Obama: "I think same sex couples should be abe to get married

MuyLocoNC

Well-Known Member
Wow again you miss the point by a mile try again. Single people can do that, by getting married see me point. Yet a gay service member is not able to get and get the same benefits. Yup no problem there, a person who serves our country is not able to visit their spouse in the hospital because others don't approve. Yup continue to close you eyes and pretend there is no problem. Yup don't blame Obama, didn't blame Bush, I blame the Americans who our stuck in the 1960s who refuse to believe that two people that love each other should be treated differently. Answer me this should they, simple yes or no?
Dude, wtf? Do you even read the posts you attempt to argue against? I have stated in almost EVERY post that I personally support gay marriage, even voted against the amendment two days ago here in NC.

I didn't miss your point at all, I just disagree with your entire premise that it's a right. It's a redefinition of marriage, it should be allowed, but it needs a majority of the electorate.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
He just affirmed his belief that the issue should be DECIDED at the state level.
show me where he said that and i'll call him a dumb shit who can't read the 14th amendment as well.

show me where he said minority rights should be put to a majority vote and i'll call him a scum of the earth piece of shit retarded moron as well.

in other words, cite your claims.
 

dontexist21

Well-Known Member
I apoligize, I guess where we and disagree, and where I disagree with Obama, is that this is not an issue that can be decided by other people who are not effected by such as vote. We are talking about someones right to marry who they please, why should some one else give them the right to decide that? It is like someone telling you, you can not smoke in the privacy of your own home. They are not consuming it, they think they can dictate what you can do. And by taking away the benefit to legally smoke, they are taking away your benefit from not getting arrested.
 

MuyLocoNC

Well-Known Member
show me where he said that and i'll call him a dumb shit who can't read the 14th amendment as well.

show me where he said minority rights should be put to a majority vote and i'll call him a scum of the earth piece of shit retarded moron as well.

in other words, cite your claims.
Why the hell do I have to cite a claim that is in the very interview you based this thread on? If you actually watched the entire interview, not the MSM edited for primetime version, then you would already know he said it should be decided at the local level. If it was a fundamental right or an equal protection issue, then it wouldn't need to be decided at the local level, would it? He would just cite the 14th ammendment as you did and that would be the end of the story. You wouldn't have th NY Times and other progressive rags fuming about his tip 'o the hat to states rights, would you?

I won't even get into the reports on the MSM that the Obama camp is furious with Biden for making him come out on the subject. You praise him for finally coming out, all the while he had zero interest in doing so. Still gonna vote for the scumbag, bigoted, conservative loon though, aren't ya?
 

kelly4

Well-Known Member
I won't even get into the reports on the MSM that the Obama camp is furious with Biden for making him come out on the subject.
They get it. They just won't admit it.
And even if they do admit they get it, they will say "It doesn't matter why his mind changed, just that it did."
They won't care that HE actually doesn't care.
By the way, has OBAMA made marijuana legal yet?
 

beenthere

New Member
show me where he said that and i'll call him a dumb shit who can't read the 14th amendment as well.

show me where he said minority rights should be put to a majority vote and i'll call him a scum of the earth piece of shit retarded moron as well.

in other words, cite your claims.
Cmon, use you head, if gay marriage was a civil right, the US Attorney General would have filed a lawsuit against every state that put it to a vote.
Obviously that lawsuit is MIA, the people spoke and the 10th amendment worked, just as our founding fathers intended.

I'm so looking forward to you calling Obama a scum of the earth piece of shit retarded moron as well!
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
If gay marriage was a civil right, the US Attorney General would have filed a lawsuit against every state that put it a vote.
Obviously that lawsuit is MIA, the people spoke and the 10th amendment worked, just as our founding fathers intended.

I'm so looking forward to you calling Obama a scum of the earth piece of shit retarded moron as well!
people like you that celebrate inequity of protection under the law are even worse scumbag pieces of shit than those who merely ignore the 14th amendment.
 

ThatGuy113

Well-Known Member
Cmon, use you head, if gay marriage was a civil right, the US Attorney General would have filed a lawsuit against every state that put it to a vote.
Obviously that lawsuit is MIA, the people spoke and the 10th amendment worked, just as our founding fathers intended.

I'm so looking forward to you calling Obama a scum of the earth piece of shit retarded moron as well!


Bitches dont know about the 10th amendment.

lbj-tape.jpg
 

Total Head

Well-Known Member
i'm probably going to regret putting this out there, but how does the premise of "defining marriage" differ from the premise of jim crow laws?

during segregation, blacks weren't denied access, they were merely denied the same level of access as everyone else. it seems like we are once again rolling out the "separate but equal" ideology. am i wrong?
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
i'm probably going to regret putting this out there, but how does the premise of "defining marriage" differ from the premise of jim crow laws?

during segregation, blacks weren't denied access, they were merely denied the same level of access as everyone else. it seems like we are once again rolling out the "separate but equal" ideology. am i wrong?
you're not wrong at all, we are creating an underclass of citizens by denying them marriage.
 

ThatGuy113

Well-Known Member
i'm probably going to regret putting this out there, but how does the premise of "defining marriage" differ from the premise of jim crow laws?

during segregation, blacks weren't denied access, they were merely denied the same level of access as everyone else. it seems like we are once again rolling out the "separate but equal" ideology. am i wrong?

They can have civil unions but are not allowed to be married.

Sounds like denial of equal access
 

Canna Sylvan

Well-Known Member
people like you that celebrate inequity of protection under the law are even worse scumbag pieces of shit than those who merely ignore the 14th amendment.
I don't need any document like the Hammurabi code telling me it's wrong to kill my neighbor so I can fuck his wife. I certainly don't need any 14th either to know not letting gays be their own person is wrong. It's rather amusing you think the constitution is this magical text, but mock bible thumpers. It's all bullshit too. It's yet another mechanism to control the masses. You have no rights. To think otherwise is foolish. If enough people want it, they'll fuck you over and throw you to the dogs once through. Don't think I'm telling you right and wrong doesn't exist, it does. But it exists independently of either of our opinions, or others' collective thoughts based on other older collective thoughts. Do I know all the answers? No. But do I know not letting gays marry but heterosexuals do is wrong? Yes I do know that. How do I know? I just do. Just like I know the the sun sets rises. You just know. Those who don't agree know too but justify why each wrong is proper.
 

NoDrama

Well-Known Member
I don't need any document like the Hammurabi code telling me it's wrong to kill my neighbor so I can fuck his wife. I certainly don't need any 14th either to know not letting gays be their own person is wrong. It's rather amusing you think the constitution is this magical text, but mock bible thumpers. It's all bullshit too. It's yet another mechanism to control the masses. You have no rights. To think otherwise is foolish. If enough people want it, they'll fuck you over and throw you to the dogs once through. Don't think I'm telling you right and wrong doesn't exist, it does. But it exists independently of either of our opinions, or others' collective thoughts based on other older collective thoughts. Do I know all the answers? No. But do I know not letting gays marry but heterosexuals do is wrong? Yes I do know that. How do I know? I just do. Just like I know the the sun sets rises. You just know. Those who don't agree know too but justify why each wrong is proper.
The sun doesn't really set or rise, it stays in one place and the earth spins as it moves in an eliptical orbit around the big star. :-P
 

Wordz

Well-Known Member
The sun doesn't really set or rise, it stays in one place and the earth spins as it moves in an eliptical orbit around the big star. :-P
The sun doesn't really stay in one place it moves in a near circular orbit around the milky way.:-P
 

Harrekin

Well-Known Member
tax rates are a question of policy.

same sex marriage is a question of rights.

policy can be debated, put to a vote, changed, and so forth.

rights are to be guaranteed.

before you say it is your right to not pay taxes, refer to the 16th amendment. that pesky constitution. always cockblocking freeloading republican mooches.
So you'd rather violate the separation of Church and State and the rights of a priest for the rights of a gay person because they can't be happy with a Civil Union?

Gays are hilarious, they fight to be part of religions that fundamentally HATE their lifestyle. Why do they even follow said religions?

I say let anyone marry anyone, but don't force people to perform a marriage service that is fundamentally against the religion they serve.

Actually I have an idea...how about the Government leaves marriage completely alone and treats all people, married and otherwise, equally?
 
Top