it should be:

Al "I'm good enough, I'm smart enough, and Gosh-Darnit, people like me!" Franken :)


Admitt it, You are a Liberal.

it should be:

Al "I'm good enough, I'm smart enough, and Gosh-Darnit, people like me!" Franken :)


Admitt it, You are a Liberal....

Read my blog and tell me I'm a liberal.

http://jordansean.blogspot.com/

it should be:

Al "I'm good enough, I'm smart enough, and Gosh-Darnit, people like me!" Franken :)


Admitt it, You are a Liberal....

Read my blog and tell me I'm a liberal.

http://jordansean.blogspot.com/


You are Conservative on every issue? Thats scary.

it should be:

Al "I'm good enough, I'm smart enough, and Gosh-Darnit, people like me!" Franken :)


Admitt it, You are a Liberal....

Read my blog and tell me I'm a liberal.

http://jordansean.blogspot.com/Raysia--this guy actually makes you seem moderate! Are you gonna take that from him? :lol: :lol: :lol:

Calling Ray liberal shows how ignorent you really are.

As a side note, I like Ray a lot more since the deat. He gets his opinions across more often now without being a dick about it.

it should be:

Al "I'm good enough, I'm smart enough, and Gosh-Darnit, people like me!" Franken :)


Admitt it, You are a Liberal....

Read my blog and tell me I'm a liberal.

http://jordansean.blogspot.com/Raysia--this guy actually makes you seem moderate! Are you gonna take that from him? :lol: :lol: :lol:I'm a low-tax, low-government, pro-democracy, pro-equal rights christian... if that makes me a Conservative, cool... if that makes me a moderate, whatever... I hate labels just as much as the next guy :)

Calling Ray liberal shows how ignorent you really are.

As a side note, I like Ray a lot more since the deat. He gets his opinions across more often now without being a dick about it.lol thanks... I think :)

Calling Ray liberal shows how ignorent you really are.

As a side note, I like Ray a lot more since the deat. He gets his opinions across more often now without being a dick about it.lol thanks... I think :)Raysia is cool even though he has evil values

Calling Ray liberal shows how ignorent you really are.

As a side note, I like Ray a lot more since the deat. He gets his opinions across more often now without being a dick about it.lol thanks... I think :)Raysia is cool even though he has evil valuesEvil Values?

Yes, Leviticus 20 states clearly that anyone who denies gays the right to legally redefine a word government shouldn't even mess with anyway is evil :P

Calling Ray liberal shows how ignorent you really are.

As a side note, I like Ray a lot more since the deat. He gets his opinions across more often now without being a dick about it.lol thanks... I think :)Raysia is cool even though he has evil valuesEvil Values?

Yes, Leviticus 20 states clearly that anyone who denies gays the right to legally redefine a word government shouldn't even mess with anyway is evil :P


Ever heard of separation of Church and State? Religion has no place in Government.

Calling Ray liberal shows how ignorent you really are.

As a side note, I like Ray a lot more since the deat. He gets his opinions across more often now without being a dick about it.lol thanks... I think :)Raysia is cool even though he has evil valuesEvil Values?

Yes, Leviticus 20 states clearly that anyone who denies gays the right to legally redefine a word government shouldn't even mess with anyway is evil :PLeviticus makes many absurd claims but what are you talken about with redefining words?

Calling Ray liberal shows how ignorent you really are.

As a side note, I like Ray a lot more since the deat. He gets his opinions across more often now without being a dick about it.lol thanks... I think :)Raysia is cool even though he has evil valuesEvil Values?

Yes, Leviticus 20 states clearly that anyone who denies gays the right to legally redefine a word government shouldn't even mess with anyway is evil :P


Ever heard of separation of Church and State? Religion has no place in Government.Seperation of Church and State is a myth...

Even if it wasn't, then government should have no right to define marriage, a religious term.

I have not been beaten down, I whooped both your asses. I add you and Squatch to my Liberal hitlist,which is rather large.

Bye Bye, I am sure somebody believes your propaganda.I refer you to the right-wing commentator list where even Raysia admits you took a beating. Must be the concussion that's making you so loopy right now. :lol:


Not really, I know i was right. BS must be pretty pissed his lies didn't work.

Are you done flaming me you little troll?

I have not been beaten down, I whooped both your asses. I add you and Squatch to my Liberal hitlist,which is rather large.

Bye Bye, I am sure somebody believes your propaganda.I refer you to the right-wing commentator list where even Raysia admits you took a beating. Must be the concussion that's making you so loopy right now. :lol:


Not really, I know i was right. BS must be pretty pissed his lies didn't work.

Are you done flaming me you little troll?


:lol:

You would know about flaming.

Calling Ray liberal shows how ignorent you really are.

As a side note, I like Ray a lot more since the deat. He gets his opinions across more often now without being a dick about it.lol thanks... I think :)Raysia is cool even though he has evil valuesEvil Values?

Yes, Leviticus 20 states clearly that anyone who denies gays the right to legally redefine a word government shouldn't even mess with anyway is evil :P


Ever heard of separation of Church and State? Religion has no place in Government.Seperation of Church and State is a myth...

Even if it was, then government should have no right to define marriage, a religious term.


Its the law, or do you ignore that to? How is gays marrying harmful?

Calling Ray liberal shows how ignorent you really are.

As a side note, I like Ray a lot more since the deat. He gets his opinions across more often now without being a dick about it.lol thanks... I think :)Raysia is cool even though he has evil valuesEvil Values?

Yes, Leviticus 20 states clearly that anyone who denies gays the right to legally redefine a word government shouldn't even mess with anyway is evil :P


Ever heard of separation of Church and State? Religion has no place in Government.Seperation of Church and State is a myth...

Even if it wasn't, then government should have no right to define marriage, a religious term.separation of church and state is a hardcore reality the founding fathers were VERY clear they didnt want a theocracy--and religion has no right to define what a family

Calling Ray liberal shows how ignorent you really are.

As a side note, I like Ray a lot more since the deat. He gets his opinions across more often now without being a dick about it.lol thanks... I think :)Raysia is cool even though he has evil valuesEvil Values?

Yes, Leviticus 20 states clearly that anyone who denies gays the right to legally redefine a word government shouldn't even mess with anyway is evil :P


Ever heard of separation of Church and State? Religion has no place in Government.Seperation of Church and State is a myth...

Even if it wasn't, then government should have no right to define marriage, a religious term.separation of church and state is a hardcore reality the founding fathers were VERY clear they didnt want a theocracy--and religion has no right to define what a family

You're right. :shock:

Calling Ray liberal shows how ignorent you really are.

As a side note, I like Ray a lot more since the deat. He gets his opinions across more often now without being a dick about it.lol thanks... I think :)Raysia is cool even though he has evil valuesEvil Values?

Yes, Leviticus 20 states clearly that anyone who denies gays the right to legally redefine a word government shouldn't even mess with anyway is evil :P


Ever heard of separation of Church and State? Religion has no place in Government.Seperation of Church and State is a myth...

Even if it was, then government should have no right to define marriage, a religious term.


Its the law, or do you ignore that to? How is gays marrying harmful?I never said it was harmful, just a contradiction of terms.

Calling Ray liberal shows how ignorent you really are.

As a side note, I like Ray a lot more since the deat. He gets his opinions across more often now without being a dick about it.lol thanks... I think :)Raysia is cool even though he has evil valuesEvil Values?

Yes, Leviticus 20 states clearly that anyone who denies gays the right to legally redefine a word government shouldn't even mess with anyway is evil :P


Ever heard of separation of Church and State? Religion has no place in Government.Seperation of Church and State is a myth...

Even if it wasn't, then government should have no right to define marriage, a religious term.separation of church and state is a hardcore reality the founding fathers were VERY clear they didnt want a theocracy--and religion has no right to define what a familyANd the Government has no right to define a religious term.

Do you realize that the first time "Seperation of Church and State" was conceived, it was in DEFENSE of religions FROM the government? (Yeah, really worked well for us mormons *roll*)

Calling Ray liberal shows how ignorent you really are.

As a side note, I like Ray a lot more since the deat. He gets his opinions across more often now without being a dick about it.lol thanks... I think :)Raysia is cool even though he has evil valuesEvil Values?

Yes, Leviticus 20 states clearly that anyone who denies gays the right to legally redefine a word government shouldn't even mess with anyway is evil :P


Ever heard of separation of Church and State? Religion has no place in Government.Seperation of Church and State is a myth...

Even if it wasn't, then government should have no right to define marriage, a religious term.separation of church and state is a hardcore reality the founding fathers were VERY clear they didnt want a theocracy--and religion has no right to define what a familyANd the Government has no right to define a religious term.

Do you realize that the first time "Seperation of Church and State" was conceived, it was in DEFENSE of religions FROM the government? (Yeah, really worked well for us mormons *roll*)and religions have no right to define a family and the way people freely choose to live in a secular society

Calling Ray liberal shows how ignorent you really are.

As a side note, I like Ray a lot more since the deat. He gets his opinions across more often now without being a dick about it.lol thanks... I think :)Raysia is cool even though he has evil valuesEvil Values?

Yes, Leviticus 20 states clearly that anyone who denies gays the right to legally redefine a word government shouldn't even mess with anyway is evil :P


Ever heard of separation of Church and State? Religion has no place in Government.Seperation of Church and State is a myth...

Even if it was, then government should have no right to define marriage, a religious term.


Its the law, or do you ignore that to? How is gays marrying harmful?I never said it was harmful, just a contradiction of terms.


I used to be against gay marriage, now i don't know why I ever thought that way.

Calling Ray liberal shows how ignorent you really are.

As a side note, I like Ray a lot more since the deat. He gets his opinions across more often now without being a dick about it.lol thanks... I think :)Raysia is cool even though he has evil valuesEvil Values?

Yes, Leviticus 20 states clearly that anyone who denies gays the right to legally redefine a word government shouldn't even mess with anyway is evil :P


Ever heard of separation of Church and State? Religion has no place in Government.Seperation of Church and State is a myth...

Even if it wasn't, then government should have no right to define marriage, a religious term.separation of church and state is a hardcore reality the founding fathers were VERY clear they didnt want a theocracy--and religion has no right to define what a familyANd the Government has no right to define a religious term.

Do you realize that the first time "Seperation of Church and State" was conceived, it was in DEFENSE of religions FROM the government? (Yeah, really worked well for us mormons *roll*)and religions have no right to define a family and the way people freely choose to live in a secular society

True, Because different religions have different ways of looking at things.

Calling Ray liberal shows how ignorent you really are.

As a side note, I like Ray a lot more since the deat. He gets his opinions across more often now without being a dick about it.lol thanks... I think :)Raysia is cool even though he has evil valuesEvil Values?

Yes, Leviticus 20 states clearly that anyone who denies gays the right to legally redefine a word government shouldn't even mess with anyway is evil :P


Ever heard of separation of Church and State? Religion has no place in Government.Seperation of Church and State is a myth...

Even if it was, then government should have no right to define marriage, a religious term.


Its the law, or do you ignore that to? How is gays marrying harmful?I never said it was harmful, just a contradiction of terms.


I used to be against gay marriage, now i don't know why I ever thought that way.conservatives who oppose gay marriage are antifamily

Look everyone! Cappa de Latta and the Red Arrow are in love!

*throws flowers*

Calling Ray liberal shows how ignorent you really are.

As a side note, I like Ray a lot more since the deat. He gets his opinions across more often now without being a dick about it.lol thanks... I think :)Raysia is cool even though he has evil valuesEvil Values?

Yes, Leviticus 20 states clearly that anyone who denies gays the right to legally redefine a word government shouldn't even mess with anyway is evil :P


Ever heard of separation of Church and State? Religion has no place in Government.Seperation of Church and State is a myth...

Even if it wasn't, then government should have no right to define marriage, a religious term.separation of church and state is a hardcore reality the founding fathers were VERY clear they didnt want a theocracy--and religion has no right to define what a familyANd the Government has no right to define a religious term.

Do you realize that the first time "Seperation of Church and State" was conceived, it was in DEFENSE of religions FROM the government? (Yeah, really worked well for us mormons *roll*)and religions have no right to define a family and the way people freely choose to live in a secular society

True, Because different religions have different ways of looking at things.this whole gay marriage debate is really just an economic argument about gays wanting the same tax and other benefits that everyone else gets

Calling Ray liberal shows how ignorent you really are.

As a side note, I like Ray a lot more since the deat. He gets his opinions across more often now without being a dick about it.lol thanks... I think :)Raysia is cool even though he has evil valuesEvil Values?

Yes, Leviticus 20 states clearly that anyone who denies gays the right to legally redefine a word government shouldn't even mess with anyway is evil :P


Ever heard of separation of Church and State? Religion has no place in Government.Seperation of Church and State is a myth...

Even if it was, then government should have no right to define marriage, a religious term.


Its the law, or do you ignore that to? How is gays marrying harmful?I never said it was harmful, just a contradiction of terms.


I used to be against gay marriage, now i don't know why I ever thought that way.conservatives who oppose gay marriage are antifamily

No, Just stupid.

Calling Ray liberal shows how ignorent you really are.

As a side note, I like Ray a lot more since the deat. He gets his opinions across more often now without being a dick about it.lol thanks... I think :)Raysia is cool even though he has evil valuesEvil Values?

Yes, Leviticus 20 states clearly that anyone who denies gays the right to legally redefine a word government shouldn't even mess with anyway is evil :P


Ever heard of separation of Church and State? Religion has no place in Government.Seperation of Church and State is a myth...

Even if it wasn't, then government should have no right to define marriage, a religious term.separation of church and state is a hardcore reality the founding fathers were VERY clear they didnt want a theocracy--and religion has no right to define what a familyANd the Government has no right to define a religious term.

Do you realize that the first time "Seperation of Church and State" was conceived, it was in DEFENSE of religions FROM the government? (Yeah, really worked well for us mormons *roll*)and religions have no right to define a family and the way people freely choose to live in a secular societyYou're right, they don't.

And neither do adoption agencies, for that matter.

Look everyone! Cappa de Latta and the Red Arrow are in love!

*throws flowers*



*Tries not to laugh*

Cappa De Latta, please treat fellow players with more respect during debates. It is perfectly OK, as a fascist, to be in disagreement with moderates. However, you should remember to express your disagreements with tact, and wherever possible, with substantive content rather than personal attacks. Thank you.

EDIT: And guys, please no quote pyramids above 5 levels. Some of those are 10 high.

http://www.bigwig.net/~bbw10606/pwned.gif
Tactical Grace
Forum Moderator

Look everyone! Cappa de Latta and the Red Arrow are in love!

*throws flowers*I agree with conservatives like Cappa when their right--people like Raysia are very dangerous in a democracy cause they want the church to be the govt (just like it was in the dark ages)

Cappa De Latta, please treat fellow players with more respect during debates. It is perfectly OK, as a fascist, to be in disagreement with moderates. However, you should remember to express your disagreements with tact, and wherever possible, with substantive content rather than personal attacks. Thank you.

http://www.bigwig.net/~bbw10606/pwned.gif
Tactical Grace
Forum Moderator


Why are you ignoring them flaming me?

Look everyone! Cappa de Latta and the Red Arrow are in love!

*throws flowers*



*Tries not to laugh*I think we've made a love connection in General tonight. Will this be a same-sex marriage by any chance?

Cappa De Latta, please treat fellow players with more respect during debates. It is perfectly OK, as a fascist, to be in disagreement with moderates. However, you should remember to express your disagreements with tact, and wherever possible, with substantive content rather than personal attacks. Thank you.

http://www.bigwig.net/~bbw10606/pwned.gif
Tactical Grace
Forum Moderator


Why are you ignoring them flaming me?because you are doing it to.

Just do what he says.

Look everyone! Cappa de Latta and the Red Arrow are in love!

*throws flowers*I agree with conservatives like Cappa when their right--people like Raysia are very dangerous in a democracy cause they want the church to be the govt (just like it was in the dark ages)


I have never been religious, Never will be. :)

Look everyone! Cappa de Latta and the Red Arrow are in love!

*throws flowers*I agree with conservatives like Cappa when their right--people like Raysia are very dangerous in a democracy cause they want the church to be the govt (just like it was in the dark ages)excuse me? I want america to be a real democracy, that's all.

Cappa De Latta, please treat fellow players with more respect during debates. It is perfectly OK, as a fascist, to be in disagreement with moderates. However, you should remember to express your disagreements with tact, and wherever possible, with substantive content rather than personal attacks. Thank you.

http://www.bigwig.net/~bbw10606/pwned.gif
Tactical Grace
Forum Moderator


Why are you ignoring them flaming me?because you are doing it to.

Just do what he says.


? I remember when you stuck to your guns and kissed up to nobody, you have changed.

Look everyone! Cappa de Latta and the Red Arrow are in love!

*throws flowers*I agree with conservatives like Cappa when their right--people like Raysia are very dangerous in a democracy cause they want the church to be the govt (just like it was in the dark ages)excuse me? I want america to be a real democracy, that's all.


:lol:

No you don't.

Look everyone! Cappa de Latta and the Red Arrow are in love!

*throws flowers*I agree with conservatives like Cappa when their right--people like Raysia are very dangerous in a democracy cause they want the church to be the govt (just like it was in the dark ages)excuse me? I want america to be a real democracy, that's all.


:lol:

No you don't.OK, I'll admit it, you know me better than me *roll*

Look everyone! Cappa de Latta and the Red Arrow are in love!

*throws flowers*I agree with conservatives like Cappa when their right--people like Raysia are very dangerous in a democracy cause they want the church to be the govt (just like it was in the dark ages)excuse me? I want america to be a real democracy, that's all.

Nice sentiments.

I agree.

But in order to do that..you do realize that an entire revision of the electoral process, and the constittion would be in order, right?

Look everyone! Cappa de Latta and the Red Arrow are in love!

*throws flowers*



*Tries not to laugh*I think we've made a love connection in General tonight. Will this be a same-sex marriage by any chance?Incertonia you should stop while your ahead or ill expose your treasonous support of that sellout waffle Bill Clinton who severely harmed the progressive cause in america

Look everyone! Cappa de Latta and the Red Arrow are in love!

*throws flowers*I agree with conservatives like Cappa when their right--people like Raysia are very dangerous in a democracy cause they want the church to be the govt (just like it was in the dark ages)excuse me? I want america to be a real democracy, that's all.

Nice sentiments.

I agree.

But in order to do that..you do realize that an entire revision of the electoral process, and the constittion would be in order, right?rephrase: LEAN towards a democracy, where the majority actually gets a say in the law of the land :) As opposed to a couple of activists in the government going "Hmm, I don't like this law, let's get rid of it. Screw what 2/3 of the nation thinks"

Look everyone! Cappa de Latta and the Red Arrow are in love!

*throws flowers*I agree with conservatives like Cappa when their right--people like Raysia are very dangerous in a democracy cause they want the church to be the govt (just like it was in the dark ages)


I have never been religious, Never will be. :)God has no religion--only hypocrites and brainwashed cultists do

Look everyone! Cappa de Latta and the Red Arrow are in love!

*throws flowers*I agree with conservatives like Cappa when their right--people like Raysia are very dangerous in a democracy cause they want the church to be the govt (just like it was in the dark ages)excuse me? I want america to be a real democracy, that's all.

Nice sentiments.

I agree.

But in order to do that..you do realize that an entire revision of the electoral process, and the constittion would be in order, right?rephrase: LEAN towards a democracy, where the majority actually gets a say in the law of the land :) As opposed to a couple of activists in the government going "Hmm, I don't like this law, let's get rid of it. Screw what 2/3 of the nation thinks"

Better.

But, let me ask you..'

Does that apply to the bad apples on your side of the political spectrum, as well as mine?

Look everyone! Cappa de Latta and the Red Arrow are in love!

*throws flowers*I agree with conservatives like Cappa when their right--people like Raysia are very dangerous in a democracy cause they want the church to be the govt (just like it was in the dark ages)excuse me? I want america to be a real democracy, that's all.well in a real democracy everyone has equal rights

I voted for Moore, but I really hate Noam Chomsky

Look everyone! Cappa de Latta and the Red Arrow are in love!

*throws flowers*



*Tries not to laugh*I think we've made a love connection in General tonight. Will this be a same-sex marriage by any chance?Incertonia you should stop while your ahead or ill expose your treasonous support of that sellout waffle Bill Clinton who severely harmed the progressive cause in americaExpose? Hell, I'm proud of the fact that I think Clinton was the best president since Truman.

Look everyone! Cappa de Latta and the Red Arrow are in love!

*throws flowers*I agree with conservatives like Cappa when their right--people like Raysia are very dangerous in a democracy cause they want the church to be the govt (just like it was in the dark ages)


I have never been religious, Never will be. :)God has no religion--only hypocrites and brainwashed cultists doI hope you realize that TG told me that he'd take action next time I find a link to someone calling me a cultist... if you don't shut up, I might just send him the link :P

Look everyone! Cappa de Latta and the Red Arrow are in love!

*throws flowers*I agree with conservatives like Cappa when their right--people like Raysia are very dangerous in a democracy cause they want the church to be the govt (just like it was in the dark ages)excuse me? I want america to be a real democracy, that's all.

Nice sentiments.

I agree.

But in order to do that..you do realize that an entire revision of the electoral process, and the constittion would be in order, right?rephrase: LEAN towards a democracy, where the majority actually gets a say in the law of the land :) As opposed to a couple of activists in the government going "Hmm, I don't like this law, let's get rid of it. Screw what 2/3 of the nation thinks"the founding fathers opposed the tyranny of the majority which is why they wrote the Bill Of Rights--stay in school

Better.

But, let me ask you..'

Does that apply to the bad apples on your side of the political spectrum, as well as mine?Duh. well in a real democracy everyone has equal rightsNot necessarily. Criminals don't have the same rights as citizens... how can you possibly say everyone?

Granted, democracy has it';s flaws, we know that from the witch trials and mormon persecutions and slavery and all that

Look everyone! Cappa de Latta and the Red Arrow are in love!

*throws flowers*I agree with conservatives like Cappa when their right--people like Raysia are very dangerous in a democracy cause they want the church to be the govt (just like it was in the dark ages)excuse me? I want america to be a real democracy, that's all.

Nice sentiments.

I agree.

But in order to do that..you do realize that an entire revision of the electoral process, and the constittion would be in order, right?rephrase: LEAN towards a democracy, where the majority actually gets a say in the law of the land :) As opposed to a couple of activists in the government going "Hmm, I don't like this law, let's get rid of it. Screw what 2/3 of the nation thinks"the founding fathers opposed the tyranny of the majority which is why they wrote the Bill Of Rights--stay in schoolexcuse me? I never heard any of the BS before. Show me where it says that in the bill of rights.

Look everyone! Cappa de Latta and the Red Arrow are in love!

*throws flowers*



*Tries not to laugh*I think we've made a love connection in General tonight. Will this be a same-sex marriage by any chance?Incertonia you should stop while your ahead or ill expose your treasonous support of that sellout waffle Bill Clinton who severely harmed the progressive cause in americaExpose? Hell, I'm proud of the fact that I think Clinton was the best president since Truman.Clinton was a dagger in the heart to the progressive agenda and he delivered congress to republicans on a silver platter

Look everyone! Cappa de Latta and the Red Arrow are in love!

*throws flowers*I agree with conservatives like Cappa when their right--people like Raysia are very dangerous in a democracy cause they want the church to be the govt (just like it was in the dark ages)


I have never been religious, Never will be. :)God has no religion--only hypocrites and brainwashed cultists doI hope you realize that TG told me that he'd take action next time I find a link to someone calling me a cultist... if you don't shut up, I might just send him the link :PI didnt call you a cultist I just said that religions are cults which they are

Look everyone! Cappa de Latta and the Red Arrow are in love!

*throws flowers*



*Tries not to laugh*I think we've made a love connection in General tonight. Will this be a same-sex marriage by any chance?Incertonia you should stop while your ahead or ill expose your treasonous support of that sellout waffle Bill Clinton who severely harmed the progressive cause in americaExpose? Hell, I'm proud of the fact that I think Clinton was the best president since Truman.Clinton was a dagger in the heart to the progressive agenda and he delivered congress to republicans on a silver platter

Not really, The Republicans stole congress.

Look everyone! Cappa de Latta and the Red Arrow are in love!

*throws flowers*I agree with conservatives like Cappa when their right--people like Raysia are very dangerous in a democracy cause they want the church to be the govt (just like it was in the dark ages)


I have never been religious, Never will be. :)God has no religion--only hypocrites and brainwashed cultists doI hope you realize that TG told me that he'd take action next time I find a link to someone calling me a cultist... if you don't shut up, I might just send him the link :PI didnt call you a cultist I just said that religions are cults which they arehowso?

Better.

But, let me ask you..'

Does that apply to the bad apples on your side of the political spectrum, as well as mine?Duh. well in a real democracy everyone has equal rightsNot necessarily. Criminals don't have the same rights as citizens... how can you possibly say everyone?

Granted, democracy has it';s flaws, we know that from the witch trials and mormon persecutions and slavery and all thatcriminals are a special case--but they chose that fate when they broke the law--nonlawbreakers tho are supposed to be treated equally under the law

Look everyone! Cappa de Latta and the Red Arrow are in love!

*throws flowers*



*Tries not to laugh*I think we've made a love connection in General tonight. Will this be a same-sex marriage by any chance?Incertonia you should stop while your ahead or ill expose your treasonous support of that sellout waffle Bill Clinton who severely harmed the progressive cause in americaExpose? Hell, I'm proud of the fact that I think Clinton was the best president since Truman.Clinton was a dagger in the heart to the progressive agenda and he delivered congress to republicans on a silver platter

Not really, The Republicans stole congress.LOL or they simply got voted into it because they're becoming the majority

Look everyone! Cappa de Latta and the Red Arrow are in love!

*throws flowers*I agree with conservatives like Cappa when their right--people like Raysia are very dangerous in a democracy cause they want the church to be the govt (just like it was in the dark ages)excuse me? I want america to be a real democracy, that's all.

Nice sentiments.

I agree.

But in order to do that..you do realize that an entire revision of the electoral process, and the constittion would be in order, right?rephrase: LEAN towards a democracy, where the majority actually gets a say in the law of the land :) As opposed to a couple of activists in the government going "Hmm, I don't like this law, let's get rid of it. Screw what 2/3 of the nation thinks"the founding fathers opposed the tyranny of the majority which is why they wrote the Bill Of Rights--stay in schoolexcuse me? I never heard any of the BS before. Show me where it says that in the bill of rights.Our System is based on INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS not majority tyranny--ask any constitutional scholar that and theyll all agree

Look everyone! Cappa de Latta and the Red Arrow are in love!

*throws flowers*



*Tries not to laugh*I think we've made a love connection in General tonight. Will this be a same-sex marriage by any chance?Incertonia you should stop while your ahead or ill expose your treasonous support of that sellout waffle Bill Clinton who severely harmed the progressive cause in americaExpose? Hell, I'm proud of the fact that I think Clinton was the best president since Truman.Clinton was a dagger in the heart to the progressive agenda and he delivered congress to republicans on a silver platter

Not really, The Republicans stole congress.LOL or they simply got voted into it because they're becoming the majority

Remember how Bush got into office? He stole it, so it is possible the Repukes stole others to.

Clinton was a dagger in the heart to the progressive agenda and he delivered congress to republicans on a silver platterClinton did what no progressive has ever been able to do--get elected--and in the end we had a rebirth of the middle class, and a rise in real wages and home ownership among the lower classes. No, we didn't get single-payer health care out of it, but we got movement. It's not Clinton's fault that the DLC idiots who tried to follow him didn't understand how to triangulate issues. Clinton was a one-of-a-kind politician--a genius at campaigning and a brilliant tactician. I didn't agree with his move toward corporate support of the party--I think that was a bad move--but in the end he was still the best president since Truman.

Better.

But, let me ask you..'

Does that apply to the bad apples on your side of the political spectrum, as well as mine?Duh. well in a real democracy everyone has equal rightsNot necessarily. Criminals don't have the same rights as citizens... how can you possibly say everyone?

Granted, democracy has it';s flaws, we know that from the witch trials and mormon persecutions and slavery and all thatcriminals are a special case--but they chose that fate when they broke the law--nonlawbreakers tho are supposed to be treated equally under the lawSo... what would you consider equal rights? Are compensational Special Rights like Affirmative action considered equal rights? Or how about conditionally equal rights, like 'Gays can marry, as long as they do what marriage is, which involves a member of the opposite sex'?

Look everyone! Cappa de Latta and the Red Arrow are in love!

*throws flowers*



*Tries not to laugh*I think we've made a love connection in General tonight. Will this be a same-sex marriage by any chance?Incertonia you should stop while your ahead or ill expose your treasonous support of that sellout waffle Bill Clinton who severely harmed the progressive cause in americaExpose? Hell, I'm proud of the fact that I think Clinton was the best president since Truman.Clinton was a dagger in the heart to the progressive agenda and he delivered congress to republicans on a silver platter

Not really, The Republicans stole congress.but Clinton allowed it cause he was a profile in weakness who let the rightwing treat him like the doormat he was

Look everyone! Cappa de Latta and the Red Arrow are in love!

*throws flowers*



*Tries not to laugh*I think we've made a love connection in General tonight. Will this be a same-sex marriage by any chance?Incertonia you should stop while your ahead or ill expose your treasonous support of that sellout waffle Bill Clinton who severely harmed the progressive cause in americaExpose? Hell, I'm proud of the fact that I think Clinton was the best president since Truman.Clinton was a dagger in the heart to the progressive agenda and he delivered congress to republicans on a silver platter

Not really, The Republicans stole congress.but Clinton allowed it cause he was a profile in weakness who let the rightwing treat him like the doormat he was

And why didn't the Democrats help him out more?

Look everyone! Cappa de Latta and the Red Arrow are in love!

*throws flowers*I agree with conservatives like Cappa when their right--people like Raysia are very dangerous in a democracy cause they want the church to be the govt (just like it was in the dark ages)excuse me? I want america to be a real democracy, that's all.

Nice sentiments.

I agree.

But in order to do that..you do realize that an entire revision of the electoral process, and the constittion would be in order, right?rephrase: LEAN towards a democracy, where the majority actually gets a say in the law of the land :) As opposed to a couple of activists in the government going "Hmm, I don't like this law, let's get rid of it. Screw what 2/3 of the nation thinks"the founding fathers opposed the tyranny of the majority which is why they wrote the Bill Of Rights--stay in schoolexcuse me? I never heard any of the BS before. Show me where it says that in the bill of rights.Our System is based on INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS not majority tyranny--ask any constitutional scholar that and theyll all agreesorry to sound like a broken record here, but don't you mean ask the LIBERAL scholars?

I'm serious, show me where it says there's seperation of church and state.

For that matter, if we're going by what the founders 'implied', then why can't we assume they never thought gay mariage a possibility, and thus the mariage laws imply man and woman? :P

Look everyone! Cappa de Latta and the Red Arrow are in love!

*throws flowers*I agree with conservatives like Cappa when their right--people like Raysia are very dangerous in a democracy cause they want the church to be the govt (just like it was in the dark ages)


I have never been religious, Never will be. :)God has no religion--only hypocrites and brainwashed cultists doI hope you realize that TG told me that he'd take action next time I find a link to someone calling me a cultist... if you don't shut up, I might just send him the link :PI didnt call you a cultist I just said that religions are cults which they arehowso?because religions worship manmade dogma and sacrifice true spirituality on the altar of ignorance and fear

because religions worship manmade dogma and sacrifice true spirituality on the altar of ignorance and fearYou have no proof that my religion practices manmade dogma. And we sacrafice spirituality for ignorance and fear? howso?

Man, you're not sounding too good right now... maybe you should be careful what you say

it should be:

Al "I'm good enough, I'm smart enough, and Gosh-Darnit, people like me!" Franken :)


Admitt it, You are a Liberal.


Geek :D :) :( :o :lol: 8) :? :shock: :x :P :oops: :cry: :wink: :roll: :twisted: :evil: :!: :?: :idea: :arrow:

Clinton was a dagger in the heart to the progressive agenda and he delivered congress to republicans on a silver platterClinton did what no progressive has ever been able to do--get elected--and in the end we had a rebirth of the middle class, and a rise in real wages and home ownership among the lower classes. No, we didn't get single-payer health care out of it, but we got movement. It's not Clinton's fault that the DLC idiots who tried to follow him didn't understand how to triangulate issues. Clinton was a one-of-a-kind politician--a genius at campaigning and a brilliant tactician. I didn't agree with his move toward corporate support of the party--I think that was a bad move--but in the end he was still the best president since Truman.Clinton never lived up to his full potential tho and he let his enemies define him to the point where his second term he practically turned into a republican--Truman wouldve fought where Clinton cynically kept caving in to the point where he stood for nothing at all

Look everyone! Cappa de Latta and the Red Arrow are in love!

*throws flowers*I agree with conservatives like Cappa when their right--people like Raysia are very dangerous in a democracy cause they want the church to be the govt (just like it was in the dark ages)excuse me? I want america to be a real democracy, that's all.

Nice sentiments.

I agree.

But in order to do that..you do realize that an entire revision of the electoral process, and the constittion would be in order, right?rephrase: LEAN towards a democracy, where the majority actually gets a say in the law of the land :) As opposed to a couple of activists in the government going "Hmm, I don't like this law, let's get rid of it. Screw what 2/3 of the nation thinks"the founding fathers opposed the tyranny of the majority which is why they wrote the Bill Of Rights--stay in schoolexcuse me? I never heard any of the BS before. Show me where it says that in the bill of rights.Our System is based on INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS not majority tyranny--ask any constitutional scholar that and theyll all agreesorry to sound like a broken record here, but don't you mean ask the LIBERAL scholars?

I'm serious, show me where it says there's seperation of church and state.

For that matter, if we're going by what the founders 'implied', then why can't we assume they never thought gay mariage a possibility, and thus the mariage laws imply man and woman? :P

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

it should be:

Al "I'm good enough, I'm smart enough, and Gosh-Darnit, people like me!" Franken :)


Admitt it, You are a Liberal.


Geek :D :) :( :o :lol: 8) :? :shock: :x :P :oops: :cry: :wink: :roll: :twisted: :evil: :!: :?: :idea: :arrow:


You sure showed me. :roll:

Better.

But, let me ask you..'

Does that apply to the bad apples on your side of the political spectrum, as well as mine?Duh. well in a real democracy everyone has equal rightsNot necessarily. Criminals don't have the same rights as citizens... how can you possibly say everyone?

Granted, democracy has it';s flaws, we know that from the witch trials and mormon persecutions and slavery and all thatcriminals are a special case--but they chose that fate when they broke the law--nonlawbreakers tho are supposed to be treated equally under the lawSo... what would you consider equal rights? Are compensational Special Rights like Affirmative action considered equal rights? Or how about conditionally equal rights, like 'Gays can marry, as long as they do what marriage is, which involves a member of the opposite sex'?affirmative action has outlived its usefulness and should be phazed out or at the very least be based on class not race or gender--and making gays marry people of the opposite sex is the height of irrationality--marriage has nothing to do with gender

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." OK, so the government can't sponsor or attack religion... doesn't mean that the government must be atheist. You can be religious in general... as far as the government cares, there is a creator of some sort... that doesn't sponsor any one religion, it embraces practically all religions.

I don't see hwere it says you can't say merry christmas in school or post a multi-religious document like the ten commandments

Better.

But, let me ask you..'

Does that apply to the bad apples on your side of the political spectrum, as well as mine?Duh. well in a real democracy everyone has equal rightsNot necessarily. Criminals don't have the same rights as citizens... how can you possibly say everyone?

Granted, democracy has it';s flaws, we know that from the witch trials and mormon persecutions and slavery and all thatcriminals are a special case--but they chose that fate when they broke the law--nonlawbreakers tho are supposed to be treated equally under the lawSo... what would you consider equal rights? Are compensational Special Rights like Affirmative action considered equal rights? Or how about conditionally equal rights, like 'Gays can marry, as long as they do what marriage is, which involves a member of the opposite sex'?affirmative action has outlived its usefulness and should be phazed out or at the very least be based on class not race or gender--and making gays marry people of the opposite sex is the height of irrationality--marriage has nothing to do with genderI agree with you on Affirmative action, however, 2/3 of the US disagrees with you on marriage

Look everyone! Cappa de Latta and the Red Arrow are in love!

*throws flowers*



*Tries not to laugh*I think we've made a love connection in General tonight. Will this be a same-sex marriage by any chance?Incertonia you should stop while your ahead or ill expose your treasonous support of that sellout waffle Bill Clinton who severely harmed the progressive cause in americaExpose? Hell, I'm proud of the fact that I think Clinton was the best president since Truman.Clinton was a dagger in the heart to the progressive agenda and he delivered congress to republicans on a silver platter

Not really, The Republicans stole congress.but Clinton allowed it cause he was a profile in weakness who let the rightwing treat him like the doormat he was

And why didn't the Democrats help him out more?because alot of democrats turned into corporate whores under Clinton and lost sight of their roots--liberal democrats defended him even tho Clinton betrayed them on a daily basis

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." OK, so the government can't sponsor or attack religion... doesn't mean that the government must be atheist. You can be religious in general... as far as the government cares, there is a creator of some sort... that doesn't sponsor any one religion, it embraces practically all religions.

I don't see hwere it says you can't say merry christmas in school or post a multi-religious document like the ten commandments


The government can't support any religion at all, Christmas was a religious holiday.

The Ten Commandments is also religious, has no place in a government building.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." OK, so the government can't sponsor or attack religion... doesn't mean that the government must be atheist. You can be religious in general... as far as the government cares, there is a creator of some sort... that doesn't sponsor any one religion, it embraces practically all religions.

I don't see hwere it says you can't say merry christmas in school or post a multi-religious document like the ten commandments


The government can't support any religion at all, Christmas was a religious holiday.

The Ten Commandments is also religious, has no place in a government building.LOL So you guys get mad when we cover up the titties on a statue, but demand the removal of a religious icon supported by a majority of americans? come on.

Look everyone! Cappa de Latta and the Red Arrow are in love!

*throws flowers*I agree with conservatives like Cappa when their right--people like Raysia are very dangerous in a democracy cause they want the church to be the govt (just like it was in the dark ages)excuse me? I want america to be a real democracy, that's all.

Nice sentiments.

I agree.

But in order to do that..you do realize that an entire revision of the electoral process, and the constittion would be in order, right?rephrase: LEAN towards a democracy, where the majority actually gets a say in the law of the land :) As opposed to a couple of activists in the government going "Hmm, I don't like this law, let's get rid of it. Screw what 2/3 of the nation thinks"the founding fathers opposed the tyranny of the majority which is why they wrote the Bill Of Rights--stay in schoolexcuse me? I never heard any of the BS before. Show me where it says that in the bill of rights.Our System is based on INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS not majority tyranny--ask any constitutional scholar that and theyll all agreesorry to sound like a broken record here, but don't you mean ask the LIBERAL scholars?

I'm serious, show me where it says there's seperation of church and state.

For that matter, if we're going by what the founders 'implied', then why can't we assume they never thought gay mariage a possibility, and thus the mariage laws imply man and woman? :Pthe entire point of the Bill of Rights is to protect the individual from the tyranny of the majority thats WHY it was written--also the founding fathers specifically came to america to escape religion mixed with govt that existed in europe at the time--why would they wanna repeat the same flawed system here that they were fleeing in europe? the founding fathers werent anti-religion but they were clear that govt was to be SECULAR--the founding fathers also believed everyone should be treated equally since thats the basis of the 14th amendment and maybe they didnt have gay marriage specifically in mind but I think over 200 years society changes--our rights dont

Look everyone! Cappa de Latta and the Red Arrow are in love!

*throws flowers*I agree with conservatives like Cappa when their right--people like Raysia are very dangerous in a democracy cause they want the church to be the govt (just like it was in the dark ages)excuse me? I want america to be a real democracy, that's all.

Nice sentiments.

I agree.

But in order to do that..you do realize that an entire revision of the electoral process, and the constittion would be in order, right?rephrase: LEAN towards a democracy, where the majority actually gets a say in the law of the land :) As opposed to a couple of activists in the government going "Hmm, I don't like this law, let's get rid of it. Screw what 2/3 of the nation thinks"the founding fathers opposed the tyranny of the majority which is why they wrote the Bill Of Rights--stay in schoolexcuse me? I never heard any of the BS before. Show me where it says that in the bill of rights.Our System is based on INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS not majority tyranny--ask any constitutional scholar that and theyll all agreesorry to sound like a broken record here, but don't you mean ask the LIBERAL scholars?

I'm serious, show me where it says there's seperation of church and state.

For that matter, if we're going by what the founders 'implied', then why can't we assume they never thought gay mariage a possibility, and thus the mariage laws imply man and woman? :Pthe entire point of the Bill of Rights is to protect the individual from the tyranny of the majority thats WHY it was written--also the founding fathers specifically came to america to escape religion mixed with govt that existed in europe at the time--why would they wanna repeat the same flawed system here that they were fleeing in europe? the founding fathers werent anti-religion but they were clear that govt was to be SECULAR--the founding fathers also believed everyone should be treated equally since thats the basis of the 14th amendment and maybe they didnt have gay marriage specifically in mind but I think over 200 years society changes--our rights dontallright, I'll consider buying that

Better.

But, let me ask you..'

Does that apply to the bad apples on your side of the political spectrum, as well as mine?Duh. well in a real democracy everyone has equal rightsNot necessarily. Criminals don't have the same rights as citizens... how can you possibly say everyone?

Granted, democracy has it';s flaws, we know that from the witch trials and mormon persecutions and slavery and all thatcriminals are a special case--but they chose that fate when they broke the law--nonlawbreakers tho are supposed to be treated equally under the lawSo... what would you consider equal rights? Are compensational Special Rights like Affirmative action considered equal rights? Or how about conditionally equal rights, like 'Gays can marry, as long as they do what marriage is, which involves a member of the opposite sex'?affirmative action has outlived its usefulness and should be phazed out or at the very least be based on class not race or gender--and making gays marry people of the opposite sex is the height of irrationality--marriage has nothing to do with genderI agree with you on Affirmative action, however, 2/3 of the US disagrees with you on marriage2/3 of the people cant force their morality on the individual

:o :D :) :wink:

Incertonia wrote:

Look everyone! Cappa de Latta and the Red Arrow are in love!

*throws flowers*

I throw in flowers too!

Neat to see the distinctions blur between professed liberals and conservatives. Too often both kinds of commentators lack acceptance for talkradio's essental element -- the callers!

Few if any national (USA) programs of either persuasion fill this need for me. There are some notable regional and local programs and commentators however. In my own state of Louisiana leaning right is Jeff Croure (<ringsidepolitics.com>) and leaning left is "Louisiana Live".
Jim Hightower's Hightower Report in Texas is another good show accomodating to multiple views even if the commentator is left leaning.

I'm definitely left of liberal, yet I believe it is just going to take progressives several years to reach an audience that right-wing talkradio has marketed and catered to.

8) Once again I am impressed with the blurring of distinctions here in NS.

Better.

But, let me ask you..'

Does that apply to the bad apples on your side of the political spectrum, as well as mine?Duh. well in a real democracy everyone has equal rightsNot necessarily. Criminals don't have the same rights as citizens... how can you possibly say everyone?

Granted, democracy has it';s flaws, we know that from the witch trials and mormon persecutions and slavery and all thatcriminals are a special case--but they chose that fate when they broke the law--nonlawbreakers tho are supposed to be treated equally under the lawSo... what would you consider equal rights? Are compensational Special Rights like Affirmative action considered equal rights? Or how about conditionally equal rights, like 'Gays can marry, as long as they do what marriage is, which involves a member of the opposite sex'?affirmative action has outlived its usefulness and should be phazed out or at the very least be based on class not race or gender--and making gays marry people of the opposite sex is the height of irrationality--marriage has nothing to do with genderI agree with you on Affirmative action, however, 2/3 of the US disagrees with you on marriage2/3 of the people cant force their morality on the individualAnd 2% of the people can't force 2/3 of the people to accept their lifestyle.

It appears we are at a stalemate here :)

because religions worship manmade dogma and sacrifice true spirituality on the altar of ignorance and fearYou have no proof that my religion practices manmade dogma. And we sacrafice spirituality for ignorance and fear? howso?

Man, you're not sounding too good right now... maybe you should be careful what you sayreligion is entirely based on manmade dogma-you worship words in cryptic books and deny yourself a chance to have direct contact with the God of the now

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." OK, so the government can't sponsor or attack religion... doesn't mean that the government must be atheist. You can be religious in general... as far as the government cares, there is a creator of some sort... that doesn't sponsor any one religion, it embraces practically all religions.

I don't see hwere it says you can't say merry christmas in school or post a multi-religious document like the ten commandmentsI agree with you on religious expression not being banned but it should encompass all religions including pagan ones--and the govt should be allowed to acknowledge God however they govt cannot pass religious LAWS

because religions worship manmade dogma and sacrifice true spirituality on the altar of ignorance and fearYou have no proof that my religion practices manmade dogma. And we sacrafice spirituality for ignorance and fear? howso?

Man, you're not sounding too good right now... maybe you should be careful what you sayreligion is entirely based on manmade dogma-you worship words in cryptic books and deny yourself a chance to have direct contact with the God of the nowExcuse me, but I strongly believe you are wrong. My books may be written by men, but they are servants of God. Prophets, great leaders, seers, and revelators. And cryptic? hardly.

And our books are considered secondary to service and prayer.

Care to actually make a point, rather than lumping my religion in with all the rest of them?

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." OK, so the government can't sponsor or attack religion... doesn't mean that the government must be atheist. You can be religious in general... as far as the government cares, there is a creator of some sort... that doesn't sponsor any one religion, it embraces practically all religions.

I don't see hwere it says you can't say merry christmas in school or post a multi-religious document like the ten commandmentsI agree with you on religious expression not being banned but it should encompass all religions including pagan ones--and the govt should be allowed to acknowledge God however they govt cannot pass religious LAWSRight.

So tell me... how exactly did marriage become a legal matter anyway? Why can't we make everyone happy and just legally refer to them all as civil unions, and let society and religion decide what a marriage is?

Better.

But, let me ask you..'

Does that apply to the bad apples on your side of the political spectrum, as well as mine?Duh. well in a real democracy everyone has equal rightsNot necessarily. Criminals don't have the same rights as citizens... how can you possibly say everyone?

Granted, democracy has it';s flaws, we know that from the witch trials and mormon persecutions and slavery and all thatcriminals are a special case--but they chose that fate when they broke the law--nonlawbreakers tho are supposed to be treated equally under the lawSo... what would you consider equal rights? Are compensational Special Rights like Affirmative action considered equal rights? Or how about conditionally equal rights, like 'Gays can marry, as long as they do what marriage is, which involves a member of the opposite sex'?affirmative action has outlived its usefulness and should be phazed out or at the very least be based on class not race or gender--and making gays marry people of the opposite sex is the height of irrationality--marriage has nothing to do with genderI agree with you on Affirmative action, however, 2/3 of the US disagrees with you on marriage2/3 of the people cant force their morality on the individualAnd 2% of the people can't force 2/3 of the people to accept their lifestyle.

It appears we are at a stalemate here :)the 2% isnt forcing anything--they just want the same rights the 2/3 takes for granted--the 2/3 are the ones forcing their morality

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." OK, so the government can't sponsor or attack religion... doesn't mean that the government must be atheist. You can be religious in general... as far as the government cares, there is a creator of some sort... that doesn't sponsor any one religion, it embraces practically all religions.

I don't see hwere it says you can't say merry christmas in school or post a multi-religious document like the ten commandmentsI agree with you on religious expression not being banned but it should encompass all religions including pagan ones--and the govt should be allowed to acknowledge God however they govt cannot pass religious LAWSRight.

So tell me... how exactly did marriage become a legal matter anyway? Why can't we make everyone happy and just legally refer to them all as civil unions, and let society and religion decide what a marriage is?

Becuase letting any religion decide whats best for me...is wrong.
No matter what that religion is.

Would you like a Catholic telling you what you can, or cant do?

Laws are for the state governments to create, or the Federal Government, second.

Churches cannot creatre laws becuase law applies to everyone.
Religions do not.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." OK, so the government can't sponsor or attack religion... doesn't mean that the government must be atheist. You can be religious in general... as far as the government cares, there is a creator of some sort... that doesn't sponsor any one religion, it embraces practically all religions.

I don't see hwere it says you can't say merry christmas in school or post a multi-religious document like the ten commandmentsI agree with you on religious expression not being banned but it should encompass all religions including pagan ones--and the govt should be allowed to acknowledge God however they govt cannot pass religious LAWSRight.

So tell me... how exactly did marriage become a legal matter anyway? Why can't we make everyone happy and just legally refer to them all as civil unions, and let society and religion decide what a marriage is?fine I can agree with that as long as everyone gets equal benefits which is the real issue here

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." OK, so the government can't sponsor or attack religion... doesn't mean that the government must be atheist. You can be religious in general... as far as the government cares, there is a creator of some sort... that doesn't sponsor any one religion, it embraces practically all religions.

I don't see hwere it says you can't say merry christmas in school or post a multi-religious document like the ten commandmentsI agree with you on religious expression not being banned but it should encompass all religions including pagan ones--and the govt should be allowed to acknowledge God however they govt cannot pass religious LAWSRight.

So tell me... how exactly did marriage become a legal matter anyway? Why can't we make everyone happy and just legally refer to them all as civil unions, and let society and religion decide what a marriage is?

Becuase letting any religion decide whats best for me...is wrong.
No matter what that religion is.

Would you like a Catholic telling you what you can, or cant do?

Laws are for the state governments to create, or the Federal Government, second.

Churches cannot creatre laws becuase law applies to everyone.
Religions do not.You missed it. I was half agreeing with you.

"Marriage" should be a term the government cares nothing about. It has too much meaning and significance to too many people.

Just call them all civil unions.

That way, gays can have unions, straights can have unions... whether or not polygamy will be allowed is another issue. Either way, "marriage" will be a ter reserved for societal use.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." OK, so the government can't sponsor or attack religion... doesn't mean that the government must be atheist. You can be religious in general... as far as the government cares, there is a creator of some sort... that doesn't sponsor any one religion, it embraces practically all religions.

I don't see hwere it says you can't say merry christmas in school or post a multi-religious document like the ten commandmentsI agree with you on religious expression not being banned but it should encompass all religions including pagan ones--and the govt should be allowed to acknowledge God however they govt cannot pass religious LAWSRight.

So tell me... how exactly did marriage become a legal matter anyway? Why can't we make everyone happy and just legally refer to them all as civil unions, and let society and religion decide what a marriage is?fine I can agree with that as long as everyone gets equal benefits which is the real issue hereOh, so equal benefits is the issue? If you haven't listened to right-wing talk radio for the last 6 months, they've all been saying they'd be happy to give gays civil unions, just as long as they didn't try to call it marriage.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." OK, so the government can't sponsor or attack religion... doesn't mean that the government must be atheist. You can be religious in general... as far as the government cares, there is a creator of some sort... that doesn't sponsor any one religion, it embraces practically all religions.

I don't see hwere it says you can't say merry christmas in school or post a multi-religious document like the ten commandmentsI agree with you on religious expression not being banned but it should encompass all religions including pagan ones--and the govt should be allowed to acknowledge God however they govt cannot pass religious LAWSRight.

So tell me... how exactly did marriage become a legal matter anyway? Why can't we make everyone happy and just legally refer to them all as civil unions, and let society and religion decide what a marriage is?

Becuase letting any religion decide whats best for me...is wrong.
No matter what that religion is.

Would you like a Catholic telling you what you can, or cant do?

Laws are for the state governments to create, or the Federal Government, second.

Churches cannot creatre laws becuase law applies to everyone.
Religions do not.You missed it. I was half agreeing with you.

"Marriage" should be a term the government cares nothing about. It has too much meaning and significance to too many people.

Just call them all civil unions.

That way, gays can have unions, straights can have unions... whether or not polygamy will be allowed is another issue. Either way, "marriage" will be a ter reserved for societal use.you can play whatever word games you want but religious people have no right to discriminate against same sex couples getting equal rights and benefits under the law

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." OK, so the government can't sponsor or attack religion... doesn't mean that the government must be atheist. You can be religious in general... as far as the government cares, there is a creator of some sort... that doesn't sponsor any one religion, it embraces practically all religions.

I don't see hwere it says you can't say merry christmas in school or post a multi-religious document like the ten commandmentsI agree with you on religious expression not being banned but it should encompass all religions including pagan ones--and the govt should be allowed to acknowledge God however they govt cannot pass religious LAWSRight.

So tell me... how exactly did marriage become a legal matter anyway? Why can't we make everyone happy and just legally refer to them all as civil unions, and let society and religion decide what a marriage is?

Becuase letting any religion decide whats best for me...is wrong.
No matter what that religion is.

Would you like a Catholic telling you what you can, or cant do?

Laws are for the state governments to create, or the Federal Government, second.

Churches cannot creatre laws becuase law applies to everyone.
Religions do not.You missed it. I was half agreeing with you.

"Marriage" should be a term the government cares nothing about. It has too much meaning and significance to too many people.

Just call them all civil unions.

That way, gays can have unions, straights can have unions... whether or not polygamy will be allowed is another issue. Either way, "marriage" will be a ter reserved for societal use.

Woah.

We were agreeing about something?

I feel so dirty now........ 8)
Not bad idea...

as for Polygamy...as long as the people involved are willing to agree to any legal matters after the marriage ends..(and it just may....)

I say..why not?

I wouldnt want to pay alimony for TWO ex wives...... :shock:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." OK, so the government can't sponsor or attack religion... doesn't mean that the government must be atheist. You can be religious in general... as far as the government cares, there is a creator of some sort... that doesn't sponsor any one religion, it embraces practically all religions.

I don't see hwere it says you can't say merry christmas in school or post a multi-religious document like the ten commandmentsI agree with you on religious expression not being banned but it should encompass all religions including pagan ones--and the govt should be allowed to acknowledge God however they govt cannot pass religious LAWSRight.

So tell me... how exactly did marriage become a legal matter anyway? Why can't we make everyone happy and just legally refer to them all as civil unions, and let society and religion decide what a marriage is?

Becuase letting any religion decide whats best for me...is wrong.
No matter what that religion is.

Would you like a Catholic telling you what you can, or cant do?

Laws are for the state governments to create, or the Federal Government, second.

Churches cannot creatre laws becuase law applies to everyone.
Religions do not.You missed it. I was half agreeing with you.

"Marriage" should be a term the government cares nothing about. It has too much meaning and significance to too many people.

Just call them all civil unions.

That way, gays can have unions, straights can have unions... whether or not polygamy will be allowed is another issue. Either way, "marriage" will be a ter reserved for societal use.you can play whatever word games you want but religious people have no right to discriminate against same sex couples getting equal rights and benefits under the lawswing and a miss

Oh, so equal benefits is the issue? If you haven't listened to right-wing talk radio for the last 6 months, they've all been saying they'd be happy to give gays civil unions, just as long as they didn't try to call it marriage.Sorry Raysia, but you're gonna have to back that one up, because when I've been listening and from the transcripts I've been reading, there's been no statement of that sort from any right-wing talk show host. None. Zip. Zero. Zilch. Nada.

You provide a link to a transcript where that's been offered and I'll cede the point, but I think you're mistaking what may be your own personal views with the view from the right.

Ummm, all of them!

Al "Liar" Franken??

Can anyone show me where EXACTLY Al Franken lied about anything?

Al "Liar" Franken??

Can anyone show me where EXACTLY Al Franken lied about anything?bump

So we're not going to acknowledge my sexy blue dolphin quote? Cuz that's a dirty, dirty lie.

Al "Liar" Franken??

Can anyone show me where EXACTLY Al Franken lied about anything?Naw, they can't. Maybe it's because he shouts "LIARRRRR!!!!!" on the show when they bust another right wing talking head. That's about all I can figure. :lol:

So we're not going to acknowledge my sexy blue dolphin quote? Cuz that's a dirty, dirty lie.Sexy blue dolphin quote? On this thread?

Al Franken is one big lie.Tell you what, I'll let you have that one, we'll never mention Franken again and we'll all agree that he's one big lie... if you can just provide us with one little one. One lie from Franken, and he's off the table. This is a No-Spin Zone :lol:

My response:

I'm a sexy blue dolphin with several hundred million clams clinging to my enormous underbelly.

I'm sorry I can't find the link to that, but I swear it's genuine.

(Heh, was in the right wing thread)

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." OK, so the government can't sponsor or attack religion... doesn't mean that the government must be atheist. You can be religious in general... as far as the government cares, there is a creator of some sort... that doesn't sponsor any one religion, it embraces practically all religions.

I don't see hwere it says you can't say merry christmas in school or post a multi-religious document like the ten commandmentsI agree with you on religious expression not being banned but it should encompass all religions including pagan ones--and the govt should be allowed to acknowledge God however they govt cannot pass religious LAWSRight.

So tell me... how exactly did marriage become a legal matter anyway? Why can't we make everyone happy and just legally refer to them all as civil unions, and let society and religion decide what a marriage is?fine I can agree with that as long as everyone gets equal benefits which is the real issue hereOh, so equal benefits is the issue? If you haven't listened to right-wing talk radio for the last 6 months, they've all been saying they'd be happy to give gays civil unions, just as long as they didn't try to call it marriage.So rightwingers are fighting tooth and nail over words? talk about PC speech code insanity on the right

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances." OK, so the government can't sponsor or attack religion... doesn't mean that the government must be atheist. You can be religious in general... as far as the government cares, there is a creator of some sort... that doesn't sponsor any one religion, it embraces practically all religions.

I don't see hwere it says you can't say merry christmas in school or post a multi-religious document like the ten commandmentsI agree with you on religious expression not being banned but it should encompass all religions including pagan ones--and the govt should be allowed to acknowledge God however they govt cannot pass religious LAWSRight.

So tell me... how exactly did marriage become a legal matter anyway? Why can't we make everyone happy and just legally refer to them all as civil unions, and let society and religion decide what a marriage is?

Becuase letting any religion decide whats best for me...is wrong.
No matter what that religion is.

Would you like a Catholic telling you what you can, or cant do?

Laws are for the state governments to create, or the Federal Government, second.

Churches cannot creatre laws becuase law applies to everyone.
Religions do not.You missed it. I was half agreeing with you.

"Marriage" should be a term the government cares nothing about. It has too much meaning and significance to too many people.

Just call them all civil unions.

That way, gays can have unions, straights can have unions... whether or not polygamy will be allowed is another issue. Either way, "marriage" will be a ter reserved for societal use.

Woah.

We were agreeing about something?

I feel so dirty now........ 8)
Not bad idea...

as for Polygamy...as long as the people involved are willing to agree to any legal matters after the marriage ends..(and it just may....)

I say..why not?

I wouldnt want to pay alimony for TWO ex wives...... :shock:polygamy should be legal too as should prostitution drugs unlimited gambling and incest

Dp

Dp

Dp

sorry for all the multiple posts--the server was effin me so I effed it right back