Reactions to the 2014 SOTU Address

[Disgustipated]

"Cars" aren't gay, dummy. Unless it's a Vette

 

[richard_daily]

"Cars" aren't gay, dummy. Unless it's a Vette

Vettes are definitely gay.

 

[bronzeage]

"Cars" aren't gay, dummy. Unless it's a Vette

If a 1972 Pantera had a vagina, I would fuck it.
http://images.hemmings.com/wp-content/uploads//2011/11/1972DeTomasoPantera_01_700.jpg

 

[about_average]

"Cars" aren't gay, dummy. Unless it's a Vette

I think they can catch the gay.

http://duckduckgrayduck.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/gay-person-touched-car.png

 

[julybaby04]

Yeah, you're right. Let me rephrase, since apparently that one word caused you to go blind and not see the rest of my post.

Interracial marriage is a choice, but people who choose to enter in to such a marriage have equal protection under the constitution.

So we're back to the "gays make the choice to be gay" just like "murderers make the choice to murder" argument.

Why is it bigots (thanks Lorilei) like you are always equating homosexuals with murderers? - a '?' means it's a question

But regardless, what "extra rights" do homosexuals want?- a '?' means it's a question "Extra" implies rights that you wouldn't have.

And you need to go read the constitution again.

Anyway, keep denying the science that has established the hereditary link for homosexuality. Enjoy the company of those who excommunicated Galileo for his scientific knowledge and those who insisted blacks were subhuman.

I did not say that homosexuality is equal to murders. I said that when people choose to murder, they lose pretty much ALL rights.

Pick any choice out there.....where to go to school, whom to marry, where to live, what to do for a living.....etc. All are choices and they are not deserving of "rights" simply for those being choices.

 

[julybaby04]

smoking the obama ass juice so early? its not even 5pm yet!

Did not know he said that....but I NEVER said marriage was for one white man and one white woman. I SAID it is one man/one woman.

 

[unregistered]

 

[julybaby04]

True, there is no logical connection between the two; and yet, it always seems to work out that way, for some reason.

I would completely agree that there probably are people who are actually afraid of homosexuals, for whatever reason.

I, however, have never actually met anyone who is afraid of them. I have met many who are not in agreement with their lifestyle.

 

[julybaby04]

No kidding?!?

Not kidding.....doubt you are either.

We are all humans with our own opinions (even scientists).

 

[KingOrfeo]

I would completely agree that there probably are people who are actually afraid of homosexuals, for whatever reason.

I, however, have never actually met anyone who is afraid of them. I have met many who are not in agreement with their lifestyle.

A lifestyle is not a thing with which one can agree or disagree. It is a thing of which one can approve or disapprove. In this instance, disapproval equates to fear; no one would raise any objection to tolerating homosexuality if they did not perceive it as a threat somehow. Remember the "Defense of Marriage Act"? The name is a dead giveaway, isn't it? It assumes gay marriage is somehow a threat to straight marriage, which it isn't.

 

[Disgustipated]

Another envious loser who can't afford to buy one, lashes out in frustration at his economic superiors.

JBJ, I just paid cash for a new car that is more fun to drive, will last longer with less problems and looks better than your plastic shit box.

Care to post some links or PM me links of your bullshit about me yet, fatty?

 

[julybaby04]

A lifestyle is not a thing with which one can agree or disagree. It is a thing of which one can approve or disapprove. In this instance, disapproval equates to fear; no one would raise any objection to tolerating homosexuality if they did not perceive it as a threat somehow. Remember the "Defense of Marriage Act"? The name is a dead giveaway, isn't it? It assumes gay marriage is somehow a threat to straight marriage, which it isn't.

I disagree.

Perhaps that is the basis of the conflict that is going on between homosexual and heterosexual people. Just because people do not agree does not mean they fear it, or at least I will speak for me, I do not fear them at all (if a couple of my other posts were read then it is known I have many friends who are gay...have been since high school which has been many years, and they have been friends the whole time. ....as well as a cousin who is gay and I love very much.). If others have issues, then I would guess they have reasons for how they feel.....but that is not me.

As far as the Defense of Marriage Act, I doubt very seriously that most people (would not dare say all) do not think that gays getting married harms their marriages. I certainly do not feel that way. What I do feel is that marriage has historically been between one man and one woman. I see no reason to change that. If a union between homosexuals needs to be made for legal reasons (which is mostly of what is reported, i.e., medical insurance, medical decisions, tax break, etc), then just pick another word. Very simple to remedy this.

But, that is not what is going on. There is a very public show to demanding that the homosexual lifestyle is accepted by ALL. That is never going to happen as those who disagree with it, for the most part, do so from a faith-based value system. In having that system, the ultimate importance is placed on worshipping and glorifying God and NOT appeasing the ever-changing moral winds just to be politically correct.

I KNOW my opinion is not the majority here, actually usually not even welcomed. However, disagreeing with a lifestyle has ZERO to do with loving and caring about others., and most certainly doesn't mean I fear them. That could not be further from the truth.

 

[RobDownSouth]

I disagree.

Perhaps that is the basis of the conflict that is going on between homosexual and heterosexual people. Just because people do not agree does not mean they fear it, or at least I will speak for me, I do not fear them at all (if a couple of my other posts were read then it is known I have many friends who are gay...have been since high school which has been many years, and they have been friends the whole time. ....as well as a cousin who is gay and I love very much.). If others have issues, then I would guess they have reasons for how they feel.....but that is not me.

As far as the Defense of Marriage Act, I doubt very seriously that most people (would not dare say all) do not think that gays getting married harms their marriages. I certainly do not feel that way. What I do feel is that marriage has historically been between one man and one woman. I see no reason to change that. If a union between homosexuals needs to be made for legal reasons (which is mostly of what is reported, i.e., medical insurance, medical decisions, tax break, etc), then just pick another word. Very simple to remedy this.

But, that is not what is going on. There is a very public show to demanding that the homosexual lifestyle is accepted by ALL. That is never going to happen as those who disagree with it, for the most part, do so from a faith-based value system. In having that system, the ultimate importance is placed on worshipping and glorifying God and NOT appeasing the ever-changing moral winds just to be politically correct.

I KNOW my opinion is not the majority here, actually usually not even welcomed. However, disagreeing with a lifestyle has ZERO to do with loving and caring about others., and most certainly doesn't mean I fear them. That could not be further from the truth.

Real Christians don't cloak their bigotry by hiding their fear and loathing behind a Bible.

Shame on you for using the Good Book to justify your bigotry. You are a loathsome person.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Perhaps that is the basis of the conflict that is going on between homosexual and heterosexual people.

There is not a conflict going on between homosexual and heterosexual people.

 

[bronzeage]

I disagree.

Perhaps that is the basis of the conflict that is going on between homosexual and heterosexual people. Just because people do not agree does not mean they fear it, or at least I will speak for me, I do not fear them at all (if a couple of my other posts were read then it is known I have many friends who are gay...have been since high school which has been many years, and they have been friends the whole time. ....as well as a cousin who is gay and I love very much.). If others have issues, then I would guess they have reasons for how they feel.....but that is not me.

As far as the Defense of Marriage Act, I doubt very seriously that most people (would not dare say all) do not think that gays getting married harms their marriages. I certainly do not feel that way. What I do feel is that marriage has historically been between one man and one woman. I see no reason to change that. If a union between homosexuals needs to be made for legal reasons (which is mostly of what is reported, i.e., medical insurance, medical decisions, tax break, etc), then just pick another word. Very simple to remedy this.

But, that is not what is going on. There is a very public show to demanding that the homosexual lifestyle is accepted by ALL. That is never going to happen as those who disagree with it, for the most part, do so from a faith-based value system. In having that system, the ultimate importance is placed on worshipping and glorifying God and NOT appeasing the ever-changing moral winds just to be politically correct.

I KNOW my opinion is not the majority here, actually usually not even welcomed. However, disagreeing with a lifestyle has ZERO to do with loving and caring about others., and most certainly doesn't mean I fear them. That could not be further from the truth.

There is a difference between "acceptance" and "interference". That is the issue here.

 

[julybaby04]

There is not a conflict going on between homosexual and heterosexual people.

okie dokie...

 

[julybaby04]

There is a difference between "acceptance" and "interference". That is the issue here.

I would agree.

 

[about_average]

I did not say that homosexuality is equal to murders. I said that when people choose to murder, they lose pretty much ALL rights.

I find it interesting that murderers was the first group that came to mind for you to use as an analogy. And it's a very common analogy that people use.

As far as the Defense of Marriage Act, I doubt very seriously that most people (would not dare say all) do not think that gays getting married harms their marriages. I certainly do not feel that way. What I do feel is that marriage has historically been between one man and one woman. I see no reason to change that. If a union between homosexuals needs to be made for legal reasons (which is mostly of what is reported, i.e., medical insurance, medical decisions, tax break, etc), then just pick another word. Very simple to remedy this.

You're the one always railing about government waste.
"Very simple to remedy " shows just how clueless you are. It would cost millions, if not billions, to change all the state and federal documents to read "marriage or civil union", or whatever word that would meet with your approval.

As for your "What I do feel is that marriage has historically been between one man and one woman." I guess it must really upset you that women are allowed to vote and own property, that interracial marriages are legal and that people aren't allowed to own slaves.

 

[bronzeage]

I would agree.

Why do you want to interfere with same sex marriages?

 

[julybaby04]

I find it interesting that murderers was the first group that came to mind for you to use as an analogy. And it's a very common analogy that people use.


You're the one always railing about government waste.
"Very simple to remedy " shows just how clueless you are. It would cost millions, if not billions, to change all the state and federal documents to read "marriage or civil union", or whatever word that would meet with your approval.

As for your "What I do feel is that marriage has historically been between one man and one woman." I guess it must really upset you that women are allowed to vote and own property, that interracial marriages are legal and that people aren't allowed to own slaves.

Why do you and those who support gay marriage always go to women voting and freedoms for blacks?

As far as marriage/civil union, that is what is called compromise, which I know is not in the liberal dictionary. I know it must be a complete takeover of anything that does not line-up with liberals, in your mind, but there are those of us who are willing to accept other things.

 

[julybaby04]

Why do you want to interfere with same sex marriages?

Why do homosexuals want to interfere with traditional marriage?

 

[Disgustipated]

Why do homosexuals want to interfere with traditional marriage?

Where is that happening?

 

[Lorilei]

Why do homosexuals want to interfere with traditional marriage?

They don't. They're not trying to stop yours, they just want one of their own.

By the way, marriage predates Christianity, and same-sex unions have always been around. http://www.livescience.com/37777-history-of-marriage.html

 

[Sean Renaud]

Why do you and those who support gay marriage always go to women voting and freedoms for blacks?

Because it's pretty much the same argument. The only reasons to fight against gay marriage are tradition and prejudice. If you don't have a problem with women voting or interacial marriage you shouldn't have a problem with this.

As far as marriage/civil union, that is what is called compromise, which I know is not in the liberal dictionary. I know it must be a complete takeover of anything that does not line-up with liberals, in your mind, but there are those of us who are willing to accept other things.

While compromise with evil is never a good plan I think you'd find if you paid any attention that most liberals would be fine with civil unions *if* they were legally the same thing and every state and city was forced to comply to the idea that a civil union = marriage. A separate but equal if you will which was overturned not because separate but equal was found to be abhorrent but because it was obvious that separate was inherently unequal. if you didn't fuck that up you'd get a lot less arguments but none of these Republican Conservative strong holds are rushing out to make Civil Unions equal to marriage. Can you even name a single state where that's happened? Someplace to hold up as proof of good faith?

 

[about_average]

But, that is not what is going on. There is a very public show to demanding that the homosexual lifestyle is accepted by ALL.

Not at all. For the most part homosexuals just want to be allowed to live their lives, with the same benefits as heterosexual couples, without you interfering.
No one wants to force you to marry another woman.

That is never going to happen as those who disagree with it, for the most part, do so from a faith-based value system. In having that system, the ultimate importance is placed on worshipping and glorifying God and NOT appeasing the ever-changing moral winds just to be politically correct.

Since when does two people loving each other and wanting to spend the rest of their lives together have anything to do with political correctness?

How would you like it if a high percentage of people wanted to pass laws, maybe even an amendment to the constitution, preventing you from practicing your religion the way you want to, because they don't "agree" with it? You know, like the Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Amish, etc.