Who do you support for U.S. Senate in...

“Liberals are closet raaacists!”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#16813 Jun 29, 2013
guest wrote:
<quoted text>
It doesn't take long to figure out the "green squared" ones does it? They think that their "green square" proves that they are a cut above but all it really proves is their propensity for group think. They are incapable of independent thought. They need a badge to help boost their self esteem and identify themselves to the like minded. They are part of the ever shrinking minority of a warped existence that can only see as far as their pinched belief system can bare. A pitiful lot to say the least, but very funny in their incessant whining about an ever changing world that they thought they had control of but have found it slipping ever further from their understanding.
Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. What an lock step Obamabot you are. You TRY to sound soooo intellectual, but your post is an EPIC fail. Can't WAIT for you to REALLY sample the world you CLAIM to be so ready for. lol

“Liberals are closet raaacists!”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#16814 Jun 29, 2013
guest wrote:
<quoted text>
It doesn't take long to figure out the "green squared" ones does it? They think that their "green square" proves that they are a cut above but all it really proves is their propensity for group think. They are incapable of independent thought. They need a badge to help boost their self esteem and identify themselves to the like minded. They are part of the ever shrinking minority of a warped existence that can only see as far as their pinched belief system can bare. A pitiful lot to say the least, but very funny in their incessant whining about an ever changing world that they thought they had control of but have found it slipping ever further from their understanding.
In reference to your "green square" comment, why don't you reveal your TRUE identity if you are SO evolved. rotfl You are a FRAUD. Run along.

“Liberals are closet raaacists!”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#16815 Jun 29, 2013
Bigdave1 wrote:
This is the final kiss of death for Rubio's so called Republican career. I don't remember, but wasn't Rubio a Tea Party favorite? I could be wrong. Doesn't matter now anyway does it?
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/...
Yep! He's over in my book.

“Liberals are closet raaacists!”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#16816 Jun 29, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
I am not claiming recognizing same sex marriage has any impact on me and even if it did, it would be irrelevant. The important impact is on society. In most civilized societies, marriage, for thousands of years, has been understood as the legal union of one man and one woman. It served to stabilize society and protect children. Now the US has decided to fundamentally redefine what constitutes marriage. Okay, where does it stop? Polygamists are already looking at this as their opening, and why shouldn't they. If marriage can be defined as both one man and one woman, and as two women and as two men - why not one man and two women?
What would be a valid argument against it, now that we have begun redefining marriage, what is the rationale to stop? And why not one woman and two men? Well, what about the children - which man is on the birth certificate? Would paternity tests be required at birth? Those are just two reasonable scenarios that could be argued for now.
Once marriage can be seen as fluid, doesn't it naturally follow that its significance must be diminished? We already have a huge segment of our population having children out of wedlock and we have seen the results - greater probability of growing up in poverty, greater chance of being abused, greater chance of not finishing high school, much less college, greater chance of ending up in jail.
Society has a vested interest in children being raised in a stable home, anything that further diminishes the odds of that, I consider a tragedy. In my opinion, the redefinition of marriage does that. That is my priority - the sanctity of marriage. What Jim and Bob do in the privacy of their home does not impact me, if they want some formal recognition of their relationship - fine, I understand that desire and can respect it - find some alternative term and have our legislatures recognize it - but don't call it marriage, because it isn't.
Don't expect you to agree and I've said my piece.
I agree 100% with your post. Although whom someone marries(I don't think same sex couple's "union" should be called marriage either) doesn't directly affect me, we all know that this is just the beginning. The minority rules now and all those who are celebrating the so-called "evolvement" of our society will most assuredly rue the day this pandora's box was opened. Even the most liberal will certainly get their toes stepped on sooner or later and then it will be too late.
OMTE

Rural Valley, PA

#16817 Jun 29, 2013
Synergy wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree 100% with your post. Although whom someone marries(I don't think same sex couple's "union" should be called marriage either) doesn't directly affect me, we all know that this is just the beginning. The minority rules now and all those who are celebrating the so-called "evolvement" of our society will most assuredly rue the day this pandora's box was opened. Even the most liberal will certainly get their toes stepped on sooner or later and then it will be too late.
What's up girl? Are you a lady of the night?*curious*

“Liberals are closet raaacists!”

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#16818 Jun 29, 2013
OMTE wrote:
<quoted text>What's up girl? Are you a lady of the night?*curious*
lol Noooooo. I'm just a bit of a night owl these days.
Oh my

Young Harris, GA

#16819 Jun 30, 2013
Who wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/blairsville-g...
...I have called it deviant behaviour; I will state here the "Census should have a section collecting information on gays as a population group."
Much could be learned about their deviant behaviour, why they do what they do, the impact on neighbors, the community's children, race relations, the impact on forlorn women who never marry because of a shortage of straight men, or the forlorn men who never marry because of a shortage of straight women.
The medical community could track any disease the gays spread, inoculate them, put them in quarantine to protect the general population.
Many good uses for a census section on gays.
Yeah, make 'em wear arm bands with little pink triangles.

Keep posting, your support is indispensable.
guest

Warrenton, VA

#16820 Jun 30, 2013
Who wrote:
Multiple polls link::
http://www.pollingreport.com/civil.htm
And many of the poll respondents probably dont even understand the questions and dont know who their elected reps are.
Why didn't you just post this and be done with it. You've exposed your complete foolishness here - "And many of the poll respondents probably dont even understand the questions and dont know who their elected reps are."

You blew it budreau, your true colors exposed and your whining can be heard all over the state. Same sex marriage, coming to your town next and there ain't a damn thing you can do about it. Get yourself a "green square" like the rest of the self righteous crybabies on here. Y'all are just too funny for words.
Who

Hiawassee, GA

#16821 Jun 30, 2013
Oh my wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, make 'em wear arm bands with little pink triangles.
Keep posting, your support is indispensable.

FYI:
Your favorite site, Huffinton Post, says,
"Census Bureau urges same-sex couples to be counted."

Looks like the gays are the ONES banding their own arms with those little pink triangles. ROFL
We look forward to seeing you around town with your arm band. ROFL.
Not saying you are gay, just a gay supporter. Not much difference huh.

Wear it to the Farmers Market for maximum effect.

This is just the beginning of government collecting data for future oppression. Remember the Nazis?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/2010...



Who

Hiawassee, GA

#16822 Jun 30, 2013
guest wrote:
<quoted text>
Why didn't you just post this and be done with it. You've exposed your complete foolishness here - "And many of the poll respondents probably dont even understand the questions and dont know who their elected reps are."
You blew it budreau, your true colors exposed and your whining can be heard all over the state. Same sex marriage, coming to your town next and there ain't a damn thing you can do about it. Get yourself a "green square" like the rest of the self righteous crybabies on here. Y'all are just too funny for words.

"Why didn't you just post this and be done with it."

Well duh! I did post it.
And what are my true colors? You don't say. you're like "bored monitor", with little understanding of the english language and the meaning of words. Yall have a lot of trouble understanding thought patterns with certain words because your fixed internal radar is faulty and corrupt.

i.e., see my previous post to Oh my, his radar has been broken since birth.


Who

Hiawassee, GA

#16823 Jun 30, 2013
Who wrote:
<quoted text>
Remember the Nazis?

"On May 6, 1933, Nazi Youth of the Deutsche Studentenschaft made an organised attack on the Institute of Sex Research. A few days later the Institute's library and archives were publicly hauled out and burned in the streets of the Opernplatz. Around 20,000 books and journals, and 5,000 images, were destroyed. Also seized were the Institute's extensive lists of names and addresses of homosexuals. In the midst of the burning, Joseph Goebbels gave a political speech to a crowd of around 40,000 people. Hitler initially protected Röhm from other elements of the Nazi Party which held his homosexuality to be a violation of the party's strong anti-gay policy. However, Hitler later changed course when he perceived Röhm to be a potential threat to his power. During the Night of the Long Knives in 1934, a purge of those whom Hitler deemed threats to his power took place, he had Röhm murdered and used Röhm's homosexuality as a justification to suppress outrage within the ranks of the SA. After solidifying his power, Hitler would include gay men among those sent to concentration camps during the Holocaust."
Who

Hiawassee, GA

#16824 Jun 30, 2013
"Another White House Play Date with Muslim Jihad."


"Forget Paula Deen. There are far more dangerous bigots and poisonous haters spoiling the American landscape. They cook up violent rhetoric and murderous plots against our troops, our citizens and our allies 24/7. And they have direct access to the White House."

http://cnsnews.com/blog/michelle-malkin/anoth...



guest

Warrenton, VA

#16825 Jun 30, 2013
Who - When you write something like this it is impossible to take you seriously:

"...the impact on forlorn women who never marry because of a shortage of straight men, or the forlorn men who never marry because of a shortage of straight women."

goodgodamighty! that is the most pitiful thing that I've read here in a long time and between the likes of yourself and the "green squared" folks there have been some incredibly pitiful stuff on here. Do you actually think that same sex marriage will reduce the numbers of "straight" folks that exist? I mean really? WOW! Do you also believe that the earth is 6,000 yrs. old? Your pinched world view is contracting ever further.

“Registered Conservative”

Since: Jul 11

Draketown, GA

#16826 Jun 30, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
I am not claiming recognizing same sex marriage has any impact on me and even if it did, it would be irrelevant. The important impact is on society. In most civilized societies, marriage, for thousands of years, has been understood as the legal union of one man and one woman. It served to stabilize society and protect children. Now the US has decided to fundamentally redefine what constitutes marriage. Okay, where does it stop? Polygamists are already looking at this as their opening, and why shouldn't they. If marriage can be defined as both one man and one woman, and as two women and as two men - why not one man and two women?
What would be a valid argument against it, now that we have begun redefining marriage, what is the rationale to stop? And why not one woman and two men? Well, what about the children - which man is on the birth certificate? Would paternity tests be required at birth? Those are just two reasonable scenarios that could be argued for now.
Once marriage can be seen as fluid, doesn't it naturally follow that its significance must be diminished? We already have a huge segment of our population having children out of wedlock and we have seen the results - greater probability of growing up in poverty, greater chance of being abused, greater chance of not finishing high school, much less college, greater chance of ending up in jail.
Society has a vested interest in children being raised in a stable home, anything that further diminishes the odds of that, I consider a tragedy. In my opinion, the redefinition of marriage does that. That is my priority - the sanctity of marriage. What Jim and Bob do in the privacy of their home does not impact me, if they want some formal recognition of their relationship - fine, I understand that desire and can respect it - find some alternative term and have our legislatures recognize it - but don't call it marriage, because it isn't.
Don't expect you to agree and I've said my piece.
Anything that impacts society as a whole, impacts the individual.
Who

Hiawassee, GA

#16827 Jun 30, 2013
guest wrote:
Who - When you write something like this it is impossible to take you seriously:
"...the impact on forlorn women who never marry because of a shortage of straight men, or the forlorn men who never marry because of a shortage of straight women."
goodgodamighty! that is the most pitiful thing that I've read here in a long time and between the likes of yourself and the "green squared" folks there have been some incredibly pitiful stuff on here. Do you actually think that same sex marriage will reduce the numbers of "straight" folks that exist? I mean really? WOW! Do you also believe that the earth is 6,000 yrs. old? Your pinched world view is contracting ever further.

Frankly guest, I really dont care one twit what you think as I never take you seriously either with your ramblings and off the wall comments made under a delusional mindset.

Do you really think you speak for normal people? Your biased opinion in favor of homosexuality shows you belong to the "pink crowd."

Wear your armband with pride, clean your bumper sticker every day, and bow down before Obama every morning for your prayers. Who knows, maybe you can go on a tour of voyeurism with Obama.
Who

Hiawassee, GA

#16828 Jun 30, 2013
"NFL stiff arms Obamacare promotion."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/06/29/nf...
Who

Hiawassee, GA

#16829 Jun 30, 2013
Obama visited a garbage dump.
All the way to Africa to visit a garbage dump when all he had to do was drive around Washington d.c.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-23514...





Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#16830 Jun 30, 2013
General Robert E Lee wrote:
<quoted text>
Anything that impacts society as a whole, impacts the individual.
You are absolutely correct, I should have worded that better. I was trying to make clear that my opposition to "same sex marriage" has nothing to do with what my feelings on homosexuality may or may be in general.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#16831 Jun 30, 2013
^^^^^. "may or may not be"
billy bob

Jefferson, GA

#16832 Jun 30, 2013
Bigdave1 wrote:
This is the final kiss of death for Rubio's so called Republican career. I don't remember, but wasn't Rubio a Tea Party favorite? I could be wrong. Doesn't matter now anyway does it?
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/...
What you are seeing is the death of the Tea Party. When as you admit a Tea Party favorite realizes that going the Tea Party route is the kiss of death on a national level you know its OVER. And once the ones elected to Congress cycle out maybe we can get back to running the country and not trying to redefine the morals of our civilization.

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.

Richmond Hill Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Beautiful woman at Georgia Eye next to Memorial... Jun 25 Planes6767 1
Review: Abbott, Greg DDS - Greg Abbott DDS (Jul '10) Jun 22 Celeste symthe 17
Stop the Illegal Alien Train Jun 20 Anthony Scarpuzzi... 20
Winn Dixie is owned and operated by the klu klu... Jun 16 Sandra Day 2
The Sanctuary 4584 Cox Rd. Evans GA., RACIST & ... Jun 16 Johnnnie 2
Libertarians Hate Trump Jun 16 so you know 18
Listen; Trump, Trump, Trump (Sep '15) Jun 16 so you know 19

Richmond Hill Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Richmond Hill Mortgages