Obama Announces Full Support for Gay ...

Obama Announces Full Support for Gay Marriage

There are 26163 comments on the politix.topix.com story from May 9, 2012, titled Obama Announces Full Support for Gay Marriage. In it, politix.topix.com reports that:

It's a historic day for gay rights activists: Obama has just announced his support for gay marriage.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at politix.topix.com.

“Evolved hunter/gatherer”

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#22524 Oct 17, 2012
dances with weebles wrote:
<quoted text>
... wouldn't it be better if he invited 50 families of 4 to live in his mansion with him and eat at his table with him?
Wouldn't it be better if he gave them jobs instead so they could feed thenselves?

Is a man that is capable of creating a job and paying another's salary going to do so when he feels put upon by outside influence to forcefully take a great chunk of his stash, against his will, and give it to others?

You shoot down the very goal of your own premise.
You advocate continually giving a non-fisherman the tools to continue to drink beer in another's boat, and eat from another's table, and not their own.

“Evolved hunter/gatherer”

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#22525 Oct 17, 2012
cpeter1313 wrote:
The "rags to riches" model has never been a common phenomenon, and it is even more unlikely in this economy. The jobs simply ar4 not there. There are over 300 million people in this country--do you really think that we even print enough money for everyone to be rich? No matter how hard someone works, they are just as likely to fail as to succeed.
The vast majority of wealth in this country is held by a very small percentage; it is economically impossible to "raise up" the poor.
<quoted text>
Perhaps you should stick to arguing for your singular gay rights cause my friend, and avoid branching out into other areas. You are better at that cause and purpose.

You argue against your own point when you say > "it is economically impossible to "raise up" the poor.", but yet you do not keep that from stopping you trying, by forcefully taking from the rich and giving it to the poor. Your way KEEPS them poor.

The American dream way, creates incentive, and yes, only a few will succeed to their wildest dreams. It allows them TO dream about better days and strive to get there. Almost all of them, will in fact however, utilize that image and motivation of the American dream, to gain a footing that is a better and higher footing than they started out with and from, and THAT my friend is the goal - to keep on dreaming that dream, and keep on living the life that the dream elevates you to - whatever level that may be that the dream takes you.

Killing the dream by saying it only works for a select few is not only a travesty and a serious mistake. As an American, it is unforgivable and treachery to the American people themselves, and the principles that uphold their dreams.

You give me a shelf stocker with a dream - an American dream - and I'll show you someone capable of making history and a good living. You show me someone without a dream, and I'll give you a stock clerk , or a beggar, and nothing more.

“Evolved hunter/gatherer”

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#22526 Oct 17, 2012
cpeter1313 wrote:
Are you going to pretend that the rich do not benefit more from the government and from civil activities than the poor do? They have greater access and priority status. Why should they not pay proportionately for that?
<quoted text>
They do.
They shop in shops that you and I do not as we can not afford it.
They fly first class and I fly coach. I do not hate them for it like you do however. I strive to get to the point where I can afford it too. You do not strive for such apparently, and prefer to eliminate first class from the plane, and from our society as a whole.

Are you going to continue to pretend that the poor do not dream of flying first class some day? What happens to their dream when you forcefully remove first class from the plane? Do they then dream of handouts and next month's allowance from federal extortion money? You think that dream noble and worthy of seeking?

“Evolved hunter/gatherer”

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#22527 Oct 17, 2012
cpeter1313 wrote:
The "rags to riches" model has never been a common phenomenon, and it is even more unlikely in this economy.
Actually the rags to riches model is the ONLY one in the world sir. It is THE goal the world over my friend.

What you meant to say is that only a small percentage of people in the world ever become truly monetarily wealthy. THAT sir, is true in every single society on Earth, irregardless of their political structure, or the people in question. It always has been thus and thus twill always be.
If becoming wealthy was easy sir, there would be no such thing as the poor.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#22528 Oct 17, 2012
cpeter1313 wrote:
Are you going to pretend that the rich do not benefit more from the government and from civil activities than the poor do? They have greater access and priority status. Why should they not pay proportionately for that?
<quoted text>
i would like to argue that point. Please explain to me how the wealthy get more government than the poor.
The Troll Stopper

Roanoke, VA

#22529 Oct 17, 2012
Wow, this thread sure got completely off-topic.

“Evolved hunter/gatherer”

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#22530 Oct 17, 2012
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
Bringing others down? Surely you jest!
Suppose wealthy people acted in their own enlightened self interest. They would realize that keeping jobs and companies alive and well rather than outsourcing, is in their best interest. The same with supporting broad based health care programs rather than the shoddy parasitic insurance/big business model. More people working means more people can pay taxes and spend money, which in turn makes rich people richer. If small business owners did not bear the burden of health care and workers comp, more people would get hired. I bought a part for my Ford Truck the other day. It was made in China. I did not benefit from the fact it was made in China because the price I paid was just as much as it would cost to make it at home. The parasites profited, not me. The parasites made money rather than American workers. Get the picture?
As a business owner or a business manager for another owner, it is their specific and sole purpose to make money - to profit.
That being said, when the environment where you have your business located becomes so inhospitable to your bottom line, that a change is needed to compensate, you are forced to find product or personage to make ends meet once again, to achieve your goal of - profit.

You erroneously blame ALL business and their methodology for the failings and shortcomings of the guilty. If your neighbor owns a yellow house right next to your yellow house, are you guilty of murder because your neighbor kills his wife?

It is the classic "look over there" magic trick that you have fallen for my friend. You accuse the right hand of trickery, when it is the left hand that is pulling the fast one on you.
You blame free enterprise for the current fiasco, when the truth be known that it is the stifling of free enterprise which has created the situation ... political magicians blaming the bottle of elixir instead of blaming the drinker of the elixir.

“Evolved hunter/gatherer”

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#22531 Oct 17, 2012
dances with weebles wrote:
<quoted text>
asking those who have benefited from the system to pay for it isn't 'vilifying' them. it's asking them to give back what they've gained in order to keep the system working. not only that, but one would think that they'd be happy; even excited to have the opportunity to do so.
like i said, a person with a 5 million dollar a year income will hardly miss 4 million of it. unless one's incredibly stupid, it's impossible to waste 5 million dollars in one year, anyway... or even 1 million. i mean, how much can one eat, anyway?
Asking for an equal income tax percentage across the board solves your perceived dilemma.

“Evolved hunter/gatherer”

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#22532 Oct 17, 2012
cpeter1313 wrote:
Are you going to pretend that the rich do not benefit more from the government and from civil activities than the poor do? They have greater access and priority status. Why should they not pay proportionately for that?
<quoted text>
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>i would like to argue that point. Please explain to me how the wealthy get more government than the poor.
As well you should argue the contrary on that "point".

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#22533 Oct 18, 2012
dances with weebles wrote:
<quoted text>
oh, bullshit.
give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day.
teach a man to fish and he'll sit in a boat and drink beer all day.
you are right, though. nobody should have to 'beg' for a meal... it should be given to them gladly by those who have it. let's look at it this way. what if a man has an income of 5 million dollars a year... wouldn't it be better if he invited 50 families of 4 to live in his mansion with him and eat at his table with him?
Give me the fish.

I hate fishing.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#22534 Oct 18, 2012
Aquarius-WY wrote:
<quoted text>
As a business owner or a business manager for another owner, it is their specific and sole purpose to make money - to profit.
That being said, when the environment where you have your business located becomes so inhospitable to your bottom line, that a change is needed to compensate, you are forced to find product or personage to make ends meet once again, to achieve your goal of - profit.
You erroneously blame ALL business and their methodology for the failings and shortcomings of the guilty. If your neighbor owns a yellow house right next to your yellow house, are you guilty of murder because your neighbor kills his wife?
It is the classic "look over there" magic trick that you have fallen for my friend. You accuse the right hand of trickery, when it is the left hand that is pulling the fast one on you.
You blame free enterprise for the current fiasco, when the truth be known that it is the stifling of free enterprise which has created the situation ... political magicians blaming the bottle of elixir instead of blaming the drinker of the elixir.
What about providing goods and services? Speculation is a parasitic relationship which ultimately leads to decline.

“Evolved hunter/gatherer”

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#22536 Oct 19, 2012
dances with weebles wrote:
<quoted text>
asking those who have benefited from the system to pay for it isn't 'vilifying' them. it's asking them to give back what they've gained in order to keep the system working. not only that, but one would think that they'd be happy; even excited to have the opportunity to do so.
like i said, a person with a 5 million dollar a year income will hardly miss 4 million of it. unless one's incredibly stupid, it's impossible to waste 5 million dollars in one year, anyway... or even 1 million. i mean, how much can one eat, anyway?
"it's asking them to give back what they've gained in order to keep the system working"

What's wrong with the system?

If they gained their wealth through this system, and you think it a bad thing, then why say they must give back their gains to keeo it going?

What happened to the system?

EXACTLY how much is ONE person allowed to make in one year in order for you to say they made their "fair share"?

“Evolved hunter/gatherer”

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#22537 Oct 19, 2012
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
What about providing goods and services? Speculation is a parasitic relationship which ultimately leads to decline.
What about them?
What kind of speculation are you talking about, and what decline are you talking about?

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#22539 Oct 19, 2012
Aquarius-WY wrote:
<quoted text>
What about them?
What kind of speculation are you talking about, and what decline are you talking about?
Economies are based upon the exchange of goods and services. When too many speculators get involved, it degrades the relationship. For example, call most customer service numbers and see if you actually get service. Companies controlled by parasitic "investment groups" don't give a shit about the customers. They not only outsource manufacture but also customer service. What happened to creating jobs for our friends and neighbors right here at home?

“Evolved hunter/gatherer”

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#22541 Oct 19, 2012
cpeter1313 wrote:
...
it is economically impossible to "raise up" the poor.
<quoted text>
It is impossible to do with the money of others being given to them, and you are correct. That is why we must maintain a system that allows them to make that individual decision and accomplishmnet themselves.
It is not capitalism that is the villian here. It is the intentional rigging of the system so that it profits the rich even more.
What you advocate is to shitcan the whole enchilada of capitalism in favor of just an empty shell, when it is only the cheese (politicians) that is rotten and taints the enchilada. Tis much wiser to throw out the rotten cheese and garnish the enchilada with fresh cheese to return the palatable flavor of the enchilada.

“Evolved hunter/gatherer”

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#22542 Oct 19, 2012
cpeter1313 wrote:
Are you going to pretend that the rich do not benefit more from the government and from civil activities than the poor do? They have greater access and priority status. Why should they not pay proportionately for that?
<quoted text>
Just how is it that the rich get more from government or civil activities than the poor? The rich have greater access to what - exactly?

A flat tax percentage across the board IS in fact a proportionate payment.

“Trolls are Clueless”

Since: Dec 07

Aptos, California

#22543 Oct 19, 2012
Aquarius-WY wrote:
<quoted text>
It is impossible to do with the money of others being given to them, and you are correct. That is why we must maintain a system that allows them to make that individual decision and accomplishmnet themselves.
It is not capitalism that is the villian here. It is the intentional rigging of the system so that it profits the rich even more.
What you advocate is to shitcan the whole enchilada of capitalism in favor of just an empty shell, when it is only the cheese (politicians) that is rotten and taints the enchilada. Tis much wiser to throw out the rotten cheese and garnish the enchilada with fresh cheese to return the palatable flavor of the enchilada.
<It is not capitalism that is the villian here. It is the intentional rigging of the system so that it profits the rich even more.>

Just say no to Romney will be a good start.

“Evolved hunter/gatherer”

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#22544 Oct 19, 2012
WasteWater wrote:
<quoted text>
Bringing others down? Surely you jest!
Suppose wealthy people acted in their own enlightened self interest. They would realize that keeping jobs and companies alive and well rather than outsourcing, is in their best interest. The same with supporting broad based health care programs rather than the shoddy parasitic insurance/big business model. More people working means more people can pay taxes and spend money, which in turn makes rich people richer. If small business owners did not bear the burden of health care and workers comp, more people would get hired. I bought a part for my Ford Truck the other day. It was made in China. I did not benefit from the fact it was made in China because the price I paid was just as much as it would cost to make it at home. The parasites profited, not me. The parasites made money rather than American workers. Get the picture?
Was it a Chinese person that delivered that part to your doorstep?
Was it a Chinese person that sold the fuel to the delivery person for their truck?
Did you not benefit from the part itself?
What makes you think that the price would be the same if it was made in America?
Did you not just get through saying that it is greed that makes them outsource? If the price is the same either way in your mind, where is the greed in that example?

“Evolved hunter/gatherer”

Since: Jan 08

Location hidden

#22545 Oct 19, 2012
LuLu Ford wrote:
<quoted text>
<It is not capitalism that is the villian here. It is the intentional rigging of the system so that it profits the rich even more.>
Just say no to Romney will be a good start.
Why? So that our industries can be owned by the government instead of your neighbor?

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#22546 Oct 19, 2012
Aquarius-WY wrote:
<quoted text>
Was it a Chinese person that delivered that part to your doorstep?
Was it a Chinese person that sold the fuel to the delivery person for their truck?
Did you not benefit from the part itself?
What makes you think that the price would be the same if it was made in America?
Did you not just get through saying that it is greed that makes them outsource? If the price is the same either way in your mind, where is the greed in that example?
American parts are often unavailable. Yes, the price would be exactly the same or less if it were made here. The point is, people like Romney are involved in American business and they don't give a shit about anyone.

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 Pence visits Focus on Family amid change for re... 3 min Wondering 5
News California AG bans state travel to Texas, 3 oth... 9 min Frankie Rizzo 45
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 21 min Frankie Rizzo 51,194
News 'Free Kim Davis': This is just what gay rights ... (Sep '15) 23 min Frankie Rizzo 26,385
News Doritos makes rainbow chips in support of gay r... (Sep '15) 59 min neighbor 1,851
J-Aid File 1 hr Rooster 1
JADE NE ARCHIVEs 1 hr Yoda 3
Mississippi can enforce LGBT religious objecti... 2 hr Jose 5
More from around the web