Posted on 12/29/2014 8:22:43 AM PST by C19fan
LOL, you’re the one who started dodging questions first. I simply responded in kind.
I dodged your question about midget tossing (post 163) and that is your justification to ignore a real and honest question?
THE TENTH AMENDMENT!
It pisses you off, huh?
No, you dodged several questions before that.
Bull. You asked a valid question in post 150 and in post 153 I said it was a valid question. Other questions were smart@ssed.
If you asked a serious question, I missed it. Please ask again.
Oops. Post 157 is where I acknowledged it was a valid question.
“A simple yes or no question just to put things into perspective...
Should citizens of a state have a tenth Amendment right to ban gay marriages?”
You’re a nanny stater. No different than the ones who want to ban cheeseburgers and Big Gulp sodas.
Of course it’s for everybodys own good.
Of course you know best, or at least believe deeply that you do.
A big government nanny stater.
I’ll bet you’re for state enforced diversity training as well.
I support States Rights in many areas but the Feds/SC are overturning decisions by State officials. Do you really think the States are going to be able to prevent gay marriage for very long?
“I dodged your question about midget tossing (post 163) and that is your justification to ignore a real and honest question?
THE TENTH AMENDMENT!
It pisses you off, huh?”
Actually you kept changing the subject. We were discussing whether adultery should be illegal and you said it should, just like a good nanny stater. When you were called on the hypocrisy of being a big government conservative then you started changing the subject to include gay marriage and abortion and anything else you could think of to justify your argument.
The truth will set you free. Just admit that you like big government as long as it does what you want.
Big Gov people remind me of Union People - they want someone handling everything for them so they don’t have to think, do for themselves, or take responsibility....
Too afraid to answer a simple question. So call me a nanny stater.
Lather. Rinse. Repeat.
All I wanna know is if you support queer marriages or not. Why are you so afraid to answer that?
“Big Gov people remind me of Union People - they want someone handling everything for them so they don’t have to think, do for themselves, or take responsibility....”
If they want to find somebody to nanny them that’s their lookout.
It’s when they want to pass laws to protect me from myself that I have an issue with their positions.
I’m old enough to decide if I want eat cheeseburgers drink Big Gulps or Big Gulp cups full of beer and whether or not I want to commit adultery or look at dirty pictures on the internet while playing online poker lol.
I don’t need their help getting into heaven.
No I don’t. But we should at least vote against this perversity even in the face of liberal judges.
I find it odd that some talk about “the good old days” then want more government control. I can appreciate progress without being “progressive” and can want to get along with others without being a hippy do-gooder. Those who keep opposing gay marriage are spinning their wheels - it is happening and will continue. We fought and lost. It is just a matter of time before the SC mandates in in all states.
Yes but it is a lost cause - you know it and I know it.
“Too afraid to answer a simple question. So call me a nanny stater.
Lather. Rinse. Repeat.
All I wanna know is if you support queer marriages or not. Why are you so afraid to answer that?”
I called you a nanny stater because you are one.
All you want to do is change the subject which is should there be a law against adultery and your answer was yes.
Just like a good concerned little liberal nanny stater.
Changing the subject or introducing a lot of “but what ifs” is just you being evasive in an effort to get the light of truth, that you’re a big government nanny state conservative, to stop shining on you.
When did you stop beating your wife? Lol
“I find it odd that some talk about “the good old days” then want more government control. I can appreciate progress without being “progressive” and can want to get along with others without being a hippy do-gooder. Those who keep opposing gay marriage are spinning their wheels - it is happening and will continue. We fought and lost. It is just a matter of time before the SC mandates in in all states.”
This is slightly off topic but...I’m against judicial activism, however a lot of idiot nanny state rules are what opens the door to that in the first place.
You have somebody convicted of some idiot law like adultery or your wife having a sex toy in her bedroom dresser, some idiot nanny state cop or DA decide to prosecute to the fullest extent of the law. The DA gets a conviction that then gets appealed all the way to the Supreme Court who then rules that the law violates the convicteds rights. If it stopped there it’d all be well and good bt then the ACLU figures out a way to use that case to get child molesters in the BSA.
It’s overbearing nanny state laws pursued by overbearing nanny staters that start all of this.
And yes gay marriage is going to be the law of the land. Like it or nor public opinion has changed and they lobby for it was able to draw comparisons to when interracial marriage was illegal.
Since most people really don’t have a dog in the fight the prevailing attitude is “Hey give em the same rights as everybody else”.
“I find it odd that some talk about “the good old days” then want more government control. I can appreciate progress without being “progressive” and can want to get along with others without being a hippy do-gooder.”
I actually consider myself something of a do-gooder but that’s my own choice.
It’s not my place or the governments to make laws making people live according to what I think is “right”.
It’s not my place to get anybody into heaven if they don’t want to go or to make anybody feel better about themselves by imposing their will on other people.
If I want to do that I’ll become a minister or a therapist.
I did take a break and thank you for the post. I would have missed the other 100 replies. Have a Blessed New Year!
The punishment for adultery is already eternal. Isn’t that enough?
YES. When a spouse enters a marriage contract, and then he or she engages in extramarital behavior, he or she is (1) breaking the contract and (2) putting the other spouse’s health in danger. Adultery should be considered reckless endangerment.
I don’t think the person should be sentenced to prison, unless the other spouse has been given an illness as a result. But infidelity should work against the cheating spouse in divorce court.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.