Obama Announces Full Support for Gay ...

Obama Announces Full Support for Gay Marriage

There are 26162 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.

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#12344 Jul 12, 2012
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks for bringing up the worst scenarios in which to bring up kids to compare yourselves to....
Single and divorced parents are the "worst scenarios" in which to bring up kids? LOL, I'm betting these many people would disagree with you bigot:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genie_ (feral_child)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fritzl_case

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alvarez_case

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lydia_Gouardo

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongelli_case

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linz_sisters

Everytime you make STUPID bigoted statements like that, it further demonstrates why your opinions aren't to be taken any more seriously then the rantings of a 5 year old.

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#12345 Jul 12, 2012
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
Hopefully this upcoming session in the fall or soon thereafter....
Maybe after Romney's elected, we can get rid of Gingsburg....she's a straight left-wing nutcase....(no pun intended)
"After Romney's elected"

LOL!!!! ROTFLMFAO!!!!!!!

Given his magic underwear will protect him, do you think we can convert the underground security bunkers into something that will produce some revenue??!!

LOL!!!! "After Romney's elected"!!!! Oh, that's a good one. My sides are aching!!!!!!
1 post removed

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#12347 Jul 12, 2012
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't understand that two gay people can't make a baby together???
No, we understand that quite well. It's hard not to actually since you make that statement about every fourth of fifth post.

What you don't understand is that two gay people aren't required to make a baby together. No one entering into marriage is. NOT ONE COUPLE, EVER.

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#12348 Jul 12, 2012
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
Still trying to ride in on someone else's coattails, huh???
Actually no bitch. If you weren't so interested in trying to type out your rhetoric at a franetic pace, you would be able to comprehend that the comparison wasn't with those being denied marriage, but with those fighting to prevent it. The post was about you dearie, not me you stupid cow!!
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
Even 'you' know you can't stand on your own arguments....
My argument was accurate and stood just fine. Your obfuscatory attempt to misquote me didn't fool anyone. Everyone here already knows your a deceitful, lying sack of shyt! Smile!

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#12349 Jul 12, 2012
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
Doesn't matter, in theory, they can still have children...they are a man and a woman......
ss couples will never have kids together.....
I'm not talking theory. I'm talking reality. SS coules aren't required to have kids together. No one is.

As always, you got NOTHING.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#12350 Jul 12, 2012
cpeter1313 wrote:
Actually, it didn't say he felt trapped in the wrong body; it says he liked certain aspects of the traditional female lifestyle (which is itself ridiculous.)
If he actually identified as female, he would be considered transgendered. A lesbian is a woman who is attracted to other women. You might as well call a white person who likes to tan an african-american.
<quoted text>
What would a white person, born and raised in South Africa, whose family has lived there for several generations, be called after he became a U.S. citizen? An "African-American", South African American, Afrikaaner American, etc.?

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#12351 Jul 12, 2012
OMG!!!!! You heard it here first!!!

I stated:
Jonah1 wrote:
I know that a couple that includes a woman who has had a hysterectomy cannot procreate in ACTUALITY nor in THEORY. She's still not denied the right to marry.
To which Dingbat Fool responded:
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
Doesn't matter, in theory, they can still have children...they are a man and a woman......
ss couples will never have kids together.....
LOL!!!!! You heard it here first people!!!! According to Dingbat fool, a woman with no uterus, no cervix, no ovaries and no fallopian tubes can still produce a child in theory!!!!!!!!

LOL!!!!!!!!!! OMG!!!!!!!

Well, fortunately for this miraculous woman, she doen't need to!!! Just like gays don't need to. Just like NO ONE needs to!!!!

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#12352 Jul 12, 2012
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
This whole nightmare will be over soon....
Yes it will, and you, like most bigots, won't like the outcome!!!!

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#12353 Jul 12, 2012
Jonah1 wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not talking theory. I'm talking reality. SS coules aren't required to have kids together. No one is.
As always, you got NOTHING.
Well, that's why you would would be incorrect...since 'in theory' a man/woman couple can procreate, where a ss couple will never...there is very 'real' distinction....

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#12354 Jul 12, 2012
cpeter1313 wrote:
He's the opposite of a black hole--everything escapes him.
<quoted text>
Flattery will get you no where.

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#12355 Jul 12, 2012
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow! What don't you all get about 'theory' and 'actuality'??? In theory, any man and woman can procreate..whether or not they 'actually' do is neither here nor there.
There is no 'theory' that ss couples can procreate, because they can not....
Wow! What don't YOU get about the "actuality" that NO ONE IS REQUIRED TO PROCREATE in order to marry?

And no you complete dingbat, "ANY man and woman" most certainly cannot procreate.

Hey, here's an idea! Why don't you come back to the room once precreation is established as a mandate for marriage!!!!!

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#12356 Jul 12, 2012
Jonah1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually no bitch. If you weren't so interested in trying to type out your rhetoric at a franetic pace, you would be able to comprehend that the comparison wasn't with those being denied marriage, but with those fighting to prevent it. The post was about you dearie, not me you stupid cow!!
<quoted text>
My argument was accurate and stood just fine. Your obfuscatory attempt to misquote me didn't fool anyone. Everyone here already knows your a deceitful, lying sack of shyt! Smile!
I must have brought the 'tolerance' out of you on this one??? Why the name-calling???? Aren't you supposed to be an adult??? Maybe not...

I don't need to 'misquote' anyone...you get mad because you can not argue the point on its merits, so you resort to a hissy-fit and name-calling...yeah, that's the way...

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#12357 Jul 12, 2012
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
I think they will take them both...
Well, given that you also think that a woman with no uterus, cervix, ovaries, and no fallopian tubes can somehow magically produce a baby!!!

You've proven that what "you think" isn't really worth much consideration!!!

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#12358 Jul 12, 2012
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
What would a white person, born and raised in South Africa, whose family has lived there for several generations, be called after he became a U.S. citizen? An "African-American", South African American, Afrikaaner American, etc.?
I guess they would be a South African American...as they will likely have to make that distinction from African Americans....

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#12359 Jul 12, 2012
Jonah1 wrote:
OMG!!!!! You heard it here first!!!
I stated:
<quoted text>
To which Dingbat Fool responded:
<quoted text>
LOL!!!!! You heard it here first people!!!! According to Dingbat fool, a woman with no uterus, no cervix, no ovaries and no fallopian tubes can still produce a child in theory!!!!!!!!
LOL!!!!!!!!!! OMG!!!!!!!
Well, fortunately for this miraculous woman, she doen't need to!!! Just like gays don't need to. Just like NO ONE needs to!!!!
I'm enjoying 'every ignorant moment' of this....

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#12360 Jul 12, 2012
Jonah1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes it will, and you, like most bigots, won't like the outcome!!!!
We will see who doesn't like the outcome.....

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#12361 Jul 12, 2012
Jonah1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow! What don't YOU get about the "actuality" that NO ONE IS REQUIRED TO PROCREATE in order to marry?
And no you complete dingbat, "ANY man and woman" most certainly cannot procreate.
Hey, here's an idea! Why don't you come back to the room once precreation is established as a mandate for marriage!!!!!
Who said 'anyone' was 'required'???? Not me...

Who says two people have to be in love to marry????

“Crusading Fundies r hilarious!”

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#12362 Jul 12, 2012
Get That Fool wrote:
<quoted text>
Nobody said the truth was easy to accept....
How would someone that doesn't employ or use truth know anything about its acceptance?

“You Get My Truth Here!”

Since: May 09

Nonya!

#12363 Jul 12, 2012
Jonah1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, given that you also think that a woman with no uterus, cervix, ovaries, and no fallopian tubes can somehow magically produce a baby!!!
You've proven that what "you think" isn't really worth much consideration!!!
(Smile)....

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#12364 Jul 12, 2012
cpeter1313 wrote:
Because that isn't how the law works. If something is relevant to a law or legal process, it has to be included in the verbiage of the law. No marriage law mentions reproduction in any way,and all laws concerning offspring are valid regardless of marital status of the parents.
You may have a popular perception of the process, but there is no legal reason whatsoever to disenfranchise american citizens from the legal processes their peers enjoy.
<quoted text>
Why would it need to mention that which occurs naturally? Are you implying because ssm is legal in a few states, all of a sudden every previous legal reference, case law, gender specific language, as it relates to conjugal, as in husband and wife, marriage, disappears? No more bride and groom, no more presumption of paternity, no more consumation of the marriage, no more "marital relations", no more.......

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.

US Politics Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Arpaio pardon fallout 27 min ardith 9
News Conservative Lawmaker Quits Congress After Disc... 30 min ardith 25
News Roy Moore vehemently denies sexual misconduct 31 min hawaiian punch 108
News Many Christian conservatives are backing Alabam... 33 min hawaiian punch 1,094
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 1 hr mdbuilder 1,655,545
News Senate Democrats stand united against GOP tax bill 1 hr Quirky 177
News Black New York legislator denounces Trump's dec... 1 hr Ms Sassy 10
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing (Mar '17) 1 hr Judge Roy Bongo 45,662
News What would Jesus say about same-sex marriage? (Jul '15) 5 hr Rose_NoHo 14,690
More from around the web