Part I: The Homosexual Agenda: Why Are Most Conservatives So Lily-Livered And Weak?

Toogood Reports ^ | July 30 , 2002 | E. S. Lee

[Cobra Scott]

AIDS; THE Solution.....PATIENCE:THE Method

LOL!

[Houmatt]

If we allow same-sex marriage, should we also allow a brother and sister to be married? How about a mother and son? Father and daughter? A woman and a horse? Where does it end?

It ends at rights. If the participants are consenting adults of sound mind, the state has no business restraining their actions if they do not infringe upon the rights of others.

The fact these people do not have the "right" to do so notwithstanding, it seems to me you actually have no problem with not only same-sex marriage, but incestuous marriage as well. Does that sound about right?

[Khepera]

So you're going to let me get away with that?

[OWK]

The fact these people do not have the "right" to do so notwithstanding, it seems to me you actually have no problem with not only same-sex marriage, but incestuous marriage as well. Does that sound about right?

Of course I have a problem with it.

I also have a problem with overweight slobs, drunks, heterosexual promiscuity, dozens of foolish religious practices, and countless other things.

But I don't prevail upon the power of state to restrain these things at gunpoint.

The only morally legitimate purpose of state is the defense of individual rights.

Any individual action which does not infringe upon the ability of individuals (sane adults) to act in accordance with the dictates of their own will by initiated force or fraud.. is a right.

[Khepera]

So you're going to let me get away with that?

[OWK]

So you're going to let me get away with that?

You definitely shouldn't let you get away with that Sybil.

[Khepera]

Hahahahahaha.

Man its a rough crowd in here.

[AppyPappy]

Any individual action which does not infringe upon the ability of individuals (sane adults) to act in accordance with the dictates of their own will by initiated force or fraud.. is a right.

Tell it to Ryan White.

[Houmatt]

Any individual action which does not infringe upon the ability of individuals (sane adults) to act in accordance with the dictates of their own will by initiated force or fraud.. is a right.

Uh, I think you need to get that old copy of the Constitution out of mothballs and read it again.

[CalConservative]

I've been saying if for quite a while - in order for truth to win out, we must be vocal and active in our representation of what is right. I'm not saying we need to hateful and mean as a lot of these PC "tolerance" advocates are, but we need to be aggressive and persistent in promoting moral standards.

Who would have ever thought in this country that advocating the viewpoint that marriage should be between a man and woman would be considered hateful. How far we have fallen!

[rdb3]

endowed [fill in the blank, please] with inalienable rights.

Don't half quote. Finish it.

[OWK]

Don't half quote. Finish it.

From the original as penned by Jefferson?

If so, then "nature".

From the edited version (edit attributed to Adams)?

If so then "creator."

[BARGE]

tick,tock,tick,tock.......

[American Blood]

Your vision of how this country should operate is scary. Thank God it will never come to fruition. We need people like you who think outside-the-box. It allows the rest of us to see how the lunatic fringe thinks and operates.

[OWK]

tick,tock,tick,tock.......

The teachings of Jesus of Nazareth are perhaps the most poorly understood, by those claiming to be the greatest devotees.

I don't think Jesus would be anticipating the death of others with such delight.

In fact, he left you some very specific instructions regarding love, humility, grace, peace, compassion, and peaceful witness.

But I guess he meant those things for some other guy... and not somebody as important as you.

[OWK]

Your vision of how this country should operate is scary.

Yeah... that whole rights and liberty thing is chilling.

Where would we be if we didn't have the state to tell us what we are allowed to do, whether we harm others or not?

Scary indeed....

Why we'd have to.. to... to think and act for ourselves.

It'd be a nightmare.

[rdb3]

When we say "endowed by" followed with "inalienable rights," it is the DoI that is well known, not who penned what. Your splitting of hairs is not cute.

But you don't believe in a Creator, so, what's the point? You are defending the indefensible. But, that's your right.

[jjm2111]

A thumping we will go! A thumping we will go! Hi-ho the derio a thumping we will go! Amen brothers and sisters. The Lord says unto you: You shall love your Lord God with all your heart, all your mind, and all your soul, and you shall love your neighbor as yourself.

And the ignorant thumper asked: "And who is my neighbor?"

What do you people care if they get "married" or not. True, the queers in that article were very mean-spirited, but why should the state interject itself between a contract between two people.

If we had a sane tax system, there would be no financial benefits to marriage. Gays could exchange rings declare themselves "married" but it would not matter one bit. The reason gays want to have marriage benefits is for financial purposes more than anything. Many corporations give benefits to domestic partners. The government does not. If there were no financial benefits to marriage, this issue would be far less volatile.