Paul Ryan promises hate group that he...

Paul Ryan promises hate group that he'll fight equality

There are 5436 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.

Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#5975 Jan 3, 2013
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
Congratulations, Wonderbread, you found a typo... Or did you just create one where one never existed before? You see, the question wouldn't have to be asked, if you didn't regularly edit the posts you choose to respond to to make it appear as though others have said things that they have in fact not said.
Wow, JD, you don't have to ask a question, I gave you the quote:
"did you notice that the have" ??? I edit out the stupid things you say if I don't find humor in them. I leave the funny stupid things you say intact. You keep confusing typos with brain farts. You suffer from chronic brain farts.

It is EXACTLY what you said. Once again,
What does that mean? "did you notice that the have" ???

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#5976 Jan 3, 2013
Are we discussing grammar or gay rights? Can the bigot please try and focus?

Nobody is making kids watch gay porn. You are blowing this all out of proportion. Do you know what the kids are actually being taught or shown?
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#5977 Jan 3, 2013
EmpAtheist wrote:
Are we discussing grammar or gay rights? Can the bigot please try and focus?
Nobody is making kids watch gay porn. You are blowing this all out of proportion. Do you know what the kids are actually being taught or shown?
Schools shouldn't be making kids watch gay anything.
You already have the same rights as everyone else.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#5978 Jan 3, 2013
School is about children; parenting is about supporting the child's education. Parents don't control the curriculum.
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
I am pretty sure that "Little Black Sambo" is banned just like the gay story books should be. School is definately about the parents and their children. Involved parents make better schools.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#5979 Jan 3, 2013
cpeter1313 wrote:
School is about children; parenting is about supporting the child's education. Parents don't control the curriculum.
<quoted text>
They do when it's about gays. See:
Gay Curriculum Proposal Riles Elementary School Parents
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,521209,00...
Erie Community Unit School District
http://godfatherpolitics.com/6054/illinois-sc...

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#5980 Jan 3, 2013
The first story indicates that the parents in fact don't control the curriculum.

The second shows the effects of politics on education. Apparently it's okay for a kindergartener to use "fa" but not to teach why it's inappropriate. The argument that it should be taught at home means it won't be taught at home. These are the same kind of incompetent parents who object to sex ed and end up wih pregnant teens.
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
They do when it's about gays. See:
Gay Curriculum Proposal Riles Elementary School Parents
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,521209,00...
Erie Community Unit School District
http://godfatherpolitics.com/6054/illinois-sc...

Since: Apr 11

Santa Monica, CA

#5981 Jan 3, 2013
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
I did answer it:
"I was demonstrating that I could right stupid comments at your level."
Still don't get it?
It has nothing to do with the question I asked.
Why did you assume I don't know who my dad was?
As predicted, you keep dodging.

Since: Apr 11

Santa Monica, CA

#5983 Jan 3, 2013
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok, let's assume that there is a gay kid in every elementary school classroom and we are in cpeter1313's pathetic underfunded and overcrowded school district. Why do the parents of the other 29 or more kids have no voice? Why are you against choice? Why would straight parents want their kids to read gay story books? Who would benefit from this practice? How would they benefit?
LOL. You are such an idiot.
Why do you assume every parent who doesn't have a gay child is a homophobe like you? Would you kill your child if you found out he was gay? That's another question you keep dodging.
I'm not against choice. People can choose to take their kids out of class for any reason. I'm all for that. But I think it's good for all kids to know gay people exist, we might end up with fewer horrible, ignorant people like you who might end up beating/killing their kids if they find out they are gay.

Since: Apr 11

Santa Monica, CA

#5984 Jan 3, 2013
Patrick wrote:
<quoted text>
...racist comment...
Reported, "Wondering".

Since: Apr 11

Santa Monica, CA

#5985 Jan 3, 2013
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
The imbecile, Justice Dumbass, apparently doesn't know what it means either. Would you like to try again or would you rather play with your alphabet blocks?
What does that mean? "did you notice that the have" ???
What does "I was demonstrating that I could right stupid comments at your level." Is that like righting a wrong? Or was it as opposed to "left stupid comments"?
Look at post 5963.

Since: Apr 11

Santa Monica, CA

#5986 Jan 3, 2013
cpeter1313 wrote:
Because school isn't about the parents; it's about the children--ALL of them. Reading a variety of literature opens the child to critical thinking in a manner no other class can.
If there is only one black kid in a class of thirty, would it be okay to put "Little Black Sambo" on the reading list?
<quoted text>
Trivia: "Little Black Sambo" is a story about an Indian (from India, not Native American) boy. The author was English, and they called Indian people "black" back in those days.

“Luke laughs at hypocrites!”

Since: Sep 10

Palm Springs, California

#5987 Jan 3, 2013
Rose_NoHo wrote:
<quoted text>
Trivia: "Little Black Sambo" is a story about an Indian (from India, not Native American) boy. The author was English, and they called Indian people "black" back in those days.
I so recall that story. It was a morality play, about how the crafty tigers tricked Sambo into handing over his valuables. Later, he tricked the tigers into running in a circle till they melted into butter.

Recall the diner chain called "Sambo's"?
Jane Dough

Montpelier, VT

#5988 Jan 4, 2013
Mona Lott wrote:
<quoted text>Is that red herring supposed to mean anything other than to demonstrate what a nitwit you are?
funny it was the same as your question...
consistency is not your virtue...
Jane DoDo

Hoboken, NJ

#5990 Jan 4, 2013
Jane Dough wrote:
<quoted text>
funny it was the same as your question...
consistency is not your virtue...
trite non-answer
and what does "consistency" have to do with this, ya retard?

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#5991 Jan 4, 2013
This case would be the same regardless if the couple were gay or straight; the state is seeking compensation for monies based on the legal fatherhood of the donor. The problem is that these people didn't go through the proper legal procedures, which would have obviated the case altogether.
Jane Dough wrote:
they love to play family until the bill comes due:
http://news.yahoo.com/child-support-claim-ran...
"KANSAS CITY, Kansas (Reuters)- A Kansas man who donated sperm to a lesbian couple so they could have a child said on Wednesday he is shocked the state is now trying to make him pay child support.
William Marotta, 46, donated sperm to Jennifer Schreiner and Angela Bauer under a written agreement that he would not be considered the father of the child nor liable for child support. A daughter, now 3, was born to Schreiner.
But in October, the state of Kansas filed a petition seeking to have Marotta declared the father of the child and financially responsible for her after the couple encountered money difficulties.
Marotta will ask the court in a hearing January 8 to dismiss the claim, which centers on a state law that the sperm must be donated through a licensed physician in order for the father to be free of any later financial obligations. Marotta gave a container of semen to the couple, who found him on Craigslist, instead of donating through a doctor or clinic.
The case is seen as having repercussions for other sperm donors. Sperm banks routinely provide sperm to people who want to conceive a child on the understanding that the donors are not responsible for the children.
Kansas is seeking child support from Marotta, including about $6,000 in medical expenses related to the child's birth, according to its petition.
"This was totally unexpected," Marotta said in a phone interview. "The very first thing that went through my mind was that no good deed goes unpunished."
The case has attracted national attention. Shannon Minter, legal director for the National Center for Lesbian Rights, said Wednesday "it is unfortunate and unfair" that Kansas is seeking money from a sperm donor.
"It certainly might have a negative effect on other men's willingness to help couples who need a donor, which would be harmful to everyone," Minter said.
"I also think it undermines everyone's respect for the law when you see it operate so arbitrarily."
Kansas officials are required under the law to determine the father of a child when someone seeks state benefits, said Angela de Rocha, spokeswoman for the Department for Children and Families. The couple was compelled to provide that information, which led to investigation of the sperm donation.
Marotta should be declared the father and subject to financial claims because he donated the sperm directly to the women and not through a physician, as required by Kansas law, the state's petition states.
Marotta said he's had virtually no contact with the child, but that he and Schreiner have remained cordial. He said she was pressured by the state to provide his name as the sperm donor.
"To me, ethics need to override rules," he said.
Lawyers for Marotta argue that he had no parental rights because of his agreement with the couple and cannot be held financially responsible.
They cite a 2007 case in which the Kansas Supreme Court ruled against a sperm donor seeking parental rights because he did not have any such agreement with the mother, lawyers for Marotta said.
"So now, we are flipping the argument around," Marotta attorney Ben Swinnen said Wednesday.
If the father had no legal parental rights in the 2007 case, Marotta should be declared to have no parental obligations in the current case, Swinnen said.
...
Jane Dough

Montpelier, VT

#5992 Jan 4, 2013
Jane DoDo wrote:
<quoted text>trite non-answer
and what does "consistency" have to do with this, ya retard?
I do wonder how low you will sink...
but its fun to watch!

do you use that people can get a marriage license as support for you position?

YES..
so why attack my use of the same argument?

Because you are a dumb and angry troll?

yup, that's it!

but speaking of trite non-answers, what did you do as a job for GE?

back to you...
(ring)
Jane Dough

Montpelier, VT

#5993 Jan 4, 2013
cpeter1313 wrote:
This case would be the same regardless if the couple were gay or straight; the state is seeking compensation for monies based on the legal fatherhood of the donor. The problem is that these people didn't go through the proper legal procedures, which would have obviated the case altogether.
<quoted text>
right, it was the way they donated the sperm that mattered, not that the couple was obviously infertile and so they needed to find a "dad"...a straight couple could have covered...

and do notice the lesbians were automatically seeking public aid?

how does that jibe with your just so stories about gays...
I guess the family was missing a primary breadwinner...and they figured we should take care of their contrived child...

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#5994 Jan 4, 2013
Jane dear, the child could not be covered under the family's existing health coverage, because her mother had lost her job and the baby could not be added to they already have been paying for their other SEVEN children. So they sought a medical card for their newborn, they were seeking no further public assistance for her and their family other than that one benefit the child would readily qualify for given the family's current circumstances. Some bureaucrat saw themselves an opportunity to exercise a loophole in the law that these parents had no idea existed and they ran with it. The state of Kansas is now punishing this child, her mothers and the donor for no other reason than the law lets them do it.
Jane Dough

Montpelier, VT

#5995 Jan 4, 2013
Rick in Kansas wrote:
Jane dear, the child could not be covered under the family's existing health coverage, because her mother had lost her job and the baby could not be added to they already have been paying for their other SEVEN children. So they sought a medical card for their newborn, they were seeking no further public assistance for her and their family other than that one benefit the child would readily qualify for given the family's current circumstances. Some bureaucrat saw themselves an opportunity to exercise a loophole in the law that these parents had no idea existed and they ran with it. The state of Kansas is now punishing this child, her mothers and the donor for no other reason than the law lets them do it.
Rick sweetie, you are only showing how selfish these ladies have been...
SEVEN kids, and they still had to MAKE them with sperm from a dude they didn't want to know...
sounds juts great,. right? a mockery of "family" is what it is...

and they are NOT punishing the child at all, they are punishing the man who provided sperm...under the law, he is still a FATHER!

see how that works hon?

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#5996 Jan 4, 2013
My father's parents had 12 children, were they being selfish too?

Dear, they are punishing the child, there is no medical card until the support issue is resolved. Period.

In this case, much like yourself, the law is just being an ass because it can be.

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.

Mitt Romney Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Romney Slams Trump's 'Unfortunate' Remarks on I... 6 hr tod see the light 7
News Lindsey Graham: Republicans will lose in 2016 i... 11 hr xxxrayted 11
News President takes victory lap on Supreme Court Ob... 17 hr Le Jimbo 14
News Perry Drops 'Vulture Capitalism' from Speech (Jan '12) Jul 1 Calgary Anti-Xeno 18
News Fiorina: GOP Nominee Must - Throw Punches at Hi... Jul 1 Miss Id 1
News Race and Beyond: Let's Talk About Race and Poverty (Oct '12) Jul 1 Human 44
News 'Mormon Rivals' -- After 2012 defeat, Romney fa... Jul 1 Share your Harem 2
More from around the web