In the meantime, we get to see Freepers make the case why government gets to define marriage:
DJ MacWoW has decided America is a secret theocracy:
The Founders set up our government according to Godly principles. What you are pushing is anarchistic.Will we know the moment thinks the government has a very strict definition for "wedding vow"
Can someone please explain how 2 gay men can consummate theirEva has some weird ideas about the implications of gay marriage:
wedding vows?
The GOP has not been discussing either homosexuality or birth control. The discussion has been on freedom of religion and defense of marriage.fwdude knows marriage exists entirely for the purpose of not being gay:
Actually, the two go hand in hand because if the left is permitted to redefine marriage as a sexually ambiguous institution, and they get away with forcing the Catholic Church to take actions that violate their own precepts, the next step will be to force churches to recognize and even perform Gay marriages.
Think of it this way, although the leftists and their disciples never will: we are under a "penal justice system," which says that all conduct is legal unless prohibited by some law. The government action of sanctioning marriage can be seen as not the creation of prohibitions, but the preventing of usurpers from coming in to redefine and, thereby, destroy.PGR88 tries to make a utilitarian argument, but lapses into making shit up and then invoking God:
I don’t know about the USA, but in Canada, Gov’t statistics show that homosexual men live more than 21 years LESS than the average heterosexual man.EternalVigilance knows what happens when you allow gays to marry - everyone becomes slaves somehow!
The wages of sin are indeed death.
Marriage, and the natural family it produces, is a God-given institution, our most fundamental civilizing one. It is the foundation stone of all civil society. It is the basis for organized human government. It is the most important wellspring of economics.Gene Eric realizes that once you legalize gay marriage, you start jailing Freepers:
To destroy that is to destroy America.
There is a name for those who are not allowed to have government recognize and pay due regard to the civil marriage contract: chattel slaves.
“Legalization” ultimately translates to incarceration of the non-believers.hoagy62 lays out some logic for us:
What a statist punk.
Let’s see....why not gay marriage?Hmmm. Biblical passages and hatred. Can't argue with that!
1)It’s sick.
2)Violates the design God intended.
3)It has a greater tendency to spread horrid diseases.
4)Violates a direct command of God.
5)Turns the stomach of any human male that has a shred of masculinity in them.
So I guess that means William F. Buckley and Barry Goldwater would both have been zotted out of FR.
ReplyDeleteNot to mention, Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon.
DeleteToday we have an article about a Florida Supreme Court judge who struck down last year's law to force gov't employees to contribute to the pension funds in FL. The details of the case are here
ReplyDeletehttp://www.theledger.com/article/20120306/NEWS/120309607?tc=cr
(spoiler: FReepers fall on the side of gov't forcing people to do things only if it's a republican gov't)
Anyways, the thread involves a gross misunderstanding of the law and ends up looking like a bad game of telephone where one bit of misinformation leads these assholes to gloriously misinformed conclusions. I love this quote because it comes from a character in Henry VI who was supporting a COMMUNIST UPRISING. The irony is delicious:
""First, kill all the lawyers."
William Shakespeare " - Buckeye McFrog
I mean these people have to have all the major kinds of retardation. This guy has a solution:
"Solution: Fire all public employees who were hired before July 1, 2011. Problem solved. "
He doesn't realize that the whole reason the judge ruled in their favor is specifically because they were hired before July 1, 2011 and their contract states that they don't have to contribute.
This guy says he supports the unconstitutional taking of private property without realizing he said it:
"I understand the concept of an unconstitutional taking of private property. The ultimate consequence of this decision is bankruptcy. We are going to see more and more cities using bankruptcy because they are insolvent. The unions will not like the results."
So by the decision not to take private property the ultimate consequence is bankruptcy? Why do you love Stalin so much?
Look out, 0beelzebama is attacking the Vatican as a money laundering hub!
ReplyDeletehttp://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2856006/posts
Of course, in reality this list also includes US, UK, South Korea, Portugal, Belgium, Ireland etc on it, but... but... THE VATICAN!
First reply out the gate:
"This, from a president who used to snort cocaine.
That’s rich."
This, from a FReetard who advocates not paying taxes. That's rich.
"Money Laundering?
I work for a bank and I know that any and all banks are not allowed to accept depositors that are on Money Laundering watch lists.
So now the Kenyan wants to place the Catholic Church on such a list?"
I don't want to live on this planet anymore. Seriously, check this thread out. It's lowered my IQ significantly.
No long, detailed descriptions of gay male sex practices (written only with the purposes of educating the public about how disgusting and evil it is, of course) in this thread? Nobody described how 2 men can consummate their vows?
ReplyDelete