| Topic: |
Religions > Bible |
| User: |
"Wyle Coyote" |
| Date: |
16 Dec 2003 10:03:00 PM |
| Object: |
BUSH: "We May Need An Amendment." |
x-no-archive:yes
WASHINGTON - President Bush (news - web sites) said Tuesday that he could support a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=544&u=/ap/20031217/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_interview_2&printer=1
.
|
|
| User: "righter" |
|
| Title: Re: "We May Need An Amendment." |
17 Dec 2003 04:43:16 AM |
|
|
"Wyle Coyote" <4@k.4> wrote in message
news:UzQDb.7939$0s2.5493@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
x-no-archive:yes
WASHINGTON - President Bush (news - web sites) said Tuesday that he could
support a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=544&u=/ap/20031217/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_interview_2&printer=1
That's one step away from a ban on sodomy, which is one step away from a ban
on nose-picking, which, according to some experts in the law, is considered
"unlawful penetration". The problem with this last big push is enforcing
the law. I mean, how many people do you know that aren't embarassed to pick
their nose in public? They'll have to start a sting operation, where
friends of nose-pickers turn their nose-picking friends in, and the case
will have to hinge on their testimony. Enhanced penalties can be lodged if
the perp wipes his boogers on someone else's property, or eats his boogers.
And, of course, they'll need protective custody in jail because, who wants
to bunk with a nose-picker? You wake up, and someone has flicked a *****
on your face! How gross is that? So, let's get this campaign on the road!
I'm all for it.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Liberals HATE America" |
|
| Title: Re: "We May Need An Amendment." |
17 Dec 2003 12:12:28 AM |
|
|
"Wyle Coyote" <4@k.4> wrote in message
news:UzQDb.7939$0s2.5493@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
x-no-archive:yes
WASHINGTON - President Bush (news - web sites) said Tuesday that he could
support a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=544&u=/ap/20031217/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_interview_2&printer=1
Excellent!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ashland Henderson" |
|
| Title: Re: "We May Need An Amendment." |
17 Dec 2003 02:47:07 PM |
|
|
"Liberals HATE America" <C750b-PIC@noliblsforus.edu> wrote in message news:<a3d2b4a686d159dad3ffc4b28bf95b53@news.teranews.com>...
"Wyle Coyote" <4@k.4> wrote in message
news:UzQDb.7939$0s2.5493@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
x-no-archive:yes
WASHINGTON - President Bush (news - web sites) said Tuesday that he could
support a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=544&u=/ap/20031217/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_interview_2&printer=1
Excellent!
Only for people as stupid as you. Think about it, assuming you are able
to think. The Constitution sets up a method of governing. It is not meant
as a guide to conduct or to regulate morals. Start putting crap like that
in it and you will find that the time will come when it bites you very
badly indeed.
.
|
|
|
| User: "The Frog" |
|
| Title: Re: "We May Need An Amendment." |
17 Dec 2003 04:11:50 PM |
|
|
On 17 Dec 2003 12:47:07 -0800, (Ashland
Henderson) wrote:
"Liberals HATE America" <C750b-PIC@noliblsforus.edu> wrote in message news:<a3d2b4a686d159dad3ffc4b28bf95b53@news.teranews.com>...
"Wyle Coyote" <4@k.4> wrote in message
news:UzQDb.7939$0s2.5493@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
x-no-archive:yes
WASHINGTON - President Bush (news - web sites) said Tuesday that he could
support a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=544&u=/ap/20031217/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_interview_2&printer=1
Excellent!
Only for people as stupid as you. Think about it, assuming you are able
to think. The Constitution sets up a method of governing. It is not meant
as a guide to conduct or to regulate morals. Start putting crap like that
in it and you will find that the time will come when it bites you very
badly indeed.
It is set up to change to our needs by supermajority (and not "living
document": style that has no democratic underpinnings).
We never needed it before. Now we do.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
"The multicultural project will never fully succeed if 'diversity'
is defined as one's own preferred ideologies and political groups."
--Richard E. Redding, "Grappling With Diverse Conceptions of Diversity,"
American Psychologist, April 2002, p. 301.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rick" |
|
| Title: Re: "We May Need An Amendment." |
17 Dec 2003 04:26:05 PM |
|
|
"The Frog" <jmattNOSPAM@ticnet.com> wrote in message news:73l1uv8djirnuoenthm1ruol759u7ne3g8@4ax.com...
On 17 Dec 2003 12:47:07 -0800, (Ashland
Henderson) wrote:
"Liberals HATE America" <C750b-PIC@noliblsforus.edu> wrote in message
news:<a3d2b4a686d159dad3ffc4b28bf95b53@news.teranews.com>...
"Wyle Coyote" <4@k.4> wrote in message
news:UzQDb.7939$0s2.5493@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
x-no-archive:yes
WASHINGTON - President Bush (news - web sites) said Tuesday that he could
support a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=544&u=/ap/20031217/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_interview_2&printer=1
Excellent!
Only for people as stupid as you. Think about it, assuming you are able
to think. The Constitution sets up a method of governing. It is not meant
as a guide to conduct or to regulate morals. Start putting crap like that
in it and you will find that the time will come when it bites you very
badly indeed.
It is set up to change to our needs by supermajority (and not "living
document": style that has no democratic underpinnings).
We never needed it before. Now we do.
No, it is set up to protect specific minorities from the tyranny
of the majority. The FMA would be the first and only federal
amendment to specifically define a group of 15-20 million
Americans and deny them rights and privleges. That's NOT
what the Constitution was intended for, and because of this
even "defense of marriage" law authors and supporters such
as Bob Barr are against it.
It will fail, and a few decades from now those who proposed
and supported it will wince in embarassment every time they
read passing references to it in American history books.
Rick
.
|
|
|
| User: "righter" |
|
| Title: Re: "We May Need An Amendment." |
18 Dec 2003 01:00:40 AM |
|
|
"Rick" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:brql5t$6fqpn$1@ID-82690.news.uni-berlin.de...
"The Frog" <jmattNOSPAM@ticnet.com> wrote in message
news:73l1uv8djirnuoenthm1ruol759u7ne3g8@4ax.com...
On 17 Dec 2003 12:47:07 -0800, (Ashland
Henderson) wrote:
"Liberals HATE America" <C750b-PIC@noliblsforus.edu> wrote in message
news:<a3d2b4a686d159dad3ffc4b28bf95b53@news.teranews.com>...
"Wyle Coyote" <4@k.4> wrote in message
news:UzQDb.7939$0s2.5493@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
x-no-archive:yes
WASHINGTON - President Bush (news - web sites) said Tuesday that he
could
support a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=544&u=/ap/20031217/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_interview_2&printer=1
Excellent!
Only for people as stupid as you. Think about it, assuming you are able
to think. The Constitution sets up a method of governing. It is not
meant
as a guide to conduct or to regulate morals. Start putting crap like
that
in it and you will find that the time will come when it bites you very
badly indeed.
It is set up to change to our needs by supermajority (and not "living
document": style that has no democratic underpinnings).
We never needed it before. Now we do.
No, it is set up to protect specific minorities from the tyranny
of the majority. The FMA would be the first and only federal
amendment to specifically define a group of 15-20 million
Americans and deny them rights and privleges. That's NOT
what the Constitution was intended for, and because of this
even "defense of marriage" law authors and supporters such
as Bob Barr are against it.
It will fail, and a few decades from now those who proposed
and supported it will wince in embarassment every time they
read passing references to it in American history books.
Rick
I agree with this post.
\
\>
.
|
|
|
| User: "Humphrey Goldberg" |
|
| Title: Re: "We May Need An Amendment." |
18 Dec 2003 12:22:56 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 07:00:40 GMT, "righter" <righter@sonic.net> wrote:
"Rick" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:brql5t$6fqpn$1@ID-82690.news.uni-berlin.de...
"The Frog" <jmattNOSPAM@ticnet.com> wrote in message
news:73l1uv8djirnuoenthm1ruol759u7ne3g8@4ax.com...
On 17 Dec 2003 12:47:07 -0800, (Ashland
Henderson) wrote:
"Liberals HATE America" <C750b-PIC@noliblsforus.edu> wrote in message
news:<a3d2b4a686d159dad3ffc4b28bf95b53@news.teranews.com>...
"Wyle Coyote" <4@k.4> wrote in message
news:UzQDb.7939$0s2.5493@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
x-no-archive:yes
WASHINGTON - President Bush (news - web sites) said Tuesday that he
could
support a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=544&u=/ap/20031217/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_interview_2&printer=1
Excellent!
Only for people as stupid as you. Think about it, assuming you are able
to think. The Constitution sets up a method of governing. It is not
meant
as a guide to conduct or to regulate morals. Start putting crap like
that
in it and you will find that the time will come when it bites you very
badly indeed.
It is set up to change to our needs by supermajority (and not "living
document": style that has no democratic underpinnings).
We never needed it before. Now we do.
No, it is set up to protect specific minorities from the tyranny
of the majority. The FMA would be the first and only federal
amendment to specifically define a group of 15-20 million
Americans and deny them rights and privleges. That's NOT
what the Constitution was intended for, and because of this
even "defense of marriage" law authors and supporters such
as Bob Barr are against it.
It will fail, and a few decades from now those who proposed
and supported it will wince in embarassment every time they
read passing references to it in American history books.
Rick
I agree with this post.
Then you are a homophile. So be careful -- AIDS takes no prisoners.
--
H. Goldberg
.
|
|
|
| User: "righter" |
|
| Title: Re: "We May Need An Amendment." |
18 Dec 2003 04:08:57 PM |
|
|
<Humphrey Goldberg> wrote in message
news:5c74c11c98a118bc6c1985a24005f19b@news.teranews.com...
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 07:00:40 GMT, "righter" <righter@sonic.net> wrote:
"Rick" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:brql5t$6fqpn$1@ID-82690.news.uni-berlin.de...
"The Frog" <jmattNOSPAM@ticnet.com> wrote in message
news:73l1uv8djirnuoenthm1ruol759u7ne3g8@4ax.com...
On 17 Dec 2003 12:47:07 -0800, (Ashland
Henderson) wrote:
"Liberals HATE America" <C750b-PIC@noliblsforus.edu> wrote in
message
news:<a3d2b4a686d159dad3ffc4b28bf95b53@news.teranews.com>...
"Wyle Coyote" <4@k.4> wrote in message
news:UzQDb.7939$0s2.5493@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
x-no-archive:yes
WASHINGTON - President Bush (news - web sites) said Tuesday that
he
could
support a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=544&u=/ap/20031217/ap_on_go_pr_w
h/bush_interview_2&printer=1
Excellent!
Only for people as stupid as you. Think about it, assuming you are
able
to think. The Constitution sets up a method of governing. It is not
meant
as a guide to conduct or to regulate morals. Start putting crap like
that
in it and you will find that the time will come when it bites you
very
badly indeed.
It is set up to change to our needs by supermajority (and not "living
document": style that has no democratic underpinnings).
We never needed it before. Now we do.
No, it is set up to protect specific minorities from the tyranny
of the majority. The FMA would be the first and only federal
amendment to specifically define a group of 15-20 million
Americans and deny them rights and privleges. That's NOT
what the Constitution was intended for, and because of this
even "defense of marriage" law authors and supporters such
as Bob Barr are against it.
It will fail, and a few decades from now those who proposed
and supported it will wince in embarassment every time they
read passing references to it in American history books.
Rick
I agree with this post.
Then you are a homophile. So be careful -- AIDS takes no prisoners.
--
H. Goldberg
How do you figure. It's the ideology that I agree with. I don't engage in
homosexuality.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Humphrey Goldberg" |
|
| Title: Re: "We May Need An Amendment." |
18 Dec 2003 10:34:26 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 22:08:57 GMT, "righter" <righter@sonic.net> wrote:
<Humphrey Goldberg> wrote in message
news:5c74c11c98a118bc6c1985a24005f19b@news.teranews.com...
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 07:00:40 GMT, "righter" <righter@sonic.net> wrote:
"Rick" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:brql5t$6fqpn$1@ID-82690.news.uni-berlin.de...
(...)
It will fail, and a few decades from now those who proposed
and supported it will wince in embarassment every time they
read passing references to it in American history books.
Rick
I agree with this post.
Then you are a homophile. So be careful -- AIDS takes no prisoners.
--
H. Goldberg
How do you figure. It's the ideology that I agree with. I don't engage in
homosexuality.
You are a homophile.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ashland Henderson" |
|
| Title: Re: "We May Need An Amendment." |
17 Dec 2003 10:48:00 PM |
|
|
The Frog <jmattNOSPAM@ticnet.com> wrote in message news:<73l1uv8djirnuoenthm1ruol759u7ne3g8@4ax.com>...
On 17 Dec 2003 12:47:07 -0800, (Ashland
Henderson) wrote:
"Liberals HATE America" <C750b-PIC@noliblsforus.edu> wrote in message news:<a3d2b4a686d159dad3ffc4b28bf95b53@news.teranews.com>...
"Wyle Coyote" <4@k.4> wrote in message
news:UzQDb.7939$0s2.5493@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
x-no-archive:yes
WASHINGTON - President Bush (news - web sites) said Tuesday that he could
support a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=544&u=/ap/20031217/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_interview_2&printer=1
Excellent!
Only for people as stupid as you. Think about it, assuming you are able
to think. The Constitution sets up a method of governing. It is not meant
as a guide to conduct or to regulate morals. Start putting crap like that
in it and you will find that the time will come when it bites you very
badly indeed.
It is set up to change to our needs by supermajority (and not "living
document": style that has no democratic underpinnings).
I'd suggest you do some reading about the constitution. You could start
by doing some research on the concept of the tyranny of the majority. In
short, you don't appear to have much of an idea what the constitution is
all about.
We never needed it before. Now we do.
No, we don't. It would be an embarresment, a shame, and a blotch of
infamy on an otherwise fine document.
.
|
|
|
| User: "righter" |
|
| Title: Re: "We May Need An Amendment." |
18 Dec 2003 01:02:11 AM |
|
|
"Ashland Henderson" <> wrote in message
news:441d41d1.0312172048.2717a894@posting.google.com...
The Frog <jmattNOSPAM@ticnet.com> wrote in message
news:<73l1uv8djirnuoenthm1ruol759u7ne3g8@4ax.com>...
On 17 Dec 2003 12:47:07 -0800, (Ashland
Henderson) wrote:
"Liberals HATE America" <C750b-PIC@noliblsforus.edu> wrote in message
news:<a3d2b4a686d159dad3ffc4b28bf95b53@news.teranews.com>...
"Wyle Coyote" <4@k.4> wrote in message
news:UzQDb.7939$0s2.5493@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
x-no-archive:yes
WASHINGTON - President Bush (news - web sites) said Tuesday that he
could
support a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=544&u=/ap/20031217/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_interview_2&printer=1
Excellent!
Only for people as stupid as you. Think about it, assuming you are able
to think. The Constitution sets up a method of governing. It is not
meant
as a guide to conduct or to regulate morals. Start putting crap like
that
in it and you will find that the time will come when it bites you very
badly indeed.
It is set up to change to our needs by supermajority (and not "living
document": style that has no democratic underpinnings).
I'd suggest you do some reading about the constitution. You could start
by doing some research on the concept of the tyranny of the majority. In
short, you don't appear to have much of an idea what the constitution is
all about.
We never needed it before. Now we do.
No, we don't. It would be an embarresment, a shame, and a blotch of
infamy on an otherwise fine document.
I agree with this post. The Constitution proves that tyranny has been doing
the same thing for thousands of years, and 227 years ago, they knew that.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Humphrey Goldberg" |
|
| Title: Re: "We May Need An Amendment." |
18 Dec 2003 12:24:40 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 07:02:11 GMT, "righter" <righter@sonic.net> wrote:
"Ashland Henderson" < > wrote in message
news:441d41d1.0312172048.2717a894@posting.google.com...
The Frog <jmattNOSPAM@ticnet.com> wrote in message
news:<73l1uv8djirnuoenthm1ruol759u7ne3g8@4ax.com>...
On 17 Dec 2003 12:47:07 -0800, (Ashland
Henderson) wrote:
"Liberals HATE America" <C750b-PIC@noliblsforus.edu> wrote in message
news:<a3d2b4a686d159dad3ffc4b28bf95b53@news.teranews.com>...
"Wyle Coyote" <4@k.4> wrote in message
news:UzQDb.7939$0s2.5493@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
x-no-archive:yes
WASHINGTON - President Bush (news - web sites) said Tuesday that he
could
support a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=544&u=/ap/20031217/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_interview_2&printer=1
Excellent!
Only for people as stupid as you. Think about it, assuming you are able
to think. The Constitution sets up a method of governing. It is not
meant
as a guide to conduct or to regulate morals. Start putting crap like
that
in it and you will find that the time will come when it bites you very
badly indeed.
It is set up to change to our needs by supermajority (and not "living
document": style that has no democratic underpinnings).
I'd suggest you do some reading about the constitution. You could start
by doing some research on the concept of the tyranny of the majority. In
short, you don't appear to have much of an idea what the constitution is
all about.
We never needed it before. Now we do.
No, we don't. It would be an embarresment, a shame, and a blotch of
infamy on an otherwise fine document.
I agree with this post. The Constitution proves that tyranny has been doing
the same thing for thousands of years, and 227 years ago, they knew that.
Then you are a homophile - Be very careful, AIDS takes no prisoners
--
H. Goldberg
.
|
|
|
| User: "righter" |
|
| Title: Re: "We May Need An Amendment." |
18 Dec 2003 04:09:35 PM |
|
|
<Humphrey Goldberg> wrote in message
news:6e845f5fc149bacaac6c05c1f054690e@news.teranews.com...
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 07:02:11 GMT, "righter" <righter@sonic.net> wrote:
"Ashland Henderson" < > wrote in message
news:441d41d1.0312172048.2717a894@posting.google.com...
The Frog <jmattNOSPAM@ticnet.com> wrote in message
news:<73l1uv8djirnuoenthm1ruol759u7ne3g8@4ax.com>...
On 17 Dec 2003 12:47:07 -0800, (Ashland
Henderson) wrote:
"Liberals HATE America" <C750b-PIC@noliblsforus.edu> wrote in
message
news:<a3d2b4a686d159dad3ffc4b28bf95b53@news.teranews.com>...
"Wyle Coyote" <4@k.4> wrote in message
news:UzQDb.7939$0s2.5493@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
x-no-archive:yes
WASHINGTON - President Bush (news - web sites) said Tuesday that
he
could
support a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=544&u=/ap/20031217/ap_on_go_pr_w
h/bush_interview_2&printer=1
Excellent!
Only for people as stupid as you. Think about it, assuming you are
able
to think. The Constitution sets up a method of governing. It is not
meant
as a guide to conduct or to regulate morals. Start putting crap like
that
in it and you will find that the time will come when it bites you
very
badly indeed.
It is set up to change to our needs by supermajority (and not "living
document": style that has no democratic underpinnings).
I'd suggest you do some reading about the constitution. You could start
by doing some research on the concept of the tyranny of the majority.
In
short, you don't appear to have much of an idea what the constitution
is
all about.
We never needed it before. Now we do.
No, we don't. It would be an embarresment, a shame, and a blotch of
infamy on an otherwise fine document.
I agree with this post. The Constitution proves that tyranny has been
doing
the same thing for thousands of years, and 227 years ago, they knew that.
Then you are a homophile - Be very careful, AIDS takes no prisoners
--
WRONG.
H. Goldberg
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "NTLDR" |
|
| Title: Re: "We May Need An Amendment." |
16 Dec 2003 10:20:08 PM |
|
|
"Wyle Coyote" <4@k.4> wrote in message
news:UzQDb.7939$0s2.5493@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
| x-no-archive:yes
|
| WASHINGTON - President Bush (news - web sites) said Tuesday that he could
support a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.
|
|
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=544&u=/ap/20031217/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_interview_2&printer=1
|
|
While they are at it why don't they include some reasonable limits on the
right to bear arms and thereby lower the murder rate? I pretty sure liberty
doesn't rest in a five year old having access to handguns.
NTLDR
.
|
|
|
| User: "Stevie" |
|
| Title: Re: "We May Need An Amendment." |
17 Dec 2003 03:52:18 AM |
|
|
WASHINGTON - President Bush (news - web sites) said Tuesday that he
could
support a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=544&u=/ap/20031217/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_interview_2&printer=1
While they are at it why don't they include some reasonable limits on
the
right to bear arms and thereby lower the murder rate? I pretty sure
liberty
doesn't rest in a five year old having access to handguns.
How about some sort of combination that disallows married gays from owning
firearms?
--
Steve
(Reply address has been changed to protect the innocent)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Vesuvius" |
|
| Title: Re: "We May Need An Amendment." |
17 Dec 2003 05:57:19 AM |
|
|
"Stevie" <NOSPaM@iglou.com> wrote in message
news:3fe02800_1@news.iglou.com...
WASHINGTON - President Bush (news - web sites) said Tuesday that he
could
support a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=544&u=/ap/20031217/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_interview_2&printer=1
While they are at it why don't they include some reasonable limits on
the
right to bear arms and thereby lower the murder rate? I pretty sure
liberty
doesn't rest in a five year old having access to handguns.
How about some sort of combination that disallows married gays from owning
firearms?
--
Steve
(Reply address has been changed to protect the innocent)
To quote that immortal line by Vincent Price from Bloodbath at the House of
Death "Collect up all the faggots & burn them" lol.
Honestly, that Bush baby will go down in history as THE most heinous
dumbass, will American politicians EVER learn?
Swartzenegger for president!
Simone
.
|
|
|
| User: "edonline" |
|
| Title: Re: "We May Need An Amendment." |
17 Dec 2003 07:56:09 AM |
|
|
"Vesuvius" <simon@eruption.corblimeylookatthatlava> wrote in message
news:brpgav$l4$1@titan.btinternet.com...
"Stevie" <NOSPaM@iglou.com> wrote in message
news:3fe02800_1@news.iglou.com...
WASHINGTON - President Bush (news - web sites) said Tuesday that he
could
support a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=544&u=/ap/20031217/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_interview_2&printer=1
While they are at it why don't they include some reasonable limits on
the
right to bear arms and thereby lower the murder rate? I pretty sure
liberty
doesn't rest in a five year old having access to handguns.
How about some sort of combination that disallows married gays from
owning
firearms?
--
Steve
(Reply address has been changed to protect the innocent)
To quote that immortal line by Vincent Price from Bloodbath at the House
of
Death "Collect up all the faggots & burn them" lol.
Honestly, that Bush baby will go down in history as THE most heinous
dumbass, will American politicians EVER learn?
Swartzenegger for president!
Simone
No he won't because he just captured Saddam, personally, mano a mano.
</sarcasm off>
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "The Frog" |
|
| Title: Re: "We May Need An Amendment." |
17 Dec 2003 07:13:31 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 04:20:08 GMT, "NTLDR" <ntldr@hotmail.delete.com>
wrote:
"Wyle Coyote" <4@k.4> wrote in message
news:UzQDb.7939$0s2.5493@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
| x-no-archive:yes
|
| WASHINGTON - President Bush (news - web sites) said Tuesday that he could
support a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.
|
|
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=544&u=/ap/20031217/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_interview_2&printer=1
|
|
While they are at it why don't they include some reasonable limits on the
right to bear arms and thereby lower the murder rate? I pretty sure liberty
doesn't rest in a five year old having access to handguns.
If you were *really* concerned about children instead of limiting
civil rights, you would be more concerned with 5 gal plastic paint
buckets. More children 5 and under die from them than from guns.
On the other hand, paint buckets don't prevent, that's PREVENT 1.5 -
2.5 million crimes per year.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
"The multicultural project will never fully succeed if 'diversity'
is defined as one's own preferred ideologies and political groups."
--Richard E. Redding, "Grappling With Diverse Conceptions of Diversity,"
American Psychologist, April 2002, p. 301.
.
|
|
|
| User: "righter" |
|
| Title: Re: "We May Need An Amendment." |
18 Dec 2003 12:58:38 AM |
|
|
"The Frog" <jmattNOSPAM@ticnet.com> wrote in message
news:9gl0uvktli0nc8nra9ikqo6c70hf6psubm@4ax.com...
On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 04:20:08 GMT, "NTLDR" <ntldr@hotmail.delete.com>
wrote:
"Wyle Coyote" <4@k.4> wrote in message
news:UzQDb.7939$0s2.5493@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
| x-no-archive:yes
|
| WASHINGTON - President Bush (news - web sites) said Tuesday that he
could
support a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.
|
|
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=544&u=/ap/20031217/ap_on_go_pr_w
h/bush_interview_2&printer=1
|
|
While they are at it why don't they include some reasonable limits on the
right to bear arms and thereby lower the murder rate? I pretty sure
liberty
doesn't rest in a five year old having access to handguns.
If you were *really* concerned about children instead of limiting
civil rights, you would be more concerned with 5 gal plastic paint
buckets. More children 5 and under die from them than from guns.
On the other hand, paint buckets don't prevent, that's PREVENT 1.5 -
2.5 million crimes per year.
Yeah, but if you redneck cow-fuckers would just ask Sheriff Leroy to let you
in the jails with yer shotguns, you could prevent even MORE! Wouldn't that
be a great topic of new business you could bring up at yer next KKKLan
meeting?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
"The multicultural project will never fully succeed if 'diversity'
is defined as one's own preferred ideologies and political groups."
--Richard E. Redding, "Grappling With Diverse Conceptions of Diversity,"
American Psychologist, April 2002, p. 301.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Humphrey Goldberg" |
|
| Title: Re: "We May Need An Amendment." |
18 Dec 2003 12:20:54 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 06:58:38 GMT, "righter" <righter@sonic.net> wrote:
Yeah, but if you redneck cow-fuckers would just ask Sheriff Leroy to let you
in the jails with yer shotguns, you could prevent even MORE! Wouldn't that
be a great topic of new business you could bring up at yer next KKKLan
meeting?
Damn good idea! What might work, might work. I'll have to talk with
Sheriff Jubalum about that next time I go to town.
Info: Our KKK Lodge has recessed for the holidays.
H. Goldberg
.
|
|
|
| User: "righter" |
|
| Title: Re: "We May Need An Amendment." |
18 Dec 2003 04:07:34 PM |
|
|
"Humphrey Goldberg" <humpgold@zion.biz> wrote in message
news:682db1c5e5be75ff680c5021fcd3f5ab@news.teranews.com...
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 06:58:38 GMT, "righter" <righter@sonic.net> wrote:
Yeah, but if you redneck cow-fuckers would just ask Sheriff Leroy to let
you
in the jails with yer shotguns, you could prevent even MORE! Wouldn't
that
be a great topic of new business you could bring up at yer next KKKLan
meeting?
Damn good idea! What might work, might work. I'll have to talk with
Sheriff Jubalum about that next time I go to town.
Info: Our KKK Lodge has recessed for the holidays.
H. Goldberg
Hmm. A Jewish Klan member. Scary.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Cleopatra" |
|
| Title: Re: "We May Need An Amendment." |
17 Dec 2003 02:59:59 PM |
|
|
The Frog <jmattNOSPAM@ticnet.com> wrote in message news:<9gl0uvktli0nc8nra9ikqo6c70hf6psubm@4ax.com>...
If you were *really* concerned about children instead of limiting
civil rights, you would be more concerned with 5 gal plastic paint
buckets. More children 5 and under die from them than from guns.
On the other hand, paint buckets don't prevent, that's PREVENT 1.5 -
2.5 million crimes per year.
Sir, this crowd isn't interested in preventing crime, but rather in
grabbing the guns of those who need to defend themselves against it.
The worse crime gets, the more intent they are in disarming
law-abiding citizens.
"If liberals read the 2nd Amendment the way they read the 14th
Amendment, you'd be *required* to own an assault rifle." Ann Coulter
*Cleopatra*
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ashland Henderson" |
|
| Title: Re: "We May Need An Amendment." |
18 Dec 2003 10:42:19 AM |
|
|
(Cleopatra) wrote in message news:<d81ac9f.0312171259.6950ef51@posting.google.com>...
The Frog <jmattNOSPAM@ticnet.com> wrote in message news:<9gl0uvktli0nc8nra9ikqo6c70hf6psubm@4ax.com>...
If you were *really* concerned about children instead of limiting
civil rights, you would be more concerned with 5 gal plastic paint
buckets. More children 5 and under die from them than from guns.
On the other hand, paint buckets don't prevent, that's PREVENT 1.5 -
2.5 million crimes per year.
Sir, this crowd isn't interested in preventing crime, but rather in
grabbing the guns of those who need to defend themselves against it.
The worse crime gets, the more intent they are in disarming
law-abiding citizens.
Try to grab my guns at your peril. Sorry, but your silly labeling of
all liberals as anti-gun is just that, silly labeling.
"If liberals read the 2nd Amendment the way they read the 14th
Amendment, you'd be *required* to own an assault rifle." Ann Coulter
Yet another dumb-***** comment by Ann.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Gregory Gadow" |
|
| Title: Re: BUSH: "We May Need An Amendment." |
17 Dec 2003 10:34:29 AM |
|
|
Wyle Coyote wrote:
x-no-archive:yes
WASHINGTON - President Bush (news - web sites) said Tuesday that he could support a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=544&u=/ap/20031217/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_interview_2&printer=1
Mind you, he's a uniter, not a divider.
--
Gregory Gadow
techbear@serv.net
http://www.serv.net/~techbear
"If you make yourself a sheep, the wolves will eat you."
-- Benjamin Franklin
.
|
|
|
| User: "righter" |
|
| Title: Re: BUSH: "We May Need An Amendment." |
18 Dec 2003 01:02:50 AM |
|
|
"Gregory Gadow" <techbear@serv.net> wrote in message
news:3FE08595.5C0BAD71@serv.net...
Wyle Coyote wrote:
x-no-archive:yes
WASHINGTON - President Bush (news - web sites) said Tuesday that he
could support a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=544&u=/ap/20031217/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_interview_2&printer=1
Mind you, he's a uniter, not a divider.
Good point! I'm so glad he cleared that up for us, BEFORE he was elected!
--
Gregory Gadow
techbear@serv.net
http://www.serv.net/~techbear
"If you make yourself a sheep, the wolves will eat you."
-- Benjamin Franklin
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
