More TV trash that I won't be watching.
1 posted on
10/08/2007 7:59:34 AM PDT by
SmithL
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-29 next last
To: SmithL
And when that doesn’t work, they will ram it down our throats anyway...
2 posted on
10/08/2007 8:01:43 AM PDT by
MaestroLC
("Let him who wants peace prepare for war."--Vegetius, A.D. Fourth Century)
To: SmithL
all california.
The GOP can use this to their advantage. But the GOP leadership is stuck on stupid.
3 posted on
10/08/2007 8:03:14 AM PDT by
longtermmemmory
(VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
To: SmithL
Keep an open mind and someone will fill it with garbage...
4 posted on
10/08/2007 8:03:29 AM PDT by
Smokin' Joe
(How often God must weep at humans' folly.)
To: SmithL
No one’s denying them the right to get married. They merely need to find someone of the opposite sex to wed.
5 posted on
10/08/2007 8:05:22 AM PDT by
syriacus
(''You sit down. You've had your say, and now I'm going to have my say.'' H Dean to an Iowan, 1/2004)
To: SmithL
This should be taught as a example of creeping incrementalism . Way back when government first started getting involved in regulating a sacred ritual this battle was as good as lost .
6 posted on
10/08/2007 8:06:15 AM PDT by
kbennkc
(For those who have fought for it , freedom has a flavor the protected will never know)
To: SmithL
“What if you couldn’t marry the person you loved?”
Well, they could still meet in outhouses to do what they like......
To: SmithL
We are supposed to open our hearts and minds to this: http://michellemalkin.com/2007/10/05/miller-beer-filters-out-photos-of-its-own-company-sponsored-public-indecency/
and this: http://michellemalkin.com/2007/09/27/miller-beer-steps-in-it-again-the-folsom-street-fair-fiasco/
8 posted on
10/08/2007 8:08:28 AM PDT by
3AngelaD
(They screwed up their own countries so bad they had to leave, and now they're here screwing up ours)
To: SmithL
"What if you couldn't marry the person you loved?" " Call me dense, but how the heck does that relate to the video?
9 posted on
10/08/2007 8:08:40 AM PDT by
Eastbound
To: SmithL
This is nothing more than to destroy marriage. Next will be legalizing polygamy and group marriage. Will marriage to a pet be far behind? Weakening marriage will greatly harm our society as can be concluded from the Russian experiment of the late 1930s and early 1940s.
10 posted on
10/08/2007 8:09:05 AM PDT by
Dante3
To: SmithL
proponents will launch a multimillion-dollar advertising campaign... And if that doesn't work, proponents can just go on doing what they've been doing for the last few decades: changing the climate by nibbling away using TV programs, hollyweird movies, propaganda in public schools, etc.
14 posted on
10/08/2007 8:13:43 AM PDT by
C210N
To: SmithL
Truly, I don't see what the hoo-hah is about. Well, I do in that gays are wanting to be "normalized", but from the pro-gay marriage standpoint, there's nothing to see here.
If you look at marriage as a legal contract, then there's absolutely no benefit that a marriage conveys, that can't be obtained legally with a little forethought (wills, "next of kin", inheritance, etc).
If you look at marriage as a religious contract (as I do) then...unless you are arrogant enough to re-write God's word, then there's nothing in the Bible that says "Marriage is between a Man and a Woman, unless you happen to disagree with that." End of story, as far as I'm concerned.
So, IMHO, all this boils down to is gays bellowing at the top of their lungs that "They're just like us, except different."
15 posted on
10/08/2007 8:14:01 AM PDT by
wbill
To: SmithL
Just say NO to the doctrines of
18 posted on
10/08/2007 8:17:13 AM PDT by
VxH
(One if by Land, Two if by Sea, and Three if by Wire Transfer)
To: SmithL
Interesting slogan...Open Hearts Open Minds...If I am not mistaken that is the present slogan for the United Methodist Chruch.
21 posted on
10/08/2007 8:19:39 AM PDT by
mware
(Americans in armchairs....doing the job of the media.)
To: SmithL
"What if you couldn't marry the person you loved?" What if you couldn't have sex with multiple random partners in a public venue?
23 posted on
10/08/2007 8:19:44 AM PDT by
Alouette
(Vicious Babushka)
To: SmithL
Just because a person can have abnormal sex with a person of the same sex or with an animal or tree stump has nothing to do with marriage.
That would only corrupt the word marriage like they did with the once good word gay.
24 posted on
10/08/2007 8:20:38 AM PDT by
HuntsvilleTxVeteran
(Remember the Alamo, Goliad and WACO, It is Time for a new San Jacinto)
To: SmithL
Maybe we could consider running ads that show unedited footage from the most recent perv-fest in San Francisco. You know, the one that's got Miller Brewing in such hot water. Maybe people would like to see the REAL world of homosexuality, instead of some sanitized, make-believe, Leave It To Beaver (!) version.
Once again, the greatest weapon against this sickness is Truth -- the awful light of day.
25 posted on
10/08/2007 8:20:48 AM PDT by
IronJack
(=)
To: SmithL
“Same-sex marriage backers go to TV - New ads ask viewers to
‘open hearts and minds’ on the issue.”
They are hoping folks will be so open-minded that their brains fall out
onto the ground.
I hope this is a sign of desperation on their part.
And I PRAY they get much louder and b-tchy with their demands.
That should be a big boost for the Republicans in Nov. 2008.
(Maybe the only boost the Republicans can get)
27 posted on
10/08/2007 8:21:37 AM PDT by
VOA
To: SmithL
“Same-sex marriage”
Can’t they just call it HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGE, and cut out the crap with “same sex”? If they’re homosexuals and damn-well proud of it, then call it what it is: HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGE!
28 posted on
10/08/2007 8:24:40 AM PDT by
laweeks
To: SmithL
They really mean for the homo-marriage supporters for us to turn off our hearts & souls and open our backsides up to them and as well as the children of this nation so the older gays / trannies /lesbo’s / beasties will have open season on the youth for recruitment to their lifestyles?
29 posted on
10/08/2007 8:31:09 AM PDT by
RSmithOpt
(Liberalism: Highway to Hell)
To: SmithL
Not surprising. This is how pro-abortion folks got their message out to the public, starting with a Maude episode in the early 70's, I believe. Abortion was presented as a heartbreaking, but inevitable choice for the woman, and anyone who disagreed was portrayed as a mean, nasty person, usually a man, who didn't want what was best for the woman involved. This attitude permeated the airwaves for many years, and as a result, the opinion polls reflected it. Folks were willing to accept abortion, because they didn't want to be associated with those radical, woman hating people.
It wasn't until Operation Rescue that folks' eyes were opened to who the pro-lifers really were. Suddenly, on the TV news, people began seeing young women and old women along with the men, being arrested for peacefully picketing abortion clinics, or staging sit-downs reminiscent of the civil rights era. The images of pro-lifers on the news didn't square with those they'd been fed by the entertainment industry for the previous 10 years, and it made some folks stop and think about the issue for the first time. From that time, to the present, you can see the changes in the attitudes among those polled about abortion.
The issue of homosexual 'marriage' will be different in that there is already a lot of information out in the public about it, and a structure already built up to oppose it. Folks won't be blindsided by it as they were by the abortion issue. That is, everyone except we here in MA who had it forced on us by the liberals on the Supreme Judicial Court, and were denied our chance to vote on the issue by the Democrat controlled state legislature.
31 posted on
10/08/2007 8:34:16 AM PDT by
SuziQ
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-29 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson