Posted on 08/14/2010 11:47:13 AM PDT by Maelstorm
Nope you delude yourself. Social conservative's are not libertarians, which seems to be where you think conservatism is. You can always dig up Barry Goldwater and run him again, or just use Ron Paul.
I knew a very rich guy in Oklahoma that had lived as man and wife with a woman for 30 years. She filed for divorce and got nothing, strangely the guy left all his money to charity, which was administered by the judges son.
It is always about he money, and the lawyers that steal it.
Oklahoma: To establish a common-law marriage, a man and woman must (1) be competent; (2) agree to enter into a marriage relationship; and (3) cohabit. ...
When HB1455 did not receive a committee hearing in the Oklahoma Senate in 2005, the bill banning common law marriage in Oklahoma died and the controversy ...
As far as your own continued use of the term "Gay" and "Gay Marriage" and phrasing, it speaks volumes about you, your in your face attitude, and possibly conduct.
As far as I’m concerned, this whole “gay marriage” thing is silly. Really silly, like Monty Python silly. In fact, it reminds me of a scene from “The Life of Brian:”
Stan: It’s every man’s right to have babies if he wants them.
Reg: But you can’t have babies.
Stan: Don’t you oppress me.
Reg: Where’s the fetus going to gestate? You going to keep it in a box?
Judith: Here! I’ve got an idea: Suppose you agree that he can’t actually have babies, not having a womb - which is nobody’s fault, not even the Romans’ - but that he can have the *right* to have babies.
Francis: Good idea, Judith. We shall fight the oppressors for your right to have babies, brother... sister, sorry.
Reg: What’s the *point*?
Francis: What?
Reg: What’s the point of fighting for his right to have babies, when he can’t have babies?
Francis: It is symbolic of our struggle against oppression.
Reg: It’s symbolic of his struggle against reality.
Simply put, “Just because the cat had kittens in the oven, doesn’t make them bisuits!”
The leftists are trying to change the language, in order to make themselves feel better about themselves.
Mark
When it comes to religious idealogies and issues, I would take with a grain of salt anything that comes out of Becks mouth. Remember he comes from a religion that believes everyone can be a god and polygamy is the way to go.
Paragraph two is incomprehensible.
I’m a little rusty on this, but from what I recall, the License becomes a contract between three parties, one being the state. This would make the whole filing taxes jointly or married filed separate a little more of an assumed requirement.
Although failing to do so probably would never be much of an issue unless an audit came along.
But you make a very interesting point. If an established Common Law marriage ended up in the courts the licensed counterpart laws would most likely be applied. Given this probability, why would the state not have standing in fining those common law marriages?
“Nope you delude yourself. Social conservative’s are not libertarians, which seems to be where you think conservatism is.”
And you believe that your definition of conservatism as “socially conservative on every issue I am” is the only one. It’s not.
Between this and his utter ignorance and occasional bashing of the Catholic Church, I am done with Glenn. He can peddle his brand of weepy, sell-out conservatism somewhere else.
Maybe not, but it wins, and your argument doesn't. Of course this election cycle will let some of your guys slip in, because the dims suck so much.
“It is impossible to rightly govern a nation without God and the Bible.”
Scripture does not use the term "gay' nor does it speak of the absurd novelty premised in sexual disorder created by man that you call "gay marriage" -maybe you meant sodomy e.g. disordered sex...
There are heterosexuals (a scientific term defining a species that procreate with two sexes) -some heterosexuals do not procreate -some heterosexuals engage in disordered sexual acrobatics with the same sex (homosexuality -a state of doing -NOT being) -some heterosexuals get married, procreate, and raise families.
Society values heterosexuals that get married, procreate, and raise children. Just as society values leadership, bravery, intelligence, honesty, success, etcetera.
Society does not value, for instance male on male sex, I do not see a societal benefit do you? Monogamous male on male sex -NO? What about committed and loving male on male sex -NO? What about committed and loving male on male sex and adopting and raising children -NO?
Why should society value and reward now what it has never valued and rewarded -the leftist experiment of homosexual coupling is absurd and if not for government imposing it thus far it would be where it belongs -in the refuse bin of society -like all other failed experiments...
I think homosexual groups have something on the Becks and Limbaughs of the airwaves. They seem completely afraid to venture into that territory, as if the mob were watching every move they make lest they go “against the family.”
Exactly. Elect a staunch "social conservative" and you almost certainly get the whole conservative ball of wax, fiscal and social. You can't say the same with a solely "fiscal" one.
No I think that Limbaugh’s and the Beck’s are afraid. They don’t want to fight the ad wars. Dr. Laura suffered and shut her mouth Savage suffered the pink wrath and he hardly ever mentions even the most egregious violations. They have been schooled. I just think that it is a pity because what they are let happen and even Foxnews is doing the same is shameful. When they do talk about it they talk about it only in abstract terms of “marriage” never daring to question the core of homosexual activism which is built out of total propaganda no better than the junk science of global warming.
They can do what they want but they are still cowards for not doing their jobs and letting the left through their silence dominate social issues. Orielly does a better job but while CNN does specials on how wonderful gaydom is you never see the other side from Fox or any conservative outlet. It is a stacked game and the reason why the faggots scream so fucking loud is they know if the other-side gets out regularly they are done as a viable political movement.
Instead they just get their way and are let trample over the will of everyone else. They run little kids along in gay pride parades twirling batons are grown men with tight underwear gyrate to the crowds with lewd signs and barely dressed freaks of nature.
I’m just tired of our so called allies in the media failing us while getting rich off us. We are at a crossroads and if they and we don’t give voice to reason the next generation will be educated by the freaks in hollywood.
They can do what they want but they are still cowards for not doing their jobs...
***********
What exactly do you think their job is?
Their job is to gather the largest possible audience for the advertisers on their shows to pitch their crap to. Nothing else. Therefore, they’ll stay away from any topics that they believe will lose them listeners or viewers.
It’s nothing to do with cowardice. It’s because that’s how they best serve their customers. What you’ve perhaps forgotten is that their customers are the advertisers, NOT the listeners or viewers.
I'm sick of leaders and organizations saying that they're "picking their battles," that that's not their focus, as an excuse not to oppose homosexuality, not even in a statement. I'm using the recent actions of Judge Walker in California as a sort of litmus test to see how so-called "conservative" organizations and politicians respond, and will redirect my resources accordingly. Politicians and organization that can't even make a mere single statement regarding the unconscionable actions of the judicial tyrant in Judge Walker don't deserve the support of conservatives.
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.