>Is that really anyones business
Yes... For medical reasons if nothing else.
Yes... For medical reasons if nothing else.
Ok. I've read over the interview a couple of times and I'm still trying to find what it is that he needs to apologize for???? Is a Senator not allowed to take a stance in oppostition to homosexual acts. The outcry for equal rights for homosexuals is completely absurd. Homosexuals do have equal rights. It's just that they seek "special rights", and they think they have the right to twist the arms of government figures to condone their actions. Sure, they have the right to
their lifestyle, but they absolutely cannot force the rest of the nation to call it right and give special rights.
their lifestyle, but they absolutely cannot force the rest of the nation to call it right and give special rights.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>The outcry for equal rights for homosexuals is completely absurd. Homosexuals do have equal rights.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Bullshit. We can debate things like "hate crimes" all night, so I wont go there.
Homosexuals however:
-Cannot serve in the military (openly, anyhow).
-Can't get their marriages recognized by state or federal government, and thus can't get marriage tax benefits.
Bullshit. We can debate things like "hate crimes" all night, so I wont go there.
Homosexuals however:
-Cannot serve in the military (openly, anyhow).
-Can't get their marriages recognized by state or federal government, and thus can't get marriage tax benefits.
>you win this round, Frank
FSB, honestly... It's NOT about *me* - I just want a future USA that is "principled." For my kids & grandkids sake.
FSB, honestly... It's NOT about *me* - I just want a future USA that is "principled." For my kids & grandkids sake.
>can't get marriage tax benefits
You mean marriage penalty!
You mean marriage penalty!
Sodomy laws and penalties in US states and territories, according to the American Civil Liberties Union [1]:
Alabama (all sexes, 1 year/$2000)
Arkansas (invalidated by courts, 2001, case on appeal)
Florida (all sexes, 60 days/$500)
Idaho (all sexes, 5 years to life)
Kansas (same sex only, 6 months/$1000)
Louisiana (all sexes, 5 years/$2000, court challenge pending)
Michigan (15 years, statute struck down by Wayne County judge but status unclear)
Mississippi (all sexes, 10 years)
Missouri (same sex only, 1 year/$1000, State Court of Appeals has interpreted the law not to apply to consensual acts)
North Carolina (all sexes, 10 years/discretionary fine)
Oklahoma (same sex only, 10 years)
Puerto Rico (all sexes, 10 years, court challenge pending)
South Carolina (all sexes, 5 years/$500)
Utah (all sexes, 6 months/$1000)
Virginia (all sexes, 1-5 years, court challenge pending)
Alabama (all sexes, 1 year/$2000)
Arkansas (invalidated by courts, 2001, case on appeal)
Florida (all sexes, 60 days/$500)
Idaho (all sexes, 5 years to life)
Kansas (same sex only, 6 months/$1000)
Louisiana (all sexes, 5 years/$2000, court challenge pending)
Michigan (15 years, statute struck down by Wayne County judge but status unclear)
Mississippi (all sexes, 10 years)
Missouri (same sex only, 1 year/$1000, State Court of Appeals has interpreted the law not to apply to consensual acts)
North Carolina (all sexes, 10 years/discretionary fine)
Oklahoma (same sex only, 10 years)
Puerto Rico (all sexes, 10 years, court challenge pending)
South Carolina (all sexes, 5 years/$500)
Utah (all sexes, 6 months/$1000)
Virginia (all sexes, 1-5 years, court challenge pending)
FSB:
I am not denying that hate crimes exist, or condoning them by any means. But that's not really the issue. There is a huge difference in a politician being criticized for openly opposing homosexuality and beating the living shit out of gays.
As far as serving in the military as an openly gay individual, there again is the push for special treatment. If they can serve as others do without disruption (lack of a better word), then they can serve.
And I don't really see that gays are denied the tax benefits of marriage. They have the same opportunity as the rest of us. The only catch is that they have to go by the rules and system that is already in place (marrying the opposite sex). Again, they are grasping for special rights by wanting the rules changed to fit their lifestyle and needs. Gee, it could be the new American way: "I can't live by the laws of the nation or the laws of nature, so you had better change them because you are stomping on my rights".
I am not denying that hate crimes exist, or condoning them by any means. But that's not really the issue. There is a huge difference in a politician being criticized for openly opposing homosexuality and beating the living shit out of gays.
As far as serving in the military as an openly gay individual, there again is the push for special treatment. If they can serve as others do without disruption (lack of a better word), then they can serve.
And I don't really see that gays are denied the tax benefits of marriage. They have the same opportunity as the rest of us. The only catch is that they have to go by the rules and system that is already in place (marrying the opposite sex). Again, they are grasping for special rights by wanting the rules changed to fit their lifestyle and needs. Gee, it could be the new American way: "I can't live by the laws of the nation or the laws of nature, so you had better change them because you are stomping on my rights".
The Senator should not step down. If nothing else like the majority of christains in america they believe homesexuality is wrong. Why should he cow down to these in your face activist. The senator said nothing more than what members of the supreme court have said in the past. The senator has a right to have a religous belief that it's wrong.
His point was crystal clear in the first place, if there are no laws to prevent certain sexual acts in private, then what is to stop some democrat from sticking their dick in the shit locker of a 5 year old?.....Say the cops were to go to a democrats house with a warrant for food stamp fraud and there is a "active' NAMBLA meeting going on?Does this mean you can't bust anybody for a B& E below the belt on a child less than 14 because it is in a private residence?
He is an idiot,but so are half the people in our government.BTW,does anyone here think that it is wrong for me and my wife or girlfriend to engage in anal or oral sex in the privacy of our home.Still I don't think the jackass should have to resign.That is why we have elections.If people want him out he will go.
Patriot,i think in that case the statutory rape laws would apply.Its these archaic sodomy laws are what I have a problem with.We are talking about what goes on between consenting ADULTS.
The gay agenda: 1. accept 2. embrace 3. promote. Most people are OK with #1, the in your face people want it all. Get out of my face!!!!!!!
Out,actually most of the gays I knew,and knew alot in NY,just want to be left alone to live the life style they have chosen.Now the gay organizations are a different story.But like most organizations they don't reflect the majority of opinions of the people they claim to represent.Not unlike they views of the Christian Coalition do not represent the feelings of most Christians.
and lets not forget #4 just do it.
Judge, i don't think there should be stupid laws like that but for the gay community to make a stink about the senators commemts is absurd, he does have a point, they don't.
But my wife thinks that there should be a law against oral sex after anal sex.My girl friend is indifferent except having oral sex after anal sex with my wife.
But my wife thinks that there should be a law against oral sex after anal sex.My girl friend is indifferent except having oral sex after anal sex with my wife.
Pat,lol.I agree.I am sick of either Dems or Reps get crucified for statements.Like I said let the voters decide at the polls.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>As far as serving in the military as an openly gay individual, there again is the push for special treatment. If they can serve as others do without disruption (lack of a better word), then they can serve.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
But thats a retarded catch-22. Thats like saying to Jackie Robinson: "You're allowed to play in the Major leagues, so long as you don't cause a disruption". Of course there is going to be a disruption for a few years. Thats how it is.
If they'd just get the intergration of the military over with, we'd be done with disruptions in a few years, and that would be one less problem for homosexuals.
But thats a retarded catch-22. Thats like saying to Jackie Robinson: "You're allowed to play in the Major leagues, so long as you don't cause a disruption". Of course there is going to be a disruption for a few years. Thats how it is.
If they'd just get the intergration of the military over with, we'd be done with disruptions in a few years, and that would be one less problem for homosexuals.
in yo face. just do it.
