First Prev
of 6
Next Last
hank hill

Columbus, IN

#118 Apr 2, 2013
KY WELLER wrote:
<quoted text>Just 2 males. Should have clarified... Every woman I have been with say the back door is "Exit Only".
lol I feel the same way.
Bbo

New York, NY

#119 Apr 3, 2013
KY WELLER wrote:
<quoted text>Just 2 males. Should have clarified... Every woman I have been with say the back door is "Exit Only".
Gullable. That's just what they told you......they were saving anal for the buttman dude they were doing on the side who satisfied them.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#121 May 20, 2013
Do you want to discuss Obama's IRS harassment of same sex marriage opponents here?
Robert Chesebrough

Desoto, TX

#125 Jun 4, 2013
Republican wrote:
Obama is going to make it so we all have to get gay marriages!
That's true. Have you picked out your new same sex partner yet? LOL.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#126 Jun 4, 2013
If the IRS gets hold of your medical records, they can leak them too. Have you heard about their $4.1 million training vacation?

Emails of top Obama appointees remain a mystery


Jun 4, 3:31 AM (ET)

By JACK GILLUM

WASHINGTON (AP)- Some of President Barack Obama's political appointees, including the Cabinet secretary for the Health and Human Services Department, are using secret government email accounts they say are necessary to prevent their inboxes from being overwhelmed with unwanted messages, according to a review by The Associated Press.
The scope of using the secret accounts across government remains a mystery: Most U.S. agencies have failed to turn over lists of political appointees' email addresses, which the AP sought under the Freedom of Information Act more than three months ago. The Labor Department initially asked the AP to pay more than $1 million for its email addresses.
The AP asked for the addresses following last year's disclosures that the former administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency had used separate email accounts at work. The practice is separate from officials who use personal, non-government email accounts for work, which generally is discouraged - but often happens anyway - due to laws requiring that most federal records be preserved.
The secret email accounts complicate an agency's legal responsibilities to find and turn over emails in response to congressional or internal investigations, civil lawsuits or public records requests because employees assigned to compile such responses would necessarily need to know about the accounts to search them. Secret accounts also drive perceptions that government officials are trying to hide actions or decisions.
"What happens when that person doesn't work there anymore? He leaves and someone makes a request (to review emails) in two years," said Kel McClanahan, executive director of National Security Counselors, an open government group. "Who's going to know to search the other accounts? You would hope that agencies doing this would keep a list of aliases in a desk drawer, but you know that isn't happening."....
TimeMarchesOn

Utica, NY

#128 Jun 4, 2013
I came out when coming out wasn't cool. My parents for religious reasons *were* against same sex marriage, using the reasoning that *civil unions* were just as good. They are not. Civil Unions do not extend the same state and federal tax benefits, retirement benefits, inheritance benefits, etc., as a *marriage* does.

Lets be clear. No one is saying anyone has to embrace gay folks. Obviously, the Civil Rights Act of '64 didn't make all Americans embrace racial diversity, but it did say that you cannot deny the same rights to black folks as white. The Loving case said the same thing about interracial marriage. YOU do not have to like gay folks, YOU do not have to agree gay folks should be allowed to marry. YOU do not have to agree gay folks should have the right to breathe. BUT... YOU cannot deny gay folks the same rights, in the public sphere as anyone else.

YOU have every right to tell your son or daughter you don't want them to be gay and do not want them to be married to a person of the same sex. YOU have every right to not attend the ceremony. YOU have every right to disown them. YOU do NOT have the right to deny them their rights to do so. Same as you have the right to tell your daughter not to marry a black guy. But he has the right to do so despite your protestations.

As for marrying your dog, sheep, goat, cow, turtle, whatever... Animals do NOT have the ability to give consent. End of that ridiculous argument. The argument for marriage being a societal standard for procreation falls short, in we do not have laws on the books barring marriage for infertile individuals, do we? Nor should we. Unless you think there should be a pre-nuptial questionnaire asking how many kids the marriage plans on producing. As for the issue of marrying for *benefits*... it goes on already. And has for the length of history. Look at all the marriages of royalty in history. They weren't marriages based on love and respect, they were based on power consolidation and retaining control.

Now, the argument of kids marrying parents, or uncles marrying nephews, etc, IS a valid argument. Using the arguments stated above for same sex marriage, the same arguments can be made for the progress of this action. Ditto on multiple partner marriages, which personally I could care less about. That's their life, not mine. The only argument I can make is that when the Loving case was decided, that was the start of the path down this road. If YOU think it would have been a good idea to retain the illegality of interracial marriage to estop the potential possible argument for the marriage between familial members, then, that's on you. My thinking is that common sense overrides the idea of the *slippery slope* sliding into that swamp.

Lastly, DOMA. Yes, DOMA was a slap in the face to gay folks. BUT... Clinton, being Clinton, master legal mind he is, understood that legalized, recognized same sex marriage would not become a reality until the SCOTUS ruled that is was discriminatory to deny that benefit to same sex couples. To rule on that, they would need a case brought in front of them. To have a case brought in front of them there needs to be a law on the books to prove discrimination. DOMA was that law. Once states began approving same sex marriages, DOMA was automatically put into play on the federal level, setting the stage for a SCOTUS ruling. Call it forethought on President Clinton's part to move the country forward.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Level 10

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#129 Jun 4, 2013
DOMA is federal law; vice president Biden voted to enact DOMA into law when he was in the senate. Biden and Obama ran on marriage as one man and one woman back in 2008.

Then, the Obama administration started meeting with the IRS commissioner every week. They rewarded political hacks and persecuted conservatives to shut down free speech.

Investigate, grant immunity if necessary but get testimony on record.

D

Level 9

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

#130 Jun 4, 2013
There is no good reason for queers to enjoy the same benefits as normal people. You pursued that sick lifestyle knowing it was not right,and in some places,illegal. Now you whine and cry that it should be legal. What other laws should we get rid of to facilitate your degenerate lifestyle? Sick fucking people...
TimeMarchesOn

New Britain, CT

#131 Jun 4, 2013
KY WELLER wrote:
There is no good reason for queers to enjoy the same benefits as normal people. You pursued that sick lifestyle knowing it was not right,and in some places,illegal. Now you whine and cry that it should be legal. What other laws should we get rid of to facilitate your degenerate lifestyle? Sick fucking people...
intellectual, articulate, well thought out response. See you at the bookstore, closet case.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 6
Next Last

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.

Utica Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
opinion on woman that cheats while pregnant (Feb '12) 10 min Working girl 15
Welfare Hockey In Utica 14 min Oh Yeah 19
ND Warmack suspended for grades but....... 17 min nd alum 9
Parole Officer Incident at Denny's 19 min bull 426
why CANT THAT RASH FAT SLOB FINGERS PROVE IT LI... 22 min Large MidSectione... 8
Why Robert T Oliveira 23 min Large MidSectione... 15
global DIDN'T USE THE COMIC SITE THEY DIDN'T EV... 25 min Large MidSectione... 12
Jill WKTV 2 hr Cornhill Nylon Ba... 48
Utica Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Utica People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Utica News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Utica

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 9:41 pm PST

Bleacher Report 9:41PM
Breaking Down Eagles' Game Plan vs. Giants
Bleacher Report12:04 AM
Jets' Week 17 Preview vs. Dolphins
Bleacher Report 4:00 AM
Buffalo Bills vs. New England Patriots: Complete Week 17 Preview for New England
Bleacher Report 5:04 AM
New York Jets vs. Miami Dolphins: Complete Week 17 Preview for Miami
NBC Sports 5:09 AM
Friday morning one-liners
NBC Sports 7:52 AM
Antrel Rolle knows finishing well no guarantee 2015 will be any better for Giants
Bleacher Report10:07 AM
Giants RB Williams Questionable for Week 17
NBC Sports10:35 AM
Vick talks future, wants to keep playing - NBC Sports
NBC Sports11:25 AM
Jets' Mangold, Harvin game-time decisions at Miami - NBC Sports
NBC Sports12:58 PM
William Hayes, Alec Ogletree draw fines after fight with Giants