Dang! I've been REAL busy, BUT .....

[Thumper]

I can't believe nobody has posted a "What'cha Think" thread here. I guess Cappy is busy riding around in his fancy, easy-chair equipped, air-conditioned, XM Radio w/surround sound tractor complaining about how hard he works. P-hole is down drinking fru-fru drinks by the pool while watching scantily clad babes through his HEAVILY tinted sunglasses and obviously Bucky decided to break out the hammer & screwdriver to do a little "tweaking" after his i-net installer left the farm house. All you other dufes always use some excuse about summer and kids being out of school, etc.

Anyway .. what'cha think about the "Rebel" flag controversy? Is it time for a change? Or is it the usual b/s over-reaction to the latest news story? You know, like when some nutbag shoots up a movie theater, it's time to ban guns because the gun made him do it? Because some scumbag kid blows people away in a church because the Rebel flag made him do it? It's spreading like wildfire ... a dozen businesses have banned the sales of the flag or symbol now ... Walmart, Sears, Target, Amazon ... heck, a whole list of businesses are distancing themselves. I even got a message from eBay that, from this point forward, there will be no sales/auctions of the Rebel flag OR it's image!

States are all pulling any image of the flag from their license plates/specialty plates. Heck, they're even screaming to change the FLORIDA State flag because it has a red "cross" on it!

http://www.50states.com/flag/image/nunst012.gif

I'm waiting for the day I'll have to start spelling my last name with a "C" instead of a "K" because they have deleted the letter "K" from the alphabet! Why? Heck, everytime I see the KKK logo it makes me want to go out and kill immigrants, Catholics, Jews, blacks and frigging union members!

I think Volkswagen should be wiped from the face of the Earth since Hitler had that danged "People's Car" designed and built. Now every time I see one of those damned things on the road, it makes me want to stuff a Jew or two into my oven!

When are we going to start holding individuals responsible for their actions instead of always trying to find some stupid excuse?

Rant over ... I have to get back to work.

[LJ3]

It's a typical dumbass reaction by people wanting to feel better about something.

and IT'S NOT THE FUCKING CONFEDERATE FLAG!!! It's the battle flag of the Northern Virginia Army. They'd never use the actual term for the flag because it has the word "Northern" in it and that may decrease the weak minded assertion that south=hating black people.

[BarryBobPosthole]

I'm not really sure how I feel about it to be honest. I've known enough racist mofos that fly the Stars and Bars proudly as a symbol of their racism and to overtly show their hatred of niggers. Just ask 'em, they'll tell you. On the other hand, I know that the vast majority of southerners use it to identify with everything that's good about the south. One thing I do know is there's lots of revisionist history being tossed around on both sides of the issue and its pretty disgusting to see what's being posted on social media. Makes both sides look stupid.
And you can say its Robert E Lee's battle flag all day long but there's no denying that the flag is a symbol of the confederate south, period. And you can also say that the Civil War was about states' rights and not slavery all you want but it was actually and only about the right to practice slavery. If you don't believe that, then go read the very words of the southern leaders when they seceded. Given that, the symbol is probably not the best way to put that all behind us. On the other hand, that is all really behind us and symbols do change.

Like I said, its kind of a tweener in my opinion. both sides need to pick better issues to get their panties in a wad about
IMO.

BKB

[HideHunter]

We, naturally, see very few around here - but I've asked a few guys that do 'fly' them.. For most it's trying to tap into the whole "rebel" thing. Most don't even know what it stood for.. I'm starting to have a little problem with minorities just "deciding" something is racist. Latest I've heard is blacks taking exception to the word "thug".. I'm not buying it.

[Chicken Dinner]

I get that it's a symbol that offends many and is meaningful to others. It doesn't mean much to me personally either way, but I can see why government institutions probably shouldn't be using it any more on state flags, license plates, etc. any more. A symbol I identify with more is the Gadsden Flag. However, I don't display it since it was co-opted to the tea-baggers and I find their form of tyranny just as offensive.

I'll also add that there are many symbols that offend me deeply and nobody seems to give a rats ass. Take that for what it's worth.

[Buckrub]

I get way tired of being labeled racist for one reason only, and that is the region of my birth and residence. And that's what this is. This is "that's a symbol that folks used back when Great Great Great Great Grandpa was a slave, and I don't like it".

Makes no sense. Storm Roof didn't shoot folks because of this flag. So what is the connection, again??????

If I was black, here's how I'd look at things. I'm being serious, NOT racist, and not facetious. I'd think "Man, I've got it good. And I have two people to thank for this. My ancestors went through a very dark and evil period in history because of the ancestors of some white folks. That was awful. BUT, in the light of trying to find something positive out of darkness, I believe that I personally am at a wonderful spot in time, and on Earth, solely because of those evil white men and their actions against innocent black people that were my ancestors. I'd not praise the white folks for their evil actions, but a good byproduct that they never dreamed is that I'm here and free and independent. What I suggest is that we raise a statue for the generic black Slaves, for it's because of him and her that I am here today. I refuse to complain about that time in history and the evil way my folks were treated because it resulted in a great and wonderful thing for ME."

And that's how I'd view it.

To continue to say they are downtrodden and beat up on and need special privileges because of something that happened in 1865 to someone they don't know............is beyond my ability to comprehend. Now, if they as a group are being mistreated legally today, that's a different story. But you'll have to show me where that's happening. As to folks' individual beliefs and thoughts of their fellow man, that's between them and God and has no bearing in the Civil and Legal world.

So let the darts be thrown.

As to the flag, I don't live there. My grandson and daughter do. They don't care what happens to the flag, so I don't either. Whatever those folks want to do with it is their business. But the idea of "Bad happened, let's do SOMETHING even if it makes no logical sense" is goofy, at least to me. It's the Liberal reaction of "Don't stand there, do something". Knee Jerk.

IF I was a South Carolina legislator, I believe I'd vote to move it to a historical place and not fly it over the Capitol. That makes sense to me, but if I was voted down on that, I'd say OK then let's move along.

[Buckrub]

And I'd honestly like in another forum to hear why folks think the Tea Party (not Baggers!) are tyrannical.

[Buckrub]

Oh, and Amazon has 'reacted' by deciding not to sell Confederate merchandise anymore...........but Communist merchandise is ok.

Let me know how that makes sense to someone. I can't get there.

[quercus alba]

I say let's get rid of the real racist flag



4974


4975

[Chicken Dinner]

Good point. That's the symbol of institutionalized racism that held black people down from 1865 until at least the passage of the Civil Rights Act.

[Big Muddy]

Saw this on another site:

"""Currently there are 137 black-only organizations listed in just the Collective Black People's Movement organization....there are literally 100's of others listed nationwide, bearing the black-only status, and many are government-funded....how are these organizations any LESS racially divisive than a piece of cloth, bearing 13 stars ???"""

[LJ3]

The whole thing seems similar in the way people choose to take offense to a particular word.

Thug, apparently, is the same as the N word now. If you choose to be offended by a word or a flag and expect everyone to bend to your feelings. I would invite you to go fuck yourself. What pill does one take to make themselves so damn important?

[Arty]

I don't think that everyone who has a Confederate flag on their truck, yard, t-shirt or wherever is a racist. I also don't think that the flag stands solely for slavery.

I know people with very deep southern roots that display the flag in pride, in honor of their southern traditions.

BUT I also know people who display it as a "fuck you" symbol.

Unless you know the person, it'd be hard to know.

I guess what I'm saying is that I understand it not being flown over the Capitol building.
But I don't support companies banning the sale of it. That's craziness and knee jerk in my opinion.

2 weeks ago Amazon and walmart thought it was fine. Now they have suddenly had a change in their morals?

[Buckrub]

Logic, son.

Try not to use that in this discussion. Puts you out of the mainstream..............

[No-till Boss]

If you can't get over racism in 150 years, you're probably not going to get over it in the next 150 either. Piss on people with stupid agendas !

[LJ3]

NTB for the win.

[LJ3]

I've found a way out of all of this. I am a white, middle class, semi-yuppie, southern, semi-redneck.

But now, the awesome part.

I now identify as a non racist white man who loves all races and thinks all wimmin are awesome.

See what I did there? I'm just self-identifying myself right out of that pigeonhole!

TOLERATE ME, FUCKERS!!!!!!

[Buckrub]

No people or race in all of recorded history has been enslaved longer, or by more countries, or for more reasons than the Jews. Yet they don't blame the Assyrians, the Syrians, the Egyptians, or even the Germans. They just hush and go to work and succeed.

[BarryBobPosthole]

Oh, and Amazon has 'reacted' by deciding not to sell Confederate merchandise anymore...........but Communist merchandise is ok.

Let me know how that makes sense to someone. I can't get there.

Why do you hate corporate America?

BKB

[Buckrub]

Sometimes the astuteness and viability of your comebacks are stunning in their apropopriety!

[quercus alba]

and never let the world forget about the holocaust . Stalin killed five times more of his own people but you don't see the Russians whining about it nonstop

[LJ3]

I am now identifying as an Irish teenager born in 1837. If any of you fuckers mention a potato I will sue you for slanderous injury to my delicate sensibilities.

[Hombre]

Famine!

[DeputyDog]

That is the battle flag of the Confederacy, they had a different national flag. I disagree that it is solely a symbol of racism. Japan still uses the same national flag they had when they were killing off the Chinese and anyone they captured. They also still use the "rising sun" flag which was their battle flag during WWII as their naval ensign. No one complains about that.

[BarryBobPosthole]

I see. I guess I am finding myself in the contrarian position here yet again. Which is fine. Since none of you are racists and believe nobody should be offended by the Stars and Bars, I think you should proudly carry it with you to visit one of your black friends and see what their reaction is. I mean, shit, if they're offended just tell them its like the Japanese flag, or the American flag, or hell, its just like the Hebrew flag. And then tell them they're just being hipocritical and sensitive.

Why don't you go do that? Well, you won't. Because you know it'd be insenesitive on your own part to do that. And no, I don't think you are a racist for not doing that and dtill belieiving as you do. You see, sometimes we don't do shit just in deference to others feelings.

But if you really think its okay to do it, then I challenge you to go do it.

BKB

[quercus alba]

I think everybody is a little racist and just won't admit it. As far as being offended, there are 300,000,000+ people in this country, there's always going to be one group offended about something or another. You can't accommodate everyone, sounds like some of these poor offended souls need to practice what they preach and be tolerant of others opinions

[BarryBobPosthole]

I think everybody is a little racist and just won't admit it. As far as being offended, there are 300,000,000+ people in this country, there's always going to be one group offended about something or another. You can't accommodate everyone, sounds like some of these poor offended souls need to practice what they preach and be tolerant of others opinions

And that was kind of my point. But don't forget, tolerance and acceptance is what got us here in the first place.

BKB

[Big Muddy]

About 6 years ago, some MS politician managed to get the vote on our state flag, put on a special statewide ballot....it was suppose to be the "final, all-said, all-done, shut-the-f**k-up-if-you-don't-like-it vote by the people"....it passed to keep our current flag by a whopping 67% majority....I guess we'll be voting on it, again, since the democraps and libtards have got their lips poked out, again. ;)

I can just about guarantee that it will stay, unless the politicians disregard the people's opinion, and over-rule it....if so, I'll not vote for a single one of the azzholes, ever again....I'm tired of all this political correctness bullsheeit!!!

4976

[Big Muddy]

BTW, Jesses Jackson's Rainbow Coalition flag gags me....take it down, or I'll hafta sue somebody. ;)


4978

[Sunshine]

In my own opinion !!!

So what's next? I can't wear black bra and panties because I'm white and might upset some black person?????


Edit:
The rest of my opinions have been deleted.
They have no relevant to many people here.

[HideHunter]

Well crap... I thought I was enlightened but you lost me at "black bra and panties".. Back to the drawing board.. ;) I promise - I'll read the rest now. :D

[BarryBobPosthole]

I kinda got that image stuck in my head too, HH. That'd be the awesomest flag ever!

BKB

[Nandy]

Hola sunshine! :poke

[Thumper]

... this blonde is trilingual and ambidextrous.

Why is it, all I can read there is "cunillingual and can change hands and pick up a stroke?" I guess the panties and bra part put the ol' filthy mind in gear. :D

[BarryBobPosthole]

I guess the upshot is that black folks need to just get over the the whole slavery deal and move on. After all it was a long time ago. Just take the white folks in the south for example. Hell, they've so obviously got over the whole getting their asses kicked in the Civil War thing. Just follow their example and stop being offended!

BKB

[Thumper]

SD'er! ;)

[BarryBobPosthole]

You are a noticer, Thump! Its all Larke's fault. I learnt it from him.

BKB

[Buckrub]

I guess the upshot is that black folks need to just get over the the whole slavery deal and move on. After all it was a long time ago. Just take the white folks in the south for example. Hell, they've so obviously got over the whole getting their asses kicked in the Civil War thing. Just follow their example and stop being offended!

BKB

Well, it does seem that you are ever so slightly starting to come around, then! Goody! :clap

[Buckrub]

They can be offended if they are being mistreated legally, or even treated differently legally. But not for something that happened to folks they never knew. History is not worthy of being offended over, even for Southerners.

I still say that Blacks would NOT be better off if slavery had never happened (so long as it didn't continue), and Southerners WOULD be better off had we won. *snort* And I also know that war wasn't about slavery, regardless of the historical rewriters. And further, that the war didn't end slavery in the north, and the Emancipation Proclamation didn't either. So, the northern attitude is a bit hypocritical.

[Big Muddy]

HA, if our rebs had only known that this delta gumbo dirt could be made into cannon balls, we woulda never lost. ;)

Oh wait, did we actually lose???....did you ever hear of anyone retiring, and moving "up north"???....didn't think so. ;)

[Buckrub]

NY film critic just called for the banning of "Gone with the Wind". Guess he didn't realize the North won in the movie. Oh well. I knew we were headed down when Amos and Andy went away. :huh

[Big Muddy]

I just heard that South Carolina is now banning the sale of Tylenol and other OTC medications....they use cotton in their bottles, and are fearful of perpetuating slavery because people will have to pick it out.:rockon

[Cards01]

goodun

[BarryBobPosthole]

The only folks I hear flappin their gums about the flag bullshit is white folks. I never heard one black person call for its removal anywhere.
BKB

[Big Muddy]

Exactly....and, they are the politically-correct libtards, I speak of....sad to say, but they've invaded MS, too.

[Buckrub]

The only folks I hear flappin their gums about the flag bullshit is white folks. I never heard one black person call for its removal anywhere.
BKB

Then you clearly are not paying any attention whatsoever, and I am sorry, but I'll have to ignore all of your comments on this cause you are a zero noticer.

[Buckrub]

This came up on another website. Aunt Jemima Pancakes.

My o my what a memory.

I just took this picture on my kitchen shelf, about 10 minutes ago. This was a doorstop since I was about 2. I'm 67 years old today. TO think that this is some kind of hate filled icon, is beyond my ability to grasp. This has nothing but positive memories for me. To be offended by it would have to show a low IQ, best I can determine.

http://i279.photobucket.com/albums/kk131/Buck7088/House/AuntJemima_zpsgijysq3t.jpg (http://s279.photobucket.com/user/Buck7088/media/House/AuntJemima_zpsgijysq3t.jpg.html)

[Buckrub]

So............y'all Libs are on Facebook, are ya?

http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/facebook-only-hired-seven-black-people-in-2013-latest-diversity-report-says/ar-AAc8FBA

[BarryBobPosthole]

Well, again, if you you'll look at history a little more accurately, more times than not its been Republicans who've called for the removal of the confederate flag in just about all southern states and that flag has been a symbol of Democrats. And last time I checked, the governors of Alabama and South Carolina, who both led the calls for removal of the flag are both Republicans. In Mississippi both US senators (republicans) called for the redesign of the state flag. Lindsay Graham also called for it.

So who's the 'tard' since y'all fancy that moniker? You need to figure out who your real targets are. The one state that's not dhanging it has a Democrat as governor (Virginia).

BKB

[Big Muddy]

It really doesn't matter whether it's the Reps. or Dems. calling for the flag change....who cares what they think, nobody trusts those dumbazzes, anyway....the day'um flag belongs to the people, not the day'um politicians....if it's such an important and sensitive issue, then let the states vote on it, just like MS did....but, don't allow the politicians to cram it down the people's throat, just because it's p.c.

And, I don't claim either of those panzy-azzed MS senators, of which you speak....never will....h3ll, one of 'em is so old, he wakes up in a different world, every morning, from his dementia.

And, all they did was give their "opinion" about changing our flag....that's a helluva long shot from actually getting it done....neither will be re-elected, anyway, and they both already know it, so they have nothing to lose, by sucking up to the p.c. flag-flap.

However, MY Governor, Phil Bryant(a Republican, btw), on the other hand, has a set of balls, and pretty much told everyone to f**k off....he said the people of MS voted to keep the flag, and that settled the matter, as far as he is concerned.

[BarryBobPosthole]

And that, IMO, is how it should be decided. Like I originally said, I don't know if it really matters one way or the other in the long run.
BUT, I've seen this described as the downfall of American values, blamed on the 'libtards' (who had nothing whatsoever to do with it), described as robbing Americans of their liberty (nobody said anything about making it illegal to fly ANY flag), and I've heard surprise at how could anyone ever construe the flag to have anything at all to do with racism which is the stupidest thing anyone could possibly say considering its history. THAT's the retardedness that irks me about the whole thing. Why it makes me want to to burn all my wife's black bras and panties!

BKB

[Captain]

4986


4987

[HideHunter]

Needs to spend a little less time in front of the camera and a little more time where he bought the shirt.

[Buckrub]

I don't think I said anywhere in this thread that the flag should be retained. And what on Earth does it matter whether Conservatives did this or that at some point? Some guy claiming to be a Conservative sits on SCOTUS and just ruled that homosexuality is ok for a legal marriage. Before, a conservative SCOTUS ruled abortion is not murder. So it seems to me that in your post above, Posty, that you are calling some folks Conservative, and maybe they are in your eyes, but not necessarily in mine.

Regardless, I said from post #1 that the SC people need to decide what to do with their flag, and more importantly, the flag and this scumbuckets murderous acts have no relation or connection to each other. How we jump to flag or symbol removal is beyond me. But I THINK I said that I can agree some 'offensive' symbol doesn't need to disappear but maybe it does need to move away from the prominence of the statehouse grounds. Alabama did that, voluntarily, and no one is claiming they did right.

So, let the record show that it was you that made this a Conservative vs. Libs. My only comment about Liberals is that Facebook has been caught with their hands in the cookie jar by not hiring blacks!!! And I was tongue in cheek slamming all you good Liberals that use this atrocious piece of crap system and helping a company that is THAT bigoted!!! That's all. And yeah, that was off subject too, so forget my complaint about being off topic!! :smileinbox

[BarryBobPosthole]

Yes, its me being divisive Aunt Jemima. Go fly a kite. I never called anyone a conservatard, nor did I even say the goddamned flag ought to be taken down anywhere. I was just trying to see the other side of things. I guess that makes me tolerant and accepting.

BKB

[Buckrub]

Nor did I call anyone a Libtard. Never used that word till just right then. I think you have. Not me.

Why is my stuff so..........divisive.......to use your word? I can't see where I've said anything so terribly polarizing?

[Buckrub]

Here's a great reaction to all of this:

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/vandals-target-confederate-monuments-in-half-dozen-states/ar-AAc9tf6

[Buckrub]

Thump starts this, comments nada, and leaves.

[Thumper]

I was simply asking what youse dufes thought about all this while working on my SD'er merit badge. :D


I can't believe nobody has posted a "What'cha Think" thread here.


Anyway .. what'cha think about the "Rebel" flag controversy? Is it time for a change? Or is it the usual b/s over-reaction to the latest news story?

[Buckrub]

But inquiring minds wanted to know what you thought!!

And I can't wait for two lovely grooms to waltz into a Mosque and ask an Imam to marry them................and then sue them when they refuse.

[Captain]

For Posthole and Thumper.

4989

[DeputyDog]

I saw a video somewhere online about the time everyone was up in arms about Indiana's religious freedom bill. They went into Dearborn, Michigan and went to several bakeries owned by Muslims and attempted to get a wedding cake made for a same sex wedding. No one would do it for them, but it was funny, they all kept sending them to the bakery next door or around the corner where they got sent onto the next one down the line.

[Thumper]

But inquiring minds wanted to know what you thought!!

Oh, I'm sorry ... I thought I'd already done that.

I don't give a rat's ass!

How's that? ;)

[Captain]

Oh, I'm sorry ... I thought I'd already done that. I don't give a rat's ass! How's that? ;) If you had a rats ass you would sell it on eBay... ;)

[DeputyDog]

If you had a rats ass you would sell it on eBay... ;)

No, he'd probably eat it. It's probably a delicacy in some of those out of the way places he likes to visit. ;)

[Thumper]

Actually, I have had rat and it ain't bad at all. No different than squirrel actually, the tails just ain't as fuzzy.

I'm not sure I ever ate the north end out of a south-bounder though. Sometimes it better to just not ask questions. ;)

[Nandy]

Sunshine, momma warn me about ALL types of blondes and I still fell for one... go figure...

[Buckrub]

NOT trying to beat a dead horse..........but this came to me whilst washing the dishes.

Thump, and of course many others, use the argument that they don't care about what doesn't affect them directly, and gay marriage doesn't affect them directly, so they don't care about it one way or the other. Further, they want me to adopt that philosophy as well, and can't understand why I don't just give up worrying about it since I should view it as they do.

Do I have that right? I think so. If not, let me know.

But if I do...........then answer me this, Batman. WHY does the 'left' viewing folks of the world.....let's just use Obama as an example, no other reason. Use anyone...... why does HE not have that attitude? Why doesn't he take your view? Why do the people who are against it have to take the view that "I'm not interested in anything that doesn't directly affect me", since you say that's a valid view???? Shouldn't he (and his ilk) take that view?

But they don't! They are adamant, active, and give a HUGE rat's ass!! Don't they??? So why do they get to validly give a rat's ass about it and I can't? It doesn't directly affect either of us? Why am I the only one (and my ilk) that isn't supposed to give a rat's ass?

I think that's a valid question.

[Captain]

Where your theory goes wrong Bucky is the issue DOES affect (effect?) them. The issue equals VOTES. So while the lifestyle does not, the results do...
Proof of the pudding is: their quickness to point out the conservatives are again' it and will repeal it if elected. So you better vote for another libitard if you don't what to loose the right just taken away from the states and illegally decided by the SCOTUS

[Thumper]

Answer this question. WHY does it bother you? WTF do you care if Bob marries Tom? Who does it hurt? Does it hurt you personally? Does it hurt anyone in your family? Does it hurt your neighbors ... friends ... work associates ... fellow retireees ... hunting club ... fishing buddies, etc. etc. etc?? The only "hurt" there is from all of this is the religious contingent who just plain don't like it. I say tough titties and I don't give a rat's ass. (had to sneak that in there) ;)

Personally, I believe religion is one of the most devisive things in the world today. Wars are fought over religion. When I was told to pack my bags and head to 'Nam ... all of a sudden half the jerk-offs around me "found religion" and decided they were concientious objectors. It's a great thing to hide behind. This descrimination (and that's exactly what it is) against gay marriage was deemed unconstitutional. Those who don't like the decision can bitch all they want. The question is, WHY are these (mostly CONSERVATIVES) bitching? Who gives a rats ass? (sorry, had to sneak that in again) Do you have a problem when the Supreme Court rules that private gun ownership is constitutionally legal? No. Why? Everything is fine and dandy as long as it fits into your narrow vison of what YOU are willing to accept. The gun haters of the world aren't happy with it. But that's fine with you, right?

I read where some county clerks are hiding behind their "religious convictions" and refusing to issue marriage licenses, etc. to gays. What a bunch of horseshit! I wonder how many of those same clerks break a commandment on a daily basis? I'm sure NONE of them have ever cheated on their spouse or peeked over their privacy fence at their neighbor's hot wife sunbathing (and "coveted" her). And I KNOW not one swinging dick has ever so much as stolen a paperclip from work or smashed their thumb in a stapler and hollered "God Damn It"!! No, they pick and choose what affects them and call it "religious conviction". I'm sorry, but as far as I know, county clerks take an oath to uphold state law and the Constitution.

Where do you draw the line? What if I want to open a bar and apply for a liquor license? Should it be ok for some nimrod county clerk to refuse to issue me one because alcohol consumption goes against his religious beliefs? What if you're filing for a divorce and get stuck with a Catholic judge? Does he refuse to grant divorces in his court because it's against his religious beliefs?

The Supreme Court made their call. Live with it you old curmudgeon. ;)

[Captain]

Thumper why does it bother you that it bothers him?

[Thumper]

Thumper why does it bother you that it bothers him?

He asked a question and I responded. His last sentence is, "I think that's a valid question." Duh.

I've answered the question repeatedly as to why it does NOT bother me. I'd like to know why it DOES bother him? That also seems like a valid question.

[Buckrub]

I'll answer you if you answer this:

Why is ok for the Pros to care so passionately one way, and not ok for me to care so passionately the other way.

And to be honest, I've already answered several times. Just re-read. It bothers me because it takes away the rights of states to set law per the wishes of their citizens. Worse, it's hypocritical. The SCOTUS has ruled marijuana use is federally illegal. Yet they allow states to legally override that law, and set their own laws in that area. YET, when it comes to marriage, they refuse to allow the same logic to apply.

Your arguments (to me), and Posthole's, continue to center around the religious issue, and such. I've said all along I won't bother arguing that way with you. I know what I believe, and I believe the government should not be issuing 'licenses' to marry or even being concerned about it. That's a Libertarian view, NOT a conservative one. See Mike Huckabee for the prevailing Conservative one. Yet you keep labeling me. (I have heard some folks don't take kindly to incorrect labeling). I have not invoked the religious issue. I believe personally that God condemns homosexuality. However, I have enough sense to separate the civil from the religious.

I do NOT want the Bible taught in schools, because I fear the teachers thereof will have a wild and crazy view of it. Lord knows that most folks do. I don't want that. I want civil and religion areas to be separate.

Why can't you see my point? It's fine for the proponents of this to be wildly, publicly, loudly, passionately FOR it..........but if the same passion and attitude is against it, they go beserk. I repeat, and repeat, and repeat...........that's Elitist, and Egotistical, and it bothers me.

[Buckrub]

And by the way, that's my best shot at having a civil discourse on a controversial current topic of the day. If you want to keep hammering at me that I need to view it identically to you and not care about this issue whatsoever then do so. But I've answered that as best I can, and as civilly as I can, and that's all I got.

[Arty]

I'll answer you if you answer this: Why is ok for the Pros to care so passionately one way, and not ok for me to care so passionately the other way. And to be honest, I've already answered several times. Just re-read. It bothers me because it takes away the rights of states to set law per the wishes of their citizens. Worse, it's hypocritical. The SCOTUS has ruled marijuana use is federally illegal. Yet they allow states to legally override that law, and set their own laws in that area. YET, when it comes to marriage, they refuse to allow the same logic to apply. Your arguments (to me), and Posthole's, continue to center around the religious issue, and such. I've said all along I won't bother arguing that way with you. I know what I believe, and I believe the government should not be issuing 'licenses' to marry or even being concerned about it. That's a Libertarian view, NOT a conservative one. See Mike Huckabee for the prevailing Conservative one. Yet you keep labeling me. (I have heard some folks don't take kindly to incorrect labeling). I have not invoked the religious issue. I believe personally that God condemns homosexuality. However, I have enough sense to separate the civil from the religious. I do NOT want the Bible taught in schools, because I fear the teachers thereof will have a wild and crazy view of it. Lord knows that most folks do. I don't want that. I want civil and religion areas to be separate. Why can't you see my point? It's fine for the proponents of this to be wildly, publicly, loudly, passionately FOR it..........but if the same passion and attitude is against it, they go beserk. I repeat, and repeat, and repeat...........that's Elitist, and Egotistical, and it bothers me.

Good job.

And since I haven't weighed in on this. I'll just say "ditto".

[No-till Boss]

Was this ever a hunting site ? LOL

[Buckrub]

Once.

In a land far away, long long ago.

Then fairy dust ate most of their brains out.

[Thumper]

It's fine for the proponents of this to be wildly, publicly, loudly, passionately FOR it..........but if the same passion and attitude is against it, they go beserk.

Ha ha ha! I'm not sure where you got all of that. I'm not for it ... OR against it, I've lost count ... maybe you know ... how many times have I said, "I simply don't give a rat's ass one way or the other?" If it's deemed legal, so be it.

The only thing I give a rat's ass about is when people get their panties all wadded up over something that affects them in no way whatsoever ... other than they "just don't like it!" (or it simply goes against their religious beliefs but they dance around it and refuse to admit it) That whole concept seems silly to me.

NTB ... isn't it odd? Haven't you noticed? We have a fishing forum, but no hunting forum. :D

[No-till Boss]

NTB ... isn't it odd? Haven't you noticed? We have a fishing forum, but no hunting forum. :D

I know y'all probably don't think so, but being a newbie, this is all really something to read. And I can't tell if any of you are serious, or y'all just like fucking with each other. LOL I enjoy much .....

[Thumper]

Personally, I like to keep people guessing. Heck, I've even been known to take a stand opposite of what I REALLY believe just for the sake of argument (but don't tell anyone here, it'll be our little secret). ;)

A lot of it has to do with me working toward my Senior SD'er badge. :D

[Buckrub]

Ha ha ha! I'm not sure where you got all of that. I'm not for it ... OR against it, I've lost count ... maybe you know ... how many times have I said, "I simply don't give a rat's ass one way or the other?" If it's deemed legal, so be it.

The only thing I give a rat's ass about is when people get their panties all wadded up over something that affects them in no way whatsoever ... other than they "just don't like it!" (or it simply goes against their religious beliefs but they dance around it and refuse to admit it) That whole concept seems silly to me.

NTB ... isn't it odd? Haven't you noticed? We have a fishing forum, but no hunting forum. :D

I feel like Groundhog Day.

The only thing that gets my panties in a wad is folks who demand that I view life as they do, and get upset about what they get upset about, and demand I pooh-pooh what they think is unimportant. As I said, that's highly Elitist, and Egotistical, and it bothers me.

And the folks I mentioned are more than just YOU. Obama is passionately for it. Hillary is passionately for it. But they, and you, get your panties in a wad if anyone passionately disagrees.

I swear.........I repeat and repeat and repeat. Am I somehow back teaching school? Is this 1972?

[Buckrub]

Personally, I like to keep people guessing. Heck, I've even been known to take a stand opposite of what I REALLY believe just for the sake of argument (but don't tell anyone here, it'll be our little secret). ;)

A lot of it has to do with me working toward my Senior SD'er badge. :D

And that's a dishonest way of arguing or discussing, and it'll get me riled enough to ignore that crap, right fast and in a hurry. Either discuss things with me with an honest heart, or don't waste my time.

[DeputyDog]

I know y'all probably don't think so, but being a newbie, this is all really something to read. And I can't tell if any of you are serious, or y'all just like fucking with each other. LOL I enjoy much .....

I've been around a long time, and sometimes I'm not sure myself. I truly believe that at least a couple of people around here are just contrarians. They'll say the opposite just for the sake of arguing or getting someone riled up.

[Sunshine]

:D Welcome to our dysfunctional GH Family , No-till. Lol :D

[Thumper]

And that's a dishonest way of arguing or discussing, and it'll get me riled enough to ignore that crap, right fast and in a hurry. Either discuss things with me with an honest heart, or don't waste my time.

It's not at all dishonest, you simply pay no attention to what I say and hear what you want to hear, that's all.

Obviously I need to translate something I've repeated over and over ... then I'll explain it in simple words so that maybe you'll understand.

"I could give a rat's ass!" Translation: 1-I don't care one way or the other ... 2-It doesn't matter to me ... 3-I could give a fuck.

Ok now, take your choice of definitions. All I've said all along is that if the courts say it's descrimination and illegal according to Constitutional Law ... I'll roll with their determination.

If they decide against gay marriage ... I'll gladly roll with that determination. Why? Because I don't give a rat's ass! ... that's why! Capiche?

If a bunch of judges, who knew enough about law to make it to the Supreme Court, put their heads together and come up with a majority determination, who am I to argue that they are wrong? I never went to law school.

Now, when I see someone who gets their panties all wadded up over their decision, I have to wonder what the reason is for that wadding ... especially if it has absolutely zero bearing on that individual's life ... in ANY way, other than this individual just plain ol' doesn't like it. That's when the only reason I can figure is one's religious beliefs. That's where we part ways. Why? Ha! Because I could give a rat's ass!! :biggrin

Now we've gone full circle. I like to do what FOX pretends to do. They always brag about the fact they present BOTH sides to any of their opinions. Ha ha ha ha! If you believe that, I have a bridge in San Francisco I'd like to sell you. One good thing about not giving a rat's ass is that it's much easier to stand back from an issue, take an unprejudiced look at it and present an argument for EITHER side. If 90% of you dufebutts decide to have tunnel vision ... I have no problem siding with the left-over 10%. I don't mind being an underdog. If I wanted to hang with the majority and have everyone agree with me on this particular issue, I'd find some Liberal, Obama-loving website to hang out at.

I can understand your being all gung-ho on the gun rights issue ... but what the fuck do YOU care if Gary is boinking Bobby in their own bedroom? I don't get it.

[Buckrub]

Jimbo, this is absolutely my last comment on this subject to you, EVER. I promise.

I have not said ONE word about the religious aspect of homosexual marriage. Your every rebuttal to me assumes I have, thus I conclude that you haven't read one word I've written. Further, you are labeling me and doing it incorrectly and that is something that you DO give a HUGE rat's ass about, but yet you do it to me.

I also realize that you don't give a rat's ass about it. I never contradicted you or claimed that you did. I DID say that you won't give me the same courtesy of believing what I want to on the subject, you demand I concur with you as the sole way of viewing this. That's Elitist and B/S. I admit I haven't counted, but I bet that's FIVE times I've said that very thing in this one thread.

I have given you my reasons for objecting to the SCOTUS decision. I will not do so again. Period. The reasons weren't religious.

And it is indeed dishonest to argue (debate, discuss, whatever the correct verb is) when you blatantly claim that no one ever knows if you are truly of that belief or just taking the opposite side because you think it's fun. I won't discuss or argue or whatever.....with someone like that. First, I can't know if you are ever serious or just poking my butt, and Second, folks like that are literally incapable of saying they are wrong.

Write more here all you want. I'm done. Not mad, panties are NOT in a wad, nothing is wrong......I'm just done with this topic because this is a humongous waste of my time if you can't even follow what I'm saying better than this.

[BarryBobPosthole]

Well, since its your last word, I guess you won't respond to me either.

But I wanted to ask a question of the folks who DO give a rat's ass about this issue. Assuming there was no SCOTUS decision, would you have supported a constitutional amendment to make homosexuality illegal? Not homosexual marriages mind you, but the act itself.

BKB

[Buckrub]

No.

[Captain]

No, but I would have supported each state taking up the issue and allowing or not allowing the union. The way the founding fathers intended. If Gary screwing Bobby up the butt had been a national issue, the founding fathers would have put it in the constitution to start with.
Just the fact alone that Gary and Bobby acts are not natural are 100 % supported by the fact they cannot naturally have children.
There are parts that go together and there are parts that don't.
And Bucky's point in valid. If you don't agree or support the decision you are viewed differently.

[BarryBobPosthole]

Where do you draw the line then on what the Supreme Court interprets in the Constitution? Y'all seem rather certain that this is a states rights issue but I'm frankly confused at how one would look at a given issue and say 'states' or 'federal' when it comes to deciding.

BKB

[Thumper]

Cappy;

And Bucky's point is valid. If you don't agree or support the decision you are viewed differently.

Viewed differently by whom? Liberals? What do you ... or anyone here care about that? You could say the same thing about the "right to bear arms" issue. I know people who think I'm off the rails and a total nut-bag because I have guns in my house ... my "Northern California" brother is one of them.

And Bucky, you've bailed and I was up until 4:00 am working on my eBay store (typical end of month stuff), so I'm beat anyway. There were no accusations ... I simply keep asking WHY you give a shit about the issue? All I wanted to know is why you feel the way you do. There has never been an answer ... only dancing. So, I have to start assuming. There is no question you have your head locked into the Bible, so that's the most obvious conclusion (for me). But, you dance around the subject and don't approach it, so I go back to why? And on what do you base you opposition on something that doesn't affect you in any way? That's all. Now I'm weary. I was simply trying to understand. It reminds me of a buddy of mine who will not touch pork. When I ask him why, he says because pigs are nasty and roll around in pig shit all day. When I ask him if he's ever looked at the hind end of a cow and what dribbles down their legs, or looked to see what chickens walk around in all day, it's no biggie. He simply has it in his head pigs are nasty. No other reason. I guess I just always like to know WHY somebody feels the way they do. It's a bad habit of mine. I'm bailing along with ya' becaue I agree, we're doing nothing but http://www.animateit.net/data/media/feb2013/deadhorse.gif.

[Thumper]

Ha ha, new blood. I guess I can get back to my end of month obligations and just check in from time to time to see what the two Master SD'ers have to say now. :D

[BarryBobPosthole]

Well, the whole reason I asked is that every news article both pro and con posts comments by people that seem to mean that they are certain it is either a states rights issue or not. I'm not so sure I'm that certain or even why they are.

And to follow that thought a little further down the bunny trail, if per the cons, if it so plainly a states rights issue then why did they wait for the decision to come down to all the sudden claim it is? Wouldn't the time for coming out with that argument have been when the court took it up to decide to begin with?

BKB

[Buckrub]

Jim, I'm not mad. I got bored telling you WHY over and over and you saying I didn't.

STATES RIGHTS. Best I can say. PLEASE try reading the words I type. The answer is there. I didn't bail. Bite all of me all over.

Whether homosexuality is wrong is ANOTHER topic, another time. Why I CARE about the SCOTUS decision is STATES RIGHTS.

Don't be obtuse.

I got lots going on too. I didn't 'bail', I just gave flipping up!

[Buckrub]

I do not think you read any of my responses. Now that I read your last, clearly you assumed my answers were biblical in reason.

I swear.

I too am tired. Bed at 10:30, up at 1:45. Long story. I got two of my family in surgery today, two of my family on airplanes, two of my family driving 900 miles with a trailer full of stuff, and I have things to do too. But I have read your stuff.

It's just hard to argue with someone who totally doesn't listen, then says that's it's me that isn't listening.

Just read all this one more time. I've said SIX times the reason for my being upset with this.

[BarryBobPosthole]

But you haven't said why you this this particular issue is one that is in the jurisdiction of the states.

What if the court decided marijuana should be legalized? Would you consider that a states rights issu or a federal one? Or for that matter should ANY drug use be considered a state or federal issue?

I'm not being difficult. I just want to know the criteria.

BKB

[No-till Boss]

Don't surrender Bucky ! I'm enjoying this way too much !

And thank you Sunny !

[Buckrub]

But you haven't said why you this this particular issue is one that is in the jurisdiction of the states.

What if the court decided marijuana should be legalized? Would you consider that a states rights issu or a federal one? Or for that matter should ANY drug use be considered a state or federal issue?

I'm not being difficult. I just want to know the criteria.

BKB

Barry, honestly, I'm too busy this morning to keep up with both arguments. That's the sole reason I haven't. Not ignoring anyone. LOTS on my plate today. Been up most of night, and kids got on road at 6:00. Son and son in law are having surgery. Daughter and granddaughter flying home from Vegas. This ain't my top priority today.

Interesting that you brought up the issue of marijuana. Your question made me laugh out loud, to be honest. What if the court decided marijuana should be legalized? Would you consider that a states rights issue or a federal one? Of all the examples you could come up with! Because that is a 100% perfect example of the crux of the matter. AND........I answered this above in detail, but I'll try one more time.

SCOTUS has said that marijuana is illegal. You with me?

Colorado, a legitimate state in the USA, said that it's NOT illegal.

SCOTUS did nothing. If asked, they'd do nothing. In that case, they allowed a state to make their own laws and rulings in DIRECT CONTRADICTION of SCOTUS rulings.

You still with me?

SO, in the case of Marijuana, they ignore State's who do their own thing and make up their own laws. They apparently don't care.

But in the case of Homosexual Marriage, all of a sudden they DO care. They are hypocrites, and they have done so IMHO to further a personal agenda and not anything to do with legal precedent or rules.

And that renders them, again IMHO, a meaningless bunch of snot nosed Elitist Drivel Pushers, to put it mildly.

As to why I disagree with homosexuality in general, I'd ask this.........if Joe Blow murders Harold Jones, and I never heard of either one, why do I care? How does that bother me personally?

I can't be here nonstop today. And this is 4 pages. Break it up and be patient is all I can say. But I am serious, I do get tired of discussing things when I have to repeat myself 9 times and keep getting asked questions I've already answered. If you seriously want to know my opinion, read what I frigging write! Thankyouverymuch.

[Sunshine]

It's neither, because its ALREADY written in Gods Law's.
Its a flat out sin to engage in Homosexuality and the only way to get back into God's good graces are to repent and change.

You CANT change Gods Laws without going to hell.

Actually started reading the Bible and finding it quite interesting.

I did not know about the clean and dirty meats. As for the pork issue:

5000 http://www.biblestudygames.com/biblestudies/healthyfood.htm

[Buckrub]

Oh Sunny. I wish I could sit down with you for a few hours.

Galatians 5:3 says if you try to keep the Old Testament Law, then you are a debtor to keep the WHOLE law! That means animal sacrifices, Priests who come through the lineage of the tribe of Levi, High Priests from the house of Aaron, keeping certain Feasts, and many others. The animal thing was given because the OT law was their CIVIL and RELIGIOUS law both. It is gone. Poof. Replaced. Not in effect any longer.

But we're getting 9 subjects going in one thread. And while I understand your contention that you want the Bible to be the law of the land, I do not. The reason I do not, is because so many people misinterpret it, and I don't want that misinterpretation becoming Civil Law. What a mess that'd be. That's why I've kept my answers (all 6 of 'em!!!) to Jimbo on this SCOTUS ruling out of the realm of religion. I believe our society is better off without sin in it, but I'm not that naive. Besides, I'm a big sinner too. But sin in my culture does affect my society. Murder, Rape, Homosexuality, all of it. Most sins do not affect me personally, which is why I find that a poor reason to "not give a rat's ass" about it. Those three (among hundreds) happen daily, but so far haven't affected me at all. None of them.

[Sunshine]

I've sinned, in the past too Bucky, but cleaned up my act many years ago.

As for being right with God over the last week, I'm sure I'm in trouble with him because of my feelings on these issues.

[BarryBobPosthole]

Again, you both seem so sure this is a decision that should be left to the states and that the SCOTUS decision is therefore illegal. But I have yet to see any critieria on what you base that on. Just because you don't like it? If the state decides it okay its suddenly okay with you? I was born at night but I wasn't born last night.

I suspect strongly that you want all of our laws to reflect your religious beliefs, even though you could not agree to what those should be, considering the arguments that have been going on for 2000 years. Why don't you just say it? You want your own version of Sharia law.

BKB

[Buckrub]

Oh now here we go.

I don't want what Sunny wants. Please don't lump us.

I don't want homosexual marriage to be legal because marriage implies government benefits, tax benefits and breaks, and such. I don't want those benefits and such fiduciary items to be spread onto another group that I don't see how they deserve it. And I don't want my society to accept that kind of behavior either. I haven't mentioned religion. I just simply don't think society is benefited from that behavior, in fact, the opposite.

I told you why, twice. They are inconsistent. But since you phrased it as a putdown, I'll rebut. I think what you want is no restrictions on society at all. And to be honest, if they'd remove all of 'em, I'd buy that compromise.

[Chicken Dinner]

Matthew 7:1

[Captain]

Cappy; You could say the same thing about the "right to bear arms" issue.

The right to bear arms IS in the constitution thus it's an SCOTUS issue.
Goober smoochin', pillow biting, fudge packing and carpet likkin' ain't mentioned in the constitution. So this its a states right issue to decide.

.

[Buckrub]

Same chapter. Matthew 7:20

[Thumper]

Well, it's REALLY hard to get any work done when all my work is being done on the computer and I'm only one click away from "checking in" from time to time. I guess I'll continue getting sucked in ... it's just SO hard to walk away.

I think you just said a lot with the above statement Bucky ... and it also explains a lot.


But sin in my culture does affect my society. Murder, Rape, Homosexuality, all of it.

So, you put homosexuality up there on the level of rape and murder? Now I understand, because I'm with you now and share SOME of your view. I will never say I don't give a rat's ass about murder and rape ... or any comparable crime. If homosexuality is a comparable crime ... I'm guilty of gross insensitivity.

And Sunny ... REALLY? Girl, you know I love ya' ... we have a LONG history and I'll always love ya' no matter what. But sometimes, with your blondness, you may as well be in "outer space"! The book you're studying has been deemed "out-dated" and was updated many, many years ago. You need to go on Amazon and order the new paperback. IMHO, we're long overdue for another update ... the sooner the better, but that's just my unpopular opinion. ;)

[Buckrub]

No Jim. Not on the same level. Of course not. For that reason, I've said that the SCOTUS opinion on Abortion is FAR more important than this one.

But just because they can be ranked, which puts Homosexuality way below both those, doesn't mean it fell off the list entirely.

And it ain't my list man. If you don't believe the Book that is my standard of right and wrong, that's fine. I gave up trying to make you believe. But I do believe in it. Why is your way the only way, and my way is not allowed?

[Chicken Dinner]

And, in Matthew 3:10

[Buckrub]

And 1 John 3:4

[Thumper]

I have a question for you Bucky. WTF does marriage have to do with anything anydamnway? It doesn't seem to mean anything to many people ... just check out the divorce rate in this country. But that aside, let's look at my situation. Lynn and I have lived together (lived in sin as far as some are concerned) for over 30 years. That's longer than probably 75% of my friends have even been married. Heck, it's longer than my own mom and dad were married! Sure, we've had our ups and downs through the years (some of those years witnessed here), not unlike most married couples, but we've always managed to overcome the obstacles and remain committed to each other. That's 30 plus years ... yet if something happens to me, Lynn gets none of my Social Security or VA benefits and if it weren't for my will, she wouldn't even have any claim to my assets. On a much simpler note, we pay extra for car insurance. I get a discount because I have the house AND my truck insured with the same company, but even though she lives here ... and has since we've owned the house (26 years) ... and we've always been a "couple" ... we're not married and cannot get the "multi-car" discount. Most of the years I was self-employed, I paid through the nose for private insurance (before I signed up for VA) because Lynn could not add me to her company insurance ... because we were not married. Simple things like that which add up. Gays would be in the same boat even though they'd WANT to get married, but could not. I don't see the fairness.

The advantage I have is, I suppose we could always get married. But the gays never had that option. We have gay friends in California who have been together FOREVER! I really don't even know how long as they were friends of Lynn and were a couple before I ever met them. (30-40 years?) ALL of their assets and benefits have accrued just like any married couple, but legally, many benefits are denied them. Why? Is it fair?

[Sunshine]

I don't want Sharia Law.
We already have a Constitution, Bill of Rights and many more documents this country has followed for many years, that our Founding Father's established UNDER GOD.

[Thumper]

Somehow, I keep getting reminded as to why I hate organized religion. ;)

[Captain]

Being the noticer I am. I noticed you and Posthole BOTH ignored my answer above.

[HideHunter]

I know y'all probably don't think so, but being a newbie, this is all really something to read. And I can't tell if any of you are serious, or y'all just like fucking with each other. LOL I enjoy much .....

Like DD - I'm still trying to sort it out myself. ;) In honesty, one of the reasons this is my favorite site on the internet is, I've never been associated with a more intelligent, informed and diverse group of people.. I seldom get too deeply involved in these "discussions" is because if there's any "deadwood" in the place - I'm it. ;) I've seen some real knock-down drag-outs. While things are often censured - nothing is ever censored. Only very occasionally, does anyone "take their ball and go home". There is probably no place I've ever frequented (including school)where I've seen both sides represented in terms I can understand.. Sure - you have to sort through some bullshit (and shit-disturbing) but there are some views presented here I could never get anywhere else. Couple more I wish would show up more often ("Will", most especially) thnx everyone.. notworthy ;)

[BarryBobPosthole]

Could you repeat the question? I honestly can't find it.

But of course the right to bear arms is a constitutional right so that is not a states rights issue at all. Unless your Texas of course, all states have to defer to the 2nd amendment to the constitution.

Bucky seems to want states to opt out of the marriage business and not have anything to do with civil unions. But of course he's also concerned because somebody might get federal benefits based on their civil union so they kind of have to be involved. But if the states get out of the civil union business, then that leaves it to the feds to decide because of all those issues. Thats why his argument makes absolutely no sense at all. Its circular. Like his brain.

BKB

[Thumper]

And it ain't my list man. If you don't believe the Book that is my standard of right and wrong, that's fine. I gave up trying to make you believe. But I do believe in it. Why is your way the only way, and my way is not allowed?

Well, at least you finally admitted what I've been saying all along, and what you've been denying. So your religious beliefs really ARE the crux of your argument. And all along I thought it was just a states rights issue.
Oh well, I'm sitting in a parking lot waiting on Lynn to arrive so we can have lunch together. I HATE typing on the phone, so I'm gonna bail. Again! Later ....

[BarryBobPosthole]

Bucky and Thumper left. That means I win.
BKB

[Thumper]

I just walked back in the door dipwad!

Wanna argue about sumpin'? :D

[Sunshine]

I'm still here, just being ignored. I Win! :D

[Captain]

Me too Sunny, I answer Postholes question about what make a state/federal issue and I'm ignored. He even acted like he didn't remember asking the question.
I respond to Thumper and all I hear is crickets chirping.
So I guess that makes me the winner!

[Cards01]

agreed

[Sunshine]

Lol watch out Cards, they'll be coming after you next. Lol

[Nandy]

You are both wieners! lol! sorry, im from the illegal alien type and cant speak/write English well, that my story and im sticking with it.

[Sunshine]

I can't speak or write it well either Nandy, so that's not a problem. :)
My grammar drives Bucky nuts!! Lol

[Buckrub]

You're all wrong, but I tire of this.

Posty, you're all wet. I said I DO want the state to be involved in CIVIL UNIONS but not MARRIAGES. UNIONS to me would be where you as a citizen get to designate anyone you want, including your Civil Unionister, to be your beneficiary of benefits. That's it. That's the sole input of the State. I said I don't want folks to get benefits based on an improper MARRIAGE, not a civil union or a designation or whatever you want to call it. That's not circular in any way, it's perfectly logical, and I'm sorry if you don't see it. Maybe I'm not explaining it, but I have to argue with about 5 people on every serious subject, and I ain't that good, sorry. So you still apparently don't understand what I'm saying.

Besides, Cappy's post #109 answers that perfectly. You just hate it that we have states.........you just want to be America, a big federal country. That ain't what they built. If you want it that way, change the name and the Constitution, and get some folks that understand what's plainly written. States are not alike. They don't want to be. They don't want to live exactly alike. They have individual laws. But I guess that bothers you, I guess they shouldn't have any of those.

Thump, you're the Master at twisting, and you did it again. You took my answer to Sunny about a religious topic, and twisted it to mean you think it applies to my argument about the SCOTUS ruling. Nope, no way, Jose. Two topics. The religious argument is the crux of how I live my personal life, and the State's Rights issue is regarding my civil beliefs. If you want us to stay on one topic each thread, hire Alison Widmer. Till then, don't twist my stuff.

[Thumper]

WTF?? Tell me how you rate this as a reply to Sunny's post.

My post:

I think you just said a lot with the above statement Bucky ... and it also explains a lot.

Bucky quote:
But sin in my culture does affect my society. Murder, Rape, Homosexuality, all of it.

So, you put homosexuality up there on the level of rape and murder? Now I understand, because I'm with you now and share SOME of your view. I will never say I don't give a rat's ass about murder and rape ... or any comparable crime. If homosexuality is a comparable crime ... I'm guilty of gross insensitivity.

Now here's YOUR post immediately after the above:

Bucky quote:


No Jim. Not on the same level. Of course not. For that reason, I've said that the SCOTUS opinion on Abortion is FAR more important than this one.

But just because they can be ranked, which puts Homosexuality way below both those, doesn't mean it fell off the list entirely.

And it ain't my list man. If you don't believe the Book that is my standard of right and wrong, that's fine. I gave up trying to make you believe. But I do believe in it. Why is your way the only way, and my way is not allowed?

Ok, yeah, it's plain as mud alright, you're responding to SUNNY'S post. Ummm, ok.

[Buckrub]

OK, I thought that last paragraph was. Guess it wasn't.

This is about as easy to follow as a Chinese roadmap. Sorry. That's my fault.

The Bible is my standard of right and wrong. But to say that I want it to be the law of the land is extreme, and very wrong. I do not. I like freedom too much, and I don't want to be dictated to by folks who don't know what it says. But to me, it's still a twist for you to think that just because I have some religious beliefs, that those are somehow always the answer to why I dislike this ruling. I don't think that's valid. I did answer you, over and over, when you asked me repeatedly why I disliked the ruling. But you just kept asking. And now it seems you're twisting my general belief to apply in this one specific area, and they are not that joined, to me. If they are to you, then let's move on.

But honest, I'm done here. Just too tired, and probably will make another mistake and answer wrong, and I'm sorry. I'm not ashamed of what I believe, and I'll be happy tomorrow or some other day to discuss it. Just worn out too much now. Too much going on in my life for me to take a break and come here and get all confused, which I'm starting to do.

[DeputyDog]

My final answer on this is to paraphrase Leviticus 20:13' " if a man lay with another man as with a female, they should be stoned."


Kinda ties the whole same sex marriage/marijuana arguments together, don't it?

[Captain]

An atheist was seated next to a little girl on an airplane and he turned to her and said, "Do you want to talk? Flights go quicker if you strike up a conversation with your fellow passenger."
The little girl, who had just started to read her book, replied to the total stranger, "What would you want to talk about?"
"Oh, I don't know," said the atheist. "How about why there is no God,
or no Heaven or Hell, or no life after death?" as he smiled smugly.
"Okay," she said. "Those could be interesting topics but let me ask
you a question first. A horse, a cow, and a deer all eat the same
stuff - grass. Yet a deer drops little pellets, while a cow turns
out a flat patty, but a horse produces clumps. Why do you suppose that is?"
The atheist, visibly surprised by the little girl's intelligence, thinks about it and says, "Hmmm, I have no idea."
To which the little girl replies, "Do you really feel qualified to discuss
God, Heaven and Hell, or life after death, when you don't know shit?"
And then she went back to reading her book.

[Nandy]

OMG Larke, you are killing me!!!

[BarryBobPosthole]

Goodern! Describes thumper perfectly!

BKB

[No-till Boss]

Romans 1:18-27

[Captain]

Goodern! Describes thumper perfectly! BKB

Like.
:D

[BarryBobPosthole]

All our times have come
Here but now they're gone
Seasons don't fear the reaper
Nor do the wind, the sun or the rain... we can be like they are

Blue Oyster Cult
Reaper 1:1


BKB

[No-till Boss]

Matt 10:28

Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell .

[Thumper]

I can see youse dufes could stand to wear out a few good stools today. ;)

[Thumper]

Man, this thread is starting to remind me of the old Burma Shave signs along the highways of the 50's-60's.

Matthew 7:1
Matthew 7:20
Matthew 3:10
1 John 3:4
Romans 1:18-27
Matt 10:28
BURMA SHAVE! ;)

[Captain]

5001

[Thumper]

:biggrin

Yep, I guess those are one of the cool things from the past that today's kids will never have a memory of. Sad. :(