Remember how underdog John McCain kept saying he had the ascendant Democrats just where he wanted them? Maybe he had a point. In a new ABC News/Washington Post poll, 56 percent of Americans say they think Democrats will do a better job handling the country’s major challenges in the next few years. Just 23 percent say the same of Republicans. Those are some high expectations in hard times. As ABC News’ Rick Klein said: “The Democrats wanted to be in power, and they’ve gotten their wish. Can these numbers retain anything like their current shape once the reality of an Obama administration confronting manifold big problems sets in?”
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/22
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/22
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- DavidB on Health care reform would save state money
- DavidB on Minority status in Senate; majority approval at home
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/22
- American_Way on Open thread 11/22
219 Comments
After a few years or even months in office, one will be able to tell former Obama followers. They will be the ones with self-inflicted mutilations and pustulating vesicles caused by close contact fist bumping.
Yeah of course dems will be better at handling the problems. That’s a no-brainer. Its hard to do worse than the republicans have.
You are correct, P-Mom. Things have got so much better since the dems took over congress two years ago!
Obama Pays a Debt, Nixon style.
A new batch of Nixon tapes was released to the public recently. One tape features President Nixon and Charles Colson chortling over the appointment of Peter Brennan as Secretary of Labor. Brennan had been the head of the building and construction trades union in New York City. The tape confirms that Nixon and Colson viewed his selection as a masterstroke in their effort to bring the “hard hats” and other working class stalwarts into the Republican party.
Nixon and Colson do not seem to have been bothered by the fact that nothing in Brennan’s background indicated his fitness to run a sizeable bureaucracy with responsibility for an array of reasonably important programs affecting the lives of American workers. Nor did Brennan demonstrate such fitness during his two year stint at DOL. My father considered Brennan the worst Labor Secretary during his 25 plus year at the Department. (He considered Nixon’s other two Labor Secretaries, George Shultz and James Hodgson, the best).
Today we were treated to a post-modern version of the Brennan selection when President-elect Obama tapped Rep. Hilda Solis (D-CA) to be his Secretary of Labor. Solis is a “three-fer” – Hispanic, female, and long-time darling of organized labor (she co-sponsored the odious “Employee Free Choice Act”). Obama has rewarded organized labor for its backing in much the way Nixon rewarded those segments of the labor movement, led by Brennan, that supported him in 1972. And, as with Brennan, there is nothing in Solis’ background that suggests her fitness (intellectual or administrative) for the job of Labor Secretary.
The face of the labor movement has changed radically since the days of Brennan’s hard-hats. For example, Brennan and his “hard hats” would be appalled by Solis’s ultra-liberal views on illegal immigration ( reportedly, Solis once said “we are all Americans whether you are legalized or not”). But politics hasn’t changed much, and the Labor Department is still too often a political dumping ground.
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2008/12/022340.php
I think Obama will be more effective at bringing politicians together to get things done than Bush was. He doesn’t buy into the partisanship politics that we’ve endured the last 8 years. He’s more focused on getting to work than parroting ideology.
I’m sure his detractors will be so disappointed.
I love what Colin Powell said the other day, that as long as Rush Limbaugh remains the spokesperson for the Republican party, they won’t be making a comeback because Amerians are sick of of it.
Mary
You really should go read Limbaughs response to Powell. Powell made himself look a fool to anyone paying attention to what really happened. Here’s a taste. But go read it all.
“John McCain is and was Colin Powell’s ideal candidate. All these moderates, Bill Weld, all these moderates that crossed the aisle and voted for Obama, they got their ideal candidate, and they got their ideal campaign in McCain. Once McCain was nominated as the Republican candidate, largely by independents and Democrats voting in Republican primaries, Colin Powell waited ’til the last minute, when it would do the most damage to McCain and the Republicans and endorsed Obama. And when I said it was largely about race, that’s what set ‘em all off, you’re not supposed to say these kinds of things. This is supposed to go unspoken.
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_121508/content/01125106.guest.html
As Powell said, Limbaugh appeals to the lowest common denominator. Thanks for proving that, Heckler.
beber
Clueless.
Powell was a reluctant Republican by his own admission. He was a Republican to further his carear. Why would the party listen to anything he says?
Editing today are we Rhonda?
“Once McCain was nominated as the Republican candidate, largely by independents and Democrats voting in Republican primaries,” –
That’s not true. McCaine was nominated by Republicans. Democrats were fighting it out in the primaries, and every swinging dick was commited
That’s the sthick. A little lying, a slice of idiocy — “John McCain is and was Colin Powell’s ideal candidate” (So why did he endorse Obama)
And a bit of bigotry — “And when I said it was largely about race, that’s what set ‘em all off, you’re not supposed to say these kinds of things.”
Too appeal to people like you, Heckler. Baaa, baaa.
Bitter much Rhonda?
There is absolutely NO WAY democrats and Obama can screw this up.
Impossible. Impossible!!!
Don’t you see it?
.
.
.
Open your eyes!!
.
.
.
.
Here it comes:
EVERYTHING WAS SO SCREWED UP BY BUSH AND THE REPUBLICANS OF COURSE OBAMA CAN’T UNFUK IT!!!!
The ready made excuse came with the package.
Batteries not included.
“Once McCain was nominated as the Republican candidate, largely by independents and Democrats voting in Republican primaries”
heheh. HAHAHAHAHAHAH.
So.. rush’s operation chaos in the democratic primaries didnt work, but somehow, a stealth operation chaos by democrats in the republic primaries did work.
ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Um, ok.
Obama will be a one termer. Partly because yeah, bush as ratfuked as much as he possibly can, but also because he’s managing to piss off, one by one, every group that supported him.
Gosh Rhonda.
You wouldn’t be wishing hard times on your country for political reasons would you?
Here’s a hint. Hard times favors people and the party that cares about helping. Hard times are the creation of Republicans, not a recruitment opportunity.
23%?
Pretty optimistic actually considering Republicans are powerless.
ksfarmgrrl
Posted December 19, 2008 at 8:46 am | Permalink
Obama will be a one termer. Partly because yeah, bush as ratfuked as much as he possibly can, but also because he’s managing to piss off, one by one, every group that supported him.
—————————————————-
Big problems Yes, with the economy.
Social agenda’s sure as hell better be taking a back seat.
EVERYTHING WAS SO SCREWED UP BY BUSH AND THE REPUBLICANS OF COURSE OBAMA CAN’T UNFUK IT!!!!
nice to see it admitted.
You have the Supreme Court to continue your obstruction, Mr. Diarrhea.
beber
Posted December 19, 2008 at 8:54 am | Permalink
You have the Supreme Court to continue your obstruction, Mr. Diarrhea.
—————————————————-
Obstruction of what?
Unemployment is rising. The stock market is in the tank. 2,000,000 jobs lost is that this month or year?
And you want your newly elected President to concentrate on queer marriage?
Nice agenda.
“Social agenda’s sure as hell better be taking a back seat.”
Yeah. Because we all know the good ol’ usa is too incompetent to tackle more than one issue at a time.
Perhaps if bushco had spent less time gay bashing and promoting religion, the economy wouldnt be in the shithole?
…and so I’m guessing kia will be glad to drop the abortion and birth control jihads during this “social issue” moratorium?
heheheh. When hell freezes over.
Haven’t seen those on any ballots lately….
Oh, and drop the union bashing too. Because, ya know, america is too inept to do two things at one time. Save the economy first. You can screw over labor later.
Excuse me Kia?
Your ideas are out of favor. That is why your side is out of power.
Now, it may be that some of our leaders wish to pander to you.
Most of us are not so inclined.
Put simply? Sit down, shut up, and ride. Like your party took the country on the last 25 years only different.
“Haven’t seen those on any ballots lately….”
No, but it sure hasnt stopped your uber christian jihad now has it?
If you want another ass kicking today smart boy, bring it.
25 years?
What planet have you been on?
That would be 1983.
Not quite half of those had a Republican majority in the House.
Or are you too stupid to know how legislation actually works in this country?
“Once McCain was nominated as the Republican candidate, largely by independents and Democrats voting in Republican primaries”
hee hee heeeeeeeeee….
The repukes got punked. The minister of propaganda admits it.
ksfarmgrrl
Posted December 19, 2008 at 9:07 am | Permalink
“Haven’t seen those on any ballots lately….”
No, but it sure hasnt stopped your uber christian jihad now has it?
If you want another ass kicking today smart boy, bring it.
————————————————–
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
You mean like one of the basic Rights of protest?
How does it feel kia to have the majority of the nation reject your jihads by electing democratic majorities in the house, the senate, and the white house?
Really. How does it make you feel? Does your weenie shrink up like it would out in the cold?
Because that is what you and yours are. Out in the cold.
I wouldnt even pee on you to keep you warm.
“You mean like one of the basic Rights of protest?”
Oh, so you CAN do more than one thing at once? Who knew?
hehehe. HAHAHAHAH.
No, I think you were right the first time. YOUR social agenda will have to wait because american pea brains cant manage two tasks at once.
Makes ya proud, doesnt it?
Actually it’s all just more of a confirmation of my Faith.
Such a loving example you set.
ksfarmgrrl
Posted December 19, 2008 at 9:12 am | Permalink
“You mean like one of the basic Rights of protest?”
Oh, so you CAN do more than one thing at once? Who knew?
—————————————————-
I can multi-task quite well.
The Government, not so much.
One of the reasons I’m in favor of less instead of more.
Chuckle.. kfg’s posts would be a very good recruiting add for the right. Scary.
BlueJay, when do Americans start getting our Obama goodies packages?
“Actually it’s all just more of a confirmation of my Faith.”
So.. being a LOSER at all levels of government confirms your faith?
heheheh. HAHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH.
Some god ya have their. Do you worship at the church of the holy loser? Our lady of ass kickings?
St. America Rejected Me Cathedral?
must be.
Want me to share some scripture for you to reject? LOL
Yeah. I SEE how many you recruited for the right in the last election.
Loser.
Why dont you tell us outie how it feels to have americans reject you and yours at every level of government?
I mean, since I recruited so many voters for you…
…and how’s that labor killing effort going?
I see bushco caved on the free market thingy.
I guess that was my doing too.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHHAHAAHAHAHAHA
nitwit
“Want me to share some scripture for you to reject? LOL”
Sure.
I mean, since you have no brain to think for yourself, why dont you call your pastor and get him to tell you what to say.
I’ll kick both your dumb asses.
ksfarmgrrl
Posted December 19, 2008 at 9:22 am | Permalink
Yeah. I SEE how many you recruited for the right in the last election.
Loser.
—————————————————-
Your feelings about the rejection of your lifestyle are sure a whole lot more frightening. LOL HAHAHAHAHA
Really? Then you dont mind republicans and wingnuts being in the wilderness in the house, the senate, and the white house? You dont mind that democrats hold the majority of governorships?
Too stupid too see the ass kicking you got? Or you just dont have any feelings. Bots dont, ya know?
Why dont you tell us outie how it feels to have americans reject you and yours at every level of government?
———
OK, you convinced me. I’ve decided that I am now an ultra conservative Democrat. I’m one of you now.
And I want my goodies.
John 15:18-21 (New International Version)
The World Hates the Disciples
18″If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first. 19If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you. 20Remember the words I spoke to you: ‘No servant is greater than his master.’[a] If they persecuted me, they will persecute you also. If they obeyed my teaching, they will obey yours also. 21They will treat you this way because of my name, for they do not know the One who sent me.
And until you address a long standing question of mine to you on how it feels to be a walking/talking fulfillment of the word of God, I will not acknowledge any other questions of yours.
I’m glad that we can so easily change sides. I’ll go with the flow. I may have even voted for Obama.
Hey Kia?
Was it your faith got you from California…
to Kansas?
You know, I may be able to contribute to my new party in ways that I couldn’t in the Republican party. They need a counterbalance to the wackos.
This is a good idea.
#
ksfarmgrrl
Posted December 19, 2008 at 9:26 am | Permalink
Really? Then you dont mind republicans and wingnuts being in the wilderness in the house, the senate, and the white house? You dont mind that democrats hold the majority of governorships?
Too stupid too see the ass kicking you got? Or you just dont have any feelings. Bots dont, ya know?
=====================
Hi baby sis,
Make me some xmas divinity candy pla…
:)
BlueJay
Posted December 19, 2008 at 9:36 am | Permalink
Hey Kia?
Was it your faith got you from California…
to Kansas?
—————————————————-
Tough one to answer. Not really, it’s been career related both times I’ve moved here.
And frankly I don’t like as much about the Christian community in this area as in California to be honest.
I wonder if I will get invited to the double top secret lunch meetings?
outlander
Posted December 19, 2008 at 9:39 am | Permalink
I wonder if I will get invited to the double top secret lunch meetings?
—————————————————-
Are those the same one’s that Tony Romo and Jason Whitten are holding? LOL
Hold your breath outlander.
“And until you address a long standing question of mine to you on how it feels to be a walking/talking fulfillment of the word of God, I will not acknowledge any other questions of yours.”
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH.
Ah yes, the poor, poor, POOR persecuted christian whine.
Pobrecito
I love it when one day they are crowing about being the majority, and the next day they are whining about their persecution.
But then, to believe the bible is the actual word of some sky god, I guess such mental gymnastics are no problem.
Awwwwwww….
outie has his widdle feewings hurt?
WHO the hell would want to have lunch with you?
The food would be cold by the time you finished your sky god blessing….
There’s a difference between persecution and hatred.
Really? Do tell. It’s all the same to me and mine.
And how about a little cheese to go with that persecution whiiiiiiiine?
Persecution is the mistreatment of a group by another group.
Hatred are intense feelings of dislike.
I wouldn’t be so close minded as yourself to think that all who share your belief system feel towards Christians as you do.
In fact, I have a friend and former co-worker that is Gay and considers himself a Christian.
I’m an atheist but the Christians have as much right to their opinions as I do mine
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5DmYLrxR0Y8
#
BlueJay
Posted December 19, 2008 at 9:42 am | Permalink
Hold your breath outlander.
————
Ah, my Democrat brother BJ. Let’s talk soon about how we get our party moving in the right direction.
So when do those goodies start flowing?
They have a right to their opinions. They do NOT have the right to make their religious beliefs the law of the land.
Do you not understand that?
And kia, no surprise there. There were jews who cooperated with the nazis too.
And guys like clarence thomas.
Big eye roll.
And kia, no surprise there. There were jews who cooperated with the nazis too.
—————————————————-
And you are talking about Christians whining about persecution?
They do NOT have the right to make their religious beliefs the law of the land.
Do you not understand that?
yes
http://www.virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=9513
http://www.narth.com/docs/sweden.html
An interesting statistic from a suspect source.
The IMAPP report notes that in Sweden, between 1995 and 2002, there were 1,526 gay partnerships contracted, compared to 280,000 for heterosexual couples. Five out of 1,000 new couples in Sweden are same-sex. Sixty-two percent of those are male same-sex unions.
In Sweden, where the partnerships are available, less than half a percent of “marriages” are among same sex couples.
Nice conflation. Telling the truth vs whiiiiining. There were jews who cooperated with the nazi’s. Something false about that statment?
When you have your marriage nullified or forbidden, give me call.
Let me explain. Essentially my sister Democrat (she denies it, but where else would she go) is saying that opinions that have a basis in religion are not valid. Pool hall opinions, however, are valid.
“less than half a percent of “marriages” are among same sex couples.”
Yeah, but that less than half percent still make jesus cry according to the wingnuts.
“is saying that opinions that have a basis in religion are not valid”
Hehe. I just said the opposite. You pick and chose here just like you do with your bible.
You have a right to your opinions, no matter how nutty they may be. You do NOT have the right to make those nutty opinions the law.
I havent voted for a democrat for years. But nice try at lying about something you already knew.
ksfarmgrrl
Posted December 19, 2008 at 10:18 am | Permalink
Nice conflation. Telling the truth vs whiiiiining. There were jews who cooperated with the nazi’s. Something false about that statment?
When you have your marriage nullified or forbidden, give me call.
—————————————————-
You’re comparing the fact you can’t legally get married in 48 states to the holocaust?
“There is now overwhelming evidence that the consecration of V. Gene Robinson, a non-celibate homosexual to the episcopacy, has been a huge net loss to the church.”
There was NOTHING in the article to prove that. There was correlation, but no proof of causation.
And ALL churches are losing attendance and members, according to a link and map YOU posted.
So Gene Robinson is so powerful he’s killing ALL churches? Dude, I want HIM for president!
I’m surprised at you annie moose. You are usually full of logic and dont make those kind of correlation is not causation mistakes.
“You’re comparing the fact you can’t legally get married in 48 states to the holocaust?”
Please post where I said that.
I said there were jews that cooperated with the nazis.
Is there some part of that statement that compares this with the holocaust?
Dumbass. You need a course in basic reading.
So annie? Robinson was elected bishop in 2003 and entered office on March 7, 2004.
Your article talks about losses from 1997-2007.
Who was responsible for the losses between ‘97 and 2004?
The Flying Spaghetti Monster?
ksfarmgrrl
Posted December 19, 2008 at 10:26 am | Permalink
“You’re comparing the fact you can’t legally get married in 48 states to the holocaust?”
Please post where I said that.
I said there were jews that cooperated with the nazis.
Is there some part of that statement that compares this with the holocaust?
Dumbass. You need a course in basic reading.
————————————————–
I don’t know what other conclusion might one come to when discussing Jews and Nazis in the same sentence? A clambake?
Bebe,
“In Sweden, where the partnerships are available, less than half a percent of “marriages” are among same sex couples.”
If such is the case, then why are all those good christians so deathly afraid of gay marriage? Is the threat that everybody will then see how lacking in gaiety christian marriages are?
Why surprised KFG? Let the market place of ideas decide. You may not realize it but you are winning these things take time,
Jeebus kia, that’s not even a logical leap. It’s a jump off the cliff.
Are you that desperate? heheheh. HAHAAHAHHAAHHAHA
No. No other conclusion possible. BIG eye roll.
I guess by talking about Uncle Tom Thomas, I’m also saying gays were slaves?
jesus WEPT!!!!!
“If such is the case, then why are all those good christians so deathly afraid of gay marriage?”
Obviously, their lives are ruled by the fear that somewhere, someone, could be happy without their blessing.
Annie, do you not see that you are conflating correlation with causation?
Are you proud of that “logic”?
And how do you account for the loss of members in denominations that do not ordain gay clergy?
Come on, I really want your answer.
ksfarmgrrl
Posted December 19, 2008 at 10:33 am | Permalink
Jeebus kia, that’s not even a logical leap. It’s a jump off the cliff.
Are you that desperate? heheheh. HAHAAHAHHAAHHAHA
No. No other conclusion possible. BIG eye roll.
I guess by talking about Uncle Tom Thomas, I’m also saying gays were slaves?
jesus WEPT!!!!!
————————————————–
Nope. You stepped in it big time and are covering that bottom of yours.
Keep digging. It’s fun to watch.
Oh pul-eeze. You draw your conclusions on something other than logic and what was actually written.
There are gay republicans too. Talk about self loathing….
Farm Gal,
Kia knows what he knows. Please don’t try to confuse him with anything as irrelevant as facts; it violates EPA standards covering raw sewage disposal when his head explodes!
Yes , I am proud of that logic.
Your opinion are yours in time you will be equals to
???? shoving it up peoples asses serves no one. It is what is.
Wow, so you do think correlation equals causation?
heheh. HAHAHAAAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA
And still no answer to the question of why the loss in attendance in denominations that do not ordain gay clergy?
Come on annie. I always thought you were better than that.
“shoving it up peoples asses serves no one”
you might try telling that to the chritianists here.
I’m not the one who’s “opinion” is being made into law.
Keep digging.
A Christian Homosexual was compared to:
ksfarmgrrl
Posted December 19, 2008 at 10:09 am | Permalink
And kia, no surprise there. There were jews who cooperated with the nazis too.
So a homosexual that is Christian is not unlike a Jew cooperating with Nazis?
The same Nazi’s that killed 6,000,000 Jews?
“Please don’t try to confuse him with anything as irrelevant as facts”
Yeah Jed. They are entitled to their own opinons, not their own facts.
KFG,
why do you give a flying f@ck what these people think? Your life is your own.
“There were jews who cooperated with the nazis too.”
And there were slaves that cooperated with the masters.
There are gay republicans.
In your fairy tale book, jesus was betrayed by one of his own.
Those are FACTS, not conclusions. Really. You do need a dictionary.
You are drawing a conclusion not based on fact.
Color me surprised.
“why do you give a flying f@ck what these people think?”
Uh, because LAWS are being made on their bigotry?
When the hell did you become a proponent of theocracy?
Answer my question annie. HOW do you account for the decline in membership of denominations that do not ordain gay clergy.
And how do you make the leap from declining episcopal memebership with Gene Robinson, when the decline started six years BEFORE he was ordained?
Farm Gal,
The Unitarian-Universalist Church not only ordains GLBT clergy, it has actively sought them out since 1974. They’ve been steadily growing while the others decline.
Keep back peddling. HAHAHAHAHHAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
“The Unitarian-Universalist Church not only ordains GLBT clergy, it has actively sought them out since 1974. They’ve been steadily growing while the others decline.”
Looks like obama and bush are not the only ones incapable of admitting they made a mistake.
We can add annie and kia to that list as well.
Thank you Jed,
KFG,
I support 100%.But sometimes you are your own worst enemy lighten up girl.
Just admit you are wrong to compare a Homosexual Christian to a Jew cooperating with Nazi’s and I’ll drop it.
When I’m treated equally under the law, I’ll lighten up.
Would you say that to any other group?
I’m still waiting on your answers to my questions.
“Just admit you are wrong to compare a Homosexual Christian to a Jew cooperating with Nazi’s”
Why is that wrong? They are both enabling their oppressors.
And why would I want you to drop it? With every post, you prove you are a dumbass who cant read and who makes leaps that are not based in logic.
Keep it up dude!
Sorry,
If I have disappointed you KFG
“KFG,
I support 100%”
Thank you for that.
So.. WTF was the posting of that article about? The one that, ya know, conflated correlation with causation.
And why cant you admit it? Or answer my questions?
Faulty logic is faulty logic. It doesnt make you a bad person, and if you REALLY support equality?
You wont change your mind based on false logic. Or me.
And you shove your head up your ass by not admitting the logical conclusion.
You just said it yourself you dumb cunt. OPPRESSORS.
So you not being able to get married in 48 states (which most Christians support) is akin to the oppression of the Nazi’s over the Jews, which was the murder of 6,000,000.
I can’t decide if you are really that stupid or it’s just the hate.
Does smegma kill brain cells?
In a survey,[28] Unitarian Universalists in the United States were asked which provided term or set of terms best describe their belief. Many respondents chose more than one term to describe their beliefs. The top choices were:
* Humanist – 54%
* Agnostic – 33%
* Earth-centered – 31%
* Atheist – 18%
* Buddhist – 16.5%
* Christian – 13.1%
* Pagan – 13.1%
So Jed, what does this church believe?
To be fair Church attendance is in decline use the google to see for yourselves
“So you not being able to get married in 48 states (which most Christians support) is akin to the oppression of the Nazi’s over the Jews”
Kia, NO ONE HERE said that. Yes, gay people are oppressed here. That does NOT equate to the holocaust, except in your mind.
Keep it up dude. You are the perfect example of the failure of education in the united states. You wouldnt know logic 101 if it bit you in the ass.
CHRISTIAN HOMO = JEW NAZI.
Said it yourself.
I find it really interesting that you pick that one statement, and dont also say that I’m equating being gay to slavery, or whatever else fucked up logic you are using.
Jews cooperated with nazis.
Slaves cooperated with their masters.
Gay republicans cooperate with bigotry.
Gay christians cooperate with bigotry.
What is false about those statements?
And how can you draw an unrelated conclusion from a statement of fact.
Oh hell, you believe god came to earth. I guess leaps of nonsense are second nature to you.
From another blog.
”
Advertisements [?]
Barack Obama is defending his invitation to Rick Warren with a plea for postpartisanship.
What I’ve also said is that it is important for America to come together even though we may have disagreements on certain social issues… That dialogue, I think, is a part of what my campaign’s been all about, that we’re never going to agree on every single issue. What we have to do is create an atmosphere where we can disagree without being disagreeable, and then focus on those things that we hold in common as Americans.
Greg Seargant asks “why campaigning against division and polarization by picking an equally radical choice on the left to give the invocation would be politically unthinkable?”
Meanwhile, consider how agreeable Warren himself chose to be — how open to dialogue — after the gay group Soulforce prematurely announced that leaders of Warren’s Saddleback church, perhaps including Warren and his wife Kay, had agreed to break bread with gay Christian families on Father’s Day:
We did not invite this group and I will not be meeting with them. They invited themselves to draw attention to their cross country publicity stunt. My staff has already told them that neither my wife nor I will meet with them for any discussion or debate.
Bear in mind that the Soulforce families were not asking to speak from the pulpit, or for Warren to publicly embrace them. They wanted a private conversation, to let Warren get to know some real people who were being hurt by his teachings and actions. And yet, not a chance.
Soulforce was traveling, by the way, with a mediator of sorts: gay-affirming pastor Jay Bakker. If Obama is really committed to having all Americans come together, he’ll have Jay up there on January 20 too.”
http://www.radosh.net/archive/002563.html
“CHRISTIAN HOMO = JEW NAZI.
Said it yourself.”
Yes, I said that. I’m not denying it.
But.. it does NOT follow that I think unequal treatment under the law is equal to the holocaust.
That is YOUR conclusion, not mine.
KFG, I am going to ask you an innocent question so don’t jump down my throat about it. OK? Precisely what specific rights or benefits do you want from the government/Obama?
Outie,
“So Jed, what does this church believe?”
The U-U’s don’t have a creed (I know, you can’t imagine a church without one), are accepting of a wide range of belief systems from atheist/agnostic to gaeist to christian to pagan to eastern to humanist and manage to get along with each other, which is more than you can say about most churches.
Actually, among the choices you listed, most of them embrace more than one. You can be a christian for instance and still be a humanist and a gaeist who finds something worthwhile in Buddhist teaching. I know it’s a bit much to wrap your one-track mind around, but religions aren’t necessarily mutually exclusive.
Sounds more like a social club, Jed.
Jed,
If you don’t stand for something, you will fall for anything.
Monique and Outlander trust me you are beating your heads against a brick wall. KFG wants what she wants and she won’t be happy until she gets it. She can make those around her miserable. She doesn’t care. She can post all day long about what she hasn’t been given without seeing anything outside those parameters.
Good luck with what you are trying to do.
Heheheheh. A church actually has growing attendance and all outlander can do is question whether or not it is a real church. Like, ya know, one that agrees with the ones losing members. Like, ya know, his. If it doesnt adopt outlander’s beliefs, it cant be a REAL church.
Monique, I dont even want to dignify you with a response, but here goes.
I want my marriage to have equal protection and recognition under secular law to your marriage. Will all the same benefits, rights, and privileges. If it makes YOU feel better to call it a civil union, fine with me. It’s the equality not the name that matters.
I want it to be illegal, in all fifty states, for employers to fire people or discriminate against them for the sole reason of being lgbt. I want equal treatment in housing, employment, and all areas of civil law.
WTF is so hard to understand about that.
I do NOT want the approval of your church. I do NOT want you to be forced to marry gay people in your church. And making my marriage legal would not force you to do a goddam thing inside your church. Divorce is legal in all fifty states and no one is forcing the catholics to marry divorced people. I mean they do, with some really funny and fancy footwork, but that’s because they need the money and the members, not because the law forces them to do so.
If you refuse to give my marriage the same protection under civil law, then I want the government, at all levels to STOP recognizing any marriage under the law. If you expect me to go without the benefits of marriage with the partner of my choice, I expect you to do the same.
Anything else is unamerican.
Now, WTF do YOU want?
And if a person doesn’t “stand for” the exact belief system someone else embraces, that means what? Does it mean they are wrong, lost, or would you consider it means they have searched their soul and committed to their own personal belief? That each person will be held accountable for themselves if there is an accounting?
“. KFG wants what she wants and she won’t be happy until she gets it.”
Duh. No shit.
Anything else would be a break in integrity.
Not that germie would know a goddam thing about integrity.
Hi Linda. I’m glad you are here. I’m sorry if I offended you yesterday. I think you are one of the best people I know. I disagree with you about obama, but it doesnt change my opinion of you as a great example of what humans can be.
I dont give a damn what “belief system” someone holds.
I do give a damn about equal treatment under secular law.
Isnt it interesting that “monique” and grmie showed up at exactly the same time last night and today?
“KFG wants what she wants and she won’t be happy until she gets it. ”
Is that not the definition of what it means to be free?
I worded that impulsively and badly as I was struck by the hypocrisy of how the quote stood in context.
“KFG wants what she wants and she won’t be happy until she gets it. ”
Is that not the essence of the pursuit and defense of liberty?
“monique” must be on another “board” again….
Who wants to bet she’ll forget the question when and if she gets back?
“Is that not the essence of the pursuit and defense of liberty?”
Germie and her ilk dont want that. They only want theocracy, because, ya know, they want what they want and they wont be happy until they STILL get it.
Heckler–
Solis is a major supporter of the Employee Free Choice Act which makes it slightly easier to unionize.
Viva Solis! And screw you, loser.
farmgrll, expressing anger at the inequality forced on you by a country where all are supposed to be equal under the law will never offend me.
As for Obama, I still think he will do some good and maybe some great things for our country and her citizens. And I’m willing to wait until he has done (or hasn’t done) something that affects civil rights to judge him.
Warren is a citizen just like every other citizen. I feel everyone, no matter what they believe or espouse, should be included in our government and that like Obama says, “We are one America.”
Now, as for the rights of Americans and the laws of our land, some, and I hope Warren is one of them, will be disappointed. His prejudices shouldn’t be allowed in America’s laws. I hope that is the direction we are headed — sooner rather than later!
But Warren is still a citizen of the same country as you and I. Just as I swallow hard at laws such as capital punishment which I am against, I hope Warren and his ilk must swallow hard that equality for all Americans won’t be decided on their religious prejudices.
Outie,
“Sounds more like a social club, Jed.”
And your church sounds more like a greedy, nasty political party run by snake-oil peddlers.
Mega dittos to what KSFrrmGrrl wrote to Monique.
The American Psychological Association long ago declared that a gay sexual orientation is not a mental illness.
It’s high time for the rest of society to come up to speed on this issue–stop stigmatizing it, stop legally discriminating against it.
What I hear the GLBT community saying is the same thing I heard the feminist movement saying 20 years ago and the Civil Rights movement before that: just treat us the way you treat yourselves.
Unsurprisingly, the same CONs who made political hay by fighting (and losing against) those two movements are fighting this one.
“If you don’t stand for something, you will fall for anything.” — Monique_J
—
My 12:04 post was in response to this post. I just wondered if Monique was tolerant enough to allow each person their own belief system?
In a survey,[28] Unitarian Universalists in the United States were asked which provided term or set of terms best describe their belief. Many respondents chose more than one term to describe their beliefs. The top choices were:
* Humanist – 54%
* Agnostic – 33%
* Earth-centered – 31%
* Atheist – 18%
* Buddhist – 16.5%
* Christian – 13.1%
* Pagan – 13.1%
No offense Jed, especially is you attend there. It’s just that since no agrees on anything, what would you do at church? Can you imagine the poor pastor trying to give a sermon. He couldn’t get a word out before he offended someone.
I suppose the church message could be that you have to find your own way, because we sure don’t have any answers. Christians, you could be right, atheists, you could be right, Mother Earth worshipers, you could be right and so on.
I wonder if that is Chas’s church? (If he really is a minister)
In my new role as ultra conservative Democrat, I am trying to get the lay of the land so that I can determine where to throw my support as we move our party forward.
So bear with me as I continue to ask questions.
Back to the orginal thread–The fact that Obama is not Bush and that the Congress is not RepubliCON is a huge step in the right direction.
Will we get universal health care and cut carbon emissions and balance the budget and stop the recession and end the war all in four years?
Of course not. Major CON Grover Norquist said at the beginning of the WorstPresidentEver era that he wanted to “drown government in the bathtub.” They very nearly succeeded. You can’t undo that in a few years.
But at least we’re headed in a more sane direction.
I had a professor once claim that “serial polygamy” was a cultural norm in this country. In other words it was okay to be married to more than one spouse, but just one at a time. I think he may have exaggerated a little bit, but if I am reading these statistics correctly, 28% of adults currently married have been married at least one time previously.
http://www.remarriage.com/Remarriage-Facts/Remarriage-after-divorce.html
Isn’t any one troubled that this sizable minority are not in step with state constitution that stipulates Marriage is to be between “one man and one woman”.
Outlander–
Why don’t you go to a UU church and find out for yourself?
Unlike your church, you don’t have to recite a loyalty oath to get in the door . . .
Farmgrrl, I love you! Now, I hope I haven’t offended you! I can’t even begin to understand the impact of this on you. I’m sorry about that. But I haven’t walked that mile in your shoes and I’m not sure I would ever be able to fully understand the depth of emotions you have every right to feel.
Like Monkeyhawk said yesterday (better than I ever will be able to say), I also can’t understand why anyone would deny you or any other person equal rights under the law. I don’t ‘get’ why that would take anything away from another or what purpose it serves.
Guess what I’m admitting is I can’t understand either side very well. I can’t even understand why there are sides.
Linda, I certainly do believe we are all entitled to our own beliefs. I have never said otherwise.
C’mon down for FG’s pity party Libertards.
SWINNNNGGGG LOWWWWWWWW SWEEEEEEEETTTT CHARRRRIIOOOOOOOTTTTT.
HAHA! Good question, Steven.
Christians like Hank have no problem with having been divorced and remarried, even though no less than Jesus says, “he that divorces one wife and marries another is guilty of adultery.”
You see, Hank is “forgiven” for that sin . . . even though he continues to live in adultery with his second wife every day. He hasn’t renounced that sin or discontinued that sin. Far from it, he continues to celebrate it and enjoy it.
So to be more specific, Hank (and all the other CONs like John McCain who’ve traded in the old model and upgraded to the new wife) has finessed the scripture which he claims is true and inviolate for all-time by interpreting in a way that allows him to forgive himself.
If you can do that, you can accept gay marriage too.
KFG, Thank you for a half-way civil response. I agree with what you said about employers and landlords. That part I understand. But, what specifically are the “benefits, rights and privileges” of marriage that you are referring to?
Gee, guess what. “monique” didnt answer my question.
WTF do YOU want?
And why did you ask what I want?
Sorry, posts crossed.
“But, what specifically are the “benefits, rights and privileges” of marriage that you are referring to?”
The same ones that straight marriages have. Do you know what they are? Then good. Those are the same ones I want. WTF is so hard to understand about that?
Is there some part of the word “equality” that you dont understand?
A title then?
Seems like a lot of arm waving and hate mongering for a title.
“WTF do YOU want?
And why did you ask what I want?”
“A title then?”
Thanks for proving, again, what a simple, obtuse ass you are.
Monique–
Are you serious?
Let’s say you’re Mrs. Smith, married to Mr. Smith.
Mr. Smith was in a terrible car accident that broke his neck. If your name is Mrs. Smith, you go right in to the hospital room, no question about it. You become your husband’s proxy if risky surgery or treatment is needed and he is comatose.
Let’s say, God forbid, Mr. Smith dies. You are protected under a myriad of laws to legally inherit his property.
You get a tax break under Federal law for “married, filing jointly” and any children you can declare will get you a 3000 dollar exclusion (or something like that).
Let’s say you want to talk to a counsellor at school about Mr. Smith’s son who’s been acting up. You say “I am Mrs. Smith” and they put you right through.
NOW . . . try any of that if you’re not married or the gay partner of Mr. Smith.
Sheesh, where have you been, Monique?
Well seriously FG, that’s what it is.
You can pursue the same legal rights and in most states have the same as any couple has from the title of marriage. Except of course the title of married, husband and wife, etc.
Outie,
“I suppose the church message could be that you have to find your own way, because we sure don’t have any answers. Christians, you could be right, atheists, you could be right, Mother Earth worshipers, you could be right and so on.”
You really can’t figure it out, can you? You can’t stretch your mind around the possibility that they’re ALL right, and that denying the truth of any of them is the real sin. That’s not a telescope you’re looking through, it’s a tunnel!
CapnAmerica
Posted December 19, 2008 at 12:51 pm | Permalink
Monique–
Are you serious?
Let’s say you’re Mrs. Smith, married to Mr. Smith.
Mr. Smith was in a terrible car accident that broke his neck. If your name is Mrs. Smith, you go right in to the hospital room, no question about it. You become your husband’s proxy if risky surgery or treatment is needed and he is comatose.
Let’s say, God forbid, Mr. Smith dies. You are protected under a myriad of laws to legally inherit his property.
You get a tax break under Federal law for “married, filing jointly” and any children you can declare will get you a 3000 dollar exclusion (or something like that).
Let’s say you want to talk to a counsellor at school about Mr. Smith’s son who’s been acting up. You say “I am Mrs. Smith” and they put you right through.
NOW . . . try any of that if you’re not married or the gay partner of Mr. Smith.
Sheesh, where have you been, Monique?
————————————————–
I happen to know a Gay couple in Wichita that has all of those rights without being married.
Things like a living will, power of attorney, etc.
“You can pursue the same legal rights and in most states have the same as any couple has from the title of marriage.”
Really? Can I collect on my spouses social security? Put her on my health insurance as my spouse? Can her children get benefits from social security if I die while they are young?
Do YOU have to pay for a lawyer to transfer property upon death? Or does your spouse just get what they deserve without a myriad of legal papers. Do you have to hire a lawyer so yours spouse can make medical decisions? Is it illegal for you to adopt your spouse’s children in some states?
Like I said, thanks for proving again what a simple, obtuse asshole you are.
In the world of business, if you’re married, you can use your spouse’s credit worthiness to get a car or a house loan.
All the money saved in IRA’s, bank accounts, 401k’s etc are automatically yours in the event of the death of your spouse.
Any assets earned by either spouse while the spouses were married is subject to equal division upon the legal dissolution of that marriage.
This is just a superficial examination of the many, many legal and financial benefits accrued by marriage.
“I happen to know a Gay couple in Wichita that has all of those rights without being married.”
You are utterly, and completely, full of shit.
Just ask this gay couple you supposedly know if they can file joint tax returns. Or collect social security. Or have a health insurance policy that covers both of them and their respective children.
Go ahead. Ask them. We’ll wait. When they’ve stopped laughing at you, and if they dont beat the shit out of you, you can post the answer.
Jesus WEPT.
Sure, Mr. Kia–
And it only cost them thousands of dollars in legal fees.
Plus, they have to carry around legal documents just so they can talk to their own child at school or see their spouse in the hospital.
Wow. Some equality . . .
If you don’t have a Will, you’re an idiot for starters. That alone would take care of half your argument.
In cases of insurance it is the issue of the provider. Are all homosexuals on Government Cheese?
Capn the tax exclusion doesn’t hold water. If you remember your history correctly ‘the marriage penalty’ charged married couples more for being married than it did singles.
———————-
The marriage penalty aspect of the federal tax code was built into the federal tax tables. Higher taxes were required for a married couple who earned the same as two single individuals. It didn’t make any difference if the married couple filed jointly or separately.
From 1913 to 1969, married couples had an advantage when it came to income taxes. However, because of the 1948 income-splitting tax-code which many thought was unfair to singles, the law was changed in 1969. The tax raise of 1993 made matters even worse for married couples. Married folks also took a hit by some targeted tax cuts enacted in 1997.
Prior to 2003, if both spouses earned about the same amount of money, then they ended up in a higher tax bracket and were penalized for being married. Actually, the smaller the difference between what they each earned, the higher the marriage penalty. However, if one spouse earned a good salary, and the other didn’t, then they weren’t penalized. The marriage penalty could affect couples in all income brackets, though. A couple who married could lose earned income tax credits that they had received as singles.
The Congressional Budget Office estimated that in 1996 the average marriage tax penalty was about $1,400 which adversely affected 42% of all married couples. Many believe that some couples chose not to marry because of the tax penalty.
2003 Tax Law Changes
In 2003 the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 reduced the impact of the marriage penalty on married couples who choose to file jointly on their income taxes. This was done by equalizing the standard deduction for singles and married couples and increasing the end point of the 15 percent tax bracket for married couples filing jointly.
The marriage penalty still exists for some couples depending on their tax bracket.
http://marriage.about.com/od/finances/a/marriagepenalty.htm
—————
As KFG says you can have your own opinions but not your own facts. This is just another of those little fables the gay community has put out as a red herring.
I quiet frankly don’t care what KFG wants or gets but I wish her vision would improve so she can see beyond the end of her nose.
Capn everything else you mentioned can be handled by a lawyer and a few simple documents. If KFG could get everything she asks for and it wasn’t called marriage she would not be happy.
CapnAmerica
Posted December 19, 2008 at 12:59 pm | Permalink
Sure, Mr. Kia–
And it only cost them thousands of dollars in legal fees.
Plus, they have to carry around legal documents just so they can talk to their own child at school or see their spouse in the hospital.
Wow. Some equality . .
————————————————–
See above. If you want any protection from the Government in life or death, you should have your ass covered by a Will at least.
If not, you are borderline retarded.
Wow farmgirl, you can turn any thread anywhere anytime into all gay and all the time can’t you?
I guess that’s how your minority will get your voice out there.
But it sure rips apart any other discussion.
But I know, I know, your march is righteous and nothing can stand in your way…..
“Are all homosexuals on Government Cheese?”
heheh. HAHAHAHAHAHA.
When you’ve been shown to be an uninformed bigot, then just post more crap.
I think that just says it all about you.
nitwit
And isnt it a little early to be that drunk?
“Wow farmgirl, you can turn any thread anywhere anytime into all gay and all the time can’t you?”
Really? There are numerous threads I’m not posting on today. The expectations of democrats is the subject of this thread. Gay people have expectations too.
Go post on one of the MANY threads I’m not on if you dont like it.
Asswipe.
Kia, You mean it’s all right and fair because Farm Gal can spend many thousands of dollars in legal fees to get some of what you get for the price of a Marriage license? Even when she does all that, it’s not as legally ironclad as marriage.
It’s also a statement by the society that her marriage is implicitly inferior to yours, which is just plain insulting!
KIA and Outlander still haven’t explained what “legal document” allows you to collect social security from a deceased gay partner or automatically get covered under their health insurance.
Because there isn’t one.
BTW, I knew KIA was lying when he said, “I know a gay couple . . . ”
No, you don’t, KIA.
Let the record show that kiahahahaha was the first one to post about “social agenda” on this thread.
Mr_Kia
Posted December 19, 2008 at 8:52 am
And we all know “social agenda” is wingnut dog whistle for “keep those damn queers in their place”.
Asshole
STFU with your biased Crap Capn.
I guarantee I have closer relationships with homosexuals than you do.
Guaranteed.
My stance on civil unions kinda takes care of the entire social security argument as well.
Kia, are you posting while drunk? Or just posting while stupid?
or both?
If you have such a close relationship with actual gay couples, KIA, why do you insist on denying them their civil rights?
“I guarantee I have closer relationships with homosexuals than you do.
Guaranteed.”
Right.
HAHAHAHAHAAHAH.
I wonder if they think they have a “close relationship” with you?
Man, I’d LOVE to be a fly on the wall and hear what they say about your dumb ass when you are gone.
For starters CapN with the exception of the libertard nazi group on the WEBlog most people in society can disagree without being disagreeable.
Life long friends and co-workers I can have sympathy for them. I can pray for peace for them.
They also know and respect my view that they would be alot better served (in expediency) by pursuing the Civil Union angle.
KFG, What I want is exactly what I asked you. I wanted to know what you want from the government/Obama. Capn threw out some examples and I thank him for that. But I know several couples who actually got divorced for financial reasons. They found out they were better off financially if they weren’t married. So maybe it just depends on the circumstances.
“They also know and respect my view that they would be alot better served (in expediency) by pursuing the Civil Union angle”
heheheh. HAHAHAHHAHAHA.
Because, of course, YOU know what’s best for gay people.
No wonder you think it’s all in the title.
“But I know several couples who actually got divorced for financial reasons. They found out they were better off financially if they weren’t married.”
Please explain.
And please answer my questions, and dont say you dont remember. Use the scroll button.
You are stupid if you don’t think my view of Civil Union vs. Marriage in this country is a shorter way to the rights you claim to want from marriage.
“So maybe it just depends on the circumstances.”
Well MY circumstances say I’d be better off married to my partner.
You would deny me this for what reason?
All this whining by Farmgirl about unions is much to do about nothing.
At one time more than a third of American workers belonged to unions. Today, less
than 12 percent of workers belong to unions – even fewer than that in the private work force. Less than 8 percent of the private sector are union. Government/public employees make up a third. Think about how few a number that is. By some estimates – this is less than the number of gay and lesbians in the USA. A small minority. The day of the evil management forcing workers to slave away in cold or excess heat are gone. Today,
the American taxpayer supports fully one third of those on union rolls. Teachers, police, fire, and federal employees who are threatened not by an evil corporation and CEO’s – but by local citizens and small town politicians.
That is why it is so critically important to the unions that they maintain power in the only place left: politicians. How is it that so few can yield such megaton power? The answer is simple: money. Money honey runs everything it seems. Union wages which are paid by union workers to the union, so the union can buy off politicians from both sides of the political aisle.
Using these union dollars, this minority population can make nearly any law they want. From the local city government (councils and school boards), to county, state, and finally the federal level.
So few in numbers, and shrinking, it is critical that during this next congress – they get their laws enacted. Self preservation! They must end Right to Work. They must ensure the ballots are public – and they must do it now. Along comes Obama and his democrat
Majority.
So despite a union population which is graying, fewer younger people joining, and declining manufacturing based jobs to unionize – the union will continue to thrive. As long as they have the memberships money and now the money of the American people.
All for 8 percent of the “working” population who belong to unions. That’s power.
But not all is well. Declining memberships, disgruntled union workers, and an American population which is becoming wise to the unions ways are all contributing to their decline.
In a recent survey, Americans said that “ nation’s two major teachers’ unions are more interested in protecting their jobs and benefits than ensuring the education and opportunities of their young charges.
[T]wo-thirds of U.S. voters (66%) say the teachers’ unions – the National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers – are more interested in protecting their members’ jobs than in the quality of education.
Only 23% of voters say educational quality comes first for the unions, according to a new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey. Twelve percent (12%) are undecided.
Men and women are equally critical of the teacher’s unions. Married voters are more critical than unmarrieds by 12 points. Seventy percent (70%) of voters with children at home think the unions are more interested in jobs, compared to 63% of those without children in the house. “
Cry alligator tears all you want for your fellow small minority Farm Girl, but the truth about the labor unions is starting to show.
I’ve already said civil unions are ok with me IF they carry all the rights and benefits of marriage.
Like equality, ya know?
Except you’ve already said you dont want that.
hehehe. And once again you, a straight man, know what’s best for gay people.
Yeah. And I, as an athiest, know what’s best for churches.
Big eye roll….
ksfarmgrrl
Posted December 19, 2008 at 1:20 pm | Permalink
I’ve already said civil unions are ok with me IF they carry all the rights and benefits of marriage.
Like equality, ya know?
Except you’ve already said you dont want that.
—————————————————-
I’ve said here way too many times that I want the Government out of the marriage equation all together.
And that any church that wants to marry Gays should be allowed to.
And any church that doesn’t want to should be allowed to as well.
That seems to be the problem for the Militant Rainbow Flag wavers. Every church HAS to.
That is in direct conflict with what you posted at 1:04 on the warren thread.
“Not wanting my Godly Union to have the same recognition as yours and FG’s…”
And in response to “monique” I posted EXACTLY the opposite of this:
“That seems to be the problem for the Militant Rainbow Flag wavers. Every church HAS to.”
And you wonder why I think you are drunk or stupid or both.
You want equality of your relationship in the eyes of my church. Not going to happen.
My Government, I don’t really care. It’s America.
You are, again, utterly and completely full of shit.
Did you read my post at 12:03 and you are just willfully lying about what I said.
Just to refresh your addled brain, here is what I said.
“I do NOT want the approval of your church. I do NOT want you to be forced to marry gay people in your church. And making my marriage legal would not force you to do a goddam thing inside your church. Divorce is legal in all fifty states and no one is forcing the catholics to marry divorced people.”
Seems like they havent lost their 501(c)3 status either.
Kia, you get your ass kicked bloody every day on here when you make shit up and willfully disregard the facts.
You must enjoy it.
I think you are not a christian, you are a masochist.
“And we all know “social agenda” is wingnut dog whistle for “keep those damn queers in their place”.
Wrong again. We all know that republicans do not even have a “social agenda”. If there is one, someone please give me a link. The only social agenda I can find info on is the one to tell girls to cross their legs (no premarital sex) and advocates a return to coathanger jobs.
One of the reasons I left them.
I did not read your post of 12:03.
I think your opinion is quite different however than a number on your side of the fence.
Facts and you do not often go together FG.
You can’t even admit that the Civil Union solution is the fastest to the equality you seek.
““I do NOT want the approval of your church. I do NOT want you to be forced to marry gay people in your church. And making my marriage legal would not force you to do a goddam thing inside your church. Divorce is legal in all fifty states and no one is forcing the catholics to marry divorced people.””
Man am I the only one tired of hearing all this?
Look, even your supporting liberals don’t understand what it is you want Farm Girl. I see arguments all over the place on the blogs where libs are fighting to get you MARRIED and recognized in the church.
And that’s not really want you want.
And that’s what I’ve said is a waste of time.
And is fighting a battle which need not be fought.
I’d support civil unions with the same legal, social, taxes, insurance, medical rights as those who are married. But I’d rather get those “rights” removed from married people.
Why should my working wifey and me get a tax break filing married? Why should two single people working same jobs same wages pay MORE taxes? Now that’s not fair!
(PS: Sidebar, CapnAmerica you are right. I can’t avoid the pull of the vacum.
You are, again, utterly and completely full of shit.
So you don’t think a Gay Civil Union measure would pass in just about every state (Utah a possible exeception but it’s Utah) in the next election and Gay Marriage would continue to get its ass kicked?
“I see arguments all over the place on the blogs where libs are fighting to get you MARRIED and recognized in the church.”
Really? Because if they are “all over the place” you should have no trouble posting a link so we can read it for ourselves. Yes, we want to be married. And we already can be married in some churches. But I have heard no gay person trying to force YOUR church to marry us. The courhouse? Yes. The church house? no.
Unless, of course, you too are utterly and completely full of it.
You are so full of shit kia. PropHate and the ks hate amendment FORBID the state from recognizing same sex civil unions. So do the other 36 hate amendments.
You can read, right?
Can you?
Are you even familiar with California law for instance?
Yes, are you? Please post where the “california law” ALLOWS for recognition of same sex civil unions.
Can you READ? I did not say existing. I said would one pass tomorrow? I am right as usual and you wrong.
http://www.pollingreport.com/civil.htm
Because if they are “all over the place” you should have no trouble posting a link so we can read it for ourselves.
Yesterday thread, today, people posting in support of Gay marriage. Chas posts yesterday.
Again, if that’s your goal, fine. But I recall a post where you said you would take civil union IF it provided all the same rights as marriage (not an exact quote).
So, now I see you DO WANT TO GET MARRIED TOO?
O.K., let me go back to my original question yesterday,
If you so hate religion and religious people, why the hell do you WANT to be part of something christians and other religions hold so firmly as part of their religion – marriage.
Do you secretly WANT the worlds belivers to change their minds, change all of their faiths, change all of their spiritual writings and belief systems and accept you as an acceptable part of their God’s design?
Well that is too much for them.
That’s why I say let you have your union. But I did not know you ALSO want to get married using the word married, maybe in a white dress, the shoes, veil, all that in a church.
I went from hearing a civil rights issue, to one now of wanting to part of a church.
Do you secretly WANT the worlds belivers to change their minds, change all of their faiths, change all of their spiritual writings and belief systems and accept you as an acceptable part of their God’s design?
—————————————————-
I don’t see that there is any secretly about it.
That is what she wants.
“I went from hearing a civil rights issue, to one now of wanting to part of a church.”
“Yesterday thread, today, people posting in support of Gay marriage. Chas posts yesterday.”
Post a link to where someone said that. Post a link to where Chas said that.
Utterly, and completely full of shit.
IF I wanted that, I could already have that in a number of different churches.
It’s the CIVIL recognition I want. LEGAL recognition. My position on this has never changed. Post a link to where it has.
Jesus. If I wanted to get married with all the trappings, I could today. But it still wouldnt be legal.
you are too stupid to live.
“I don’t see that there is any secretly about it.
That is what she wants.”
Oh for god’s sake. I posted exactly the opposite, and you STILL try to tell me what I want?
heheh>HAAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA..
hell, churches should be outlawed just for THAT kind of obtuse stupidity.
“That is what she wants.”
Wish she would make up her mind.
Farm Gal,
Don’t fall for this “civil union” crap. One of the things we learned from the civil rights struggle is that separate is NEVER equal!
John 15:18-21 (New International Version)
The World Hates the Disciples
18?If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first. 19If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you. 20Remember the words I spoke to you: ‘No servant is greater than his master.’[a] If they persecuted me, they will persecute you also. If they obeyed my teaching, they will obey yours also. 21They will treat you this way because of my name, for they do not know the One who sent me.”
___________________________________________
My goodness…. what wonderful verses for the LGBT community…. Those who persecute the gay community, do not know the One who sent the Christ…. Mercy sakes!! NIV Even… Hmmmmmm….
I know Jed. Separate but equal was disallowed in 1954, but you’d never know it from these nut jobs. These asswipes cant even read, and yet THEY think they should make the laws?
jesus WEPT
Heheheh Chas. Now they are trying to put words in your mouth too.
And outie not only believes that a church that is different from his is not a REAL church, but he’s saying you are not a real minister.
Again.
I think you are a saint for tolerating these ignorant nut cases.
Hee hee hee heeeeeee….
It’s all about the white shoes and veil for amway and kia.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH.
hey kia, how’s the child custody and battle with the SRS going?
O.K., I’ve had enough of the whining malcontent lesbian for the day.
Sound rude? So does her filling every thread with her bellyaching. There simply is not enough tissue in the world.
So much for this thread topic.
Jed
Posted December 19, 2008 at 2:16 pm | Permalink
Farm Gal,
Don’t fall for this “civil union” crap. One of the things we learned from the civil rights struggle is that separate is NEVER equal!
—————————————————-
Are you a hillbilly?
Have you seen any pictures of the President elect?
ksfarmgrrl
Posted December 19, 2008 at 2:20 pm | Permalink
Hee hee hee heeeeeee….
It’s all about the white shoes and veil for amway and kia.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH.
hey kia, how’s the child custody and battle with the SRS going?
————————————————–
What are the voices telling you now?
You don’t even have any original thoughts.
HAHAHAHAH
This is pretty good. A conversation with jesus regarding warren.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132×8007585
And Chas the pretend Reverend echos in with actual verse. Before the day is out he will be all caps and posting negatives to his fellow man.
Lost soul.
heheheheh
“O.K., I’ve had enough of the whining malcontent lesbian for the day.”
I’d be leaving too, tail tucked, if I had my ass kicked as badly as you have.
And I noticed you still provided no proof of any of the crap you spouted.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAAHHAHA!
Need a reference or a source Farm Girl, just get specific so I know what you can’t fukin google.
Hee hee hee heeee…..
So much for being through with me and this thread.
You cant scroll up and read the question?
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHHA
Have another drink…
Farm Girl don’t flatter yourself. I just get tired of your crying just as I do the GW posts. So it’s nothing personal at all.
Besides, Ellen is on.
Am_Way,
In your 1:19 p.m. post I was not getting the seque from Labor unions to Civil unions. Was there supposed to be one? You do know they are different things, correct?
seque = segue – sorry
?
Kia,
“Have you seen any pictures of the President elect?”
Yeah, I have. What about them?
Who the Dem’s gonna blame when Bush is gone and they control Congress & the White House?
Don’t fall for this “civil union” crap. One of the things we learned from the civil rights struggle is that separate is NEVER equal!
That, obviously, depends on what’s being proposed. Separate but equal won’t cut it. If you strike the “M” word from government (where no one gets “married” under the law), and have one form for everyone, no sex discrimination allowed. The same exact rights.
Of course, those who wail about “protecting” marriage would call that an assault on the institution, even though it would not change the legal, spiritual or social status of heretosexual marriages whatsoever.
That’s a great idea Rage.
Why is marriage the Government’s business? If I’m married or not married, why should the Government care?
I’ve posted before, there should be ONE filing status for all taxpayers called – Taxpayer. There should be no special tax rates and exemptions for anyone, we should all be treated the same. That would be fair.
I’ve posted before, there should be ONE filing status for all taxpayers called – Taxpayer. There should be no special tax rates and exemptions for anyone, we should all be treated the same. That would be fair.
Figures you would think only about taxes, e.g., money. If your spouse was in a serious accident, should the hospital be able to keep you from the room, because you’re not a blood relation?
Oh really Rage, what “one form” were you talkin about?
(Oh, and it’s not the Government keeping you out of your boyfriends hospital room Rage.)
(Oh, and it’s not the Government keeping you out of your boyfriends hospital room Rage.)
Actually, the legal status of marriage opens up doors that don’t seem to realize even exist.
Some of it could be informally achieved socially, but legal equality makes more sense. Actually, I would be a bit miffed if I couldn’t visit my girlfriend in the hospital, but I underatand that marriage confers a relationship that isn’t recognized if you’re just dating (and, considering some of the dates I’ves had, maybe that’s not such a bad thing. . . :-0 ).
Jimbo,
“Who the Dem’s gonna blame when Bush is gone and they control Congress & the White House?”
Well, the ‘publicans spent the last 8 years blaming all their failures on Clinton. Now it’ll be Bushie’s turn to get equal treatment, and this time it’ll be for real. Our nation will be paying one hell of a price for his and his party’s greed, lust for power and incompetence for decades to come!
Obama and congress will have to perform several consecutive miracles just to keep our country out of both the financial and moral bankruptcy visited on us by the republican party’s 8 year spree.
Rage,
That’s not a viable solution! As long as there are two separate institutions, civil unions and marriage, there will be no way to insure that they stay equal, and the bigots will never stop trying to find ways to discriminate. The churches are trying deperately to claim marriage as their own strictly religious privilege, yet marriages are and have been for ages a secular union licensed by the state, with judges, justices of the peace, ship’s captains and Elvis impersonators as well as clergy granted the right by the state to marry people.
Since equality under the law is a right enshrined in our constitution and our national ideals, any couple of legal age and legally competent must be extended the same secular marriage right. If churches wish to bless whatever unions they want, they’re welcome to, but no religious service can have any legal significance whatsoever under the law.