Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#101 May 15, 2013
Those polygamists aren't mormons. The Mormon church condemns polygamy. The polygamists in Arizona (Utah City, AZ is a haven for them) LIE about it being their religion when it's really just a cover for having sex with underage girls.

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#102 May 15, 2013
edogxxx wrote:
Gays are not denied any rights. They are not getting all the benefits hetero married couples get, but neither am I.
Those benefits ARE the rights. and you can have them if you get married.
Stina

Saint Petersburg, FL

#103 May 15, 2013
RedheadwGlasses wrote:
Those polygamists aren't mormons. The Mormon church condemns polygamy. The polygamists in Arizona (Utah City, AZ is a haven for them) LIE about it being their religion when it's really just a cover for having sex with underage girls.
Actually, I am pretty sure they are considered *fundamental* Mormans. They are a splinter group off of the main non-polygamist sect. Who, as we all know, are only non-polygamists because they had to do that in order to become a state. They didn't begin condemning it because they suddenly started believing marrying off little girls was a bad thing. Of course, the modern-day mainstream Mormons probably *DO* think marrying off little girls for s*x is a bad thing, but that wasn't the original "spirit" of condeming polygamy. They were kind of forced into it.

Toj

“Where is Everyone?”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#104 May 15, 2013
Mister Tonka wrote:
So let's review.
Dog raises question about whether or not gays are denied rights in this country.
<quoted text>
Dog again asks about the rights of gays.
<quoted text>
Dog again asks a question pertaining to gay rights.
<quoted text>
Mimi provdes a lengthy list of rights gays are denied.
Dog asserts that gays should not get the same benefits as married hetero couples....
<quoted text>
...though he has no idea what those rights would be.
<quoted text>
And after several pages of discussion about RIGHTS, dog decides rights are not the issue being discussed.
<quoted text>
Along the way, he tried to misdirect from the the issue HE raised, to government handouts, the irs vs conservatives, amnesty, compared the marriage of 2 (gay) human beings to the marriage of a horse(and in the same breath claimed to not be a homophobe).
If he was not so consistent, I'd say he was clowning us. If I read a book with a character like him, I'd say the writer went to unbelievably over the top.
This was great, Tonka.

Edog? What say you now?

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#105 May 15, 2013
Stina wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, I am pretty sure they are considered *fundamental* Mormans. They are a splinter group off of the main non-polygamist sect. Who, as we all know, are only non-polygamists because they had to do that in order to become a state. They didn't begin condemning it because they suddenly started believing marrying off little girls was a bad thing. Of course, the modern-day mainstream Mormons probably *DO* think marrying off little girls for s*x is a bad thing, but that wasn't the original "spirit" of condeming polygamy. They were kind of forced into it.
They call themslves Mormons, but the mormon church doesn't recognize them.

“The two baby belly, please!”

Since: Sep 09

Evanston IL

#106 May 15, 2013
RedheadwGlasses wrote:
<quoted text>
They call themslves Mormons, but the mormon church doesn't recognize them.
"Under the Banner of Heaven" by John Krakauer (also wrote "Into Thin Air") is a really good book if you're intersted in the history of mormonism and how these splinter groups got started.

“reign in blood”

Since: May 09

Wilmington, IL

#107 May 15, 2013
Toj wrote:
Edog? What say you now?
Go back and look.

Toj

“Where is Everyone?”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#108 May 15, 2013
edogxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
Go back and look.
Go back and look where? Perhaps I need to be more specific.

What is your response to Tonka's post?

“reign in blood”

Since: May 09

Wilmington, IL

#109 May 15, 2013
Toj wrote:
Go back and look where? Perhaps I need to be more specific.
What is your response to Tonka's post?
Post #100

“What's it to ya?”

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#110 May 15, 2013
edogxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
I like how you you make the leap from being opposed to gay marriage to being a homophobe. I saw a show last night called Polygamy USA about a mormon compound in Arizona who are polygamists. I'm also opposed to polygamy, does that mean I hate Mormons? I'm opposed to marrying a horse, does that mean I hate horses? See, your very logic is flawed.
Gays are not denied any rights. They are not getting all the benefits hetero married couples get, but neither am I. So what? Cry me a river while I play the worlds smallest violin for you.
::channelling Sam:: TSTI

“What's it to ya?”

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#111 May 15, 2013
I read this last summer (I think). It's written by one of the (many) wives of the FLDS group in (Arizona?) who was married to one of the higher up guys.

http://www.amazon.com/Escape-Carolyn-Jessop/d...

Toj

“Where is Everyone?”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#112 May 15, 2013
edogxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
Post #100
You wrote:

"Gays are not denied any rights. They are not getting all the benefits hetero married couples get, but neither am I. So what? Cry me a river while I play the worlds smallest violin for you."

This isn't even correct. You've said many times you are hetrosexual. If you choose to marry your soulmate, you will gain many rights and privileges afford to married people. In a lot of state, if a gay person marries their soulmate, they are not afforded the same rights.

How is this the same?

“A Programmer is not in IT!”

Since: Feb 09

Neda, stay with me! Charlie

#113 May 15, 2013
Its called deflection. He is saying "compare unmarried gays to me, Mr single" Instead of saying "Compare an unmarried gays who want to be married to a married couple."
Toj wrote:
<quoted text>
You wrote:
"Gays are not denied any rights. They are not getting all the benefits hetero married couples get, but neither am I. So what? Cry me a river while I play the worlds smallest violin for you."
This isn't even correct. You've said many times you are hetrosexual. If you choose to marry your soulmate, you will gain many rights and privileges afford to married people. In a lot of state, if a gay person marries their soulmate, they are not afforded the same rights.
How is this the same?

“reign in blood”

Since: May 09

Wilmington, IL

#114 May 15, 2013
Toj wrote:
if a gay person marries their soulmate, they are not afforded the same rights.
Boo hoo.

Toj

“Where is Everyone?”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#115 May 15, 2013
edogxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
Boo hoo.
Ah, so you finally agree.

“reign in blood”

Since: May 09

Wilmington, IL

#116 May 15, 2013
Toj wrote:
Ah, so you finally agree.
I have always "agreed" that two gay men don't get the same "benefits" (not to be confused with "rights") that a traditional married couple gets. My point is, so what? Should I get the same benefits for marrying a sheep? Or my sister? Or my girlfriend and her daughter? Where do we draw the line? At what point should we decide that certain benefits should or shouldn't apply to someone? SHOULD there be a line? Should it be anything goes? What?

“The two baby belly, please!”

Since: Sep 09

Evanston IL

#117 May 15, 2013
We draw the line at two consenting unrelated adults.

Until society changes again and it gets redefined again.

“A Programmer is not in IT!”

Since: Feb 09

Neda, stay with me! Charlie

#118 May 15, 2013
Now, thats just crazy talk,,,,
squishymama wrote:
We draw the line at two consenting unrelated adults.
Until society changes again and it gets redefined again.

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#119 May 16, 2013
edogxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
I have always "agreed" that two gay men don't get the same "benefits" (not to be confused with "rights") that a traditional married couple gets.
Um, no, you have not "always agreed" to this. Just this week you didn't believe gays were lacking in rights and demanded that someone tell you what rights straights have that gays don't. Mimi provided a lengthy list.

“The two baby belly, please!”

Since: Sep 09

Evanston IL

#120 May 16, 2013
RACE wrote:
Now, thats just crazy talk,,,,
<quoted text>
I know! Just think of all those poor inanimate objects that will be denied their rights.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Chicago Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 2 min positronium 1,173,924
Abby 1-30 4 min Sublime1 5
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 17 min Atticus Tiberius ... 183,904
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 18 min Sublime1 98,995
Triple Word Game (Dec '11) 35 min not a ghost 977
Amy 1-28 37 min not a ghost 5
Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 50 min positronium 50,457

Winter Storm Watch for Cook County was issued at January 30 at 10:37AM CST

Chicago Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 10:04 am PST

NFL10:04AM
Richardson was suspended for two Colts playoff games
ESPN10:58 AM
Colts won't commit to RB Richardson for 2015
Yahoo! Sports11:49 AM
League conducts nearly 40 interviews into 'deflate-gate'
Yahoo! Sports11:50 AM
NFL: No decision yet on deflated balls
NBC Sports12:54 PM
Grigson goes silent on NFL investigation into Patriots