Harsh treatment? Something weird came up on the scanner. By procedure, he is supposed to have the pat down.
I don't like getting groped and molested at the airport either. But at least it's good to know that they're trying to apply that equally, regardless of how powerful the person might be.
Problem: The TSA has expanded their operations to trains and pulling-over cars along interstates. Also post offices and unemployment/social security buildings.
Citation Needed. I've never encountered the TSA in any of these situations. Any security I have encountered has been nowhere near TSA levels, and has been at a level appropriate to the location.
What else did you expect from a progressive? There is no Truth other than "that which serves the Party." Facts are ok unless they are in the way in which case invent some new ones and insist they are equally valid.
Because you're clearly the bastion of real truth, with all your lies and disinformation about what will happen if gay marriage is legal.
Fuck your persecution complex. You are the one actively trying to persecute people.
You have no fucking numbers to back this up and you fucking know it.
Go fuck yourself. You are quite frankly the worst bigot I have seen on here.
And no, you cannot use this as an example of "intolerance". You have to take responsibility for your positions. That involves getting called out as a bigoted piece of shit when you act like one.
Wrong. Once you legally redefine the word marriage all sorts of follow on side effects begin. Tolerance ends and acceptance on pain of government begins. Catholic Church doesn't believe it is right? Tough. Won't matter once the law changes, they will give em a full church wedding and place a child in their care through their adoption agency or the Justice Dept cornholes em. And the fun only begins in those obvious places. We will be cleaning up the messes in the laws for fifty years.
This is the most bigoted piece of trash I have seen written here. You are completely, utterly, 100% WRONG.
The Catholic Church, and EVERY OTHER RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION IN THE COUNTRY is already allowed to decide whether or not they want to perform a wedding. If the Catholic Church does not believe that you and your spouse will live a life consistent with their beliefs, they will deny the wedding. Same thing will happen with gay couples.
Or do you honestly believe that Islamic centers are being forced to provide weddings for Jewish couples?
Go fuck yourself, you ignorant, worthless, bigoted piece of trash.
Everyone who thinks I should be boiled in oil for daring to disagree should go watch South Park's "Death Camp of Tolerance" episode. Especially Mr. Garrison's rant at the end.
Except that doesn't agree with you in the slightest. Remember, he was trying to get fired because he was gay, and performing sex acts in front of the children. Such things would not be tolerated if they were straight, either.
The presence of legislation that allows two men or two women to marry each other has no impact on me or my heterosexual marriage.
I really, really wish everyone else thought like this. It would make the world a much better place to live in.
I would imagine there exist some small group of people who's hatred of gays is so fierce that they would refuse to do business with, and be employed by companies that support gay marriage. Fortunately for Microsoft, I don't believe many of them are highly tech savvy or awesome software engineers.
Good god, that post is such stupid bullshit. Using children as the reason to allow straight marriage but deny gay marriage is nothing short of ignorant.
Polygamy has a whole host of unique problems with it that simple, two people marriage doesn't. Nothing has to change at all, legally, for gay marriage to happen. When it comes to plural marriage, there are a number of things that can be different. Power of Attorney, for one. Divorce and custody of children, for another.
Not saying these can't be overcome. But there's a lot different between plural marriage and two people marriage, and posing the question like this is just a slippery slope argument.
Slashdot Mirror
No, he's right. On average, taking into account inflation, wages for working and middle class people have stayed mostly stagnant.
You can't honestly think to use the one anecdote of your case to try and prove something, can you?
I like how your first instinct is to jump to the slippery slope of incest. It really shows how you feel about gay marriage.
Harsh treatment? Something weird came up on the scanner. By procedure, he is supposed to have the pat down.
I don't like getting groped and molested at the airport either. But at least it's good to know that they're trying to apply that equally, regardless of how powerful the person might be.
Problem: The TSA has expanded their operations to trains and pulling-over cars along interstates. Also post offices and unemployment/social security buildings.
Citation Needed. I've never encountered the TSA in any of these situations. Any security I have encountered has been nowhere near TSA levels, and has been at a level appropriate to the location.
What else did you expect from a progressive? There is no Truth other than "that which serves the Party." Facts are ok unless they are in the way in which case invent some new ones and insist they are equally valid.
Because you're clearly the bastion of real truth, with all your lies and disinformation about what will happen if gay marriage is legal.
Fuck your persecution complex. You are the one actively trying to persecute people.
That makes it a good idea, not that there's any legal basis for it.
This is completely and utterly false. Marriage has been a civil institution for just as long, if not longer, than it's been a religious institution.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/mar_bene.htm
You have no fucking numbers to back this up and you fucking know it.
Go fuck yourself. You are quite frankly the worst bigot I have seen on here.
And no, you cannot use this as an example of "intolerance". You have to take responsibility for your positions. That involves getting called out as a bigoted piece of shit when you act like one.
Wrong. Once you legally redefine the word marriage all sorts of follow on side effects begin. Tolerance ends and acceptance on pain of government begins. Catholic Church doesn't believe it is right? Tough. Won't matter once the law changes, they will give em a full church wedding and place a child in their care through their adoption agency or the Justice Dept cornholes em. And the fun only begins in those obvious places. We will be cleaning up the messes in the laws for fifty years.
This is the most bigoted piece of trash I have seen written here. You are completely, utterly, 100% WRONG.
The Catholic Church, and EVERY OTHER RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION IN THE COUNTRY is already allowed to decide whether or not they want to perform a wedding. If the Catholic Church does not believe that you and your spouse will live a life consistent with their beliefs, they will deny the wedding. Same thing will happen with gay couples.
Or do you honestly believe that Islamic centers are being forced to provide weddings for Jewish couples?
Go fuck yourself, you ignorant, worthless, bigoted piece of trash.
Actually, they don't care about a goddamned piece of paper. They care about tax breaks and pensions.
And things like these: http://www.religioustolerance.org/mar_bene.htm
Everyone who thinks I should be boiled in oil for daring to disagree should go watch South Park's "Death Camp of Tolerance" episode. Especially Mr. Garrison's rant at the end.
Except that doesn't agree with you in the slightest. Remember, he was trying to get fired because he was gay, and performing sex acts in front of the children. Such things would not be tolerated if they were straight, either.
Which does kinda lead to the real problem. Intolerance.
Oh please. "Waaaaaaaa! We're experiencing intolerance because of our bigotry! Waaaaaaaaa"
Go fuck yourself. Maybe if you weren't "intolerant" in the first place, people wouldn't be calling you intolerant.
So the whole kerfuffle boils down to "we don't want gays to sign a piece of paper".
Well, there's also all the shit that goes with signing the paper. Things like being able to visit your spouse in the hospital.
Which of the benefits of marriage are they wanting?
Here's a list of about 1400 benefits that are given to married couples but denied gay couples: http://www.religioustolerance.org/mar_bene.htm
Homosexuality is a mental defect, albeit a minor one in the bigger scheme of things.
You have just shown yourself to be a bigoted asshole with that statement. Fuck you.
Why do people insist that we don't allow them to redefine perfectly good words that we are bigots
Why do you get to believe that you have a monopoly on what those words mean?
Face it: If you are against gay marriage, you are a bigot. End of story.
Chik-Fil-A is actively bigoted.
So the first question in any given social issue is often: is it better to accept one particular belief at the expense of another?
When one of those beliefs is actively denying basic human and civil rights to another class of people, then yes.
The presence of legislation that allows two men or two women to marry each other has no impact on me or my heterosexual marriage.
I really, really wish everyone else thought like this. It would make the world a much better place to live in.
I would imagine there exist some small group of people who's hatred of gays is so fierce that they would refuse to do business with, and be employed by companies that support gay marriage. Fortunately for Microsoft, I don't believe many of them are highly tech savvy or awesome software engineers.
Good god, that post is such stupid bullshit. Using children as the reason to allow straight marriage but deny gay marriage is nothing short of ignorant.
Polygamy has a whole host of unique problems with it that simple, two people marriage doesn't. Nothing has to change at all, legally, for gay marriage to happen. When it comes to plural marriage, there are a number of things that can be different. Power of Attorney, for one. Divorce and custody of children, for another.
Not saying these can't be overcome. But there's a lot different between plural marriage and two people marriage, and posing the question like this is just a slippery slope argument.
Or if you believe that marriage isn't inherently religious to start with.
The state has been involved in the contracts of marriage for just as long, if not longer, as religion has been.
You realize that stat is pretty old and outdated now, right? And that men, not women, are the ones suffering the most from the recession?
Nope. I'm pretty sure upholding of civil rights and reaffirming equality for all is something we should be pursuing and is in our best interests.