Religions > Atheism > Faggots lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Randy Jabsco" |
| Date: |
20 Dec 2003 06:55:16 PM |
| Object: |
Faggots lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage |
Hey faggots, I'm still confused. Help me out here. Didn't you faggots say
that the tide has changed and that EVERYONE is accepting faggots now, and
that only a few minor bigots won't accept? Didn't you say the majority of
people are accepting ***** behavior? I don't understand this article, I am
very confused. Why is it that faggots can only be accepted by imposing
their will on other people and seeking out sypathetic judges to change laws
for them? How come they can't take their case to the 'majority public' in
the voting booths? Surely if EVERYONE is accepting faggots now, they should
EASILY get these laws passed on the ballots!! Why is it that 38 states now
have a consititutional ban on ***** marriages if the majority of the voters
want otherwise? Help me out here...
===
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/21/national/21GAY.html?ex=1073192400&en=a887ec494ccc1c01&ei=5004&partner=UNTD
Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage
The latest New York Times/CBS News poll has found widespread support for an
amendment to the United States Constitution to ban gay marriage. It also
found unease about homosexual relations in general, making the issue a
potentially divisive one for the Democrats and an opportunity for the
Republicans in the 2004 election.
Support for a constitutional amendment extends across a wide swath of the
public and includes a majority of people traditionally viewed as supportive
of gay rights, including Democrats, women and people who live on the East
Coast.
Attitudes on the subject seem to be inextricably linked to how people view
marriage itself. For a majority of Americans - 53 percent - marriage is
largely a religious matter. Seventy-one percent of those people oppose gay
marriage. Similarly, 33 percent of Americans say marriage is largely a legal
matter and a majority of those people - 55 percent - say they support gay
marriage.
The most positive feelings toward gay people were registered among
respondents under 30, and among those who knew gay people.
The nationwide poll found that 55 percent of Americans favored an amendment
to the constitution that would allow marriage only between a man and a
woman, while 40 percent opposed the idea.
The findings come after the highest court in Massachusetts ruled 4 to 3 last
month that same-sex marriage was permissible under the state's Constitution.
That ruling followed a 6-to-3 decision in late June by the United States
Supreme Court striking down antisodomy laws.
President Bush had been noncommittal about a constitutional amendment
immediately after the Massachusetts ruling, with the administration worried
that support for a ban on gay marriage would alienate moderate voters. But
last week Mr. Bush for the first time voiced his support, saying, "I will
support a constitutional amendment which would honor marriage between a man
and a woman, codify that."
The statement signals the White House's increasing confidence that it can
exploit the matter in the presidential campaign, both to energize its
evangelical supporters and to discredit the eventual Democratic nominee.
Most of the Democratic candidates oppose gay marriage but favor civil
unions. Howard Dean, who is leading in the polls for the Democratic
nomination, signed a law when he was governor of Vermont allowing civil
unions, an action that Republicans have already used to portray him as too
liberal for mainstream America.
The court rulings generated extensive publicity and concern, not only about
same-sex marriage but also about having the courts set social agendas that
have not been approved by the legislative process.
"We have found that the more people focus on it, the less they support it,"
said the Rev. Lou Sheldon, chairman of the Traditional Values Coalition,
which strongly opposes gay marriage and is working actively for a
constitutional ban.
The Times/CBS News poll was conducted from Dec. 10 through Dec. 13 in
telephone interviews with 1,057 people. It carries a margin of sampling
error of plus or minus three percentage points. Responses about gay rights
tend to be influenced somewhat by the wording of the questions.
This poll and other surveys show that as the courts have extended legal
rights to gays this year, Americans have become increasingly uncomfortable
with same-sex relations.
For decades, a majority of Americans have not approved of homosexual
relations. That had begun to change, until the Supreme Court ruling in June
and the Massachusetts ruling in November. A New York Times/CBS News poll
conducted in July found that 54 percent of respondents said homosexual
relations should be legal. Only 41 percent of the respondents in the latest
poll said they should be legal.
Richard Waters, 71, a retired elementary school teacher in Little Valley,
N.Y., and a Republican, said in a follow-up interview to the poll that he
strongly supported a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage.
.
|
|
| User: "Amelia M. Samples" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuals lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage |
16 Jan 2004 05:40:26 PM |
|
|
"DemsAngryBushHonoredMLK" <BigotryRules@DNC.org> wrote in message
news:a8YNb.69469$Rc4.230478@attbi_s54...
"Letao" <letao@fire.and.fishing.net> wrote in message
news:letao-87B801.14120416012004@netnews.comcast.net...
In article <YeVNb.68237$Rc4.227698@attbi_s54>,
"DeanDownForTheCount?" <TheirSaviorDies@HopefulDemmies.com> wrote:
"Letao" <letao@fire.and.fishing.net> wrote in message
news:letao-78D033.11263116012004@netnews.comcast.net...
Incorrect. What we are talking about is restricting the fundmental
civil rights of the citizenry.
No, that's not what we are talking about, because same-sex marriage
isn't a
"fundamental civil right".
Marriage is a fundamental civil right.
Actually, it is not. In fact, there are all sorts of limits on marriage,
not the least of which that it is illegal to marry a person of the same
sex.
And the Mass. court disagreed with that! DUH! The SCOTUS has said that
marriage is a fundimental civil right. If you don't like that, go file a
case. I see you changed your name again...your killfile complex is really
bad.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dionisio" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuals lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on GayMarriage |
16 Jan 2004 08:36:45 PM |
|
|
DemsAngryBushHonoredMLK wrote:
"Letao" <letao@fire.and.fishing.net> wrote:
Marriage is a fundamental civil right.
Actually, it is not. In fact, there are all sorts of limits on marriage,
not the least of which that it is illegal to marry a person of the same sex.
Now that depends on where one lives. Curiously, in the land of "freedom
of religion" there is a contingent of Chicken Littles who claim that
their religion would be disrespected if the State recognized the fact
that some religions consider same-sex marriage a non-issue. And they
can't quite grasp the concept that no religion has a lock on civil
affairs, but are only influential regarding their own religion's
affairs. Seems they think their "spiritual viewpoint" should be a law
that affects all; even those not of their faith... Ah, the Dark Ages. We
remember them too well.
--
"The sponsor of one of the bills that would outlaw gay marriages in
Michigan asserts that same-sex unions would 'lead to further
disintegration of the traditional family unit.' But it appears at least
worth asking how a public declaration of commitment, monogamy and
permanence by any two people would subvert family values. Strong
marriages are the foundation of strong families and a strong nation, but
committed relationships can and do take different forms. At their best,
marriages are tangible expressions of love, respect, security, social
stability and human dignity. Preemptive legislation that presumes only
heterosexual relationships invoke that kind of commitment may not defend
the sanctity of the institution of marriage, but weaken it."
-- Editorial in the Detroit Free Press.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Amelia M. Samples" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuals lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage |
16 Jan 2004 08:38:02 PM |
|
|
"Dionisio" <moc.rr.thgisni@5ellimd.com> wrote in message
news:1d1Ob.14746$f97.5186@fe3.columbus.rr.com...
DemsAngryBushHonoredMLK wrote:
"Letao" <letao@fire.and.fishing.net> wrote:
Marriage is a fundamental civil right.
Actually, it is not. In fact, there are all sorts of limits on
marriage,
not the least of which that it is illegal to marry a person of the same
sex.
Now that depends on where one lives. Curiously, in the land of "freedom
of religion" there is a contingent of Chicken Littles who claim that
their religion would be disrespected if the State recognized the fact
that some religions consider same-sex marriage a non-issue. And they
can't quite grasp the concept that no religion has a lock on civil
affairs, but are only influential regarding their own religion's
affairs. Seems they think their "spiritual viewpoint" should be a law
that affects all; even those not of their faith... Ah, the Dark Ages. We
remember them too well.
The Y1K problem...brought to you by Christianity!
--
"The sponsor of one of the bills that would outlaw gay marriages in
Michigan asserts that same-sex unions would 'lead to further
disintegration of the traditional family unit.' But it appears at least
worth asking how a public declaration of commitment, monogamy and
permanence by any two people would subvert family values. Strong
marriages are the foundation of strong families and a strong nation, but
committed relationships can and do take different forms. At their best,
marriages are tangible expressions of love, respect, security, social
stability and human dignity. Preemptive legislation that presumes only
heterosexual relationships invoke that kind of commitment may not defend
the sanctity of the institution of marriage, but weaken it."
-- Editorial in the Detroit Free Press.
.
|
|
|
| User: "DemsHateHonoringMLK" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuals lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage |
17 Jan 2004 06:48:37 AM |
|
|
"Amelia M. Samples" <milla@georgebush.visi.com> wrote in message
news:5e1Ob.47157$VV4.40253@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
"Dionisio" <moc.rr.thgisni@5ellimd.com> wrote in message
news:1d1Ob.14746$f97.5186@fe3.columbus.rr.com...
DemsAngryBushHonoredMLK wrote:
"Letao" <letao@fire.and.fishing.net> wrote:
Marriage is a fundamental civil right.
Actually, it is not. In fact, there are all sorts of limits on
marriage,
not the least of which that it is illegal to marry a person of the
same
sex.
Now that depends on where one lives. Curiously, in the land of "freedom
of religion" there is a contingent of Chicken Littles who claim that
their religion would be disrespected if the State recognized the fact
that some religions consider same-sex marriage a non-issue. And they
can't quite grasp the concept that no religion has a lock on civil
affairs, but are only influential regarding their own religion's
affairs. Seems they think their "spiritual viewpoint" should be a law
that affects all; even those not of their faith... Ah, the Dark Ages. We
remember them too well.
The Y1K problem...brought to you by Christianity!
Actually, if you'll check the history books, you'll discover Judaism
predates Christianity. You'll also discover Christianity predates Islam.
Yet all three religions - Judaism, Christianity, and Islam - recognize
marriage as the union of one man, one woman.
Go figure.
So for you to attempt to isolate and attack Christianity and Christians
makes you a what? Go on, see if you can guess the answer! That's right!
It makes you a bigot!! Congratulations!!!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Amelia M. Samples" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuals lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage |
17 Jan 2004 01:54:44 PM |
|
|
"DemsHateHonoringMLK" <HatredRules@DemocratParty.com> wrote in message
news:FaaOb.84638$8H.122141@attbi_s03...
"Amelia M. Samples" <milla@georgebush.visi.com> wrote in message
news:5e1Ob.47157$VV4.40253@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
"Dionisio" <moc.rr.thgisni@5ellimd.com> wrote in message
news:1d1Ob.14746$f97.5186@fe3.columbus.rr.com...
DemsAngryBushHonoredMLK wrote:
"Letao" <letao@fire.and.fishing.net> wrote:
Marriage is a fundamental civil right.
Actually, it is not. In fact, there are all sorts of limits on
marriage,
not the least of which that it is illegal to marry a person of the
same
sex.
Now that depends on where one lives. Curiously, in the land of
"freedom
of religion" there is a contingent of Chicken Littles who claim that
their religion would be disrespected if the State recognized the fact
that some religions consider same-sex marriage a non-issue. And they
can't quite grasp the concept that no religion has a lock on civil
affairs, but are only influential regarding their own religion's
affairs. Seems they think their "spiritual viewpoint" should be a law
that affects all; even those not of their faith... Ah, the Dark Ages.
We
remember them too well.
The Y1K problem...brought to you by Christianity!
Actually, if you'll check the history books, you'll discover Judaism
predates Christianity. You'll also discover Christianity predates Islam.
Yet all three religions - Judaism, Christianity, and Islam - recognize
marriage as the union of one man, one woman.
Go figure.
And that is completely irrelevant when it comes to US law. This is not a
christian country. Again, if you like theocracy so much, may I suggest Saudi
Arabia?
So for you to attempt to isolate and attack Christianity and Christians
makes you a what? Go on, see if you can guess the answer! That's right!
It makes you a bigot!! Congratulations!!!
I attack all religions...but they attacked first. I don't take well to
people telling me what I can or can't do with my body because their book of
blood says something about it. Go worship as you please, but keep god in his
cage (church, temple, synagogue, etc).
(apologies to the Simpsons)
.
|
|
|
| User: "BushAdmiredByBlacks" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuals lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage |
17 Jan 2004 02:49:51 PM |
|
|
"Amelia M. Samples" <milla@georgebush.visi.com> wrote in message
news:8qgOb.36900$LW.436@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
I attack all religions...but they attacked first. I don't take well to
people telling me what I can or can't do with my body because their book
of
blood says something about it.
Then you have nothing to say to the rapist, because he can put up the same
claim you just put up - "I don't want people telling me what I can or can't
do with my body".
Now be a good little homosexual girl and go attack some religions again,
Amelia!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Light Templar" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuals lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage |
17 Jan 2004 03:17:28 PM |
|
|
"BushAdmiredByBlacks" <FancyThatDems!@arrogantDems.com> wrote in message
news:PdhOb.75618$5V2.90394@attbi_s53...
"Amelia M. Samples" <milla@georgebush.visi.com> wrote in message
news:8qgOb.36900$LW.436@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
I attack all religions...but they attacked first. I don't take well to
people telling me what I can or can't do with my body because their book
of
blood says something about it.
Then you have nothing to say to the rapist, because he can put up the same
claim you just put up - "I don't want people telling me what I can or
can't
do with my body".
What a ridiculously stupid argument since a rapist, by definition, is
telling someone else what they can and cannot do with their body.
.
|
|
|
| User: "BushAdmiredByBlacks" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuals lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage |
17 Jan 2004 03:19:57 PM |
|
|
"Light Templar" <I@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> wrote in message
news:IDhOb.12326$q4.4756@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
"BushAdmiredByBlacks" <FancyThatDems!@arrogantDems.com> wrote in message
news:PdhOb.75618$5V2.90394@attbi_s53...
"Amelia M. Samples" <milla@georgebush.visi.com> wrote in message
news:8qgOb.36900$LW.436@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
I attack all religions...but they attacked first. I don't take well to
people telling me what I can or can't do with my body because their
book
of
blood says something about it.
Then you have nothing to say to the rapist, because he can put up the
same
claim you just put up - "I don't want people telling me what I can or
can't
do with my body".
What a ridiculously stupid argument since a rapist, by definition, is
telling someone else what they can and cannot do with their body.
No more so than the abortionist is.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Light Templar" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuals lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage |
17 Jan 2004 03:28:41 PM |
|
|
"BushAdmiredByBlacks" <FancyThatDems!@arrogantDems.com> wrote in message
news:1GhOb.75749$5V2.90834@attbi_s53...
"Light Templar" <I@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> wrote in message
news:IDhOb.12326$q4.4756@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
"BushAdmiredByBlacks" <FancyThatDems!@arrogantDems.com> wrote in message
news:PdhOb.75618$5V2.90394@attbi_s53...
"Amelia M. Samples" <milla@georgebush.visi.com> wrote in message
news:8qgOb.36900$LW.436@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
I attack all religions...but they attacked first. I don't take well
to
people telling me what I can or can't do with my body because their
book
of
blood says something about it.
Then you have nothing to say to the rapist, because he can put up the
same
claim you just put up - "I don't want people telling me what I can or
can't
do with my body".
What a ridiculously stupid argument since a rapist, by definition, is
telling someone else what they can and cannot do with their body.
No more so than the abortionist is.
Not even remotely.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Amelia M. Samples" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuals lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage |
17 Jan 2004 03:36:42 PM |
|
|
"BushAdmiredByBlacks" <FancyThatDems!@arrogantDems.com> wrote in message
news:1GhOb.75749$5V2.90834@attbi_s53...
"Light Templar" <I@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> wrote in message
news:IDhOb.12326$q4.4756@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
"BushAdmiredByBlacks" <FancyThatDems!@arrogantDems.com> wrote in message
news:PdhOb.75618$5V2.90394@attbi_s53...
"Amelia M. Samples" <milla@georgebush.visi.com> wrote in message
news:8qgOb.36900$LW.436@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
I attack all religions...but they attacked first. I don't take well
to
people telling me what I can or can't do with my body because their
book
of
blood says something about it.
Then you have nothing to say to the rapist, because he can put up the
same
claim you just put up - "I don't want people telling me what I can or
can't
do with my body".
What a ridiculously stupid argument since a rapist, by definition, is
telling someone else what they can and cannot do with their body.
No more so than the abortionist is.
Women have abortions of their own free will. No one is holding a gun to
their head when they're on the table...and as an aside..
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=35539 - Bush
playing both sides on the gay marriage debate -
How do you like them apples?
.
|
|
|
| User: "BushAdmiredByBlacks" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuals lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage |
17 Jan 2004 04:09:22 PM |
|
|
"Amelia M. Samples" <milla@georgebush.visi.com> wrote in message
news:KVhOb.37133$LW.35917@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
Women have abortions of their own free will. No one is holding a gun to
their head when they're on the table...and as an aside..
Yet the abortionist is holding a knife to the baby's throat.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Light Templar" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuals lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage |
17 Jan 2004 05:03:18 PM |
|
|
"BushAdmiredByBlacks" <FancyThatDems!@arrogantDems.com> wrote in message
news:moiOb.88059$xy6.158977@attbi_s02...
"Amelia M. Samples" <milla@georgebush.visi.com> wrote in message
news:KVhOb.37133$LW.35917@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
Women have abortions of their own free will. No one is holding a gun to
their head when they're on the table...and as an aside..
Yet the abortionist is holding a knife to the baby's throat.
Absolute *****.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Amelia M. Samples" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuals lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage |
17 Jan 2004 05:24:50 PM |
|
|
"BushAdmiredByBlacks" <FancyThatDems!@arrogantDems.com> wrote in message
news:moiOb.88059$xy6.158977@attbi_s02...
"Amelia M. Samples" <milla@georgebush.visi.com> wrote in message
news:KVhOb.37133$LW.35917@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
Women have abortions of their own free will. No one is holding a gun to
their head when they're on the table...and as an aside..
Yet the abortionist is holding a knife to the baby's throat.
Which, under the law, the mother gets to make that choice. I do believe that
there are too many abortions, and that it shouldn't be used as birth
control, I am fine with partial birth abortion outlawed, but I still think
the woman should have the right. Again, let's keep on-topic here...if you
want to have an abortion discussion, start a thread.
.
|
|
|
| User: "No One" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuals lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage |
17 Jan 2004 07:18:53 PM |
|
|
"Amelia M. Samples" <milla@georgebush.visi.com> writes:
I am fine with partial birth abortion outlawed, but I still think
the woman should have the right. Again, let's keep on-topic here...if you
want to have an abortion discussion, start a thread.
So-called "partial birth abortions" are medical procedures used very
rarely and only when there is a serious problem. The alternative is a
seriously injured or dead mother in addition to a dead fetus (or a
seriously damaged baby that wouldn't survive more than a few seconds
once the umbilical cord is cut.)
The use of the term by the religious right wing, and the attempts to
pretend this precedure is something other than an last-ditch effort
to handle a medical emergency, is indicative of how the religous
right wing behaves, and that behavior is relevant to the current
thread - it tells you nothing these people say can be trusted.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Amelia M. Samples" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuals lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage |
17 Jan 2004 07:41:22 PM |
|
|
"No One" <noone@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:m3u12uhx5s.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net...
"Amelia M. Samples" <milla@georgebush.visi.com> writes:
I am fine with partial birth abortion outlawed, but I still think
the woman should have the right. Again, let's keep on-topic here...if
you
want to have an abortion discussion, start a thread.
So-called "partial birth abortions" are medical procedures used very
rarely and only when there is a serious problem. The alternative is a
seriously injured or dead mother in addition to a dead fetus (or a
seriously damaged baby that wouldn't survive more than a few seconds
once the umbilical cord is cut.)
The use of the term by the religious right wing, and the attempts to
pretend this precedure is something other than an last-ditch effort
to handle a medical emergency, is indicative of how the religous
right wing behaves, and that behavior is relevant to the current
thread - it tells you nothing these people say can be trusted.
True enough, my bad. I engaged keyboard too fast. I forget the
incrementalism these people operate on.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas Berry" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuals lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage |
17 Jan 2004 04:53:34 PM |
|
|
Lo, many moons past, on Sat, 17 Jan 2004 22:09:22 GMT, a stranger
called by some "BushAdmiredByBlacks" <FancyThatDems!@arrogantDems.com>
came forth and told this tale in alt.atheism
"Amelia M. Samples" <milla@georgebush.visi.com> wrote in message
news:KVhOb.37133$LW.35917@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
Women have abortions of their own free will. No one is holding a gun to
their head when they're on the table...and as an aside..
Yet the abortionist is holding a knife to the baby's throat.
*sigh* Care for the list of court decisions that state clearly that a
fetus is *not* a person until birth?
I have a fun one from Florida. A man was convited of DUI by a minor.
He argued that under Florida's declaration that life begins at
conception, he was actually 21 at the time of the arrest. Judge threw
it out, citing a pile of cases showing that under the law, life begins
at birth.
Another good one from my own backyard. Pregnant woman busted for
driving alone in the carpool lane tried to claim her fetus as a
passenger. Before throwing the argument out, the judge point out that
if this was the case, then she was guilty of a pile of violations..
child not in a car seat, two people behind the wheel, etc.
So, again case law goes against you.
--
Douglas Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
Ezekiel 13:20 "Wherefore thus saith the
Lord GOD; Behold, I am against your pillows"
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jeff North" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuals lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage |
17 Jan 2004 09:51:19 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 22:53:34 GMT, in alt.politics.homosexuality
Douglas Berry <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote:
| Lo, many moons past, on Sat, 17 Jan 2004 22:09:22 GMT, a stranger
| called by some "BushAdmiredByBlacks" <FancyThatDems!@arrogantDems.com>
| came forth and told this tale in alt.atheism
|
| >
| >"Amelia M. Samples" <milla@georgebush.visi.com> wrote in message
| >news:KVhOb.37133$LW.35917@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
| >> Women have abortions of their own free will. No one is holding a gun to
| >> their head when they're on the table...and as an aside..
| >
| >
| >Yet the abortionist is holding a knife to the baby's throat.
|
| *sigh* Care for the list of court decisions that state clearly that a
| fetus is *not* a person until birth?
|
| I have a fun one from Florida. A man was convited of DUI by a minor.
| He argued that under Florida's declaration that life begins at
| conception, he was actually 21 at the time of the arrest. Judge threw
| it out, citing a pile of cases showing that under the law, life begins
| at birth.
|
| Another good one from my own backyard. Pregnant woman busted for
| driving alone in the carpool lane tried to claim her fetus as a
| passenger. Before throwing the argument out, the judge point out that
| if this was the case, then she was guilty of a pile of violations..
| child not in a car seat, two people behind the wheel, etc.
Were these people representing themselves? If not, where did their
lawyers get their degrees, from a cereal box?
| So, again case law goes against you.
---------------------------------------------------------------
jnorth@yourpantsbigpond.net.au : Remove your pants to reply
---------------------------------------------------------------
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jeff North" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuals lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage |
17 Jan 2004 09:49:00 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 22:09:22 GMT, in alt.politics.homosexuality
"BushAdmiredByBlacks" <FancyThatDems!@arrogantDems.com> wrote:
|
| "Amelia M. Samples" <milla@georgebush.visi.com> wrote in message
| news:KVhOb.37133$LW.35917@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
| > Women have abortions of their own free will. No one is holding a gun to
| > their head when they're on the table...and as an aside..
|
| Yet the abortionist is holding a knife to the baby's throat.
A baby is a human being living outside of the womb.
---------------------------------------------------------------
jnorth@yourpantsbigpond.net.au : Remove your pants to reply
---------------------------------------------------------------
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Amelia M. Samples" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuals lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage |
17 Jan 2004 03:20:34 PM |
|
|
"BushAdmiredByBlacks" <FancyThatDems!@arrogantDems.com> wrote in message
news:PdhOb.75618$5V2.90394@attbi_s53...
"Amelia M. Samples" <milla@georgebush.visi.com> wrote in message
news:8qgOb.36900$LW.436@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
I attack all religions...but they attacked first. I don't take well to
people telling me what I can or can't do with my body because their book
of
blood says something about it.
Then you have nothing to say to the rapist, because he can put up the same
claim you just put up - "I don't want people telling me what I can or
can't
do with my body".
Now be a good little homosexual girl and go attack some religions again,
Amelia!
Um...rape is a violent crime with a victim. Gay marriage is not violent in
and of itself, and there are no victims. Don't pull the domestic violence
canard either, your merry little band has pretty much cornered the market on
that one. BTW, rape is defended in the bible...are you OK with that?
References upon request.
.
|
|
|
| User: "BushAdmiredByBlacks" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuals lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage |
17 Jan 2004 03:25:32 PM |
|
|
"Amelia M. Samples" <milla@georgebush.visi.com> wrote in message
news:CGhOb.37121$LW.26752@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
"BushAdmiredByBlacks" <FancyThatDems!@arrogantDems.com> wrote in message
news:PdhOb.75618$5V2.90394@attbi_s53...
"Amelia M. Samples" <milla@georgebush.visi.com> wrote in message
news:8qgOb.36900$LW.436@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
I attack all religions...but they attacked first. I don't take well to
people telling me what I can or can't do with my body because their
book
of
blood says something about it.
Then you have nothing to say to the rapist, because he can put up the
same
claim you just put up - "I don't want people telling me what I can or
can't
do with my body".
Now be a good little homosexual girl and go attack some religions again,
Amelia!
Um...rape is a violent crime with a victim.
So is abortion, so what is your point??
.
|
|
|
| User: "Amelia M. Samples" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuals lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage |
17 Jan 2004 03:39:29 PM |
|
|
"BushAdmiredByBlacks" <FancyThatDems!@arrogantDems.com> wrote in message
news:gLhOb.74624$sv6.167700@attbi_s52...
"Amelia M. Samples" <milla@georgebush.visi.com> wrote in message
news:CGhOb.37121$LW.26752@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
"BushAdmiredByBlacks" <FancyThatDems!@arrogantDems.com> wrote in message
news:PdhOb.75618$5V2.90394@attbi_s53...
"Amelia M. Samples" <milla@georgebush.visi.com> wrote in message
news:8qgOb.36900$LW.436@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
I attack all religions...but they attacked first. I don't take well
to
people telling me what I can or can't do with my body because their
book
of
blood says something about it.
Then you have nothing to say to the rapist, because he can put up the
same
claim you just put up - "I don't want people telling me what I can or
can't
do with my body".
Now be a good little homosexual girl and go attack some religions
again,
Amelia!
Um...rape is a violent crime with a victim.
So is abortion, so what is your point??
No, it's not. Abortion is legal. The state has quite properly declared that
abortion is a matter between the woman, her doctor, and her god if she has
one. This isn't an abortion debate, don't try to turn it into one.
.
|
|
|
| User: "BushAdmiredByBlacks" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuals lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage |
17 Jan 2004 04:09:22 PM |
|
|
"Amelia M. Samples" <milla@georgebush.visi.com> wrote in message
news:lYhOb.37137$LW.25137@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
"BushAdmiredByBlacks" <FancyThatDems!@arrogantDems.com> wrote in message
news:gLhOb.74624$sv6.167700@attbi_s52...
"Amelia M. Samples" <milla@georgebush.visi.com> wrote in message
news:CGhOb.37121$LW.26752@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
"BushAdmiredByBlacks" <FancyThatDems!@arrogantDems.com> wrote in
message
news:PdhOb.75618$5V2.90394@attbi_s53...
"Amelia M. Samples" <milla@georgebush.visi.com> wrote in message
news:8qgOb.36900$LW.436@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
I attack all religions...but they attacked first. I don't take
well
to
people telling me what I can or can't do with my body because
their
book
of
blood says something about it.
Then you have nothing to say to the rapist, because he can put up
the
same
claim you just put up - "I don't want people telling me what I can
or
can't
do with my body".
Now be a good little homosexual girl and go attack some religions
again,
Amelia!
Um...rape is a violent crime with a victim.
So is abortion, so what is your point??
No, it's not. Abortion is legal. The state has quite properly declared
that
abortion is a matter between the woman, her doctor, and her god if she has
one. This isn't an abortion debate, don't try to turn it into one.
Then don't raise the issue of "people telling me what I can or cannot do
with my body", Snookums.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Amelia M. Samples" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuals lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage |
17 Jan 2004 05:26:31 PM |
|
|
"BushAdmiredByBlacks" <FancyThatDems!@arrogantDems.com> wrote in message
news:moiOb.89181$na.48621@attbi_s04...
"Amelia M. Samples" <milla@georgebush.visi.com> wrote in message
news:lYhOb.37137$LW.25137@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
"BushAdmiredByBlacks" <FancyThatDems!@arrogantDems.com> wrote in message
news:gLhOb.74624$sv6.167700@attbi_s52...
"Amelia M. Samples" <milla@georgebush.visi.com> wrote in message
news:CGhOb.37121$LW.26752@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
"BushAdmiredByBlacks" <FancyThatDems!@arrogantDems.com> wrote in
message
news:PdhOb.75618$5V2.90394@attbi_s53...
"Amelia M. Samples" <milla@georgebush.visi.com> wrote in message
news:8qgOb.36900$LW.436@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
I attack all religions...but they attacked first. I don't take
well
to
people telling me what I can or can't do with my body because
their
book
of
blood says something about it.
Then you have nothing to say to the rapist, because he can put up
the
same
claim you just put up - "I don't want people telling me what I can
or
can't
do with my body".
Now be a good little homosexual girl and go attack some religions
again,
Amelia!
Um...rape is a violent crime with a victim.
So is abortion, so what is your point??
No, it's not. Abortion is legal. The state has quite properly declared
that
abortion is a matter between the woman, her doctor, and her god if she
has
one. This isn't an abortion debate, don't try to turn it into one.
Then don't raise the issue of "people telling me what I can or cannot do
with my body", Snookums.
Abortion isn't relevant to this conversation. If you want to have an
abortion debate, start another thread and I'll happily join you there,
sweetie..
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Homosexuals lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage |
19 Jan 2004 12:09:24 PM |
|
|
| | | | | | |
