It is currently Tue Feb 25, 2025 11:01 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 189 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Rand Paul 2016
PostPosted: Tue Apr 14, 2015 3:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 4:29 pm
Posts: 40944
Location: Everywhere
pizza_Place: giordanos
Chus wrote:
pittmike wrote:
Chus wrote:
You can't blame Harry Reid forever.


Serious question that I never seem to get an answer to. Why is it that right supporters that blame people for things like Reid for me in this instance it is bad? Let go of the past. Get over it already. Yet after almost 8 years I still get all over the place the left's Bush blame? Which one is it?


You blame Reid and Pelosi for everything, but I have never heard you criticize John Boehner. You may not like Reid and Pelosi, and it's obvious you don't, but they actually got some bills passed. Can you list some of Boehner's achievements, other than drinking, tanning, and failing to repeal the ACA?

This Congress has been in office for more than 100 days, and all they have accomplished is passing the dead on arrival Keystone Pipeline bill, which the President said he would veto.

Bush will continue to get the blame for starting two wars on false premises, and nearly destroying the economy. For all of the bellyaching you do about ISIS, you fail to understand that W created that mess too, by removing Saddam from power, creating a vacuum in an already unstable region.


You always do this crap. You shift rather than answer my question. Nowhere is not at issue. For the record I am not happy with him but have other issues to discuss. The question is about why the left can blame bush but I cannot blame Reid/pelosi and hold my grudge as long as say yours for Reagan.

_________________
Elections have consequences.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rand Paul 2016
PostPosted: Tue Apr 14, 2015 3:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 26, 2006 8:10 pm
Posts: 38609
Location: "Across 110th Street"
pittmike wrote:
You always do this crap. You shift rather than answer my question. Nowhere is not at issue. For the record I am not happy with him but have other issues to discuss. The question is about why the left can blame bush but I cannot blame Reid/pelosi and hold my grudge as long as say yours for Reagan.


If the issues you choose to want to hammer the current administration or the apparent POTUS front runner on all started down the miserable road with Bush or Reagan, you have to own (up to) their failures as well. We've come to figurative federal bankruptcy largely because of policies started in '81. $3-4 trillion in principal was added to the debt (but off-books :wink: ) just because of wars of the last 13 years. Not to mention the tax cuts that weren't made "deficit neutral" as everything Rs want now. Hell, Rubio's own economic plan can't even be scored now given that it makes no rational economic sense. Paul & Cruz are still in the margins over Ryan's swiss cheese kinda/sorta budget.

No Bush has ever presented any budget that even attempted to reduce deficits, but this one (who traded favors as a president's son for gain) will?

We've now gone to war under false pretenses. Frightening given that this was after the alleged tough guy made his bones fighting the bum of the month (Cuba in Grenada) or establishing the forgotten Republican response to the rise of nationalists/Islamists by arming the Iranians/Iraqis/Saudis/etc. even after St. Ronnie cut and ran after the Marine barracks was terror bombed. We're at a point were preemptive war is being fought for private concerns and started over shaky foreign intelligence :wink: And all but called for by a guy who once was cheeky enough to sing "Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran!?!

But that clown (nxt. to last in his class at the Academy & apparently a shitty pilot) still doesn't realize that this country caused many of the problems in Iran by propping up a criminal dictator in the early 50's (Thanks Ike!)

Whenever in history did an American POTUS (or leading candidate) blithely dismiss an entire city, or one of this country's biggest and most vital industrial engine? Or an entire party vow inaction and the closure of the gov't so that guy won't have a shot at being effective?

Exactly what did Pelosi/Reid/Obama or Hillary ever do in comparison? A better question is exactly why shouldn't we bring the republican failures (& their legacies) to account?

_________________
There are only two examples of infinity: The universe and human stupidity and I'm not sure about the universe.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rand Paul 2016
PostPosted: Tue Apr 14, 2015 3:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2006 3:29 pm
Posts: 34795
pizza_Place: Al's Pizza
pittmike wrote:
Serious question that I never seem to get an answer to. Why is it that right supporters that blame people for things like Reid for me in this instance it is bad? Let go of the past. Get over it already. Yet after almost 8 years I still get all over the place the left's Bush blame? Which one is it?


Did you have a stroke while you were typing that?



pittmike wrote:
You always do this crap. You shift rather than answer my question.


What crap? What shift? I answered your question, which was constructed poorly. You just don't like my answer.

pittmike wrote:
Nowhere is not at issue.


Great point.

pittmike wrote:
For the record I am not happy with him but have other issues to discuss.


The guy who says to let it go, doesn't want to talk about the current Speaker, who hasn't done anything since he took the job, but rather the last one, who actually passed bills. That makes sense.

pittmike wrote:
The question is about why the left can blame bush but I cannot blame Reid/pelosi and hold my grudge as long as say yours for Reagan.




I have never heard you blame Bush for anything. Everything is the fault of Reid and Pelosi, despite the Republicans having control of both houses for Bush's first six years. Everything that got pushed through, was pushed through by the R's. Reid and Pelosi didn't start the wars. Reid and Pelosi didn't deregulate Wall Street.

I didn't say a word about Reagan, so try to stay on topic. But since you brought him up, I'm not on the side that engages in revisionist history, when talking about St. Ronnie. If Obama illegally sold weapons to Iran, to fund wars in Central America, your head would fucking explode. At that point, you might stop talking about Benghazi.

What did Reid and Pelosi do specifically, that was more damaging than what Bush and Cheney did? Take as much time as you need.




Stop. Watching. Fox. News.

_________________
Good people drink good beer - Hunter S. Thompson

<º)))><

Waiting for the time when I can finally say
That this has all been wonderful, but now I'm on my way


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rand Paul 2016
PostPosted: Tue Apr 14, 2015 4:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 02, 2011 4:29 pm
Posts: 40944
Location: Everywhere
pizza_Place: giordanos
You and Reader are way off the track predictably. Deflect any talk about Rand and Hillary and turn into make the righties defend Bush, Chaney and Boehner. No Thanks. Bye.

_________________
Elections have consequences.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rand Paul 2016
PostPosted: Tue Apr 14, 2015 4:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2006 3:29 pm
Posts: 34795
pizza_Place: Al's Pizza
pittmike wrote:
You and Reader are way off the track predictably. Deflect any talk about Rand and Hillary and turn into make the righties defend Bush, Chaney and Boehner. No Thanks. Bye.


This is what happens when one gets separated from the herd, and thinking for one's self becomes crucial.

pittmike wrote:
Image

_________________
Good people drink good beer - Hunter S. Thompson

<º)))><

Waiting for the time when I can finally say
That this has all been wonderful, but now I'm on my way


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rand Paul 2016
PostPosted: Wed Apr 15, 2015 1:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2006 8:35 pm
Posts: 10885
Location: Parrish, FL
pizza_Place: 1. Peaquods 2. Aurelios
RR is correct. RPB is correct.

Back to the thread topic. He has no chance of coming close to winning.

_________________
This Ends in Antioch wrote:
brick (/brik/) verb
1. block or enclose with a wall of bricks
2. Proper response would be to ask an endless series of follow ups until the person regrets having spoken to you in the first place.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rand Paul 2016
PostPosted: Thu Apr 16, 2015 2:58 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2006 3:29 pm
Posts: 34795
pizza_Place: Al's Pizza
It's one embarrassment after another.

He believes that you should be able to marry who you want, but there is a religious connotation to marriage, so tough shit gays. :lol:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7Mw8o6_YJs

_________________
Good people drink good beer - Hunter S. Thompson

<º)))><

Waiting for the time when I can finally say
That this has all been wonderful, but now I'm on my way


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rand Paul 2016
PostPosted: Thu Apr 16, 2015 3:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Chus wrote:
It's one embarrassment after another.

He believes that you should be able to marry who you want, but there is a religious connotation to marriage, so tough shit gays. :lol:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7Mw8o6_YJs

Wait, are you saying churches should be forced to have gay weddings?

If you want to marry another woman, you can do that and have a marriage contract.


Im legit confused. What is he saying Gays cant do?

He is ok with gays marrying, but wants to keep the religious connotation? Do gay people want to force churches to marry them?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rand Paul 2016
PostPosted: Thu Apr 16, 2015 3:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 13, 2006 1:25 pm
Posts: 27055
rand paul is a worse flip flopper than mitt romney

his is a fake piece of shit like the rest of them. fuck him. no wonder his dad keeps his distance- his dad has to be incredibly upset with rand right now.

_________________
the world will always the world. your entire existence is defined by your response.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rand Paul 2016
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 3:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2006 3:29 pm
Posts: 34795
pizza_Place: Al's Pizza
The gift that keeps on giving.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski ... #.ovDDjapV

_________________
Good people drink good beer - Hunter S. Thompson

<º)))><

Waiting for the time when I can finally say
That this has all been wonderful, but now I'm on my way


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rand Paul 2016
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 4:17 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 6:45 pm
Posts: 38797
Location: Lovetron
pizza_Place: Malnati's
rogers park bryan wrote:
Chus wrote:
It's one embarrassment after another.

He believes that you should be able to marry who you want, but there is a religious connotation to marriage, so tough shit gays. :lol:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7Mw8o6_YJs

Wait, are you saying churches should be forced to have gay weddings?

Do gay people want to force churches to marry them?


Does this come as a surprise to you?

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
The victims are the American People and the Republic itself.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rand Paul 2016
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 4:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2006 9:29 am
Posts: 66054
Location: Darkside Estates
pizza_Place: A cat got an online degree.
Seacrest does hate the gays.
They're just so, just so damn GAY.

_________________
"Play until it hurts, then play until it hurts to not play."
http://soundcloud.com/darkside124 HOF 2013, MM Champion 2014
bigfan wrote:
Many that is true, but an incomplete statement.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rand Paul 2016
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 4:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 1:05 am
Posts: 25181
Location: Cultural Mecca
pizza_Place: Pequod's / Barnaby's
Diddling boys? A-Okay if you can keep it under wraps for a few years.

Consensual butt sex between two of-age men? THE WORST THING EVER

_________________
Rick Hahn is the best GM in baseball.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rand Paul 2016
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 4:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2006 9:29 am
Posts: 66054
Location: Darkside Estates
pizza_Place: A cat got an online degree.
IMU wrote:
Diddling boys? A-Okay if you can keep it under wraps for a few years.

Consensual butt sex between two of-age men? THE WORST THING EVER

That's something I cannot wrap my mind around.
the church knew for YEARS that their priests were having sex with little children and didn't do a damn thing about it except move them to different places that had new, fresh targets for them, but you get a couple grown men who dig each other and it's the worst thing that could happen to humanity and to make them a cake signifies they condone it.

_________________
"Play until it hurts, then play until it hurts to not play."
http://soundcloud.com/darkside124 HOF 2013, MM Champion 2014
bigfan wrote:
Many that is true, but an incomplete statement.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rand Paul 2016
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 5:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Seacrest wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Chus wrote:
It's one embarrassment after another.

He believes that you should be able to marry who you want, but there is a religious connotation to marriage, so tough shit gays. :lol:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7Mw8o6_YJs

Wait, are you saying churches should be forced to have gay weddings?

Do gay people want to force churches to marry them?


Does this come as a surprise to you?

Isn't the main idea in the the marriage equality debate the legality?

I haven't seen many gay folks wanting to be married at a church that doesn't want them. (I'm sure it exists, but its mostly about the law)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rand Paul 2016
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 6:03 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 6:45 pm
Posts: 38797
Location: Lovetron
pizza_Place: Malnati's
Seacrest wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Chus wrote:
It's one embarrassment after another.

He believes that you should be able to marry who you want, but there is a religious connotation to marriage, so tough shit gays. :lol:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7Mw8o6_YJs

Wait, are you saying churches should be forced to have gay weddings?

Do gay people want to force churches to marry them?


Does this come as a surprise to you?

rogers park bryan wrote:
Isn't the main idea in the the marriage equality debate the legality?

I haven't seen many gay folks wanting to be married at a church that doesn't want them. (I'm sure it exists, but its mostly about the law)


I think the main idea in the debate is what is definition of marriage.

So what do you do when someone feels that a church should be forced to marry them?

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
The victims are the American People and the Republic itself.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rand Paul 2016
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 6:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2006 9:29 am
Posts: 66054
Location: Darkside Estates
pizza_Place: A cat got an online degree.
Is there anyone forcing or trying to force a church to marry them?

_________________
"Play until it hurts, then play until it hurts to not play."
http://soundcloud.com/darkside124 HOF 2013, MM Champion 2014
bigfan wrote:
Many that is true, but an incomplete statement.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rand Paul 2016
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 6:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 93674
Location: To the left of my post
Seacrest wrote:
So what do you do when someone feels that a church should be forced to marry them?
They should marry them like they would anyone else.

If the marriage package includes hating on gay people then hate on gay people there too!

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rand Paul 2016
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 6:58 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 6:45 pm
Posts: 38797
Location: Lovetron
pizza_Place: Malnati's
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
So what do you do when someone feels that a church should be forced to marry them?
They should marry them like they would anyone else.

If the marriage package includes hating on gay people then hate on gay people there too!



So when a church disagrees with the state's new definition of marriage, what will be done?

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
The victims are the American People and the Republic itself.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rand Paul 2016
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 6:59 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2006 9:29 am
Posts: 66054
Location: Darkside Estates
pizza_Place: A cat got an online degree.
Seacrest wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
So what do you do when someone feels that a church should be forced to marry them?
They should marry them like they would anyone else.

If the marriage package includes hating on gay people then hate on gay people there too!



So when a church disagrees with the state's new definition of marriage, what will be done?

Seperate the Church from the State?

_________________
"Play until it hurts, then play until it hurts to not play."
http://soundcloud.com/darkside124 HOF 2013, MM Champion 2014
bigfan wrote:
Many that is true, but an incomplete statement.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rand Paul 2016
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 7:28 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Posts: 81625
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
So what do you do when someone feels that a church should be forced to marry them?
They should marry them like they would anyone else.

If the marriage package includes hating on gay people then hate on gay people there too!

Who would want to join a church (getting married at one is an endorsement of the church at least) that thinks their lifestyle is a sin or their marriage is wrong?

Don't need to make churches or any religuos group marry anyone.

The legality is what matters.

Wanting churches to accept and want to take part is a different issue.



I


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rand Paul 2016
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 7:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 93674
Location: To the left of my post
Seacrest wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
So what do you do when someone feels that a church should be forced to marry them?
They should marry them like they would anyone else.

If the marriage package includes hating on gay people then hate on gay people there too!



So when a church disagrees with the state's new definition of marriage, what will be done?
Marry the gays and shame them for the whole ceremony like a good Christian would! It isn't that hard.

My wife and I aren't very religious. The rent-a-pastor guy ended up throwing in some religious stuff, which actually worked out ok because others in my family are. I'd say you simply marry the gays and then tell the entire crowd how marriages between the same sex are sinful and the two people in front of you just got a first class ticket to hell.

Pretty simple if you ask me.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rand Paul 2016
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 7:36 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 93674
Location: To the left of my post
rogers park bryan wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
So what do you do when someone feels that a church should be forced to marry them?
They should marry them like they would anyone else.

If the marriage package includes hating on gay people then hate on gay people there too!

Who would want to join a church (getting married at one is an endorsement of the church at least) that thinks their lifestyle is a sin or their marriage is wrong?

Don't need to make churches or any religuos group marry anyone.

The legality is what matters.

Wanting churches to accept and want to take part is a different issue.



I
I'd imagine that the yelp review of the service would say "hates gays, thinks they will burn in hell, cannot recommend if you are gay. A++ would recommend if you hate gays too".

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rand Paul 2016
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 7:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2006 3:29 pm
Posts: 34795
pizza_Place: Al's Pizza
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
rogers park bryan wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
So what do you do when someone feels that a church should be forced to marry them?
They should marry them like they would anyone else.

If the marriage package includes hating on gay people then hate on gay people there too!

Who would want to join a church (getting married at one is an endorsement of the church at least) that thinks their lifestyle is a sin or their marriage is wrong?

Don't need to make churches or any religuos group marry anyone.

The legality is what matters.

Wanting churches to accept and want to take part is a different issue.



I
I'd imagine that the yelp review of the service would say "hates gays, thinks they will burn in hell, cannot recommend if you are gay. A++ would recommend if you hate gays too".


Thumbs up to the catering, which was done by Chick-Fil-A.

_________________
Good people drink good beer - Hunter S. Thompson

<º)))><

Waiting for the time when I can finally say
That this has all been wonderful, but now I'm on my way


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rand Paul 2016
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 7:46 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 6:45 pm
Posts: 38797
Location: Lovetron
pizza_Place: Malnati's
Seacrest wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
So what do you do when someone feels that a church should be forced to marry them?
They should marry them like they would anyone else.

If the marriage package includes hating on gay people then hate on gay people there too!



So when a church disagrees with the state's new definition of marriage, what will be done?

Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Marry the gays and shame them for the whole ceremony like a good Christian would! It isn't that hard.

My wife and I aren't very religious. The rent-a-pastor guy ended up throwing in some religious stuff, which actually worked out ok because others in my family are. I'd say you simply marry the gays and then tell the entire crowd how marriages between the same sex are sinful and the two people in front of you just got a first class ticket to hell.

Pretty simple if you ask me.


So your experience with christians who shamed you should be visited upon those who had a different experience?

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
The victims are the American People and the Republic itself.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rand Paul 2016
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 7:47 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 6:45 pm
Posts: 38797
Location: Lovetron
pizza_Place: Malnati's
rogers park bryan wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
So what do you do when someone feels that a church should be forced to marry them?
They should marry them like they would anyone else.

If the marriage package includes hating on gay people then hate on gay people there too!

Who would want to join a church (getting married at one is an endorsement of the church at least) that thinks their lifestyle is a sin or their marriage is wrong?

Don't need to make churches or any religuos group marry anyone.

The legality is what matters.

Wanting churches to accept and want to take part is a different issue.



I


So, do you think that churches will be allowed to sit this one out?

Do you really think that this is how it will play out?

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
The victims are the American People and the Republic itself.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rand Paul 2016
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 8:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 93674
Location: To the left of my post
Seacrest wrote:
So your experience with christians who shamed you should be visited upon those who had a different experience?
No one shamed me. I don't know what you mean here though besides that.

If a Christian wedding provider feels the need to make it clear that marriage should be between a man and a woman in every ceremony then they can and should do that in the gay wedding too. Isn't that the goal? Spread the word of God?

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rand Paul 2016
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 8:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 28, 2006 9:29 am
Posts: 66054
Location: Darkside Estates
pizza_Place: A cat got an online degree.
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Isn't that the goal? Spread the word of God?

Not to the gays. They're not welcome to the word of the god who created them exactly the way they are.

_________________
"Play until it hurts, then play until it hurts to not play."
http://soundcloud.com/darkside124 HOF 2013, MM Champion 2014
bigfan wrote:
Many that is true, but an incomplete statement.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rand Paul 2016
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 8:07 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 08, 2005 6:45 pm
Posts: 38797
Location: Lovetron
pizza_Place: Malnati's
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Seacrest wrote:
So your experience with christians who shamed you should be visited upon those who had a different experience?
No one shamed me. I don't know what you mean here though besides that.

If a Christian wedding provider feels the need to make it clear that marriage should be between a man and a woman in every ceremony then they can and should do that in the gay wedding too. Isn't that the goal? Spread the word of God?



So a christian wedding provider should be forced by the state to do something they disagree with and are unable to provide?

_________________
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote:
The victims are the American People and the Republic itself.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Rand Paul 2016
PostPosted: Wed Apr 22, 2015 8:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2006 3:29 pm
Posts: 34795
pizza_Place: Al's Pizza
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
you just got a first class ticket to hell.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cH7I6ibA-SM

_________________
Good people drink good beer - Hunter S. Thompson

<º)))><

Waiting for the time when I can finally say
That this has all been wonderful, but now I'm on my way


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 189 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 29 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group