Faggots lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage



 Religions > Atheism > Faggots lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage

LINK TO THIS PAGE  


rating :  0   |  0


  Page 1 of 110

1

 

2

 

3

 

4

 

5

 

6

 

7

 

8

 

9

 

10

 

11

 

12

 

13

 

14

 

15

 

16

 

17

 

18

 

19

 

20

 

21

 

22

 

23

 

24

 

25

 

26

 

27

 

28

 

29

 

30

 

31

 

32

 

33

 

34

 

35

 

36

 

37

 

38

 

39

 

40

 

41

 

42

 

43

 

44

 

45

 

46

 

47

 

48

 

49

 

50

 

51

 

52

 

53

 

54

 

55

 

56

 

57

 

58

 

59

 

60

 

61

 

62

 

63

 

64

 

65

 

66

 

67

 

68

 

69

 

70

 

71

 

72

 

73

 

74

 

75

 

76

 

77

 

78

 

79

 

80

 

81

 

82

 

83

 

84

 

85

 

86

 

87

 

88

 

89

 

90

 

91

 

92

 

93

 

94

 

95

 

96

 

97

 

98

 

99

 

100

 

101

 

102

 

103

 

104

 

105

 

106

 

107

 

108

 

109

 

110

 
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: "Baghdad Bob Baghdadbob"

Title: Re: Faggots lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage 05 Jan 2004 12:44:44 AM
"Randy Jabsco" <RandyJabsco@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:bs2qv5$5h4$0@pita.alt.net:

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.




You can choose to select a couple of skewed articles, but it will not
change reality.
.

User: "Budikka"

Title: Re: Faggots lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage 22 Dec 2003 07:22:03 PM
"Randy Jabsco" <RandyJabsco@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<bs2qv5$5h4$0@pita.alt.net>...

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...

Be happy to help you out. The door is right over there - the one
marked "garbage chute". Bye bye now. Do come visit again when you're
all grown up.
Budikka
.

User: "L. D. Blake"

Title: Re: Faggots lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage 20 Dec 2003 10:11:11 PM
On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 16:55:16 -0800, "Randy Jabsco" <RandyJabsco@yahoo.com>
wrote:

Hey faggots, I'm still confused.

Obviously.
-----
Laura
.
User: "Tate Gerard"

Title: Re: Faggots lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage 21 Dec 2003 08:19:46 AM
L. D. Blake wrote:

On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 16:55:16 -0800, "Randy Jabsco" <RandyJabsco@yahoo.com>
wrote:


Hey faggots, I'm still confused.



Obviously.

-----

Laura

Most of the world still hates faggots and they will for a long long time
to come.
.
User: "Light Templar"

Title: Re: Faggots lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage 21 Dec 2003 10:43:26 AM
"Tate Gerard" <tate23@bellsouth.com> wrote in message
news:bs4a60$cuf$0@pita.alt.net...

L. D. Blake wrote:

On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 16:55:16 -0800, "Randy Jabsco"

<RandyJabsco@yahoo.com>

wrote:


Hey faggots, I'm still confused.



Obviously.

-----

Laura



Most of the world still hates faggots and they will for a long long time
to come.

In your dreams.
.
User: "Randy Jabsco"

Title: Re: Faggots lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage 21 Dec 2003 02:05:06 PM
How do you explain the fact that faggots can only be accepted by imposing
their will on other people and seeking out sympathetic 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 constitutional ban on ***** marriages if the majority of the voters
want otherwise? Help me out here...
"Light Templar" <I@DONTACCEPTEMAIL.FAM> wrote in message
news:O4kFb.159$lo3.67@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...


"Tate Gerard" <tate23@bellsouth.com> wrote in message
news:bs4a60$cuf$0@pita.alt.net...

L. D. Blake wrote:

On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 16:55:16 -0800, "Randy Jabsco"

<RandyJabsco@yahoo.com>

wrote:


Hey faggots, I'm still confused.



Obviously.

-----

Laura



Most of the world still hates faggots and they will for a long long time
to come.


In your dreams.


.
User: "the cutest atheist"

Title: Re: Faggots lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage 22 Dec 2003 03:48:33 AM
"Randy Jabsco" <RandyJabsco@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bs4ub0$smf$0@pita.alt.net...

How do you explain the fact that faggots can only be accepted by imposing
their will on other people and seeking out sympathetic 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 constitutional ban on ***** marriages if the majority of the

voters

want otherwise? Help me out here...

replace the word 'faggots' for 'women' and you hvae the same story with
women's struggle for suffrage. if adults want to join themselves together in
a civil union, who the ***** are the greater public, in any country, to say
they can't??
if you can't join them, beat them? how sad. get a fucking life
.
User: "Al Klein"

Title: Re: Faggots lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage 23 Dec 2003 07:22:41 PM
On Mon, 22 Dec 2003 09:48:33 GMT, "the cutest atheist"
<herdofnerd(remove)@hotmail.com> posted in alt.atheism:

if you can't join them, beat them? how sad. get a fucking life

Jabsco and his ilk would have to get brains first.
--
"So much blood has been shed by the Church because of an omission from the Gospel: "Ye
shall be indifferent as to what your neighbor's religion is." Not merely tolerant of it,
but indifferent to it. Divinity is claimed for many religions; but no religion is great
enough or divine enough to add that new law to its code."
- Mark Twain, a Biography
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
.
User: "Al Klein"

Title: Re: Faggots lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage 23 Dec 2003 08:09:12 PM
oh, and I also post as ExtremeOne too...
--
"Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever
conceived."
- Isaac Asimov
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:6ehhuv4o7qkees5rvh9el1nkutaubs731b@Pern.rk...

On Mon, 22 Dec 2003 09:48:33 GMT, "the cutest atheist"
<herdofnerd(remove)@hotmail.com> posted in alt.atheism:

if you can't join them, beat them? how sad. get a fucking life


Jabsco and his ilk would have to get brains first.
--
"So much blood has been shed by the Church because of an omission from the

Gospel: "Ye

shall be indifferent as to what your neighbor's religion is." Not merely

tolerant of it,

but indifferent to it. Divinity is claimed for many religions; but no

religion is great

enough or divine enough to add that new law to its code."
- Mark Twain, a Biography
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net

.


User: "Wild Bill Taylor"

Title: Re: Faggots lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage 22 Dec 2003 05:15:38 AM
On Mon, 22 Dec 2003 09:48:33 GMT, "the cutest atheist"
<herdofnerd(remove)@hotmail.com> wrote:


"Randy Jabsco" <RandyJabsco@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bs4ub0$smf$0@pita.alt.net...

How do you explain the fact that faggots can only be accepted by imposing
their will on other people and seeking out sympathetic 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 constitutional ban on ***** marriages if the majority of the

voters

want otherwise? Help me out here...


replace the word 'faggots' for 'women' and you hvae the same story with
women's struggle for suffrage. if adults want to join themselves together in
a civil union, who the ***** are the greater public, in any country, to say
they can't??

if you can't join them, beat them? how sad. get a fucking life

"f you can't beat them pay someone to beat them." -Mahatma Gandhi
.
User: "Douglas Berry"

Title: Re: Faggots lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage 22 Dec 2003 10:18:34 AM
Lo, many moons past, on Mon, 22 Dec 2003 11:15:38 GMT, a stranger
called by some Wild Bill Taylor came forth and told this tale in
alt.atheism

"f you can't beat them pay someone to beat them." -Mahatma Gandhi

I'd love to see the source for this quote. Or are you lying again?
--
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: "Randy Jabsco"

Title: Re: Faggots lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage 22 Dec 2003 11:54:33 AM
You obviously know little about the 'suffrage' movement. But since you
brought it up... take a look at what has happened as a result...
In 85% of all divorce cases, women initiate the divorce. They usually get
full custody of the children and a nice hefty paycheck from dad. The father
is usually against a bias gendered system and ends up paying more than 50%
of his pay to the feminist ***** who initiated the divorce. All she has to
do is marry two or three times, one child each. She'll be set for life.
Then we have the NOW, an extreme militant (mostly lesbian), man hating
organization dedicating to removing all rights for men and transferring them
100% to women.
Yup, that's is a very good idea of what would happen with gays in exactly
the same situation. Imagine that, the first society where straights are
hated and their rights removed... wouldn't last long though, since fags
can't breed.
"the cutest atheist" <herdofnerd(remove)@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:R5zFb.61537$aT.58459@news-server.bigpond.net.au...


"Randy Jabsco" <RandyJabsco@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bs4ub0$smf$0@pita.alt.net...

How do you explain the fact that faggots can only be accepted by

imposing

their will on other people and seeking out sympathetic 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 constitutional ban on ***** marriages if the majority of the

voters

want otherwise? Help me out here...


replace the word 'faggots' for 'women' and you hvae the same story with
women's struggle for suffrage. if adults want to join themselves together

in

a civil union, who the ***** are the greater public, in any country, to say
they can't??

if you can't join them, beat them? how sad. get a fucking life


.
User: "the cutest atheist"

Title: Re: Faggots lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage 23 Dec 2003 01:10:20 AM
"Randy Jabsco" <RandyJabsco@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bs7b27$cet$0@pita.alt.net...

You obviously know little about the 'suffrage' movement. But since you
brought it up... take a look at what has happened as a result...

In 85% of all divorce cases, women initiate the divorce.

I've never heard a bad reason for a divorce. may I see your reference for
this figure...? I'm a girl who likes everything nicely sourced...
They usually get

full custody of the children and a nice hefty paycheck from dad. The

father

is usually against a bias gendered system and ends up paying more than 50%
of his pay to the feminist ***** who initiated the divorce. All she has

to

do is marry two or three times, one child each. She'll be set for life.

I believe alimony/palimony is not paid once the payee remarries


Then we have the NOW, an extreme militant (mostly lesbian), man hating
organization dedicating to removing all rights for men and transferring

them

100% to women.

well, they DO have catchy slogans!


Yup, that's is a very good idea of what would happen with gays in exactly
the same situation. Imagine that, the first society where straights are
hated and their rights removed... wouldn't last long though, since fags
can't breed.

poor baby. very put upon by the rest of the world wanting the same rights as
you enjoy, aren't you?
.
User: "Randy Jabsco"

Title: Re: Faggots lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage 23 Dec 2003 01:26:39 AM
"the cutest atheist" <herdofnerd(remove)@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:wTRFb.62449$aT.798@news-server.bigpond.net.au...


"Randy Jabsco" <RandyJabsco@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bs7b27$cet$0@pita.alt.net...

You obviously know little about the 'suffrage' movement. But since you
brought it up... take a look at what has happened as a result...

In 85% of all divorce cases, women initiate the divorce.


I've never heard a bad reason for a divorce. may I see your reference for
this figure...? I'm a girl who likes everything nicely sourced...

If it is so important to you, couldn't you look it up yourself?
The website is down right now, but I am sure I saw it on www.ancpr.org


They usually get

full custody of the children and a nice hefty paycheck from dad. The

father

is usually against a bias gendered system and ends up paying more than

50%

of his pay to the feminist ***** who initiated the divorce. All she has

to

do is marry two or three times, one child each. She'll be set for life.


I believe alimony/palimony is not paid once the payee remarries


Then we have the NOW, an extreme militant (mostly lesbian), man hating
organization dedicating to removing all rights for men and transferring

them

100% to women.


well, they DO have catchy slogans!


Yup, that's is a very good idea of what would happen with gays in

exactly

the same situation. Imagine that, the first society where straights are
hated and their rights removed... wouldn't last long though, since fags
can't breed.


poor baby. very put upon by the rest of the world wanting the same rights

as

you enjoy, aren't you?


.
User: "the cutest atheist"

Title: Re: Faggots lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage 23 Dec 2003 05:57:04 PM
"Randy Jabsco" <RandyJabsco@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bs8qkr$5er$0@pita.alt.net...> "the cutest atheist"
<herdofnerd(remove)@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:wTRFb.62449$aT.798@news-server.bigpond.net.au...


"Randy Jabsco" <RandyJabsco@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bs7b27$cet$0@pita.alt.net...

You obviously know little about the 'suffrage' movement. But since

you

brought it up... take a look at what has happened as a result...

In 85% of all divorce cases, women initiate the divorce.


I've never heard a bad reason for a divorce. may I see your reference

for


this figure...? I'm a girl who likes everything nicely sourced...


If it is so important to you, couldn't you look it up yourself?

no, you're the one making the claim, I'm the one who's doubting its validity


The website is down right now,

how convenient
but I am sure I saw it on www.ancpr.org
so is this rate just for the usa, or all countries with feminism? or all
countries with divorce? or all nations in your fantasy?



poor baby. very put upon by the rest of the world wanting the same

rights

as

you enjoy, aren't you?


.
User: "Al Klein"

Title: Re: Faggots lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage 24 Dec 2003 08:04:32 PM
On Tue, 23 Dec 2003 23:57:04 GMT, "the cutest atheist"
<herdofnerd(remove)@hotmail.com> posted to alt.atheism:

"Randy Jabsco" <RandyJabsco@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bs8qkr$5er$0@pita.alt.net...> "the cutest atheist"

The website is down right now,

how convenient

but I am sure I saw it on www.ancpr.org

so is this rate just for the usa, or all countries with feminism? or all
countries with divorce? or all nations in your fantasy?

The site's not down but it *is* a biased site, so take anything
unsourced that you find there with at least a few grains of salt.
--
"We should do unto others as we would want them to do unto us. If I were an unborn
fetus I would want others to use force to protect me, therefore using force against
abortionists is *justifiable homocide*."
- "Pro-Life" doctor killer and corpse Paul Hill
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
.
User: "Al Klein"

Title: Re: Faggots lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage 24 Dec 2003 10:14:18 PM
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:rfgkuvskbdqgnfndlk67quvjh6v660quqr@Pern.rk...

On Tue, 23 Dec 2003 23:57:04 GMT, "the cutest atheist"
<herdofnerd(remove)@hotmail.com> posted to alt.atheism:

"Randy Jabsco" <RandyJabsco@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bs8qkr$5er$0@pita.alt.net...> "the cutest atheist"


The website is down right now,


how convenient


but I am sure I saw it on www.ancpr.org


so is this rate just for the usa, or all countries with feminism? or all
countries with divorce? or all nations in your fantasy?


The site's not down but it *is* a biased site, so take anything
unsourced that you find there with at least a few grains of salt.
--
"We should do unto others as we would want them to do unto us. If I were

an unborn

fetus I would want others to use force to protect me, therefore using

force against

abortionists is *justifiable homocide*."
- "Pro-Life" doctor killer and corpse Paul Hill
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net

Oh, and I also post as ExtremeOne..
--
"Damn. Looks like all of usenet agrees that you don't have the logical
faculties to prove the statement 'dogshit is not peanut butter' if we
gave you a jar of each and a box of crackers" - John Hattan to Tichy
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
rukbat at optonline dot net
.


User: "Randy Jabsco"

Title: Re: Faggots lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage 23 Dec 2003 06:32:06 PM
remove foot from mouth before speaking. and check the other replies.
"the cutest atheist" <herdofnerd(remove)@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:kD4Gb.63310$aT.54790@news-server.bigpond.net.au...


"Randy Jabsco" <RandyJabsco@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bs8qkr$5er$0@pita.alt.net...> "the cutest atheist"
<herdofnerd(remove)@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:wTRFb.62449$aT.798@news-server.bigpond.net.au...


"Randy Jabsco" <RandyJabsco@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bs7b27$cet$0@pita.alt.net...

You obviously know little about the 'suffrage' movement. But since

you

brought it up... take a look at what has happened as a result...

In 85% of all divorce cases, women initiate the divorce.


I've never heard a bad reason for a divorce. may I see your reference

for



this figure...? I'm a girl who likes everything nicely sourced...


If it is so important to you, couldn't you look it up yourself?


no, you're the one making the claim, I'm the one who's doubting its

validity



The website is down right now,


how convenient

but I am sure I saw it on www.ancpr.org

so is this rate just for the usa, or all countries with feminism? or all
countries with divorce? or all nations in your fantasy?



poor baby. very put upon by the rest of the world wanting the same

rights

as

you enjoy, aren't you?




.
User: "the cutest atheist"

Title: Re: Faggots lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage 24 Dec 2003 07:11:42 AM
"Randy Jabsco" <RandyJabsco@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bsamni$qcu$0@pita.alt.net...

remove foot from mouth before speaking. and check the other replies.

are you fucking serious?? jeeee-bus, you fucking got me.....
-godless *****
.



User: "Douglas Berry"

Title: Re: Faggots lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage 23 Dec 2003 12:19:30 PM
Lo, many moons past, on Mon, 22 Dec 2003 23:26:39 -0800, a stranger
called by some "Randy Jabsco" <RandyJabsco@yahoo.com> came forth and
told this tale in alt.atheism

"the cutest atheist" <herdofnerd(remove)@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:wTRFb.62449$aT.798@news-server.bigpond.net.au...

I've never heard a bad reason for a divorce. may I see your reference for
this figure...? I'm a girl who likes everything nicely sourced...


If it is so important to you, couldn't you look it up yourself?

Randy, the standard is that when you make a claim, you back it up.

The website is down right now, but I am sure I saw it on www.ancpr.org

The site is back up, and hardly look impartial. It's like going to a
SF Giants site for information on the Dodgers.
I wasn't able to find any referenced information on who initiates
divorces.

I believe alimony/palimony is not paid once the payee remarries

Yup. Child support continues until the child reaches 18. Of course,
to Randy this is hideously unfair.
--
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: "Randy Jabsco"

Title: Re: Faggots lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage 23 Dec 2003 04:24:08 PM
"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:oi1huvsl91537sfuijdksjs5035h2sg9br@4ax.com...

Lo, many moons past, on Mon, 22 Dec 2003 23:26:39 -0800, a stranger
called by some "Randy Jabsco" <RandyJabsco@yahoo.com> came forth and
told this tale in alt.atheism

"the cutest atheist" <herdofnerd(remove)@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:wTRFb.62449$aT.798@news-server.bigpond.net.au...


I've never heard a bad reason for a divorce. may I see your reference

for

this figure...? I'm a girl who likes everything nicely sourced...


If it is so important to you, couldn't you look it up yourself?


Randy, the standard is that when you make a claim, you back it up.

I don't post proof of the obvious.


The website is down right now, but I am sure I saw it on www.ancpr.org


The site is back up, and hardly look impartial. It's like going to a
SF Giants site for information on the Dodgers.

That doesn't make it untrue. It only means they specialize in that type of
information. If you believe otherwise, why don't YOU post proof to the
contrary?


I wasn't able to find any referenced information on who initiates
divorces.

You must not have been looking very hard. I found it in five minutes by
using their search engine. And a whole shitload of other information that
only proves my point even more... but since you are bucking for an *****
whooping, here you go...
http://childrens-justice.org/myths.htm
Myth: Men are the ones who initiate most divorces and want to leave
the marriage - usually because of an extramarital involvement.
Truth: Women initiate between 65% and 80% of all divorces over the
objections of their husbands. Further, among causes for divorce an affair
ranks sixth and any sort of abuse - whether alcohol, violence, or
drug-related - doesn't show up until the eleventh cause. When a wife
divorces her husband for reasons such as a "gradual growing apart" or
"serious differences in lifestyle" (the top two reasons!) and takes the kids
with her, her ex-husband truly has been disenfranchised - and left
powerless.
Now... let's get back to the subject....


I believe alimony/palimony is not paid once the payee remarries


Yup. Child support continues until the child reaches 18. Of course,
to Randy this is hideously unfair.

Post proof that I said that... or were you just trying to side track the
real issue by changing the subject?



--

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: "Douglas Berry"

Title: Re: Faggots lose again - Strong Support Is Found for Ban on Gay Marriage 25 Dec 2003 12:29:11 PM
Lo, many moons past, on Tue, 23 Dec 2003 14:24:08 -0800, a stranger
called by some "Randy Jabsco" <RandyJabsco@yahoo.com> came forth and
told this tale in alt.atheism

"Douglas Berry" <penguin_boy@mindOBVIOUSspring.com> wrote in message
news:oi1huvsl91537sfuijdksjs5035h2sg9br@4ax.com...

Randy, the standard is that when you make a claim, you back it up.


I don't post proof of the obvious.

You can't.
If I claim that there is another planetary mass outside Pluto; I'm
going to be expected to show evidence to back uo my claims. Same
thing here. You have made claims. Now back them up or back down.

The site is back up, and hardly look impartial. It's like going to a
SF Giants site for information on the Dodgers.


That doesn't make it untrue. It only means they specialize in that type of
information. If you believe otherwise, why don't YOU post proof to the
contrary?

Because I'm not the one making claims. The sight is misogynistic,
seems to feel that men are oppressed, and thinks that any judge who
doesn't bend over backwards to cater to men should be lynched. Not
the best source. Find me some stats from an impartial source, like a
records department that actually tracks these things.

I wasn't able to find any referenced information on who initiates
divorces.


You must not have been looking very hard. I found it in five minutes by
using their search engine. And a whole shitload of other information that
only proves my point even more... but since you are bucking for an *****
whooping, here you go...

http://childrens-justice.org/myths.htm

Myth: Men are the ones who initiate most divorces and want to leave
the marriage - usually because of an extramarital involvement.
Truth: Women initiate between 65% and 80% of all divorces over the
objections of their husbands. Further, among causes for divorce an affair
ranks sixth and any sort of abuse - whether alcohol, violence, or
drug-related - doesn't show up until the eleventh cause. When a wife
divorces her husband for reasons such as a "gradual growing apart" or
"serious differences in lifestyle" (the top two reasons!) and takes the kids
with her, her ex-husband truly has been disenfranchised - and left
powerless.

OK, where did they get that number? Randy, I could put up a page
that claimed that the majority of men fighting in Noerth Africa during
World War II were left-handed, but without a source, it's worthless!
Where do you get the numbers? How were they gathered? What's the
margin of error?
Look at that range! I did a quick search, and found that in 1994,
there were 1,191,000 divorces (approx.) in the United States.
80% of that number is 952,000
65% of that number is 774,150
That's a diiference of 178,650 divorces! Somebody had to iniate them,
and the names will be on the documents, and the documents are public
record! Can you see why I'm skeptical? The huge range of numbers
strikes me as a PIOTA guess.
--
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"
.