1
   

Marriage Amendment, My Ass!

 
 
Reply Mon 9 Jul, 2007 12:01 pm
I had just been cutting back my crepe myrtle tree in 90 plus weather, and I was feeling a bit pooped. I didn't like how I was feeling so I slapped on my blood pressure cuff.

I had not hit the start button, when my phone rang. It was some organization touting a petition that would put a "Marriage Amendment" before the Florida voters. In short, the amendment would define marriage as a union between a man and a woman. Apparently, they needed 21,000 more votes to get the amendment on the ballot.

I wanted to scream at the person at the other end of the phone. Problem is, the "person" was a robot. I was so mad that I could spit.

My blood pressure was fine, but my pulse was up the roof.

Just how do we stop these jokers from attempting to deprive every committed couple the right to be legally joined?


http://www.florida4marriage.org/

Looks like they got more petitions since they made the recording. Ugh!
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 2,876 • Replies: 64
No top replies

 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Jul, 2007 12:07 pm
They're afraid the gays may take over the government and it would be difficult to tell by the color of their skin -- they'd have to check to see if any of them were married to a man. Very Happy
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Jul, 2007 12:10 pm
Re: Marriage Amendment, My Ass!
Phoenix32890 wrote:
I had just been cutting back my crepe myrtle tree in 90 plus weather, and I was feeling a bit pooped. I didn't like how I was feeling so I slapped on my blood pressure cuff.

I had not hit the start button, when my phone rang. It was some organization touting a petition that would put a "Marriage Amendment" before the Florida voters. In short, the amendment would define marriage as a union between a man and a woman. Apparently, they needed 21,000 more votes to get the amendment on the ballot.

I wanted to scream at the person at the other end of the phone. Problem is, the "person" was a robot. I was so mad that I could spit.

My blood pressure was fine, but my pulse was up the roof.

Just how do we stop these jokers from attempting to deprive every committed couple the right to be legally joined?


http://www.florida4marriage.org/

Looks like they got more petitions since they made the recording. Ugh!


Who should decide the social makeup of our society?
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Jul, 2007 12:12 pm
Re: Marriage Amendment, My Ass!
woiyo wrote:
Phoenix32890 wrote:
I had just been cutting back my crepe myrtle tree in 90 plus weather, and I was feeling a bit pooped. I didn't like how I was feeling so I slapped on my blood pressure cuff.

I had not hit the start button, when my phone rang. It was some organization touting a petition that would put a "Marriage Amendment" before the Florida voters. In short, the amendment would define marriage as a union between a man and a woman. Apparently, they needed 21,000 more votes to get the amendment on the ballot.

I wanted to scream at the person at the other end of the phone. Problem is, the "person" was a robot. I was so mad that I could spit.

My blood pressure was fine, but my pulse was up the roof.

Just how do we stop these jokers from attempting to deprive every committed couple the right to be legally joined?


http://www.florida4marriage.org/

Looks like they got more petitions since they made the recording. Ugh!


Who should decide the social makeup of our society?


Each individual has the right to do so for themselves, within the boundaries of negatively affecting others.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Jul, 2007 12:14 pm
Re: Marriage Amendment, My Ass!
Cycloptichorn wrote:
woiyo wrote:
Phoenix32890 wrote:
I had just been cutting back my crepe myrtle tree in 90 plus weather, and I was feeling a bit pooped. I didn't like how I was feeling so I slapped on my blood pressure cuff.

I had not hit the start button, when my phone rang. It was some organization touting a petition that would put a "Marriage Amendment" before the Florida voters. In short, the amendment would define marriage as a union between a man and a woman. Apparently, they needed 21,000 more votes to get the amendment on the ballot.

I wanted to scream at the person at the other end of the phone. Problem is, the "person" was a robot. I was so mad that I could spit.

My blood pressure was fine, but my pulse was up the roof.

Just how do we stop these jokers from attempting to deprive every committed couple the right to be legally joined?


http://www.florida4marriage.org/

Looks like they got more petitions since they made the recording. Ugh!


Who should decide the social makeup of our society?


Each individual has the right to do so for themselves, within the boundaries of negatively affecting others.

Cycloptichorn


You did not answer the question. Why would I expect you would?

Wanna try again?
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Jul, 2007 12:18 pm
You asked who should decide the social make-up of our society. Cyclo answered that the individual has the right to do so for themselves--so he answered your question.

Is English not your native langauge?
0 Replies
 
hamburger
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Jul, 2007 12:27 pm
i wonder what woiyo really means when using the words "...the social makeup of our society? ..." ?

the phrase "we are all equals , but some are more equal than others " would probably fit rather nicely into the same category .

does this mean that certain people have more rights to decide on "the social makeup of society" than others ?
i don't think anyone has been given special rights or privileges to decide on that .
last time i checked , i noticed we are all coming naked into this world and are part of the social makeup of society ; i didn't realize anyone was to be excluded .
hbg
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Jul, 2007 12:29 pm
Setanta wrote:
You asked who should decide the social make-up of our society. Cyclo answered that the individual has the right to do so for themselves--so he answered your question.

Is English not your native langauge?
Rolling Eyes

No, it is not you condenscending rodent.

However, I am Native American and I accepted the rules this society has developed over it's 200+ years of existance, all of which have been determined by the people and their elected officials.

The "anything goes" attitude of you and Cycle goes against many principles created by the founding fathers of this great society that we helped build.

So if "anything goes" is the excepted norn, then Polygamy should be accepted, etc...

Rules suck!
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Jul, 2007 12:31 pm
Quote:

The "anything goes" attitude of you and Cycle goes against many principles created by the founding fathers of this great society that we helped build.


You are 100% incorrect about this. Our Constitution was specifically designed and crafted to preserve individual freedoms from Governmental control.

Quote:
So if "anything goes" is the excepted norn, then Polygamy should be accepted, etc...


Sure. I don't have a problem with polygamy at all.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Jul, 2007 12:33 pm
Do you care to direct me, you vile insect, to your evidence that the "founding fathers" ever unequivocally stated that marriage can only take place with a man and a woman?

(By the way, your response suggests that your native language is something other than English. If you're attempting to suggest that you learned an Amerindian language before you learned English, i frankly consider you a liar.)
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Jul, 2007 12:35 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Sure. I don't have a problem with polygamy at all.


I have a problem with it . . . but i have no problem if you do something that stupid.
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Jul, 2007 12:38 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Quote:

The "anything goes" attitude of you and Cycle goes against many principles created by the founding fathers of this great society that we helped build.


You are 100% incorrect about this. Our Constitution was specifically designed and crafted to preserve individual freedoms from Governmental control.

Quote:
So if "anything goes" is the excepted norn, then Polygamy should be accepted, etc...


Sure. I don't have a problem with polygamy at all.

Cycloptichorn


Then you should have a ball with incest. How about marrying your Dog for medical benefits (for the Doggie that is).

Anything goes...right?
0 Replies
 
hamburger
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Jul, 2007 12:40 pm
i believe phoenix posted about "marriage amendment" .
i recall that someone started a thread about "polygamy" and woiyo might want to revive it .
hbg
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Jul, 2007 12:41 pm
Setanta wrote:
Do you care to direct me, you vile insect, to your evidence that the "founding fathers" ever unequivocally stated that marriage can only take place with a man and a woman?

(By the way, your response suggests that your native language is something other than English. If you're attempting to suggest that you learned an Amerindian language before you learned English, i frankly consider you a liar.)



1) No

2) I do not care what you think.

Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Jul, 2007 12:45 pm
So then, as usual, you are just making sh*t up to support a brain-dead, reactionary agenda when you write: I accepted the rules this society has developed over it's 200+ years of existance, all of which have been determined by the people and their elected officials--because until the Defense of Marriage Act was passed during the Clinton administration, no one had an ax to grind on this subject.

What's the matter, Woiyo, did the Reverend Lovejoy play with your wee-wee when you were just a lad? Is that why you hate homosexuals?
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Jul, 2007 12:47 pm
Setanta wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Sure. I don't have a problem with polygamy at all.


I have a problem with it . . . but i have no problem if you do something that stupid.


Naturally, you have written what I meant in a better way.

I remember ol' Kinky down in Texas - when asked about Gay marriage, he always replied:

Quote:
Well, personally, I feel that gays have the right to be as unhappy as everyone else.


Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Jul, 2007 12:51 pm
woiyo wrote:
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Quote:

The "anything goes" attitude of you and Cycle goes against many principles created by the founding fathers of this great society that we helped build.


You are 100% incorrect about this. Our Constitution was specifically designed and crafted to preserve individual freedoms from Governmental control.

Quote:
So if "anything goes" is the excepted norn, then Polygamy should be accepted, etc...


Sure. I don't have a problem with polygamy at all.

Cycloptichorn


Then you should have a ball with incest. How about marrying your Dog for medical benefits (for the Doggie that is).

Anything goes...right?


You are Appealing to Extremes, which is a logical fallacy.

My original comment:

Quote:


Who should decide the social makeup of our society?


Each individual has the right to do so for themselves, within the boundaries of negatively affecting others.


First, Incest amongst consenting adults is not illegal.

If you are talking about Incest amongst adults and children, this does not fall within the boundaries of 'not negatively affecting others.'

Marrying a dog is the same way; the dog is not an adult human, with rights and responsibilities and the ability to judge situations for itself. It can easily be argued that the dog would be taken advantage of in such a situation, and therefore this does not meet the 'not negatively affecting others' standard either.

Though, you are making a ridiculous argument anyways, so I don't know why I'm bothering to correct your poor logic.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Jul, 2007 12:52 pm
Cycloptichorn, quoting Kinky, wrote:
Well, personally, I feel that gays have the right to be as unhappy as everyone else.


Eggs-acktly
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Jul, 2007 12:58 pm
Setanta wrote:
So then, as usual, you are just making sh*t up to support a brain-dead, reactionary agenda when you write: I accepted the rules this society has developed over it's 200+ years of existance, all of which have been determined by the people and their elected officials--because until the Defense of Marriage Act was passed during the Clinton administration, no one had an ax to grind on this subject.

What's the matter, Woiyo, did the Reverend Lovejoy play with your wee-wee when you were just a lad? Is that why you hate homosexuals?


Who is Rev Lovejoy? Where does it say I hate homosexuals?
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 9 Jul, 2007 12:59 pm
If you don't hate homosexuals, why would care if they got married?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Marriage Amendment, My Ass!
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/25/2024 at 01:04:13