Print

[melon]

QUOTE

Gay Marriage- He has not limited any freedoms. This is not a right of gay people and never has been.

I started a thread on this. Gay marriages are currently allowed in 2 states but Bush is bringing in a change of law to make marriage a hetrosexual arrangment only. He went as far as saying it was wrong.

I dont know Bush's policy on abortion but even Clinton was against. There are abortion clinics but they reguarly suffer attacks from "terrorists" who are anti-abortion. This includes doctors bieng beaten up and buildings bieng set on fire.

[67thRaptorBull]

QUOTE (Ween311 @ May 25 2004, 02:51 PM)

Actually, most of those links were letters that people were writing on other forums.  I only bothered to look at the links on the first page.  One was about how GW said that freedom is a 2 way street when the Dixie Chicks got mad that people were upset by what they said, and one of the links was about kids soccer playoffs. Remember kids, just because someone posts links of their backup information, doesn't means it pertains to anything.... To some of the other things that were listed as part of our freedoms in the US being limited by GW. Gay Marriage- He has not limited any freedoms.  This is not a right of gay people and never has been. Abortion- As far as I know, there are legally operating abortion clinics all over the US.  I think you have it mixed up with late-term abortions, which I have not been able to find a President (past or future candidate) who is for late-term abortions. Freedom from religions persecution-I think the only people who want to suppress our religious freedom is the ACLU.  (Read about how they made Los Angeles remove the cross symbol from their city seal). Patriot Act-  Hmmmm.....I agree with you there, but now it is the Democrats who want to extend the Act.  Remember it was set in place temporarily during a time when our country was threatened.  I think it should go away. I don't agree with a lot of things Bush does, but to say that he wants to limit the freedom of Americans is kind of silly.

wait, so if someones gay, that means there entitled to less rights then someone straight?

thats likes saying your a negro, so im gonna make a law saying you cant do what whites can

o wait, that already did happen and look what came of it  

[67thRaptorBull]

[Ween311]

QUOTE (melon @ May 25 2004, 08:58 PM)

ween I respect you for the way you argue your point without correcting peoples gramma or resorting to namecalling. But I started a thread on this. Gay marriages are currently allowed in 2 states but Bush is bringing in a change of law to make marriage a hetrosexual arrangment only. He went as far as saying it was wrong. I dont know Bush's policy on abortion but even Clinton was against. There are abortion clinics but they reguarly suffer attacks from "terrorists" who are anti-abortion. This includes doctors bieng beaten up and buildings bieng set on fire.

Thanks for the props.  Too bad you are in a diferrent country.  It would be cool to have a couple of cold ones and talk politics in some smokey pub.

Anyway, as far as Bush bringing that law, it is my understanding that in most states it is already the law that only a male and a female that are not related may be married legally.  This is a whole discussion for another thread because I know everyone has strong opinions on this, I was merely trying to point out that no ones freedoms are being limited any more than the current law states.  Perhaps if more states change their laws, then things will change on the federal level.

I also don't agree with people who bomb doctors and clinics.  I think they are as crazy as any other zealot.

Raptor....no I don't think homosexuals are entitled to any less rights, but the law in most states is that only a man and a woman can get married.  If the law changes, so be it, but until then...no ones freedom is being limited by Bush.

More to the point...If you vote your opinion and let your elected representatives know how you feel about issues, then you can change things.  That is why I think America is a great country.  We will find out how the country feels toward our current leadership come November.  Too bad the other choice is Kerry.

[67thRaptorBull]

bah, both choices suck this year, its either bush or kerry, its a choice between who sucks the less cock



and ween, bush didnt have to go as far as he did when gay marriage was allowed and say he was gonna draft an amendment (which he knew would never ever pass) outlawing gay marriage
thats not moral at all

[67thRaptorBull]

i dont think he blatenly and outright 100% wants to limit freedoms, but he sure wants to put an invisible "hinder" on them, so that if something "wrong in the govt's eyes" is done, he can arrest them, but make it seem as if it wont affect everyday people

[Colonel32]

QUOTE (67thRaptorBull @ May 25 2004, 10:10 PM)

yea, whats your guys' (mods) stance on people returning that were banned, even if they cleaned up there act and dont do stupid shit anymore? or is it a, once u do it once, ur fucked forever, type thing?

I dunno, I'm not really one of the moderators. I just hate when stuff gets locked or trashed in the political forums so this way it won't    



Sorry to be off topic, just wanted to make to make it clear that the comment about the "mysterious ubermensch" was my own,  it probably was against their policy about banned members. I assume it would be frowned upon, but would be pretty hard to police unless people are advertising their return.

[67thRaptorBull]

ok, i was just wondering

and yes helium, when bush adds those words, for security and our saftey, it seems everyone just bends over and grabs there ankles (except the few that realize whats going on)