There is no logical answer to my post Mark, all Tom can do, is sling nasty hateful rhetoric back at me, because he knows that I (and you) are right. Later, he will come on and accuse us of being the hateful ones.....
Typical of Moonbats. When confronted with the truth, they have no answer other than to sling nasties at ya.... On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 6:20 PM, THE ANNOINTED ONE <[email protected]>wrote: > Tommy, > > That sort of post will have me pushing a permanent and irreversible > button. Address the issues and the post. > > I see that you have seen it unwise to pose an actual argument to my > last post that goes to the very core of your "issue"...federal > codification or the lack there-of. > > On Feb 14, 11:02 am, Tommy News <[email protected]> wrote: > > Wrong again Keithie. > > > > Your twisted pretzel glue right wing glue logic is both illogical and > > homophobic, as usual. > > > > On 2/14/11, Keith In Köln <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 5:04 PM, Tommy News <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Wrong again, Markie. > > > > > As long as the govrnment codifies civil marriage, all people must be > > > includid in those laws equally, regardless of gender. > > > > > ============== > > > > > This is once again, where you are misguided, and purposely so Tom. > > > > > You have the "right" to go and marry anyone that you so choose! Just > as I > > > do, and each and every other man and woman do.... > > > > > You can go and marry any woman that you so choose, as long as she is > > > competent, and of legal age. > > > > > What you are proposing is to add "additional rights" to a select and > > > privileged class of people, based on their sexual proclivities. In > other > > > words, you are attempting to redefine the definition of marriage. > > > > > Not gonna happen. > > > > > Anything less is discriminatory, and a civil rights violation. > > > > > The Federal Government offers many important benefits to married > > > couples, denied to same sex couples, even married ones, such as joint > > > tax returns, social security, survivor benefits, tax benefits, joint > > > property benefits, estate and survivorship benefits, employment > > > benefits, etc. etc. etc. > > > > > The number is 1,342 I believe. All are important. > > > > >> On 2/14/11, THE ANNOINTED ONE <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > Tommy, > > > > >> > In the past you posted the list of 2462 "protections"... the vast > > >> > majority were memberships in things like military wives clubs (never > > >> > gonna happen) etc.; > > > > >> > Why do you persist in posting items that contain outright lies ?? > This > > >> > only damages your cause. Further, marriage is a STATE licensed > > >> > "activity..... just like driving a car or a building permit.... Each > > >> > state has the prerogative to set up their own guidelines for their > > >> > license departments. Marriage is not a "RIGHT". > > > > >> > On Feb 14, 9:12 am, Tommy News <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> >> Love, always: Same-sex couples should have the right to marry in > New > > >> York > > > > >> >> On this Valentine’s Day — a day dedicated to love — chances are > better > > >> >> than they have ever been that marriage equality will become law in > New > > >> >> York state this year. But it is far from assured. > > > > >> >> A bill that would have legalized same-sex marriage was defeated in > the > > >> >> Senate at the end of 2009. Andrew Cuomo made its passage a plank in > > >> >> his gubernatorial campaign platform. The new governor mentioned it > in > > >> >> his first State of the State address in January. As recently as > > >> >> Wednesday, Cuomo reiterated his intention to pursue a vote in the > > >> >> state Legislature within the next few months. > > > > >> >> “We’ll be working very hard to pass it,” he told reporters after a > > >> >> speech at Hofstra University. > > > > >> >> The measure, perennially passed by the state Assembly, failed in > the > > >> >> Senate > > >> >> by a 38-24 vote in December 2009. Every Republican senator voted > no; > > >> >> they were joined by eight Democrats, who were then in the majority. > > > > >> >> Despite Cuomo’s support, the bill’s prospects this time around are > > >> >> even muddier. The Senate has flipped back to Republican control, > and > > >> >> although Senate Majority Leader Dean Skelos opposes legalizing > > >> >> same-sex marriage, he has said he would not block a vote on the > > >> >> legislation. > > > > >> >> Advocates for marriage equality have public opinion on their side. > In > > >> >> late January, a Quinnipiac University poll found New York state > voters > > >> >> support legislation allowing same-sex couples to marry by 56 > percent > > >> >> to 37 percent. That was the highest approval margin ever for that > > >> >> poll, and represents an astonishing turnaround from 2004, when New > > >> >> Yorkers opposed gay marriage 55 percent to 37 percent. > > > > >> >> The tide may be turning as more people view same-sex marriage > through > > >> >> the prism of civil rights. Civil marriage — and the 2,462 > protections > > >> >> and responsibilities conferred by it — is a right that all other > New > > >> >> Yorkers enjoy. Denying those protections to committed, loving gay > > >> >> couples because of their sexual orientation is increasingly seen as > an > > >> >> injustice. > > > > >> >> It is important to make the distinction between civil marriage and > > >> >> religious marriage. Civil marriage does not require the blessing of > > >> >> any religious institution, and no religious institution would be > > >> >> required to perform gay marriages under legislation permitting > civil > > >> >> same-sex marriage. > > > > >> >> Marriage binds loving couples. It’s time that extended to same-sex > > >> >> couples in New York. > > > > >> >> More: > > >>http://blog.syracuse.com/opinion/2011/02/lov_always_same-sex_couples_. > .. > > >> >> -- > > >> >> Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time. > > >> >> Have a great day, > > >> >> Tommy > > > > >> > -- > > >> > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. > > >> > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum > > > > >> > * Visit our other community at > > >> >http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ <http://www.politicalforum.com/>< > http://www.politicalforum.com/> > > >> > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. > > >> > * Read the latest breaking news, and more. > > > > >> -- > > >> Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time. > > >> Have a great day, > > >> Tommy > > > > >> -- > > >> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. > > >> For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum > > > > >> * Visit our other community at > > >>http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ <http://www.politicalforum.com/>< > http://www.politicalforum.com/> > > >> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. > > >> * Read the latest breaking news, and more. > > > > > -- > > > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. > > > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum > > > > > * Visit our other community > > > athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/<http://www.politicalforum.com/> > > > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. > > > * Read the latest breaking news, and more. > > > > -- > > Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time. > > Have a great day, > > Tommy > > -- > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. > For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum > > * Visit our other community at > http://www.PoliticalForum.com/<http://www.politicalforum.com/> > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. > * Read the latest breaking news, and more. > -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
