Powered by TypePad

« Empower The Rich! | Main | Gay Marriage Brain Lock »

March 26, 2013

Comments

lyle

Of course the resident lesbian has integrity....

Aren't you missing a conditional word here?

She sure didn't show she possessed any with Obamacare.

Captain Hate

DrJ, I assumed you were a man; am I wrong? I wanted to know what women preferred but I understand, and agree with, how it provides a non-offensive by being non-specific greeting when corresponding.

Threadkiller

"Sen. Susan Collins, ranking member on the Homeland Security Committee, and Rep. Carolyn Maloney of the House Oversight Committee suggested having more female agents could help avoid such scandals.

On ABC's "This Week," Sen. Susan Collins, a ranking member of the Senate's Homeland Security Committee, wondered aloud whether more female agents within the Secret Service's ranks would deter such bad behavior.

"I can't help but wonder if there'd been more women as part of that detail if this ever would have happened," Collins said, calling for the agency to recruit more women and minorities."

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/secret-sex-scandal-congressional-members-call-wider-probe-001252319.html

The party is over.

Chubby

((Tammy Bruce is pro homo marriage and stated that states that have approved initiatives approving them have included language giving churches exemptions from being forced to perform them.))

and once upon a time a whole bunch of people signed on to the DOMA and now they've all changed their mind. A piece of paper with a bunch of language on it is no guarantee of anything.

hit and run


Pictured: Secret Service Julia

Clarice

I don't think that our constitution would permit that .CH, but in Scandinavia I think the govt can mandate church compliance. I recall ministers being prosecuted there for preaching against homosexuality.

Porchlight

Tammy Bruce is pro homo marriage and stated that states that have approved initiatives approving them have included language giving churches exemptions from being forced to perform them.

Not sure if this is universally true, but even if it were, "free exercise of religion" does not stop at churches, though that's what the Obama HHS would like us to believe re: contraception mandates. See Gideon7's 2:32:

Once the full force of the State is behind gay marriage the next step will be to force it to be normative in all public discourse. For example, next the State will force wedding cake makers and photographers to work at gay weddings regardless of their religious convictions (this has already happened). Later, any church pastor who condemns gay marriage from the pulpit will be persecuted for hate crimes (already happening in Canada and Europe).

Major impact in the public schools too, of course. A family headed by a gay couple will have to be shown every time a family headed by a straight couple is shown; etc. etc.

bgates

The Judeo-Christian culture has for 4,000 years maintained a preferential option for the nuclear family.

Between 2000 and 3000, surely. King David was ~1000BC. Strange that polygamy is effectively endorsed in the older parts of the Old Testament, then it just disappears. Does anybody know why the Jews discontinued the practice?

Threadkiller

"A piece of paper with a bunch of language on it is no guarantee of anything."

This is what I have been saying about Article 2.

Rob Crawford
Tammy Bruce is pro homo marriage and stated that states that have approved initiatives approving them have included language giving churches exemptions from being forced to perform them.

Tammy the Bruce should do some research. Illinois used its Orwellian titled "Civil Unions and Religious [Something] Protection Act" as a hammer to drive Catholic Charities out of adoptions. Multiple private individuals have been sued for declining to provide services (photography, baking) for gay marriage ceremonies.

Sure, the progs will make noises about protecting the "churches". Then they'll persecute the believers.

narciso

Things that make you go, hmm;

http://twitchy.com/2013/03/26/what-about-jobs-some-citizens-wonder-why-gay-marriage-is-on-the-front-burner/

it's basically another form of 'bread and circuses' while we enjoy funenployment, and the extra chocolate rations.

Rob Crawford
Does anybody know why the Jews discontinued the practice?

Someone finally said, "Wait. You mean with one wife I only have one mother-in-law?"

Rob Crawford

The left would be perfectly happy with churches that preach the progressive gospel. They will never be happy so long as even a single person openly expresses disagreement with them.

narciso

Hilde Benjamin, the real version of Rosa Klebb, featured in 'Europe Central' , wrote the East German law, that mandated children be raised in the socialist manner,

cathyf
Question to the JOM wimmenz: What do you think of Ms.? I thought it was kind of stupid in a PC look-at-me-for-no-good-reason-just-because kind of way, but I'm not directly impacted by it. So have at it; I'll acquiesce to the majority. Maybe.
Well, "Ms" is a title, and it has the advantage of not being overly specific. If Mary Smith marries John Jones, then she can accurately be described as "Ms Smith" "Ms Jones" or "Mrs Jones". Other variations -- "Miss Smith" "Miss Jones" or "Mrs Smith" -- are just going to get you into trouble. If your goal is to address "Mary Smith" or "Mary Jones" politely and you are TOTALLY UNINTERESTED in the details of her marital arrangements, stick with the safe honorific.
matt

But Jane;

If a judge has shares in a company with a case before the bench or has a family member involved in a case or has property at stake in litigation before him or her, are those not legitimate and well accepted reasons for recusal?

If one is engaged in a relationship that would benefit from a change in the law or the application thereof, isn't that a legitimate reason?

The sea change is artificial and programmed by a full scale propaganda campaign.All the right people think, if you will.

But the most recent poll by Pew or whomever still indicated that the number of GLBT's in the population has been stable at 3-4% but their voice is much stronger from what we've seen.

And how does a society deal with people who are unstable in their sexuality?

Bisexuality is clearly indecisive, and would be so in a relationship. Today boys, tomorrow girls certainly sends out a mixed message. Transgenders are by definition not what they seemed to be however far along they are in the process.

Polyandry? Sheep? Pederasty? Society has always drawn certain lines, but without a moral foundation there is no basis.

Rob Crawford
If your goal is to address "Mary Smith" or "Mary Jones" politely and you are TOTALLY UNINTERESTED in the details of her marital arrangements, stick with the safe honorific.

"Hey, you!"

matt

Re; Jewish Polygamy....could you just imagine having two Jewish mothers???

Somewhere way back when someone understood the odds stacked against the Jewish male and evened them out.

narciso

And Sgt. Schultz, reveals himself to be the epitome of an Uruk hai Orc, on another matters.

Porchlight

Sure, the progs will make noises about protecting the "churches". Then they'll persecute the believers.

It probably won't be but half a minute before the state refuses to issue licenses to perform marriages to anyone whom they suspect might refuse to marry gays. Or start revoking the licenses of those who already do refuse.

Threadkiller

Should the Jewish and Catholic Justices recuse themselves based on their respective religions view of traditional marriage?

Chubby

((Does anybody know why the Jews discontinued the practice? ))

because between the Persian period and the Roman period was the Greek period, and Greek culture (which I've read exalted homosexuality) was always monogomous, with one man one woman marriages. Apparently the Grecian law was not in any way incongruous with the Ten Commandments, so why not adopt it. (The Jews' outstanding patriarch Moses had only one wife I believe. )

cathyf
If one is engaged in a relationship that would benefit from a change in the law or the application thereof, isn't that a legitimate reason [for Kagan to recuse herslef] ?
Well, if you want to argue that gay marriage has an effect on heterosexual marriage, then, by the same argument, all of the members of the court married to a member of the opposite sex should recuse themselves, too.

Under that logic, maybe the real objection is that the heterosexual justices only have 87.5% of the votes while representing 96-97% of the population. So we can fix that by giving the 7 het judges 4 votes each and Kagan only one, right? Why not plunge headlong merrily along at our infinite fracturing along racial/gender/tribal lines?

Chubby

The Romans, who copied Greek culture to a large extent, also had monogomous marriages.

Dave (in MA)
it's basically another form of 'bread and circuses' while we enjoy funenployment, and the extra chocolate rations.
You'll be able to have an unemployed same-sex husband instead of an unemployed same-sex live-in partner.
Chubby

((I don't think that our constitution would permit that .CH, ))

how could someone have the right to marry but not have the right to be ordained as a minister or priest? any church that tries to disallow it will be sued to hell and back

narciso

We understand this is about dismantling institutions, out of the same wurlitzer of Soros and company, that Clarice outlined, it doesn't matter the meme they use to push it.

Just the false flag presented by this fellow in the LUN, tied to the Hagel nomination.

Clarice

"Does anybody know why the Jews discontinued the practice?"

Can't be sure, but i you read about David and Absalom you can get the idea of the sort of chaos that is endemic in polygamy.

Clarice

Very disturbing:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/sns-rt-us-usa-studentloans-delinquencybre92o11k-20130325,0,6746534.story#.UVH2tBfX8vw.facebook

cathyf

Actually you can make a reasonable argument (more or less made by Carmen Bin Laden) that Osama Bin Laden is a product of the inherent evils of polygamy.

Captain Hate

Most of the people I 'friend' on Facebook, aside from JOMers, are flying the pink equal sign. I think I'll stay away for a while.

Danube of Thought on iPad

"I don't think a gay person should have to recuse herself because she is gay."

No more than a straight Justice should.

Captain Hate

Major impact in the public schools too, of course. A family headed by a gay couple will have to be shown every time a family headed by a straight couple is shown; etc. etc.

Aren't they fairly close to that now?

Chubby

((Someone finally said, "Wait. You mean with one wife I only have one mother-in-law?"))

lol!!!!!@

Porchlight

Aren't they fairly close to that now?

Sometimes, but post-legalization, it will be mandated across the board, and no one will have any grounds to complain.

Danube of Thought on iPad

"This is what I have been saying about Article 2."

What you, Breckenridge Long and Leo Donofrio have been saying as that it has a meaning that eceryone else says it doesn't have.

Danube of Thought on iPad

Saying *is*

Janet

The Bible doesn't endorse polygamy. It was practiced & written about...but the Bible doesn't endorse it.

Clarice

Yes, you can, cathyf.

Threadkiller

A stupid twisat says what?

Cruz, a constitutional lawyer, is unequivocal on the question. His press secretary, Catherine Frazier, tells NATIONAL REVIEW ONLINE that, while a 2016 run is far from his mind right now — he’s “fully focused on his role representing Texans in the U.S. Senate” — there should be no confusion about his presidential eligibility. “He is a U.S. citizen by birth, having been born in Calgary to an American-born mother,” Frazier says.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/343914/cruz-birthers-eliana-johnson

un·e·quiv·o·cal /ˌəniˈkwivəkəl/ :Adjective Leaving no doubt; unambiguous: "an unequivocal answer".

Hmm. So why no quotes around the no confusion part of the press secretary's statement? That leaves some doubt as to what she really said.

More:

The Cruz birthers, though, will evidently need more convincing.

So much worry over a tiny group of asylum dwelling fringe loons.

Clarice

Latest in Martin case from Orlando Sentinel:

"Tuesday, for the second time in as many days, defense attorneys asked Circuit Judge Debra S. Nelson to sanction prosecutors, accusing them of another rule violation.

This time was a fight over whether to video record the deposition of the state's most important witness, a young Miami woman who was on the phone with Trayvon moments before he was shot.

Her deposition was scheduled for 9 a.m. March 13 at a state office in Miami, and the parties were in place, along with a camera and operator, according to new paperwork filed by defense attorney Mark O'Mara, but Assistant State Attorney Bernie de la Rionda said no to the video recording.

That happened after defense attorneys had sent two deposition notices to the state, spelling out that the session would be videotaped and identifying the company that would do the recording.

Defense attorneys tried for five hours that day to get de la Rionda to change his position, telephoned the judge in Sanford several times, and after a five-hour delay, began the deposition without the videotape. They did not complete it.

In Tuesday's paperwork, O'Mara asked the judge to fine de la Rionda $4,000, the amount of money wasted in lawyers' time, as well as that of the court reporter and video operator during that five-hour delay.

On Monday, O'Mara asked the judge to sanction de la Rionda and co-prosecutor John Guy, saying they had known for six or seven months but failed to disclose that the same witness had lied about going to the hospital and about her age."

Threadkiller

Oh Danube, let's fight over the fun stuff, not the jesting.

Frau Hoffnungslos

"Most of the people I 'friend' on Facebook, aside from JOMers, are flying the pink equal sign. I think I'll stay away for a while."

Winning elections and changing public (LIV) opinion with social media = politics by other means.

Rob Crawford
Winning elections and changing public (LIV) opinion with social media = politics by other means.

Social media changes no minds, it only creates the illusion that the mob is bigger than it really is.

Chubby

((Social media changes no minds))

it was through social media that I found freedom from mushy liberalism.

Rob Crawford

Chubby, did your opinions change or did you just find that "mushy liberalism" didn't believe what you did?

Rob Crawford

Folks, what is it with Missouri? We had the Obama "Truth Squad" with law enforcement officials threatening to act against people saying bad things about the Lightbringer, that horrid "fusion center" report that made everyone to the right of Lenin out to be a terrorist, and now the Missouri Department of Revenue illegally feeding gun ownership data to the Department of Homeland Security.

And WTF is it with the DHS collecting data on legal gun ownership? It's shit like this that makes someone skeptical about conspiracy theories into a True Believer.

Chubby

((Chubby, did your opinions change or did you just find that "mushy liberalism" didn't believe what you did?))

Rob, my opinions totally changed. first to go were my views on gun control. when I first started posting on social media, my world view was totally cloistered by liberal media. I had never been exposed to rational arguments from the right but I hated rightie extremists with the best of them. But when I started reading actual debates between conservatives and saw how intelligent, rational and factual they were, versus shreiking name-calling liberals, I began to see the light.

Porchlight

Chubby, do you include blogs in "social media?" I think of social media as Facebook, Twitter, instagram etc. where one communicates directly with one's own network of friends and family (vs. reading blogs and occasionally commenting on some of them, some of the time, in a largely anonymous way).

To make the distinction, the political posts I see on Facebook are less persuasive than the political arguments I read on blogs, and I'm sure my own political Facebook posts convince no one, except maybe to unfriend me, but YMMV. Whereas my own political views have been somewhat shaped by intelligent conservatives at places like JOM. But again I would not consider JOM to be social media.

Danube of Thought on iPad

TK, you left out this part:

"Legal scholars are firm about Cruz’s eligibility. 'Of course he’s eligible,'Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz tells National Review Online. 'He’s a natural-born, not a naturalized, citizen.' Eugene Volokh, a professor at the UCLA School of Law and longtime friend of Cruz, agrees, saying the senator was 'a citizen at birth, and thus a natural-born citizen — as opposed to a naturalized citizen, which I understand to mean someone who becomes a citizen after birth.' Federal law extends citizenship beyond those granted it by the 14th Amendment: It confers the privilege on all those born outside of the United States whose parents are both citizens, provided one of them has been 'physically present' in the United States for any period of time, as well as all those born outside of the United States to at least one citizen parent who, after the age of 14, has resided in the United States for at least five years. Cruz’s mother, who was born and raised in Delaware, meets the latter requirement, so Cruz himself is undoubtedly an American citizen."

Threadkiller

By including the link, I left out nothing.

What I did do is focus on the biznitch's use of "unequivocal" with regard to Cruz's own feelings on the subject.

The quote you offer does not address what the author claims the press secretary said.

Clarice

From Volokh Conspiracy==part of today's SCOTUS argument


JUSTICE SCALIA: I’m curious, when -­ when did — when did it become unconstitutional to exclude homosexual couples from marriage? 1791? 1868, when the Fourteenth Amendment was adopted? Sometimes — some time after Baker, where we said it didn’t even raise a substantial Federal question? When — when — when did the law become this?

MR. OLSON: When — may I answer this in the form of a rhetorical question? When did it become unconstitutional to prohibit interracial marriages? When did it become unconstitutional to assign children to separate schools.

JUSTICE SCALIA: It’s an easy question, I think, for that one. At — at the time that the Equal Protection Clause was adopted. That’s absolutely true. But don’t give me a question to my question. When do you think it became
unconstitutional? Has it always been unconstitutional? . . .

MR. OLSON: It was constitutional when we -­as a culture determined that sexual orientation is a characteristic of individuals that they cannot control, and that that -­

JUSTICE SCALIA: I see. When did that happen? When did that happen?

MR. OLSON: There’s no specific date in time. This is an evolutionary cycle.

Mark Folkestad

I'm scrolling fast, so I might have missed someone addressing Captain Hate's puzzlement over DrJ's gender. Judging from our lunch together, DrJ is either male or the most butch lesbian I've ever met.

As far as Israelite kings having multiple wives, don't mistake that for the rule for the general population. Kings have always made exceptions and exemptions for themselves.

My Lutheran pastor goddaughter just posted the marriage equality banner on Facebook. My cousin, her pastor and seminary professor father disagrees with her, but keeps his head down for family peace.

Chubby

Porchlight, it was pre twitter and pre facebook -- it was a discussion forum attached to the CSM. Does that count? It was media and it was social in that I made online friends from all over the world.

Mark Folkestad

I missed a comma in my comment a moment ago. Narciso, could I borrow one of your commas?

Chubby

Porchlight, the forum wasn't a blog; it was a forum.

Chubby

and a "community".

Porchlight

Thanks Chubby. I mention it because I think most people consider "social media" to be the more recent iterations (FB et al) where not a lot of serious discussion typically takes place, but lots of photos and shallow slogany stuff is posted (like today's pink equal signs that are all over the place, at least on my FB feed). So that might be the thinking behind Rob Crawford's comment about social media not changing minds.

Danube of Thought on iPad

“He is a U.S. citizen by birth, having been born in Calgary to an American-born mother,”

Seems unequivocal to me.

I live in California. There should be no confusion about that.

bgates

The Bible doesn't endorse polygamy.

Polygamy was practiced by many of the most venerated figures of the Old Testament; God rebukes them for any number of sins, but not for that.

Chubby

thanks Porchlight. that makes sense. I agree that something like twitter would not have been able to change my view of the world, probably just reinforced it, but the lengthy forum debates surely did.

Threadkiller

Something with "no doubts" gets a powerful "seems"?

Danube of Thought on iPad

"Something with 'no doubts' gets a powerful 'seems'?"

You seem to be tying yourself in knots.

Rick Ballard

"MR. OLSON: There’s no specific date in time. This is an evolutionary cycle."

Now that's a hanging curve.

Is there any logical reason marriage cannot evolve into Bob & Ted & Carol & Alice & Spot & Fluffy plus a Shetland pony to be named later? Should BOzo and Claire's inability to look Spot in the eye be sufficient reason to include or exclude him/her? Is there any logical reason which prevents marriage from completing an "evolutionary cycle" with Carol married to Bob & Ted & Frank while Alice is married to Spot & Fluffy and the sturdy little Shetland?

"evolutionary cycle" = "shit for brains"

Jane - Mock the Media!

She sure didn't show she possessed any with Obamacare.

Really lyle? So you are for Obamacare and think anyone against it lacks integrity.

What the hell are you doing here?

Chubby

((Is there any logical reason marriage cannot evolve into Bob & Ted & Carol & Alice & Spot & Fluffy plus a Shetland pony to be named later? )

LOL!!!!!

Threadkiller

“The Congress shall have Power To...establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization....”

ARTICLE I, SECTION 8, CLAUSE 4

Unequivocal?

Dave (in MA)
Most of the people I 'friend' on Facebook, aside from JOMers, are flying the pink equal sign. I think I'll stay away for a while.
I have 3 so far. What's the color change all about? For years it's been a yellow on navy sticker alongside the de rigueur COEXIST and STOP THIS Endless WAR stickers on moonbat-conveying vehicles.
Jane - Mock the Media!

If a judge has shares in a company with a case before the bench or has a family member involved in a case or has property at stake in litigation before him or her, are those not legitimate and well accepted reasons for recusal?

It's not the same Matt. Gay marriage is way down on the list for many gays. Amy would get rid of Obamacare, or Dodd Frank, (or Obama) long before she would spend time on gay marriage. It just doesn't have that much impact on her. She was first married in a civil union, and that continues to be her anniversary.

Under your standards, most people on the SC would have to recuse themselves from everything, starting with Obamacare, because it may impact them.

There are federal tax laws that would benefit gays and also federal tax laws that will harm gays mostly dependent on their income level. In many ways federal acceptance of gay marriage would be more harmful than helpful to Amy. Those issues matter to her as much as the title. And I promise you she doesn't want to be talking about this issue for the next 40 years ala Roe v Wade. Leave it to the states where it belongs.

Janet

I believe lyle meant Kagan, Jane...not Amy.

Jane - Mock the Media!

Actually you can make a reasonable argument (more or less made by Carmen Bin Laden) that Osama Bin Laden is a product of the inherent evils of polygamy.

Same with Obama.

MarkO

What's up with Olson? The enactment of the 13th to 15th Amendments made the prohibition on miscegenation unconstitutional. The Court wisely waited for a case with the name "Loving."

It is the solemn goal of the gay movement to make itself not unlike the enslaved black population. Olson makes that very point.

Mark Folkestad

So far, on Facebook, I've seen George Takei and four beautiful heterosexual females using the marriage equality pink equal sign on a red square. Oddly enough, my married gay buddy hasn't used it, yet, and a lesbian friend not friendly to gay marriage isn't likely to.

Extraneus

In my younger days, I could have supported gay marriage as a stepping stone to the legalization of polygamy. Now that I pay my ex-wife more than my actual wife - and as a result she has a nicer house and takes great vacations - I'm doubtful that two more wives would have been a good move for me, in retrospect.

narciso


well reading Coll's bio of the Bin Ladens, he seems the less well adjusted of the sprawling clan, add to that he is Yemeni and Syrian, on his mother's side,

Jane - Mock the Media!

Janet,
I don't see how.

boris

"It's not the same Matt"

I'd say when a lone judge with an apparent activist self interest in the subject overrules the majority population of the state that attempted to preserve the historical and traditional meaning of a word for an institution that predates this civilization ... and replace it's meaning with something that same judge claims has lesser status and human dignity ... I'd say there is the appearance of unfairness.

lyle

Geez, Jane, I was referring to Kagan's lack of integrity in not recusing herself from Ocare. Was I that obtuse or was it you? No need to attack my presence here as sporadic as it already is.

Extraneus

UPDATE: University Takes Action to Punish Student

A Florida Atlantic University student who filed a complaint against his professor after he was ordered to stomp on the name of Jesus has been brought up on academic charges by the school and may no longer attend class, according to documents obtained by Fox News.
Jane - Mock the Media!

Lyle,

My apologies. Around here Amy, my law partner is known as "the resident lesbian".

Extraneus

Sorry, I shouldn't have said "two" more wives. *Any* more wives and I'd be begging for coins on 5th Avenue and 42nd Street.

Which brings up a point. Will divorced gays get hosed as severely as divorced heterosexuals do? If so, I might be for it after all!

boris

"No need to attack my presence ..."

I read your comment that way but knew Jane was talking about her friend, not Kagan.

As an aside it seems like most here can discuss the issue without bashing gays. It would be nice if it could be discussed without "hets" too.

boris

*** without bashing "hets" ***

Janet

Ya figure this person wants to get married?...or is it about forcing society to accept his lifestyle?

Mark Folkestad

Back in '71, Mom invited my Gambian Muslim friend to dinner. She asked him how many wives he intended to have. He replied that it wasn't how many he was allowed. Rather, he would choose only one wife, the only way to maintain peace, sanity and a reasonable budget. Mohammedou wound up with only one wife. He knuckled under to his peanut-exporter uncle, the richest man in the little country, and married his homely cousin. His uncle wanted a monogamous marriage as well for his beloved daughter.

lyle

Jane, apology accepted. I went back and read your comment that I replied to. I saw "resident lesbian" in the context of SCOTUS and assumed you were referring to Kagan. My mistake but at least it was an honest one.

narciso

Pronoun trouble, Lyle, it is striking what a 'travesty of two mockeries of a sham; the Zimmerman 'salvaging' has turned out to be.

Captain Hate

In many ways federal acceptance of gay marriage would be more harmful than helpful to Amy.

After getting into a back and forth with Malor yesterday over him calling something in the future "a fact", I've come to the conclusion that, if the Supreme Court would broadly open the floodgates for homo marriage, there's a very good chance that a significant number of homo couples will end up severely depressed when they find out that they're just as miserable married as they were before.

Jane - Mock the Media!

It certainly was honest Lyle. I'm very quick on the trigger when it comes to Amy, so my mistake.

Janet

OT - We just got a new 1 million dollar bus stop. How bout that!

"In the end, the new stop cost $575,000 for construction and fabrication and $440,000 for construction management and inspections, officials said. Federal and state transportation money paid 80 percent of the costs."

I apologize that you all had to help pay for this first one. We will be paying for the next 23. We're also suppose to get a Trolley....I'll be trying to stop that tomorrow night, but they never listen to me. :(

lyle

More like antecedent trouble, narc. But point taken.

Captain Hate

Jane, I'm sure I overlooked something it the past, probably multiple times, but I'm benefiting from your explanation to lyle of that reference to Amy.

Jim Rhoads f/k/a vnjagvet

It appears Florida Atlantic has surrendered

Jane - Mock the Media!

I've come to the conclusion that, if the Supreme Court would broadly open the floodgates for homo marriage, there's a very good chance that a significant number of homo couples will end up severely depressed when they find out that they're just as miserable married as they were before.

That is where the truth lays IMO. I am shocked by the zealousness to get into that state.

We recently had the first married lesbian murder trial in Northhampton. I have no idea how it ended up, but I suspect not well.

Enough gays have been married on MA now that divorce is becoming a factor. That can't be fun.

Captain Hate

something IN the past..

Danube of Thought on iPad

I understand that school has backed off from punishing the student.

Rick Ballard

"That can't be fun."

Yeah. Imagine the agony of splitting up the furnishings in a perfectly harmonized living room. The drapes will never get over the loss of the sofa and matching throw...

narciso

Well sending Dennis over there, did wonders didn't it;

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/03/north-korea-orders-strategic-rockets-to-combat-posture-targeting-us-military-bases/

Captain Hate

Enough gays have been married on MA now that divorce is becoming a factor. That can't be fun.

I don't know if I mentioned this here before but I work with a married lesbian who is in limbo regarding the POS she married in Mass and now can't get divorced from in Ohio. Meanwhile her credit has gone to Hell as her spouse has spent her into oblivion. She's an extremely nice person whom I like a lot (and is now in an apparently fulfilling relationship with a man with children from a previous marriage, which satisfies a maternal instinct that was previously a bone of contention with her spouse) and wouldn't wish what she's gone through on somebody I liked a lot less.

Danube of Thought on iPad

Article 1, Section 8:

"Congress shall have power....

"To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

"To provide and maintain a Navy;...."

Unequivocal. And nary a word about a Marine Corps or an Air Force.

"Two years" is unequivocal, too.However...

The comments to this entry are closed.

Wilson/Plame