Posted on 10/05/2006 4:42:21 PM PDT by SJackson
Were that true, progressives would be four square behind abortion based on future sexual preference. Which orientation they'd be aborting is an open question.
Hey, you left out the polyamorous community you lousy bigot.
Same sex marriage will in no way effect me. I'm not a deviant. The Capital Slimes seems to be a ravingly leftist party organ. First they condemn the entire GOP over one pervert congressman, then shill for pervert marriage on the other. LOL.
If I follow the author's "reasoning" correctly, not allowing homosexuals the same state sanctions for marriage as heterosexuals is the same thing as throwing babies overboard. I hope he brought enough of what he's smoking for everyone.
And what happened to the period in .3% and .8% ~ makes a lot of difference, and that's only for people reporting. It's probably much lower than that once you account for respondents who refuse to talk to pollsters.
Yes. And considering the author of this rubbish, I'm not the least bit surprised.
What? We don't have enough Kookburgers within our City Limits such as 'Resident Socialist' John Nichols to write these types of articles? Is he on vacation this week or something?
'Das Kapital Times' had to go out of state to support their lame-o argument on this topic?
ROFLMAO! I love it. :)
Here in Massachusetts we don't need to vote on a gay marriage referendum being on the ballot in 20 or so years from now (or ever) because everyone in this state is so already for it.
We are all so clearly for it that we have been repeatedly denied the opportunity to vote and prove it.
"A child's right to have two parents, one of each gender takes precedence over the desire of adults."
Amen to that! :)
He's doing Mark Foley today.
Not to sound cold, but children do not have and cannot be granted any such "right to two parents, one of each gender." That is legally and socially untenable and unobtainable. States cannot realistically guarantee any such right and would invite a veritable flood of lawsuits to suddenly declare one.
--These hormones set the delicate balance of masculinizing androgens and feminizing estrogens in the fetus and the baby's later development. These androgens and estrogens determine how each baby's body and mind will grow into the indefinitely varied combination of male and female physical and mental traits that define us all.--
Some unscrupulous scientists or doctors may even decide to suppress the hormones, and create entirely asexual individuals. Wait, come to think of it, it's already happened ... Sen. H.R. Clinton, for example...
Rights are not granted by government, but to the best of the government's ability, they are protected. Based on "The Best Interest of the Child" standard, written by the state's supreme court, it's an already an implied right in Wisconsin.
Homosexual "marriage" is not the real goal. It is a foot in the door. You won't be able to stop the rest of the agenda. More and more of our schools are looking like this:
http://www.city-journal.org/html/13_2_queering_the_schools.html
Homosexual "marriage" is not the real goal. It is a foot in the door. You won't be able to stop the rest of the agenda. More and more of our schools are looking like this:
http://www.city-journal.org/html/13_2_queering_the_schools.html
My bad. Of course he is! What was I thinking? Smearing Republicans would trump his pushing of the Gay Agenda, wouldn't it? ;)
Mixing up a pitcher of Blue Koolaid and Rat Poison for this Socialist loser...
Studies done to challenge aspects of family law back up my position. The reason visitation is seperated from child support is because studies justified overthrowing the old "tender years" doctrine.
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.