Paul Ryan promises hate group that he...

Paul Ryan promises hate group that he'll fight equality

There are 5444 comments on the www.wisconsingazette.com story from Oct 9, 2012, titled Paul Ryan promises hate group that he'll fight equality. In it, www.wisconsingazette.com reports that:

In a recent interview with Focus on the Family president Jim Daly, Paul Ryan reassured the anti-gay hate group that a Romney-Ryan administration will fiercely oppose gay rights.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at www.wisconsingazette.com.

Jane Dough

Barre, VT

#3626 Nov 14, 2012
snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
Equal Rights are never an area for compromise.
right. so that's why you would get all the RIGHTS...just not the name...
is a name a "right" now?

“Alley Cat Blues”

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#3627 Nov 14, 2012
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
It said nothing of the sort.
"The amendment prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion,"
"The amendment prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion"
This means the US can't have a national religion. It in no way excludes religious principles from the laws. It would be naive to believe otherwise.
"impeding the free exercise of religion"
This means that the government can't favor any one religion over another.
I hope you've learned something here but I really doubt it.
Some "religious" principles are broad-based throughout many religions and even among the non-religious; the act of murder and the act of stealing are two. The law is not based upon religious principles but principles that are common to humanity and fair to all, without regard to religion.

Ergo, the government cannot mandate that U.S. laws are will be based upon any religion, and any religion should be able to practice within the limits of the law without government interference.

“What Goes Around, Comes Around”

Since: Mar 07

Kansas City, MO.

#3628 Nov 14, 2012
WeTheSheeple wrote:
Romney-Ryan:
Anti-gay
Anti-hispanic
Anti-black
Anti-woman
Anti-poor
Anti-middle class
Anti-elderly
How are they even CLOSE to the President in the polls?
That was sure proven!

“Alley Cat Blues”

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#3629 Nov 14, 2012
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
Why so bitter? Gays don't value the importance of a child having a mother and a father. Gay couples can't produce children so they must not value creating a family. Why would they value marriage? I know, 1400 questionable benefits.
The problem with your statement is:

1. Many gays do value the importance of a child having loving parents. Many heterosexuals don't value the importance of having a mother and a father; there are plenty of single moms and dads and also heterosexual singles who legally adopt. They are not forced to get married for the sake of the child.

2. Gays can and do produce children, through a surrogate partner or through in vitro fertilization.

3. Gays value marriage for the same reason you do -- the desire to make a legal and binding commitment to someone they love and consider their soul mate. If it were only for the benefits, any two people, gay or straight, could get married, live apart, and receive marriage benefits.

4. Straight couples don't necessarily have to get married, but they do so, and not just for the benefits, and not just to start a family. Some married couples don't want children and others are past child-bearing age, but they are not denied marriage.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#3630 Nov 14, 2012
Jupiter wrote:
<quoted text>
The problem with your statement is:
1. Many heterosexuals don't value the importance of having a mother and a father;
2. there are plenty of single moms and dads and also heterosexual singles who legally adopt. They are not forced to get married for the sake of the child.
3. Gays can and do produce children, through a surrogate partner or through in vitro fertilization.
4. Gays value marriage for the same reason you do -- the desire to make a legal and binding commitment to someone they love and consider their soul mate. If it were only for the benefits, any two people, gay or straight, could get married, live apart, and receive marriage benefits.
5.Straight couples don't necessarily have to get married, but they do so, and not just for the benefits, and not just to start a family. Some married couples don't want children and others are past child-bearing age, but they are not denied marriage.
The problem with your comments are:
1. All straights have no choice, just like you. If they are born to a single mother then it is what it is.
2. That doesn't change the fact that gay couples CAN'T create children.
3. Gay couples CAN'T produce children.
4. Since marriage isn't required for commitment or love, it's for the benefits or it's for religion.
5. Since marriage isn't required for commitment or love, it's for the benefits or it's for religion.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#3631 Nov 14, 2012
Jupiter wrote:
<quoted text>
Ergo, the government cannot mandate that U.S. laws are will be based upon any religion, and any religion should be able to practice within the limits of the law without government interference.
Ummm...that's what I said.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#3632 Nov 14, 2012
Lacez wrote:
<quoted text>
That quote about sums up the separation of church and state. Religion can not have any part in making any laws for freedom of religion applies. If one religion has a view on something and another doesn't, then that one religion has a part in making a law that goes against that other religion, that is in direct violation of "freedom of religion."
Can't read between the lines, can you?
I can't recall ever seeing so much stupid in one place.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#3633 Nov 14, 2012
Lacez wrote:
<quoted text>
You can't make that judgement when you think that every election held won by a minority.
More stupid from Canada, I'm loving it.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#3634 Nov 14, 2012
Lacez wrote:
<quoted text>
You claim to be a rational being, yet you side with those who have proven "rationality" to not be located within their dictionaries.
Irrational is one man going down on another man, but I support your right to do it.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#3635 Nov 14, 2012
Mona Lott wrote:
<quoted text>
We've learned that you drank the Kool-Aid, but then we knew that already.
That, from the queen of one liner fails.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#3636 Nov 14, 2012
Jane Dough wrote:
<quoted text>
right. so that's why you would get all the RIGHTS...just not the name...
is a name a "right" now?
International Law and Treaties.
Jane Dough

Barre, VT

#3637 Nov 14, 2012
snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
International Law and Treaties.
so what? We still use the standards and not metric system...we'll all survive...

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#3638 Nov 14, 2012
Marriage has nothing to do with having a mother and father; in case you hadn't noticed a helluva lot of kids are being born outside of marriage. Moreover, lots of heteros are opting to marry without procreating. They are two separate issues.

Many gay couples raise kids; many of them are taking up the slack you feckless fu**ers bear and toss away. You people must not value kids either.
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
Why so bitter? Gays don't value the importance of a child having a mother and a father. Gay couples can't produce children so they must not value creating a family. Why would they value marriage? I know, 1400 questionable benefits.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#3639 Nov 14, 2012
Jane Dough wrote:
<quoted text>
right. so that's why you would get all the RIGHTS...just not the name...
is a name a "right" now?
It's not a compromis at all. there is no one to compromise with. religion has nothing to do with legal marriage.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#3640 Nov 14, 2012
Jane Dough wrote:
<quoted text>
so what? We still use the standards and not metric system...we'll all survive...
We won't.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#3641 Nov 14, 2012
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>It's not a compromis at all. there is no one to compromise with. religion has nothing to do with legal marriage.
Exactly.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#3642 Nov 14, 2012
Psst...even state amendmets can be overturned, either by vote or by federal court decision. And since pretty much every state
DoMA uses the same language, overturning one will overturn most if not all.
Jane Dough wrote:
<quoted text>
32 states...psst that's a majority, ban you by AMENDMENT...
but you have no duty to give anything up....its just part of a COMPROMISE...
so the name is more important to you than the actual rights, huh?
Jane Dough

Barre, VT

#3643 Nov 14, 2012
cpeter1313 wrote:
Marriage has nothing to do with having a mother and father; in case you hadn't noticed a helluva lot of kids are being born outside of marriage.
<quoted text>
and they always have been...they WERE called BASTARDS?
why do you think that is?

the number one indicator of success is being raised by both your biological mother and father...

marriage keeps fathers present.

“Educating the uneducated”

Since: Aug 12

Montreal

#3644 Nov 14, 2012
spud wrote:
<quoted text>Now there's a meaningless statement that could have come right out of a Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama speach. Actually, I'm pro environment, anti PC, anti free trade, pro private union, anti public union, pro flat tax, anti Obamacare, anti depts of education, agriculture and interior, pro raising the minimum wage, pro immigration enforcement, anti big government, anti overspending, pro liberty, pro constitution, anti bailout, anti subsidy, anti corporate welfare and pro free market. I don't believe our federal government should have any say about abortion, gay marriage or public education. So tell me Mr. smart guy, who am I siding with?
You've stayed on the fence about what side you're on so far, but you've also been leaning more towards the bigoted side.
If you'd like to make a clear statement as to where you stand on this topic, feel free, but until then, you really can't say you have a point if you don't make one.

“Educating the uneducated”

Since: Aug 12

Montreal

#3645 Nov 14, 2012
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
I can't recall ever seeing so much stupid in one place.
Ah, the famous Wondering quality of insulting and not debunking anything because you can't.
You admit you were wrong through your actions, for they speak louder than words.

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.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News 'Free Kim Davis': This is just what gay rights ... (Sep '15) 5 min Fa-Foxy 12,983
News Sanders: Don't blame Islam for Orlando shooting 18 min ImFree2Choose 602
2016 NOM DC March for Marriage FAIL 22 min Fa-Foxy 3
News Man Accused Of Firing Paintballs At Stockton Ga... 26 min Roscoe 52
News Pride parade steps off in New York in Orlando's... 29 min Roscoe 7
News Obama: Notion that being armed would have saved... 41 min Gov Corbutt of th... 901
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 1 hr Pietro Armando 37,261
News Chicago Reacts to Orlando Shooting 1 hr Fa-Foxy 28
More from around the web