Paul Ryan promises hate group that he'll fight equality

Oct 9, 2012 | Posted by: Rick in Kansas | Full story: www.wisconsingazette.com

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.

Comments (Page 180)

Showing posts 3,581 - 3,600 of5,438
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
OH NO You Did not

Rancho Cucamonga, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3924
Nov 17, 2012
 
Xyzhoturutsmail wrote:
<quoted text>Like we care what you think and what lies you tell. Too bad if gays are not allowed to walk the streets, used public bathrooms, go into restaurants, used public pools, go to integrated schools and are forced to ride at the back of the bus. Oh wait, that was the blacks.
WHAT DO GAYS WANT? To get married. Wait, gays have always been able to get married, even when blacks were slaves. WHAT DO GAYS WANT THEN? To get married to the same sex. Oh no, no one has that right, so that is simply changing the laws to impact all and not a basic or civil rights issue. You know, like polygamy, it was not discrimination against a sect of Mormons, it impacted all equally.
SO, WHAT DO GAYS WANT? They want to demonstrate their hate and bigotry towards mom and dad, religion, God, breeders and children.
NOW, THAT EXPLAINS WHY GAYS ARE SUICIDAL. WHAT? Self hatred and hatred towards normal people.
GOSH, HOW COME A GAY NEVER EXPLAINED IT LIKE I JUST DID? CaUSE gays are liARS.
They certainly have immense hatred as all the post show either name calling, full on attacks, denigration and just plain meanness. Only "quest" has been the only posters that cares to debate the topic and even his posts have tinges of nastiness.

“Luke laughs at hypocrites!”

Since: Sep 10

Palm Springs, California

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3925
Nov 17, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

OH NO You Did not wrote:
<quoted text>

.
There, I got rid of the mean spirited parts of your post and left only the kind things you said.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3926
Nov 18, 2012
 
Curteese wrote:
<quoted text>
1. If you are so worried about destroying families, then why do you allow for FIFTY percent of HETERO marriages to end?
2. I thought marriage vows were made to God, why do you guys LIE to God so much?
3. As for destroying heteros, do you really think I CARE what you do in your own home? It has NOTHING to do with me. Screw whomever you want. Just don't concern yourself with what goes on over here.
4. Pedos and polygamists do NOT have any rights, for both are illegal. How is that any way related to gays?
1. Gays are catching up.
2. Marriage vows are made to each other, not to God.
3. I agree, now just keep your gay BS out of the elementary schools. Straights don't care about it.
4. Easy one, it is illegal for gays to marry in most states. It's written into the state constitutions and/or there are statutes forbidding it .

“Engaged to the love of my life”

Since: Aug 12

Montreal

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3927
Nov 18, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Wondering wrote:
I agree, now just keep your gay BS out of the elementary schools. Straights don't care about it.
If your only problems are the one or two books going around in a few schools, then your issue isn't with marriage. Common sense would dictate not to deny an entire minority their rights just because a couple dozen of them decided to put a book or two into educative circulation. Especially when putting one or two books into circulation does not have anything to do with marriage.

So, following that common sense, are you for or against equality and marriage equality?
If not, you're the perfect example of Rose's law.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3928
Nov 18, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Lacez wrote:
<quoted text>
If your only problems are the one or two books going around in a few schools, then your issue isn't with marriage. Common sense would dictate not to deny an entire minority their rights just because a couple dozen of them decided to put a book or two into educative circulation. Especially when putting one or two books into circulation does not have anything to do with marriage.
So, following that common sense, are you for or against equality and marriage equality?
If not, you're the perfect example of Rose's law.
'Lacez' is an antonym for 'common sense.'

“Engaged to the love of my life”

Since: Aug 12

Montreal

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3929
Nov 18, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
'Lacez' is an antonym for 'common sense.'
Rose's law it is. You don't give a shit about children, just as long as you can use them as an excuse.
OH NO You Did not

Rancho Cucamonga, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3930
Nov 18, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Curteese wrote:
<quoted text>There, I got rid of the mean spirited parts of your post and left only the kind things you said.
Gee, you think you are funny and I bet all the haters on this forum love it, but for me your posts are quite trite and boring. Best of luck entertaining the haters on this forum! I'll debate those that have something really to say.

“Engaged to the love of my life”

Since: Aug 12

Montreal

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3931
Nov 18, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

OH NO You Did not wrote:
I'll debate those that have something really to say.
If you have a valid point, I'm sure that someone would love to debate with you. So far, you've not posted a single valid point.

Since: Mar 07

The entire US of A

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3932
Nov 18, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
'Lacez' is an antonym for 'common sense.'
As usual, you avoid answering the question, and post a silly insult.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3933
Nov 18, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Quest wrote:
<quoted text>
As usual, you avoid answering the question, and post a silly insult.
I have answered the question many times. Why is it that gays don't seem to get it no matter how many times something is said. I think it's part of the mental disorder.
When that dumb Canadian says something is common sense you know you're in for a good laugh. She's really something.

“Engaged to the love of my life”

Since: Aug 12

Montreal

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3934
Nov 18, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Quest wrote:
<quoted text>
As usual, you avoid answering the question, and post a silly insult.
That's because he knows he's wrong and that he's just a big bigot.
It's funny, bigots always hate being called bigots.
It's like they hate the fact that people are calling them on their hate.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3935
Nov 18, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Lacez wrote:
<quoted text>
Rose's law it is. You don't give a shit about children
RoHo never said I didn't care about kids, you bonehead. My spouse and I have kids and they're very successful adults. What would you know about children other than you act like a 10 year old. BTW, having kids with your spouse is an impossibility because you weren't meant to be with a same sex partner, the plumbing doesn't work.

“Engaged to the love of my life”

Since: Aug 12

Montreal

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3936
Nov 18, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
I have answered the question many times. Why is it that gays don't seem to get it no matter how many times something is said. I think it's part of the mental disorder.
When that dumb Canadian says something is common sense you know you're in for a good laugh. She's really something.
Every time you refer to me as female, you dig yourself deeper into that stupid little hole of yours.
Now you're making fun of Canadians? All because you can't answer a simple question.

You constantly contradict yourself, saying you're for or against something then saying the opposite the next. We know you're like Mitt Romney and all flip-floppity.

“Engaged to the love of my life”

Since: Aug 12

Montreal

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3937
Nov 18, 2012
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
RoHo never said I didn't care about kids, you bonehead. My spouse and I have kids and they're very successful adults. What would you know about children other than you act like a 10 year old. BTW, having kids with your spouse is an impossibility because you weren't meant to be with a same sex partner, the plumbing doesn't work.
I said you don't care about kids unless they fit in your stupid little hate agenda. You REALLY can't read, for you never seem to understand simple English.

Even if we ignored the fact that same sex parents can have kids that are related to both parents, why would I care if I couldn't have kids, I don't want kids. It doesn't matter what you say, I'm still going to be married whether you like it or not.
Your hateful thinking, hiding behind the excuse of children, will not stop people from getting married. Your generation is dying out.

You can do your little charade of "I support equality but I don't," but everyone knows that you're only a little bigot who hates being called what he is.
Mona Lott

Hoboken, NJ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3938
Nov 18, 2012
 

Judged:

3

3

2

OH NO You Did not wrote:
<quoted text>
Obvious you have no idea about the proposition process. The judiciary has killed many laws and that is the reason why the Democrats fight so hard for their liberal judges, etc. It is called a "judicial activist" judge.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_activis...
"Jump to: navigation, search
Judicial activism describes judicial rulings suspected of being based on personal or political considerations rather than on existing law. It is sometimes used as an antonym of judicial restraint.[1]:1 The definition of judicial activism, and which specific decisions are activist, is a controversial political issue, particularly in the United States. This phrase is generally traced back to a comment by Thomas Jefferson, referring to the "despotic behaviour" of Federalist federal judges, in particular, John Marshall.[2] The question of judicial activism is closely related to constitutional interpretation, statutory construction, and separation of powers."
...
Definitions
Black's Law Dictionary defines judicial activism as a "philosophy of judicial decision-making whereby judges allow their personal views about public policy, among other factors, to guide their decisions."[5]
...
Detractors of judicial activism charge that it usurps the power of the elected branches of government or appointed agencies, damaging the rule of law and democracy.[12] Defenders of judicial activism say that in many cases it is a legitimate form of judicial review, and that the interpretation of the law must change with changing times.
A third view is that so-called "objective" interpretation of the law does not exist. According to law professor Brian Z. Tamanaha, "Throughout the so-called formalist age, it turns out, many prominent judges and jurists acknowledged that there were gaps and uncertainties in the law and that judges must sometimes make choices."[13]
Some proponents of a stronger judiciary argue that the judiciary helps provide checks and balances and should grant itself an expanded role to counterbalance the effects of transient majoritarianism, i.e., there should be an increase in the powers of a branch of government which is not directly subject to the electorate, so that the majority cannot dominate or oppress any particular minority through its elective powers.[
Are you retarded?

“Luke laughs at hypocrites!”

Since: Sep 10

Palm Springs, California

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3939
Nov 18, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

1

OH NO You Did not wrote:
<quoted text>
the sound of wind chimes softly making their musical charms.
Sea gulls crying overhead.
Lavender candles in a lovely room.
A cheery fireplace on a cold wet night.
Long white curtains moving softly in and out of big sunny windows,
A window seat in a restaurant on a rainy night
.
How soothing...
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3940
Nov 18, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Lacez wrote:
<quoted text>
1. Every time you refer to me as female, you dig yourself deeper into that stupid little hole of yours.
Now you're making fun of Canadians? All because you can't answer a simple question.
You constantly contradict yourself, saying you're for or against something then saying the opposite the next. We know you're like Mitt Romney and all flip-floppity.
1. If you aren't female, you should be.
2. Just you.
3. I never contradict myself, it's your piss poor reading comprehension. You see things 'between the lines' that aren't there. Not my fault.

“... from a ...”

Since: Mar 09

GREAT HEIGHT

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3941
Nov 18, 2012
 
Xyzhoturutsmail wrote:
<quoted text>You're kidding, right? The only thing lost is education, which was lost in you.
So, you are not really for gay rights, but for illegal immigrant, rapists, pedophiles, bestiality, polygamy, child incest marriages and and equal rights for all citizens. If not, then that makes you the person with HATE and BIGOTRY.
By your post I see that you do not want gays to have the same rights as pedophile, zoophiliacs and incest couples.
We all see your hate and your hatred towards your mom and dad. You devalue them and do not see their roles as critical.
You are hateful because you don't want predatory violent criminals to have the same freedom as yourself. You, of course, are exactly the same as any predatory violent criminalcriminal.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3942
Nov 18, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

It is not illegal for gays to marry anywhere in the country. The marriages simply are not recognized by the state. That's not the same as being illegal.
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
1. Gays are catching up.
2. Marriage vows are made to each other, not to God.
3. I agree, now just keep your gay BS out of the elementary schools. Straights don't care about it.
4. Easy one, it is illegal for gays to marry in most states. It's written into the state constitutions and/or there are statutes forbidding it .

“Engaged to the love of my life”

Since: Aug 12

Montreal

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3943
Nov 18, 2012
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
1. If you aren't female, you should be.
2. Just you.
3. I never contradict myself, it's your piss poor reading comprehension. You see things 'between the lines' that aren't there. Not my fault.
You like to practice your counting don't you. Petty and silly insults won't change the fact that you said you were against marriage equality, then for it as long as they don't give books to children, then still against marriage equality for no reason when you found out marriage had nothing to do with publishing books.

Please, enlighten us, why after all these times of correcting you about my sex, you still can't remember I'm a man. Please elaborate on why I should be a woman, for that comment didn't make sense either.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 3,581 - 3,600 of5,438
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

•••
•••
•••
•••