Posted on 08/06/2010 4:27:00 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
Edited on 08/06/2010 7:11:52 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
Already here.
Arthur Damask, a physicist who frequently testifies in automobile accident cases, tells the following sad story in a 1987 paper about accident reconstruction published in Physics Today. In one of his cases, after having testified convincingly and dispositively, as he thought, he went home, only to find out later that his side actually had lost. Apparently the other side's lawyer was allowed to tell the jury that "the laws of physics are obeyed in the laboratory, but not in rural New Jersey."
Cheers!
More than previously, this must be the year of the q|_|eer. They keep this up and there is the potential for people and honorable States and their leaders to disobey court rulings.
The time is growing short to fix our country. It might even be too late.
Verminous libs.
Verminous libs.
I’d be lying if I denied that at the time of Schwarzeneggar’s initial election that I thought it was probably, all in all, a good thing... having a supposedly ‘fiscal’ conservative and a ‘social’ moderate seemed at the time the best California could do. But, if it proved anything to me, it’s that you can NEVER trust a politician who labels himself this way (fiscal con / social moderate). They always turn out to be double-crossing, loathesome libs on every damn subject.
Is it too late to revoke Schwarzeneggar’s citizenship? He’s certainly proved himself totally unworthy of being an American. With this latest gay love-in of his, I truly hope the POS bastard gets cancer and dies a long, painful death.
FAG-INATOR
If it’s brown, flush it.
You know that is a "straw man" argument? Taking that fallacy out of your passive argument leaves what exactly -support for homosexual marriage?
You do not care? -well, one that does not care matters not as far as questions are concerned -some call this being a useful idiot -tyrants like useful idiots...
Maybe my post will shock you -maybe my post will cause you to reevaluate apathy taken on a dismissive premise?
You post here on Free Republic so I assume you 'get it' for the most part e.g. individual freedom, unalienable rights etcetera... You know of course that all these 'freedom' things are premised upon small government and the free market system.
Many people are familiar with the economic free market -almost all if not all here on FR support it -WHY?
Support of the economic free market system has reasons -reasons proved historically by facts. Capitalism works in spite of the socialist arguments. Do we capitalist support the economic free market because we are all greedy rich capitalist pig oppressors that want to keep the poor victims down as the socialists claim? NO? No, it is because the economic free market system is the best and only system that works. It is a system that empowers the individual -a system that takes all knowledge from all areas and translates it into a price for a good or service with the price being an instant measure of market determined value. The free market enables the best to succeed and be rewarded while allowing failures to be punished but try again. The economic free market determines true value and creates wealth -all benefit... ALL this without central planning and without government imposed prices and values on goods and services. Any time government has attempted to impose prices or meddle in value determination the results has been bad -always the Utopian ideal is pursued by imposition contrary to the free market and always the unintended consequences have happened... Take for instance the housing crisis -at its root was the government mandate for the poor to become homeowners -quite a noble cause. Quite the unintended consequences we now suffer economically...
Anyway, the economic free market is good. Why not then the moral free market? Marriage the institution -that between man and woman has been proven successful. The moral free marker has given it value and according has rewarded it with privilege. WHY? Because they wish to keep the homosexual downtrodden and poor? LOL Think again...
THINK! WallStreetCapitalist
WHY NOT MainStreetMoralist TOO?
Jesus is coming soon for His bride!
Ahnuld is proof that voting for a RINO ‘because he’s better than the alternative’ isn’t true.
Oh Arnold, you poop head. Why don’t you just come clean and switch to the socialist democrat party?
I’m scrubbing my hand that voted for you with scotchbrite until it bleeds, you loser.
Arnold was, and still is, taking his orders from Maria.
Now THAT is a fantastic argument, grey whiskers. I could see the other side saying that tax exemption is a privilege and if churches weren’t willing to perform marriages, they could lose it.
That could be a very real concern.
Hey let the girlie man speak : ) I knew it was only a matter of time before his true colors would show though. Are we all surprised that the Republican party would showcase this fool at the convention? 7 million disenfranchised voters will have something to say about this come November!
If two men can marry I want to marry two women.
In both senses of the word.
The answer is to do counter-offensives.
For "gay rights" the answer is to hold them to the same standards of safety that they apply to consumer goods and any non-big-pharma owned medicines.
"Even one person" dying from Pneumocystis Carinii Pneumonia is too many.
The other way is to present a cultural counterdilemma to the pincer movement on the heterosexual Christian middle class in the United States by the left and the Muslims.
The other way would be to publicly identify the gay activists and gay judges to the militant jihadists allowed into our country.
When the jihadists start confronting the homosexuals -- or committing violence -- we can then roll back the tide of subjugation; and presumably in the ensuing publicity we can then educate the public to what the gay lifestyle *really* entails (Folsom Street Fair, bathhouses, annilingus and worse).
Cheers! Cheers!
He’s from showbiz, we can’t expect more from him. And actually, he’s done a better job than anyone had any right to expect. Also, he wasn’t a dictator, he had to deal with a gerrymandered Demwit majority in the legislature. He didn’t have much luck with his ballot proposals to amend the Cali constitution. It’s weird — I had some dumbass around here complain that I was badmouthing Ahnold when I posted one of those link-heavy messages in a topic. But I’ve been excoriated for a) being anti-corn-ethanol, b) being pro-corn-ethanol, c) being a creationist, d) being an atheist/socialist/old-earth-mythologist, well, you get the idea. :’) Some people just don’t have a lot of room for thought in their heads because of the size of their mouths.
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.