Got to marry those girls when they are 15 or 16

[beenthere]

your message here is contradicted by the fact that you actively advocate for unequal rights for gay people, and you actively sponsor and encourage bigotry.

you two faced, lying little weasel.

No I don't support gay marriage, however, I've stated many times that gays should have every and all rights that heterosexual married couples have.

you're against gay marriage, thus you support inequality.

that is not a lie, that is a fact about you. you are a bigot who supports inequality and sponsors and encourages hate.

no need to lie about who you are now, bigot. i have all of your hateful remarks at the ready.

As you can see by the posts above, you changed the goal posts from I advocate unequal rights for gays to, I support inequality, but of course that was after the truth was staring you in the face.

This is one of the reasons I would never sit down and discuss politics with a guy like you Bucky.
You're flat out dishonest and can't be trusted, and that's one thing I don't have tolerance for.

 

[UncleBuck]

Marriage needs a husband and a wife.

by whose definition? yours?

sorry, not gonna go asking a subway employee for definitions on stuff like this.

 

[Canna Sylvan]

Marriage needs a husband and a wife. If Adam and Steve get married, which one is the wife? If I get to call you cheesus's wife, then I would be ok with it for the lulz.

Marriage predates even when the Hebrews were just a tribe of bushmen with no gods at all.

 

[UncleBuck]

As you can see by the posts above, you changed the goal posts from I advocate unequal rights for gays to, I support inequality, but of course that was after the truth was staring you in the face.

This is one of the reasons I would never sit down and discuss politics with a guy like you Bucky.
You're flat out dishonest and can't be trusted, and that's one thing I don't have tolerance for.

you won't sit down with me because you are a fraud.

you support unequal rights for gays and you support inequality.

why don't you call your partnership a civil union? it only makes sense since your wife doesn't excite you anymore.

 

[BigNBushy]

they seem pretty civilized to me.

Me too, because they are a rather large country within a much larger civilization.

 

[BigNBushy]

Marriage predates even when the Hebrews were just a tribe of bushmen with no gods at all.

You're right. And even way back then it was an arangment between a woman and a man.

 

[BigNBushy]

you won't sit down with me because you are a fraud.

you support unequal rights for gays and you support inequality.

why don't you call your partnership a civil union? it only makes sense since your wife doesn't excite you anymore.

Come east, I'll cook you up a good possum road-kill stew.

 

[Canna Sylvan]

You're right. And even way back then it was an arangment between a woman and a man.

Tell that to the evangelical right who say it's between man, woman, and God.

 

[BigNBushy]

Tell that to the evangelical right who say it's between man, woman, and God.

Those are the folks I call the "christianists"

I'm a Christian

Most consider me on the right

I hate them more than you do.

They are fucking nuts. Good thing is though, they are Christian nuts, Islamic nuts strap bombs on themselves and blow up innocent people.

Surey, they may have taken down a few abortion clinics. But abortion doctors have blood on their hands. Don't mean you get to judge and kill them, though.

Besides, I would say back then, those stone age people incorporated their God's in their marriage.

 

[Canna Sylvan]

Marriage needs a husband and a wife. If Adam and Steve get married, which one is the wife? If I get to call you cheesus's wife, then I would be ok with it for the lulz.

Little Big Dick and Stuffing Bullshit were marrying each other for thousands of years before the white man came here.

 

[UncleBuck]

Islamic nuts strap bombs on themselves and blow up innocent people.

so much better than killing doctors, blowing up gay night clubs, or flying your plane into an IRS building.

 

[BigNBushy]

so much better than killing doctors, blowing up gay night clubs, or flying your plane into an IRS building.

In one way, murder is murder.

But if nothing else, care to hazard a guess at how many people Christian terrorists have murdered versus how many Islamic terrorists have murdered.

Let's not get crazy and go back to the crusades. Accurate records don't exist, and both sides killed lots of folks.

Let us limit it to post WWII.

I would say you can count up all the Christian terrorist victims, then look at 9/11 and declare the Muslims the victors.

So yeah buck, one is way worse than the other.

I'll give you (though I don't fully agree) that the Christian terrorist who blows up an abortion clinic is no better than the islamic terrorist who straps on a bomb and gets on a bus.

Which occurs with more frequency? And which one has a justification that is more realistic?

I did it for my god, and he will give me 72 virgins.

Or

I did it to keep him from killing more babies.

At least one of those is true. In some sick way, you can say the abortion doctor killer actually saves lives.

 

[BigNBushy]

Much better than killing nearly a hundred million asians. Who needs that many number crunchers anyway, huh? State sponsored atheism FTW, bitch!

Who killed 100 million Asians?

 

[Canna Sylvan]

Who killed 100 million Asians?

The Chinese, Japanese, Vietnamese, Korean, Cambodian, Laotian, and Russians all killed asians in the name of communist policy, that reached around 100 million.

 

[UncleBuck]

In one way, murder is murder.

But if nothing else, care to hazard a guess at how many people Christian terrorists have murdered versus how many Islamic terrorists have murdered.

Let's not get crazy and go back to the crusades. Accurate records don't exist, and both sides killed lots of folks.

Let us limit it to post WWII.

I would say you can count up all the Christian terrorist victims, then look at 9/11 and declare the Muslims the victors.

So yeah buck, one is way worse than the other.

I'll give you (though I don't fully agree) that the Christian terrorist who blows up an abortion clinic is no better than the islamic terrorist who straps on a bomb and gets on a bus.

Which occurs with more frequency? And which one has a justification that is more realistic?

I did it for my god, and he will give me 72 virgins.

Or

I did it to keep him from killing more babies.

At least one of those is true. In some sick way, you can say the abortion doctor killer actually saves lives.

too many contradictions in there.

coherent thought is not the domain of subway employees.

 

[tokeprep]

Here again you are a failure of the first order.

First of all, your using bigot now, after I exposed your false use of racism. Nice to see I have had an affect on you. But you are also using bigot incorrectly. Bigotry implies hatred.

You say he is a bigot because he does not support gay marriage.

OK, but yet he says he supports some sort of civil-union in which gay couples are given all the benefits that married couples are given.

How is this bigotry? Marriage has always been, in all societies, a union between men and women. Some have allowed plural marriages, but never same-sex.

This would constitute expanding the definition of a thousands of years old institution. I dont have a problem with it, I also dont have a problem with it not happening. The compelling argument for me is the inequity that results from gay couples and federal income taxes. If that can be accomplished through civil union, then whats the beef?

Tradition isn't much of an argument. Slavery was legal and sanctioned for 10,000 years; women were denied the right to vote in this country for hundreds of years. If there's a principled reason to change a tradition, why object? Perhaps a selfish desire to maintain the comfortable status quo? The slaves were people and they wanted to be treated like people; women are people and they want their voices to be equal to those of all other people in establishing the rules they live under. Gay people just want the equality they have always deserved but almost always been denied--they want the same rights that everyone else has.

two things or you are a complete failure, almost as big of a failure as a heroin junkie who steals from his parents and works at subay;

1) Explain how it is bigoted to want homosexuals to have the same rights as married couples, but under a different name so as to not alter the meaning of a word that has meant one thing since its inception.

Legally distinguishing between marriage and gay partnerships would be meaningless anyway. You think people would use "civil union" in referring to the relationships? Of course not. They'd say "We're getting married," and people would say "They're married." Language is controlled by how people use it, not by the words on government forms. What principled reason does the government have to maintain a legal distinction? The way people use the word "marriage" has changed, and the government has no reason not to recognize that change.

 

[Canna Sylvan]

He has the liberal super powers which allow him to speak his disdain of those workers beneath him while at the same time dazzling the majority with bullshit. Except he doesn't hide it too well. Otherwise he'd be an awesome politician.

 

[NLXSK1]

Chesus would rather see these girls made single parent mother's to children of deadbeat boyfriends so the US government can send them a welfare check every month.

God bless liberal America!!

 

[nitro harley]

In one way, murder is murder.

But if nothing else, care to hazard a guess at how many people Christian terrorists have murdered versus how many Islamic terrorists have murdered.

Let's not get crazy and go back to the crusades. Accurate records don't exist, and both sides killed lots of folks.

Let us limit it to post WWII.

I would say you can count up all the Christian terrorist victims, then look at 9/11 and declare the Muslims the victors.

So yeah buck, one is way worse than the other.

I'll give you (though I don't fully agree) that the Christian terrorist who blows up an abortion clinic is no better than the islamic terrorist who straps on a bomb and gets on a bus.

Which occurs with more frequency? And which one has a justification that is more realistic?

I did it for my god, and he will give me 72 virgins.

Or

I did it to keep him from killing more babies.

At least one of those is true. In some sick way, you can say the abortion doctor killer actually saves lives.

Hey BigNBushy..

I have to say that was a well written post..Buck and CheezyO won't get it they are into glamorizing Muslims. If they could they would turn 9/11 into an american Muslim appreciation day..

 

[schuylaar]

I am more tolerant than buck or cheesy.

Wait a minute because Im sure you guys are laughing, but let me explain...

I am a well established racist. Im not ashamed of my beliefs. Although sometimes I do exaggerate my racism because I lol at how it gets reacted to, but racism alone does not an intolerant person make.

What is tolerance? Could it be said I am tolerant of white people? Sure, is that any accomplishment? Nope. It is obvious I prefer white folks.

The fact that I am tolerant of black people, now that is something.

You claim bullshit.

Never have I endorsed anything but completely equal treatment for african americans, save my troll post last night. Having a belief that blacks have lower intelligence than whites make me intolerant of them? What exactly is it that I am not tolerating?

That is tolerance.

You guys are confusing acceptance with tolerance.

Phil Robinson is tolerant of homosexuals, he is not accepting of homosexuals. There is a difference. In our society you can ask me to tolerate you, you cannot force me to accept you (by acceptance I mean shape what my opinion is of you or what it is you are doing that I find objection with.)

Many of you liberals that suffer from some self-aggrandizing delusion that makes you feel that anyone with whom you disagree is stupid. I am not the same. I can perfectly accept that someone with whom I disagree can be just as smart as me.

In fact, many of you get so irate when someone does not share your opinion, you resort to wishes of death. If I had seen it just a few times, I would not point it out. But I have read numerous times Buck, et al, wishing death upon those they are debating. What kind of tolerance is that?

You are hypocrites of the first order.

In order for someone to be tolerant of something, he has to disagree with it.

You (homosexuals, minorities, and damn near any group I can think of) have tolerance, and demand acceptance under the false name of tolerance. You want to be thought police, and that is abhorrent to freedom.

i think nitro falls into this category with his son-in-law..although i believe he thinks it's acceptance..