Whenever I see “common sense” I shudder
I know, I know, we already beat the Marriage thing to death, but a Letter to the Editor in NJ This past SUNDAY (ironically) revisited it and the person writing the letter made a great point:
A majority of Americans have supported the Marriage Protection Amendment in every state where it has been put up to a vote because it is straightforward and common sense. With this bill in place, the courts cannot force our churches to marry same sex couples or lose their tax-free status, or possibly be sued.
The point? Oh, that this lady is an idiot. I’m half inclined to think it was David Anderson penning it.
Question: Deliberately lying or just tragically misinformed?
If she listen’s to Rick Jensen she is “Deliberately misinformed.”
You mean like what he’s doing right now? I’m personally tired of listening to him, day after day, insist that anyone who took campaign contributions from AIG must be in the bag for them. Nobody ever calls to ask him for evidence, of course.
I think the theory is that if you say it often enough and loud enough no one needs any stinking evidence…
It’s really their last gasp. Gay marriage is only a matter of time… and everybody knows it.
It’s really their last gasp. Gay marriage is only a matter of time… and everybody knows it.
I’m soo looking forward to being forced to marry gay.
Beware of the conflation between donations from private individuals who work for X, and those from X, by way of a PAC.
They are not the same, but if you do a search of contributors by employer, it will be grouped first, and then separated by individual and company.
So regarding complaints from either side of the aisle and campaign contributions are supposed to be an aggravating factor, if there is no disclaimer stating the difference, then be sure, or at least assume, the complaints are subjective, and usually misleading, in nature.
Here’s the silliness in reverse:
Joe P works for PETA and is a personal friend of McCain. He contributes 2k to McCampaign; so I pen a column stating that PETA supports the GOP candidate just because someone who works there gave money.
Oh, and that woman’s certainty of Common Sense is laughable!
good point von cracker
oh…and….nice name
Those that are the most ignorant are often the most certain. I have certainly witnessed that!
I read that the wingnuttosphere has gone wacky over one of Obama’s judge nominations – saying he was bought and paid for by ACORN (cue evil-sounding music). Apparently he was a fundraiser for ACORN for 2 weeks when he was 22 years old, in 1979.
Nemski,
I’m looking foward to forcing my bosatsu to officiate at my gay wedding. Then I might just force him to look at some porn. Although I’m not sure.
I have not worked through the details yet.
“It’s really their last gasp. Gay marriage is only a matter of time… and everybody knows it.”
Prepare to be surprised.
And by surprised I mostly mean wait around while nothing happens.
DV – I crush your head – pinch, pinch!
Hate to bust this person’s party, or anyone else who stands with her, but I already detailed how the FIRST AMENDMENT of the US Constitution would itself have to be AMENDED to force organized religion to even so much as recognize, let alone perform/execute gay marriages: read it here. This is not to mention that the ACLU has already put itself in position to DEFEND religious institutions as well, in this regard.
It’s…raining…BRIMSTONE! YAAAHHHH!!!
👿
😈
get to work deadbeat
Just for you, I shall repeat…
😈
Still, there is a legitimate issue to be concerned with there. remember that the Supreme COurt ruled that private schools that practiced racial segregation could not be tax-exempt charities because of their opposition to the fundamental public policy of non-discrimination. Will churches that refuse to perform gay marriages suddenly find themselves similarly disadvantaged at some point, especially if a court rules there is a constitutional right to gay marriage (citing, perhaps, the Fourteenth Amendment)? It is a point to consider.