Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-S...

Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil Unions

There are 52049 comments on the CBS2 story from Nov 30, 2010, titled Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil Unions. In it, CBS2 reports that:

The Illinois House has approved a measure to legalize civil unions for same-sex couples.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at CBS2.

mahz

Granite City, IL

#56927 Aug 29, 2014
Dick Topick wrote:
Who ever controls this topix. Please DELETE this one. This is totally ignoramous and stupid.
You know what's really stupid? That you come here to read it even though it only frustrates you.

You really think that topics you do not like should be shut down? You're that much of a narcissist?
the real Jonah1

Saint Louis, MO

#56929 Aug 29, 2014
Please, dear god NO. I live for this. I'd have nothing left.
.....
....
.....except my cats.
Dick Topick wrote:
Who ever controls this topix. Please DELETE this one. This is totally ignoramous and stupid.
the real Jonah1

Saint Louis, MO

#56930 Aug 29, 2014
I like cats.
Dick Topick wrote:
YOU need to admit it is stupid. Every morning I expect some intelligent conversation, but no, same old bull turds. And you are part of this pathetic abuse of the 1st amendment - dump a$$.

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#56931 Aug 29, 2014
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
And you gave no rational response.
I gave as much rational as was required by your opinions. If you want more rationalization, present something rational to respond to, not just your opinions. Try using specifics git. We know how you fundies hate specifics, because they make your lying more difficult, but give it a try Greg.
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
That is one of the most idiotic assertions possible.
What assertion would that be Greg? Specifically, lift the exact assertion from my post that you are referencing. We’ll wait as you cowardly avoid doing so, as is typical of your childish antics.
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
A combination of two diverse objects is not more complex than two duplicate objects?
Who was discussing complexity Greg? Oh, that's right, absolutely no one. And who decided that "complexity" was the same as "superior"? Oh, that's right, just you. By the way Greg, people are a composite of numerous things, there is no such thing as two duplicate people, hard as you try to pretend otherwise. No one is the sum of their genitalia, well, other than perhaps you since you are just one giant asshole. The “complexity” of two duplicate objects can be equal to the complexity of two diverse objects. If you disagree, site a source that proves otherwise. Your OPINION on the matter isn’t relevant. Prove that one is “more complex” than the other, and then prove that complexity is the same as superior. Good luck with that git.
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
And you deny that principle with the complexity of joining male and female genders???
Where did this denial occur? Please present the post number where I made such an idiotic “denial”. Come on coward liar, present the post where I asserted this denial.
Liars for Jesus unite, the coward KiMare is here to lead you.
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
It is my 'personal view' that natural, normal intercourse is healthy, but anal sex is inherently harmful, unhealthy and demeaning??? Look up webmed's info on anal sex.
Yes, we know, you talk about it more than any normal person ever would. You’re obsessed with it. You’re a very sick individual that thinks it’s perfectly normal to think about the sex other people have, and even creepier, to think you’re entitled to a say in such matters.

Oh, and just fyi,“personal view” is the same thing as “opinion”. As you’ve been told, your opinions aren’t worth a hill of beans, given that you’re a complete and utter moron.

You know what else is an opinion Greg? What you would like to call “normal” and “not normal” when it comes to sex. And, as has been pointed out to you on numerous occasions, NO WHERE on webmed’s info on anal sex is there anything that confirms your opinion about it. NO WHERE can you confirm your statement about its “inherent harm”. Absolutely nowhere. Know why? Because that’s a lie that you intentionally perpetuate. I’d ask you to present the actual verbiage from webmd, but that would be silly given that you’re a proven coward and you NEVER support anything you post when called on your lies. Coward to the core.

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#56932 Aug 29, 2014
continued...
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
It is 'unimportant' that a couple can bear a child??? The value of a child is 'my view'???
Oh, look at you being so intentionally deceitful again. Please cut and paste exactly from my post where I made any statement about the “value of a child”, and reference the post number. We’re waiting coward. Watch everyone as Greg Kirshmann cowardly avoids providing this information. As for whether it’s important if a couple can bear a child, no, it isn’t. One couple that can’t bear a child is not going to stop millions of others from procreating. But if you disagree Greg, then please be kind enough to present the state’s interest (you remember the state, right Greg, that’s the entity that actually sanctions marriage) in this procreation, and show where the state has denied marriage to a couple solely because of their inability to procreate. Come on coward, support yourself.

For the record, the “importance” of having a child is determined by each individual couple. Be that couple straight or gay, both equally complex and equally diverse. The importance is not determined by the state, or by bitchy, cowardly ex-pastors.
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you understand how foolish those claims make you look?
What I understand is that I didn’t make any of the claims you’ve deceitfully attributed to me, and by continueing to lie about them, the only one looking foolish (as well as very desperate) is you. Yet again.

If your cause is so just Greg, why is it that you defend it solely with lies and deceit? Seems very odd.

Hurry back princess, after you’ve taken Sandy for her morning walk.
mahz

Saint Louis, MO

#56933 Aug 29, 2014
Dick Topick wrote:
YOU need to admit it is stupid. Every morning I expect some intelligent conversation, but no, same old bull turds. And you are part of this pathetic abuse of the 1st amendment - dump a$$.
You need to admit that coming here every day and expecting the conversation to be different is extremely stupid of you.
the real Jonah1

Saint Louis, MO

#56934 Aug 29, 2014
I thinking of switching from tidy cat to fresh step.
mahz

Saint Louis, MO

#56936 Aug 29, 2014
Dick Topick wrote:
YOU need to admit it is stupid. Every morning I expect some intelligent conversation, but no, same old bull turds. And you are part of this pathetic abuse of the 1st amendment - dump a$$.
That may be the only honest thing you have ever said here, rageposter.
mahz

Granite City, IL

#56938 Aug 29, 2014
I actually quoted the wrong post. That was meant for CDC/The Real Jonah1/ Rageposter.
mahz

Granite City, IL

#56953 Aug 30, 2014
Spreading hatred in the name of Jesus, like a good modern Xtian. It's why your religion is fading into obscurity in this country. Less than 25% of people under 35 identify as Xtian. Your bigotry and hatred has spoiled the name of Jesus.

Judged:

11

11

11

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#56954 Aug 30, 2014
Jonah1 wrote:
continued...
<quoted text>
Oh, look at you being so intentionally deceitful again. Please cut and paste exactly from my post where I made any statement about the “value of a child”, and reference the post number. We’re waiting coward. Watch everyone as Greg Kirshmann cowardly avoids providing this information. As for whether it’s important if a couple can bear a child, no, it isn’t. One couple that can’t bear a child is not going to stop millions of others from procreating. But if you disagree Greg, then please be kind enough to present the state’s interest (you remember the state, right Greg, that’s the entity that actually sanctions marriage) in this procreation, and show where the state has denied marriage to a couple solely because of their inability to procreate. Come on coward, support yourself.
For the record, the “importance” of having a child is determined by each individual couple. Be that couple straight or gay, both equally complex and equally diverse. The importance is not determined by the state, or by bitchy, cowardly ex-pastors.
<quoted text>
What I understand is that I didn’t make any of the claims you’ve deceitfully attributed to me, and by continueing to lie about them, the only one looking foolish (as well as very desperate) is you. Yet again.
If your cause is so just Greg, why is it that you defend it solely with lies and deceit? Seems very odd.
Hurry back princess, after you’ve taken Sandy for her morning walk.
Jonah, if people care to wade through your mad ranting, they can read for themselves what you wrote and what I wrote.

I logically and calmly addressed your comments. I understand why you don't like how foolish your logic looks when stripped of it's vulgarities.

The bottom line remains, ss couples like yours are inferior to marriage.

Judged:

13

13

13

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
mahz

Granite City, IL

#56955 Aug 30, 2014
Proverbs 6:16-19
There are six things the Lord hates,
seven that are detestable to him:
haughty eyes,
a lying tongue,
hands that shed innocent blood,
a heart that devises wicked schemes,
feet that are quick to rush into evil,
a false witness who pours out lies
and a person who stirs up conflict in the community.

There's nothing in there about gays. Although that last one applies to most of the "Christians" in here.

Judged:

11

11

11

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
oh to sin

Chicago, IL

#56956 Aug 30, 2014
But God did say that homosexuality was a sin. Remember Sodom and Gomorra? Do you know of the man who offered his virgin daughters to the men who wanted to rape the angels? What is your stance on that? Technically, The Bible doesn't say much on lesbianism. Only Romans 1:26-27... so yes, I guess God is against homosexuality in men and women. So would it be safe to say you're not born that way? Instead it's a life choice?

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

lides

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#56957 Aug 30, 2014
oh to sin wrote:
But God did say that homosexuality was a sin. Remember Sodom and Gomorra? Do you know of the man who offered his virgin daughters to the men who wanted to rape the angels? What is your stance on that? Technically, The Bible doesn't say much on lesbianism. Only Romans 1:26-27... so yes, I guess God is against homosexuality in men and women. So would it be safe to say you're not born that way? Instead it's a life choice?
Logical failure.
http://www.gotquestions.org/Sodom-and-Gomorra...
http://www.religioustolerance.org/hombibg193....
http://www.str.org/articles/what-was-the-sin-...

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

lides

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#56964 Aug 30, 2014
Destroy Satans Children wrote:
Q: What do you call a gay midget?
A: A lowblow
What do you call an idiot from Providence, UT?

“It's a bathroom”

Since: Jul 07

Get over it, already

#56970 Aug 30, 2014
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>

The bottom line remains, ss couples like yours are inferior to marriage.
The bottom line remains, yours are the opinions of a 3-nippled, schizophrenice hermaphrodite with a Sandy vagina. Your thousands of posts here have done nothing to stop the progress of marriage equality. You're impotent, Pastor.

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
well

Lake Villa, IL

#56971 Aug 30, 2014
KiMerde wrote:
<quoted text>
Your thousands of posts here have done nothing to stop the progress of marriage equality. You're impotent, Pastor.
Yes he is, Sandy told me....

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#56976 Aug 30, 2014
mahz wrote:
Proverbs 6:16-19
There are six things the Lord hates,
seven that are detestable to him:
haughty eyes,
a lying tongue,
hands that shed innocent blood,
a heart that devises wicked schemes,
feet that are quick to rush into evil,
a false witness who pours out lies
and a person who stirs up conflict in the community.
There's nothing in there about gays. Although that last one applies to most of the "Christians" in here.
Every part of that passage addresses the behavior of homosexuals on this site.

Speaking the truth is NOT stirring up conflict, it is an act of love.

Here is one for you:

"Woe to those who call evil good and good evil."
mahz

Granite City, IL

#56986 Aug 30, 2014
Dick Topick wrote:
<quoted text>
Remember a-hole. You ain't no John McCain. Give the Senator the respect he deserves. For he carries his arm in a manner that no one should ever forget. Freedom is not free and the good Senator deserves the respect of all.
John McCain traded on his daddy's connections as an Admiral. He crashed several planes during training and should have never been allowed back in a cockpit. Instead he kept getting passed along, even though he was a total failure and then he gets shot down during one of his first combat mission over Vietnam. What a joke.

He is no different that Dubya. Just the retard son of a very powerful man who was able to trade on daddy's name.

Judged:

11

11

11

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!
mahz

Granite City, IL

#56987 Aug 30, 2014
Sadistic Homosexuals wrote:
Here is another incident where a mainstream GLBT group did not shy away from associating with S&M:
O'Neill18 described the case of the Canadian Supreme Court objecting to different standards for homosexual pornography. A Canadian homosexual pornography store had some imported pornography (sadomasochistic) confiscated by Customs for violating obscenity laws. Some homosexual groups such as Equality for Gays and Lesbians Everywhere and the feminist Women's Legal Education and Action Fund (LEAF) argued that the customs laws should either be thrown out or a different, more lax standard be applied to homosexual pornography. LEAF took the position that sexual sadomasochism plays an emancipatory role in gay and lesbian culture and should be judged by a different standard from that applicable to heterosexual culture. Some homosexuals and feminists were opposed to different standards for homosexual pornography. For instance, the group, Homosexuals Opposed to Pride Extremism, which opposes special rights based on sexuality, along with the New York-based feminist group, Equality Now, supported the Supreme Court decision and the Customs laws.
I was trying to be nice, but honestly, Greg, you display several things on that list daily. You bitter, angry old freak.

Judged:

11

11

11

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

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.

Dixmoor Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Moody and Madigan Politics 22 min Really 8
Got xänax/ädderall/Öxy/H/Tär?etc 4 sale 4 hr Making it happen 1
News Slowik: Blue Island mayor faces intense critici... 7 hr Virtual Reality 103
Who will be running in April for trustee 8 hr Moody Doesnt Get It 39
You're an old time Riverdale/Dolton resident if... (Nov '09) 10 hr Nick Henricks 1,084
property taxes and theives (Nov '09) 15 hr Mike 191
Who do you support for U.S. House in Illinois (... (Oct '10) Wed VoteTermLimits 195

Dixmoor Jobs

Personal Finance

Dixmoor Mortgages