Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

I don't support gay marriage but a federal amendment is unnecessary.

Once again, this isn't an issue so much about sexual orientation as it is about illegal gov't practices.

idiot...

who gives these people jobs?

...it's a sad, sad world.

The government obvously......
(F*ck them.....)

now bush is saying he had nothing to do with it and that he's backing out of it...*cough*bullshit*cough*

January 26th, 2005 11:08 pm
Bush Says Won't Pay Commentators to Promote Agenda


By Adam Entous / Reuters

WASHINGTON - President Bush on Wednesday ordered his Cabinet secretaries not to pay media commentators to promote his legislative agenda, saying payments by the Education Department were improper and new leadership was now in place.

In his most direct criticism to date, Bush leveled blame at officials at the Education Department for paying conservative commentator Armstrong Williams $240,000 to tout his landmark education plan, "No Child Left Behind."

Bush said it was an improper use of government funds, and told a news conference: "I expect my Cabinet secretaries to make sure that that practice doesn't go forward. There needs to be independence."

Federal communications regulators earlier this month opened an investigation into whether Williams violated a ban on "payola" in promoting the education law.

Bush said, "We didn't know about this in the White House."

Asked what will happen to officials at the Education Department who made the decision to pay Williams, Bush said: "We've got new leadership going to the Department of Education."

White House domestic policy adviser Margaret Spellings is replacing Rod Paige as education secretary.

"But all our Cabinet secretaries must realize that we will not be paying, you know, commentators to advance our agenda. Our agenda ought to be able to stand on its own two feet," Bush said.

Williams has acknowledged that the Education Department's outside media firm paid $240,000 to a public relations company he owns to promote Bush's education act during a television show he owned and hosted.

U.S. law requires that radio or television stations, as well as individuals, disclose on air when they have received compensation to talk about a product or issue.

After the Education Department compensation became public, Williams admitted "poor judgment."

He said he had been a strong backer of the law and that he was not influenced by outside parties. Tribune Co.'s syndication unit, Tribune Media, has canceled his column.

He wasn't responsible for the incorrect intelligence that led to the war in Iraq. He wasn't responsible for the slander campaign against McCain in his first election or Kerry in his second. He wasn't responsible for many of the incorrect military decisions in Iraq (including Abu Gahrib). And now he isn't responsible for this fiasco.

So that means that he's either got an administration that's running amok, or he's lying, or BOTH.

You, and me, and anyone else that votes. That's the sad part about this assbackwards country. There is no one to blame but ourselves. And while I know that some people, even on this forum, are proud of this news, it doesn't do much for the golden rule of 'do unto others as you would have them do unto you'

I voted for Bush! I honestly don't care about the gay marriage issue, the stem cell/abortion issue or the christian propaganda issue. My main concern is not having my ass blown to pieces as a result of a terrorist attack.

oh dont worry. bush supporters dont blame a damn thing on him.
nothing is the president's fault. you know what? at this point i admire bush. only he can take probably the most stressful job on the planet and turn it into a freaking holiday. man if only nixon just played the stupid monkey routine he may have gotten away with watergate.

people are so brainwashed that dubya can do NO WRONG in their eyes. its just phenominal! i take my hat off to mr. bush. he is THE bullshit MASTER.

I have a feeling that that is because you bought into the propoganda that only GW could save us. Much like Jesus, don't you think?

Hitler said it best: "The bigger the lie, the more people will believe it"

Or, just read my sig. It's a quote from Hitler as well.

The Iraq War was necessary. Why? Because it would instill a democracy in the Middle East. This is the last thing the Middle East rulers want. Women in Afghanistan can vote. For the first time in 800 years they can actually vote. People in other Middle Eastern countries are ruled under an iron thumb. If they see people in Iraq with freedoms they could never dream of, guess what they'll do. They'll rebel. They'll rebel against their country's tryanny and attempt to overthrow their monarchs from their thrones. The Middle East has not changed for a thousand years. Kings, tyrants and corrupt governments. That's the way it's always been. The Middle East leaders want to keep their power and their money. So they will do whatever they can to stop America from creating democracy in Iraq. Ever wonder why so many soldiers are dying this week? It's because it's election week. A democratic leader will be chosen. The other countries don't want this. They know that if Iraq becomes a democracy. The people in the other countries will want the same.

I personally don't like Bush. But he's the best chance we got compared to UN-pu*** Kerry.

The "middle east democracy domino theory" is as ridiculous as the "southeastern asia communism domino theory" that was the working principle behind the U.S. justification for the Vietnam conflict.

Vietnam becoming communist did not result in communism spreading though the rest of southeast asia and Iraq becoming a democracy is not going to result in the democracy spreading through the rest of the middle east.

"White House Uses Gay Tax Money to Fund Anti-Gay Propoganda"
That doesn't make any sense!

Someone needs to correct that title!

That's your opinion. But this entire ordeal is much bigger than just the Middle East. France, Italy, China and Russia are also involved. There are Russian snipers attacking troops in Iraq. Why? Because Russia has oil money in the Middle East. China is against the Middle East because Islam tends to turn their people against them. France also has oil money in Iraq. The picture is bigger than it seems.

Comparing Vietnam and Iraq is completely the wrong way to go.

Aside from the fact that WMD's were not found. And acknowledging the fact that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, was a secular gov't opposed to fundamental Islam, and posed absolutley zero tactical threat to the united states. And Considering that every reason Bush gave to go into Iraq was a lie in the first place and the region has been further destabilized, I don't think the war was necessary. And being as that the majority of the population will not be voting (no matter what the press tells you) and that little if any Sunni's will be voting. The gov't that will be put in place will hardly be democratic.

The idea that other middle eastern countries are going to see how great everything is going in Iraq and want to be a part of that is laughable. If people had wanted a democracy so badly they would have fought for it long ago.

Draco, your outlook on this issue does not seem to have been tempered with trying to see how different middle eastern cultures and values are from north american ones.

Actually my outlook on the issue is due to the fact that numerous members of my family actually work with the government. FBI, CIA you name it. So I have access to information that most people don't. It makes interesting dinner conversation. All I can say is that there is more going on then you know about.

What are you smoking. If the iraqi people don't support you like the vietnam war you can't win. The only way this will be solved by the iraqi people after the soldiers leave.



You think that people would that easily rise up aginst thier leaders.

oh god

"You think that people would that easily rise up aginst thier leaders."

Their culture is ingrained with fear and servitude against the leaders as it has been for hundreds of years. Nothing has ever changed. Until now. Why do think Syria is surrendering so early? Because of Iraq. Believe it or not it's working.

"What are you smoking. If the iraqi people don't support you like the vietnam war you can't win. The only way this will be solved by the iraqi people after the soldiers leave."

I don't smoke. And the issue is bigger than just Iraq. Russia, China, France and even Italy are all involved. Vietnam was a result of poor planning and backstabbing politics. It's nowhere near the same.

Anyway this WAY off topic.

Yes i can see the Americans wanting to change their Saudi head chopping friends. I saw it in bush's Crystal ball.lol

In that case your family should not be sgaring info with you and you and your family area national security risk.

My father worked in intelligence for the canadian navy during the cuban missle crisis and during the cold war. He spent alot of time up on the DEW line listening to the going's on of the world. For many years after he left the service he had to let the gov't know where he lived and when he left the country. He did not share the knowledge that he obtain with his family over dinner because that is INCREDIBLY UNETHICAL AND ILLEGAL!!!!!!

I want a democracy! Who will help me overthrow Bush?

Bush is capable of being a great leader, he just needs to know more about the world before declaring war on it.

My family doesn't disclose everything. They just tell the information that is not common knowledge nor readily available to the press. We're not a national security risk lol. And no offense but a Canadian navy guy ain't much compared to my family's occupation. Sorry. It's not illegal (are you even aware of our laws) nor unethical (this coming from a country which allows pot smoking).

South Park said it best.

"this coming from a country which allows pot smoking"
And we aprove gay marriage and we are the evil doers and should be punished. Lets declare war on Canadains communists!!!
We Canadains are ethical and tolerant people thank you every much!! I can't say americans are tolerant.

Yes, that's true, shame on our intelligence service for actually getting their facts straight. Being as you show a complete ignorance as to the importance of DEW line surveillance during the cold war and your casual dismissal regarding the sharing of security issues around the dinner table, not to mention the obvious lack of knowledge as to the level of communication that "used" to be prevalent between your mighty intelligence gathering nation and my puny backward country I really am questioning alot of what you have to say as truth.

Oh yes, just so you know, the reason why we don't waste time and money going after kids who smoke pot is because there are much more serious issues that take precedence. To waste time on little issues like that would be as foolish as government officials wasting time and money on investigating issues such as the sexual orientation of an animated sponge as opposed to paying attention to social security or the war in Iraq.

Dude, legal pot smoking is just like legal gay marriage, a form of tolerance. People are free to do what they want, not stopped unnecessarily.

Thats a clever job done by intelligence works men, discuss work stuff with your family and let one of the family members brag on the net about it. Secret intelligence my ass, they should change it to common unintelligent agency. Their slogan is "you ever wonder about stuff the media dont tell you, just ask an agents family member and they fill you inn"

omg just noticed it LOL!!

and when it comes to these ppl they're just couple of morons... **** 'em

Allow me to translate for the simple-minded:

White House (the Bush administration) uses Gay Tax Money (the tax money collected from gay Americans) to Fund Anti-Gay Propoganda.

It is not the worst injustice relating to taxpayers' money by far...

could congress actually prove useful?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

January 28th, 2005 2:45 am
Senators to Introduce 'Stop Government Propaganda Act'

By Brian Orloff / Editor & Publisher

In response to continued revelations of government-funded "journalism" -- ranging from the purported video news releases put out by the drug czar's office and the Department of Health and Human Services to the recently uncovered payments to columnists Armstrong Williams and Maggie Gallagher,who flacked administration programs -- Sens. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) and Frank R. Lautenberg (D-N.J.) will introduce a bill, The Stop Government Propaganda Act, in the Senate next week.

"It's just not enough to say, 'Please don't do it anymore,'" Alex Formuzis, Lautenberg's spokesman, told E&P. "Legislation sometimes is required and we believe it is in this case."

The Stop Government Propaganda Act states, "Funds appropriated to an Executive branch agency may not be used for publicity or propaganda purposes within the United States unless authorized by law."

"It's time for Congress to shut down the Administration's propaganda mill," Lautenberg said in a statement. "It has no place in the United States Government." The bill is co-sponsored by Sens. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) and Jon Corzine (D-N.J.).

Formuzis told E&P that while the bill is being introduced by Democrats, its message and intent is something endorsed by Republicans and Democrats alike.

"We only have a few senators on the bill so far, but we hope and expect that we'll get a number of others to sign on to the legislation once we introduce it," he said. "This is not a Republican or Democratic issue. This is an issue about an independent press, and I think that's something that will cross party lines."

The act would allow citizens to bring qui tam lawsuits on behalf of the United States government when the Department of Justice does not respond.

If the matter is taken to court, the bill proposes that the senior official responsible would be fined three times the amount of the "misspent taxpayer funds" plus an additional fine ranging from $5,000 to $10,000. And if a citizen's qui tam suit is accepted, the bill proposes that the plaintiff receives between 25 and 30% of the proceeds of the fine.

"The President said that his cabinet agencies made a mistake when they paid commentators to promote his agenda," Kennedy said in a statement. "It's more than just a mistake, it's an abuse of taxpayer funds and an abuse of the First Amendment and freedom of the press. ... If the President is serious about stopping these abuses, he will support this legislation."

According to a release, publicity or propaganda is defined in the bill as: news releases or publications that do not clearly identify the government agency responsible for the content; audio/visual or Internet presentations that do not identify the responsible government agency; any attempt to manipulate journalists or news organizations; messages created to aid a political party or candidate; messages with a "self-aggrandizing" purpose or "puffery of the Administration, agency, executive branch programs or policies or pending legislation"; and, finally, messages that are "so misleading or inaccurate that they constitute propaganda."

well said draco

Yeah I would appreciate not being blown to pieces too

Thats generally not a good day

allow me to translate it for dumbass

u make it sound like the tax money is gay, u say Im weak minded, learn to write a title and the\n we talk

duh...

Or maybe you could just understand what he meant

i agree that it is phrased poorly, but why the hostility?
i can see what he is saying, how a gay person pays taxes and that money is being used to fund anti gay-propaganda...but it would have been a better point made in a post rather than as the thread title

Oh dear God! Paint the streets of Toronto Gold will ya?!

We Germans are ethical and tolerant people too!! it hink a lot of Americans are tolerant too though


I consider painting Berlins streets gold

Wind Dancer, as much as I love my country, I have to admit that manny321 goes a little overboard. I do not believe that all americans are intollerant. A blanket statement like that is just insane.

I will say that, unfortunately, the intollerant people usually speak the loudest so are most often heard firmly supporting the current sterotype that seems to be developing.

I understand your views KD. And I know that intollerant people come from all different parts of the world. We are living in a world of constant change and who knows how things will turn out. Stereotyping may never go away is something that prolly will have to deal with for the rest of our lives.

the difference is in america we now live in an environment where
we are encouraged to outwardly express intolerance. thus and the unsilent minority of a-holes seem to have the loudest voices.

take sponge-bob for example. the right is attacking it's creators for taking part in a televised message to children promoting tolerance of differences in their peers...making ABSOLUTELY NO comment on homosexuality. since the tolerance of all people is promoted, that pisses the right off.

i guess the message should read" be tolerant of all people...except gay people because god hates them and so should you"

why is their an evil minority in power which wishes to turn america into a culture of hateful bible beating redneck fascists?

That statement could be said for both "sides" and still be accurate.

First, I did not say you were weak-minded, I said you were simple-minded.

Second, the title of the thread is the title of the article. If you have an issue with the way the title is phrased, take it up with the author, Paul Johnson.

Furthermore, the phrasing of the title is not atypical of what would appear in a newspaper. Maybe you should read more?

Over sixty percent of people are against gay marriage So deal with it

figures dont lie, but liars figure. lets see a link there professor.
if not, please keep your numbers to yourself.

Check some polls you guys are in a minority

Not over here

not over here either

i asked for a link to such figures, not another pompous declaration that you are the majority...so yeah, where is that link?

I don't need a link Alabama and Michigan already passed a law against it

you are truely a gem

The last time I checked, we do not put the rights of minorities up for a majority vote.

The majority of America does not endorse gay marriage. It's fact. I don't support gay marriage for reasons both political and social.

This is rather facist I believe.

And how is the objection of gay marriage in any way fascist?

Well cause you take rights from peopel. Prtetty much yes.

i always thought that the constitution was created to limit governmental powers, and not the power of the people...shit it starts with WE THE PEOPLE.
it was supposed to be a list of things our government CANT tell us we can/cant do...now its being changed into another lawbook

Hahah soo true. Really why should gay people not marry? I mean I can well understand what the people with the gay adoption are trying to say but here there are just no valueable arguements.

Yea I think for once I argee with you!But how do you know if this is true or not?JM

JM please you always have good arguements. Why not allow Gays to marry?

Gay marriage is a romantic idea. I would love for it to happen. But it doesn't work. In a political/legal sense it really can't happen. If gays are allowed to marry then it would adversely affect our legal system. If man can marry another man why can't a man marry his cousin or a dog or his daughter. Now hold on before you blow your top and accuse me of being a homophobe and such. Marriage was originally a man and woman. If gay marriage is legalized in America. Then it can be a man and man, a woman and a woman or a man and a woman. There's no census. There are sick people in the world that would love to take advantage of this legal plothole. Under such a law marriage can be between anyone. There's no definition to abide by. Under such a law the state courts and even the Supreme Court would not have the power to block a incestous, zoophilic, or polygamous marriage because the very definition of marriage has been shattered.

What comes with marriage when two people marry besides a ring and a dowry? Tax refunds, hospital rights, and shared business. Imagine what would happen if Bill Gates and Donald Trump got married ( I know these men are heterosexual but the court has no way of knowing nor no right to object under a gay marriage law) These two men are filthy rich on their own. Married these two men would be beyond the defintion of wealth. Tax refunds and several marriage dowries would increase their business exponentially because their marriage grants them more profit. That's why rich people marry other rich people. A single divorce causes the state to pay several thousand dollars. Imagine what would happen if gay marriage were legalized. The divorce rates would double. The state's would be under tremendous financial strain.

Is their a limit to partners? Can I marry a man and woman at the same time? Can gay marriage make another a person a citizen? How would religous institutions be affected? There's so many variables to take into consideration.

It's a nice dream. I would love for it to happen. But in scope of the bigger picture it cannot work. Our governmental/societal system was not designed for it. Civil unions are the best way to go. All the benefits of marriage. None of the nasty afteraffects.

"If man can marry another man why can't a man marry his cousin or a dog or his daughter."

This is not a valid argument. It's been debunked numerous times in some of the other gay threads.

Hmm I wonder why that didn't haoppen in germany so far and we got it for what 4-5 years now?

To BackFire :

I know its not a valid arguement. But under such a law the court could not prevent such a marriage from occurring since a consensus does not exist. I am by no means equating gay marriage to such disgusting practices. But there are sick people in America that would take advantage of this law and circumvent it to their benefit.

To Bardock42 :

No offense, but Germany is completely different from America.

Because of what? Cause we don't want to marry toasters?

"I know its not a valid arguement. But under such a law the court could not prevent such a marriage from occurring since a consensus does not exist. I am by no means equating gay marriage to such disgusting practices. But there are sick people in America that would take advantage of this law and circumvent it to their benefit."

Yes they could disallow such marriages.

If some law was passed it would simply be changed to allow same sex marriage, it wouldn't suddenly allow people to marry toasters, dogs, or cousins because it is harmful to do so.

Yeah don't put your Wiener into a toaster

Well it's impossible for someone to legally marry a dog or a toaster for the mere reason that they can't actually agree to marriage because they aren't aware of what it is. A toaster isn't alive and thus can't talk, love or give it's permission to be married. A dog is alive, but can't agree to marry because it doesn't have an idea of what the concept or marriage is. Cousins wouldn't be allowed to marry because it's dangerous.

If some law was passed it would simply be changed to allow same sex marriage to be allowed, it wouldn't suddenly allow people to marry toasters, dogs, or cousins because it is harmful to do so.

And again no consensus on marriage exists. Marriage would not be between a man and woman. It can be anybody. Such a law would be appealed and probably conceded.

There would still be a consensus of marriage, it would just be expanded to allow same sex marriage.

Cousins wouldn't be allowed to marry because it's dangerous."


How is this dangerous? Many bigoted people in America think the same thing about gay marriage.

There would still be a consensus of marriage, it would just be expanded to allow same sex marriage."

What consensus is that? What about polygamy? And you seemed to also forgotten about the economic, societal, and political affects of the legalization of gay marriage.

Because it is dangerous geneticwise

More Mutations and all

I do?Some people say I am bad with debating.I think that marriage should between a man and a woman and not anything else.If those people want to get married fine but leave the church out of it.JM

The offspring have a greater chance of a deformity. The bigots who think that about gay marriage are basing it off of prejudice, not fact.

Well so you are pro Gay marriage as long as they don't marry inchurches? I mean they don't want that anyway I think.

"What consensus is that? What about polygamy? And you seemed to also forgotten about the economic, societal, and political affects of the legalization of gay marriage."

It would just allow it to be between a man and a woman, or people of the same sex, it wouldn't effect the number of people allowed in a marriage, simply the sexuality of those involved.

I don't think there will be any significant effects from allowing gay marriage, other then some pissed off bigots and happy gay people.

Kind of I am againt gays all the way becaue it is not normal or anything likle that.But instead of making a big deal of them wanting to be a law for them to married is pointless.
JM

But you know that even animals have homosexual tendencies. And they just want government to reckognize them as a couple, which is ok simnce they life together and sharre their lifes in exactly the same way as heterosexual couples do I think

Actually the cousins mutation arguement is myth. The greater chance of deformity is as minimal as anybody else. And many bigots could also argue that marriage between gays is harmful to society because the children will be "corrupted".

Religions would also be affected by the gay marriage legalization since religions are often the curtailers of the union.

"and happy gay people"
this is just funny isn't it.

The government can recognize gay couples. Under civil unions. All the benefits of marriage, none of the side effects

but that is like saying that heterosexual couples are better. Well if heterosexual can only have civil unions too I agree

Of course for that argument to be valid you'd have to ignore all of the evidence that supports that children growing up with two gay parents turn out no different then those who grow up in a straight houshold.

Also, a law wouldn't force religions to marry gays if it went against their beliefs. All it would do is allow gays to be married by those religions who already support it (Budhism, for example) and said marriage would be recognized by state.

Also, there is some greater chance of deformity by marrying cousins, it's not alot, but it's there.

Of course for that argument to be valid you'd have to ignore all of the evidence that supports that children growing up with two gay parents turn out no different then those who grow up in a straight houshold.

True. But the bigots would argue the children need a "traditional" environment.

The chance of deformity is 4% with cousins. Lawyers can agrue the same thing about alcholics, people with down syndrome, and blacks with sickle cell anemia. If these people can marry, despite the danger to their children, why not cousins?

Buddhism doesn't actually support homosexuality. It justs says that homosexuality is just a need like heterosexuality that must be rationed.

And the economy?

What aboot the economy? Well its just a decision the government made I don't know if it is right with cousins but well for brother or sisters it sure is right.

"True. But the bigots would argue the children need a "traditional" environment."

The fact that this is factually untrue from the evidence makes this invalid.

"The chance of deformity is 4% with cousins. Lawyers can agrue the same thing about alcholics, people with down syndrome, and blacks with sickle cell anemia. If these people can marry, despite the danger to their children, why not cousins?"

The difference is that these people all have diseases that can't be helped in anyway (save alcholics). People marrying cousins are conciously making a decision that could ultimately be harmful, one that they can avoid.

"Buddhism doesn't actually support homosexuality. It justs says that homosexuality is just a need like heterosexuality that must be rationed"

The point is that they would marry gay people if given the chance.

What about the economy?

"The difference is that these people all have diseases that can't be helped in anyway (save alcholics). People marrying cousins are conciously making a decision that could ultimately be harmful, one that they can avoid."

And the alcoholics, blacks with Sickle Cell anemia, and people with Down Syndrome also consciously choose to marry despite the fact it would be ultimately harmful to the child. Not to mention the risks are greater than the cousins marrying defacto.

The point is that they would marry gay people if given the chance.

I doubt it. And Buddhism makes a miniscule percentage of our population. Christianity, Islam, Juddhism and others are outright against it. It is it fair for homosexuals to only be allowed to marry under one religion even if they belong to another denomination?

What about the economy?

Read previous post. Bill Gates, divorce tax, marriage tax, marriage dowries, etc.

You know that fake marriages are illegal?

Fake marriages? What are talking about. Please Explain.

"And the alcoholics, blacks with Sickle Cell anemia, and people with Down Syndrome also consciously choose to marry despite the fact it would be ultimately harmful to the child. Not to mention the risks are greater than the cousins marrying defacto."

Yes but they have no alternative to their diseases. The person marrying the cousin does have an alternative, they can marry someone else who they aren't related too.

"I doubt it. And Buddhism makes a miniscule percentage of our population. Christianity, Islam, Juddhism and others are outright against it. It is it fair for homosexuals to only be allowed to marry under one religion even if they belong to another denomination?"

Well it's kinda silly to force a religion to do something they don't believe in. The law would only make it allowable for gays to be married, they wouldn't force religions to participate in it if they didn't believe in it. Besides, you can be married without the use of any religion, straight through the government you can be married.

well for example marriages between foreigners and citizens are investigated at least in my country.

I think I know what you're talking about Bardock. When you say fake marriages you mean an illegal alien marries a citizen of a certain country so that the illegal alien can become a citizen? Is that what you mean? If so that happens here very often. Certain people from other countries marry U.S. Citizens in order to obtain a visa or a residential permit.

Yes thats what I mean, I guess you could as well do that with people that you doubt really life together and all.

Yes. Imagine if a Afgnan male terrorist who's a citizen marries another male Afghan male terrorist and automatically becomes a citizen. The immigration rate would double. And believe me that's the last thing we want. People are willing to do anything to become a American citizen. Including marrying someone of their own gender.

Yeah, but the other side of the coin is that some of the marriages are fixed so that illegal alien pays the citizen for the marriage. After a year they get a divorce and each goes his/her separate way. Is a scheme that is becoming agaisn't the law. Problem is......how can you tell if the marriage is fix or not?

Well why not just marry someione of the opposite gender? What do you mean with double? Are you implying there are as many people that want to marry people of their own gender as there are of different?

well I know we have investigator they check if the people live and together. And probablys more stuff.

I'm saying that people with twisted intentions will take every advantage imaginable of the gay marriage legislation. It won't matter if they're gay or not. Let's say a certain gang member is wanted for attempted murder. Another gang member can marry him and escape prosecution. Why? Because the law authorizes that any conversation taken between a married couple is legally bound as privilage. The criminal justice system would require a complete revamp.

No I'm arguing that gay marriage doesn't just affect the gays. It affects everything and everybody. The government, the army, the navy, the state government, our economy, the criminal justice system, EVERYTHING. Is it fair to give marriage to homosexuals with complete disregard to everyone else. Is it fair to authorize a complete revison of our government and laws for the interests of one minority group. Is it fair to put a small group's wishes above the majority's welfare? No it's not.

Gays can marry. We call these civil unions.

Well then let Heterosexuals only have civil unions too and its fair again.

It's not about fairness. It's about practicality and rationality.

Why? I don't see whats the point, well if these civil unions are so great why not everything cut back to them,. So it would be fair and there wouldn't be any negative aspects?

Civil Unions is just a politically correct statement for marriage. It's not an actual marriage but it has all its benefits. Once again, why should a small group that represents a very small percentage of America cause everybody else revert to civil unions. It would not be fair at all.

Yes it would be, everyone would be equal, and you said civil union are the same as marriages so why not for all?

It would cost a sh**load of money to revert marriage to civil unions. Do really think millions of Americans would sit back and let their marriage be substanderized?

Well why shouldn't say, you say its the same, so whats the problem?

The problem is that reverting civil unions would cause our government trillions of dollars, a significant increase in taxes and probably some very very angry heterosexual people that want their marriages to remain marriages not a civil union. In a perfect society, gay marriage would work. We're anything BUT a perfect society.

Yeah you are a homophobic society, which is the 0only problem there is.

Actually we are the one of the most tolerant towards homosexuals society in the world. Lest we forget that there are countries like Egypt and China that castrate you for being a homosexual. We're pretty tolerant compared to the rest of the world.

Oh thats great what next? compare your executions to ancient rome and say you are actually a liberal society? One question do you really want to be compareds to these countries?

We ARE a liberal society. We're the most liberal society in the world. Nobody's more liberal than us. Except maybe Canada.

Forgiv3e me if I laugh at you.

hahahahah

no you are not.

Practiacally western europe is more liberal then you

They don't have the rights we do. Western Europe practically plagarized our Constitution.

Oh and you stole it from John Locke, who cares. By the way we imprioved it.

John Locke? "Improved it" would be a massive overstatement. Don't even let me get into your country's history.

No please do. What dit the Federal Republich of Germany do?

Oh and yes John Locke "Life, Liberty and Property" basically you just copy pasted.

Can anyone say Nazism? America saved your country's ass and practically organized your country's current government.

John Locke was practically an American. Why? Because all the Americans at the time were British. John Locke is British and lived in America briefly before he died. We didn't copy anything. His essays just inspired us to create a government based on his ideas.

Well then you made it better when you installed our government. And well still Locke was British and it doesn'T really matter where you got the odeas from, just saying you are the most liberal country is BS.

It's not BS. It's the truth. Why do you think hundreds of immigrants flock to America to escape their totalitarian governments? Because our country represents liberty and human rights unlike any other country in the world. Not many immigrants wanna go to Germany.

And Canada is WAY more liberal.

Hahaha this made me laugh, actually a hell of a lot of immigrants go to germany we just don'TR whine aboot it since we are not racist.


The reason why people go to the US is not because you are so liberal (you don'T even allow gays to marry) but because people belive in the american dream, which actually is a really nice ide, but you are maybe more liberal then 3rd world countries but thats aboot it.

And yes Canada is way more liberal, too.

**** you don't even have a decent welfare state.

So not allowing gays to marry some how makes them racist? What a small world you live in my man. Our countries has liberties you haven't even dreamed of. You are extremely ignorant of our country. We have a very good welfare state. Germany has WAY less to worry about. You don't have as many people, you don't have terrorists bombing us, and you certainly don't have any major influence to the outside world. America is the most proactive country of human rights and democracy int the world. 79 countries in the last half century have become more tolerant of races, gender and social classes because of us. Because of us your country was freed from Nazism and instilled with democracy by Woodrow Wilson. Your country would have became a communist state if it weren't for us.

America is the patron of liberal thinking. The rest are just followers. Including yours.

"It's not BS. It's the truth. Why do you think hundreds of immigrants flock to America to escape their totalitarian governments? Because our country represents liberty and human rights unlike any other country in the world. Not many immigrants wanna go to Germany.

And Canada is WAY more liberal."

Wow we had over 325,000 last year in Canada last year and you only a few hundred. Sad sad lol Canada accepts immigrants at a much higher then America and we are not complaining about the end of Canada as we know it. Why because we are tolerant people, and its a fact they are many more intolerant Americans then Canadians. Even if you bring population in.

No not allowing gays to marry is narrow minded.
Think bad of Hispanics and Blacks and Asians and what not makes youir sonciety racist.
Well what are these liberties? I wouldn't know any you have that I don'T have here.
Your welfare state is good? this is just not true. Way more people live in poverty in your country than in mine. Even though we get problems to afford that nowadays.
Well we have like one third the people you have and what 1/100th of the space I am not sure Germany is way smaller though.
Well maybe we don't have terrorist bombing us because we didn't give terrrorist weapons and pissed them off then.
Yes its tru e we don't have a lot of influence but should you really be proud of it? Yopu prtetend to be the police force of the world, no one asked you for it.
What 79 countries? I only remember you ****ing up countries after you freed us.
Your last point is true, and we know it.

And this is not true Britain laid the foiundation you took it over and made a pretty goofd thing out of it, but Europe took its way there too, yes we got it because of the US but thats not for all countries.
Actually we are not followers of your country we want to be friend swith your country, but you just keep ****ing up all relations to other countries. Well I don't think that is too smart. But its your decision I just hope you don't lose one day.

"Wow we had over 325,000 last year in Canada last year and you only a few hundred. Sad sad lol Canada accepts immigrants at a much higher then America and we are not complaining about the end of Canada as we know it. Why because we are tolerant people, and its a fact they are many more intolerant Americans then Canadians. Even if you bring population in."


No its because of terrorists. Terrorists that want dismantle our country. We don't let many people in because we don't want anybody flying an 747 into the Empire State building. Canada isn't a threat to anybody. They have absolutely nothing to worry about. Ladies and Gentlemen, ignorance at its best. Idiot.

Your country seriously is a thread because you think its on you to force people to do what you want them to do

"No its because of terrorists. Terrorists that want dismantle our country. We don't let many people in because we don't want anybody flying an 747 into the Empire State building. Canada isn't a threat to anybody. They have absolutely nothing to worry about. Ladies and Gentlemen, ignorance at its best. Idiot."


WEll if you your country didn't do such stupid things in the past maybe you guys wouldn't face this problem. If you bomb muslims for 15 years now they are going to strike back. So imo both sides are the idiots. The past is coming back to haunt us.

You coud respond to my post too, since I took my time to answer all you said.

just a question ...........
how stupid is a country who try to determine love as a legal process.
You cant help who you fall in love with, time to face reality rather than this is how i see the world!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
For the gays out there, hope you find what you look for, love is a magical thing so god bless and screw the ignorant ones. Love conquer all in the end ...........

this is the classic you caused you solve it. You gave them weapons and money to fight but now they are using it to attack you. I don't see how can argue aginst that. You sudam weapons of mass destruction in the 80's he was going to use them again. Damnit the CIA was helping OSama full out in the 80'd to fight the russians. As my history teachers said America dosne't care who you are if you are of any use for them Ex IRAQi 80d's.

If you give them weapons they will come idiot.

No not allowing gays to marry is narrow minded.
Think bad of Hispanics and Blacks and Asians and what not makes youir sonciety racist.
Well what are these liberties? I wouldn't know any you have that I don'T have here.
"Your welfare state is good? this is just not true. Way more people live in poverty in your country than in mine. Even though we get problems to afford that nowadays."

Our people have about hundred times more people than your country. Of course we have more poverty. We have more people. Don't they teach you math over there?


"Well we have like one third the people you have and what 1/100th of the space I am not sure Germany is way smaller though."

You're kidding me right. Germany is about the size of Alaska. It's now here near the size of our country. Look at a map! Your country does not have a third of our population. A fifth would be more accurate.


"Well maybe we don't have terrorist bombing us because we didn't give terrrorist weapons and pissed them off then."

Your ignorance and stupidity is staggering. The terrorists attacked us because we're institutionalizing democracy in the Middle East. Not to mention these are crazy jihad members who believe that they'll get 70 virgins if they blow themselves up. Are saying we deserved you little speck of dust?

Yes its tru e we don't have a lot of influence but should you really be proud of it? Yopu prtetend to be the police force of the world, no one asked you for it.

We don't police the world because we want to. We police the world because we have to. Nobody else will do it. When there's trouble in another country, who do you call? You call us. And we save your asses again and again. And of course we get no thanks.

What 79 countries? I only remember you ****ing up countries after you freed us.

Let's see Uzbekistan, South Korea, Japan, GERMANY, and Russia to name a few. ****ing what countries? How? When?

"And this is not true Britain laid the foiundation you took it over and made a pretty goofd thing out of it, but Europe took its way there too, yes we got it because of the US but thats not for all countries."

Britain was monarchy. They had no foundation for democracy. We do you think we rebeled against them? The US instills democracy like no other.

"Actually we are not followers of your country we want to be friend swith your country, but you just keep ****ing up all relations to other countries. Well I don't think that is too smart. But its your decision I just hope you don't lose one day."

No its because Germany has significant oil interests in the Middle East and they don't want it to be taken away. Explain the hired German ex-soldiers assassins sniping our soldiers in Iraq. Russia is a similar situation.

Ignorance is thy name. Apparently the press has not changed since the Nazi regime. It's the only explanation for your misinformation.

"WEll if you your country didn't do such stupid things in the past maybe you guys wouldn't face this problem. If you bomb muslims for 15 years now they are going to strike back. So imo both sides are the idiots. The past is coming back to haunt us"

You're joking right? We bombed the muslims dictators because they killing millions of their own people with their experimental gases. Your p*ssy nation you call Canada refused to do anything about it. We were the only ones who had the balls to act on such an injustice. Why I am I arguing with a Canadian? It's not like your country does anything for the world. You're a country of cowards who critize everyone from a distance.

ok proof of the german snipers........maybe they are hired guns cause they are so f****** good at what they do

You being biased i gave facts, terrorist are idiot so is American foreign policy. It will lead to nothing, but bledshed. All isay with that kind of thinking may god be with you my yankee friends.

No we do help people that we know can be helped. Not iraq!!





YOU GAVE THEM THE GASSES YOU F^%&% MORON

ohh terorists are idoits????????????????? damn we didnt know so what is this yankee stuff aboot

*sigh* Okay, again what more liberties do you have?


I, of course meant the officcial calculation of poverty which is 60% of the average income I figured you would go by that, of course you have more people but its aboot percentage.

Thats what I said, Germany is way smaller then the US we have aboot one third to one fourth of the population though we have like 85 million you like 270 million.


But why do you think the terrorist belive you to be the enemy? Why did you brin in Saddam Husseins regime just to take it out later, same with Bin Laden you actually supported them and let them fall which started the anger. And that is BS you weren'T doing anything aboot democracy you on the other hands supported monarchies over there.


well maybe next time ask if people actually want you, and maybe work together with the United Nations, so that it doesn't look like you do as you please, you are not our Big Brother you don'T have to watch the world, and even if you do save us from communism in China and North Corea and don't beat on some guys that aren't even a thread to their neighbour countries

I don't remember you doing anything aboot russia I think they decided that and did it then. But well ok I give you you got a few democratic countries, its just not your duty to do that.


Britain was monarchy. They had no foundation for democracy. We do you think we rebeled against them? The US instills democracy like no other.

Britain was a monarchy, a liberal one though with elections and stuff. Well what aboot the French Revolution then. Ok your system was the first but that doesn't make yours the best.


>>Ignorance is thy name. Apparently the press has not changed since the Nazi regime. It's the only explanation for your misinformation.<<

This at least I can agree too, your press seriously doesn't seem to give you any proper information.

Haha that is funny we have no oil interest whatsoever, we don't evedn have a chance to get to the oil that you took from the middle east. The problem is your country wanted the oil not ours. the reason why we didn'T fight with you is because our constitution doesn'T allow us too.
And I really don't know what german ex soldiers do, its none of my business, and just beccause someone from my country helped Iraq (even though I don'T know if that is true) it is in no way related to my countries government

"You being biased i gave facts, terrorist are idiot so is American foreign policy. It will lead to nothing, but bledshed. All isay with that kind of thinking may god be with you my yankee friends."

Biased. Please. Where was Canada during WWI? Where was Canada during WWII? You don't do anything. You just critize and pout with this ridiculous "holier than thou" rhetoric. Terrorists need to be stopped. They kill and maim without reason. Spain suffered greatly with thousands dead. You believe we should let them do what ever they want. I was right. You are cowards. Instead of facing the enemy, you hide under the carpet. Pathetic.

No we do help people that we know can be helped. Not iraq!!

Like who? Besides Save the Whales and Right to Weed foundations?

One second Canada joinde WW2 2-3 years before you

Sorry I didn't get that