OHCHUTE

They really need to get that execution cocktail sorted out. Now inmates are sueing the state for using illegal obtained drugs in the mix. While we are on the subject of guns and since so many people have died from guns it is NOT UNUSUAL to die from a gun. And should you die quickly from a gun is is not CRUEL. I say shotgun blast to the chest with 1 1/8 oz of #6 shot will remove the heart instantly. Cost: less than a dollar for the shell.

Let first get rid of the loonies including the idiot Biden who recommends standing on the front porch firing warning shot with a shot gun! There's no responsible people in gov't. Look at Iraq, Afgani, They are disasters. And trillions spent there for nothing.

Why, in your mind, is that just a gay thing? You think hetero couples don't have open relationships like that? If not, you need to get out more often! You mean, kinda like how straight people are telling gays who they can and can not marry? Got it. If somebody told you that you couldn't marry your significant other, you wouldn't be at all offended? Or get nasty and defensive? How dare those single parents have the audacity to raise their kids without their hetero counterparts after a divorce! If having a single gender raise you is so devastating, how come kids from a divorced family or raised by 1 parent aren't all screwed up? You keep on about this whole "jury is out thing," but it sounds like it's not really out for you. You've settled on your opinion (or at least it sounds like you have), and what is funny is you probably have no personal experience with gay couples raising children. Do you know any? Do you know any peers who were brought up my gay parents? I know both, and guess what-- some of those kids came out plenty more accomplished than friends I have that were raised by straight parents. Doesn't mean that all gay kids come out like that, and it doesn't mean that all straight kids come out all f'd up. A kid is a kid, and who they grow up to be is going to be is shaped more by how they were raised and not the gender or sexual preference of who raised them. I just went to a bachelor party for my friend and his partner. They have been approved to adopt a 5 year old boy in June after they are married. Both have higher degrees (one getting his PhD at the moment), both have great jobs, both are amazing people, and they can both provide a loving and nurturing home for a boy who needs one. I think of it this way...... It sounds to me like you'd rather see a kid stay in an abusive crack house with a traditional mom/dad set up versus growing up with two accomplished people like my friend and his partner. I just don't see how that makes sense. You asked if I knew any gays: I supervised nearly 100 gay men. Most were good workers and made the firm I worked for a lot of money, but never did I hear anything regarding values, family, raising kids. It was mostly about poppers, dancing, getting layed and docs they might see for there their medical problems. Many of these guys died with aids. Their obitz's are on the internet. Many ended up homeless living in cars etc. At that time, I'm not sure I'd approve anyone I knew to care for children. But times have changed and so have belief's from those days long ago. So has the marketing and advertising and the money pushing agenda's. Look what happened in Canada: many homosexuals were elected to office and the rules changed. But the fact remains: the norm for the world is heterosexual marriage and the rasing of kids via that union is also standard.

Why, in your mind, is that just a gay thing? You think hetero couples don't have open relationships like that? If not, you need to get out more often! You mean, kinda like how straight people are telling gays who they can and can not marry? Got it. If somebody told you that you couldn't marry your significant other, you wouldn't be at all offended? Or get nasty and defensive? How dare those single parents have the audacity to raise their kids without their hetero counterparts after a divorce! If having a single gender raise you is so devastating, how come kids from a divorced family or raised by 1 parent aren't all screwed up? You keep on about this whole "jury is out thing," but it sounds like it's not really out for you. You've settled on your opinion (or at least it sounds like you have), and what is funny is you probably have no personal experience with gay couples raising children. Do you know any? Do you know any peers who were brought up my gay parents? I know both, and guess what-- some of those kids came out plenty more accomplished than friends I have that were raised by straight parents. Doesn't mean that all gay kids come out like that, and it doesn't mean that all straight kids come out all f'd up. A kid is a kid, and who they grow up to be is going to be is shaped more by how they were raised and not the gender or sexual preference of who raised them. I just went to a bachelor party for my friend and his partner. They have been approved to adopt a 5 year old boy in June after they are married. Both have higher degrees (one getting his PhD at the moment), both have great jobs, both are amazing people, and they can both provide a loving and nurturing home for a boy who needs one. I think of it this way...... It sounds to me like you'd rather see a kid stay in an abusive crack house with a traditional mom/dad set up versus growing up with two accomplished people like my friend and his partner. I just don't see how that makes sense. Interesting how you combine rasing a child by single parent out of a divorse when the topic is about gays getting married and having kids. They're different topics. I think this is the liberal gay left attemp to rationalize the behavior to the likeness of heterosexual mores. When they are not the same. Adoption is always about the kids. And should some guy dressed up in a girls outfit, come into an adoption agency wanting to adopt a kid, PHD or not, then YOU can only imagine what might come of that. Like there would be no discussion about wether or not it should go through? Don't think so.There would be discussion. Like I said, gay marriage is a realatively new idea. Not all state approve of gay marriage and here you are advocating rasing kids in a marrage! We're not near the adoption question yet. It's not registered on societies phyche yet. Do what they did in Canada: get homsexuals elected to office and get the rules changed. Pretty simple.

Then there is no friggin reason to take guns from the NORMAL people just because one of your bipoler guys lets off some steam now is there? And when the coat hanger is around your neck and you're begging for mercy as you're being shanked too by the home intruder do you worry if he is bipoler or not? What would your feeling about the death penalty be then as your life fades before you? As was mentioned. This perp needs not be here.

Perhaps if we're lucky humans will evolve into having both male and female organs then they can screw themselves. No longer would anyone one say: go fuck yourself as that would be a given. Only then, we'd get more chatter perhaps including: who ya talking to buddie! With the amount of pharm in our drinking water and as fish develop both male and female organs, it's only a matter of time. Glad I won't be here.

It is true there have been employees that have tainted samples. There needs better controls over testing. This doesn't mean death shouldn't be handed out. Test DNA 3 times via independent labs. And what if, the guy was so bloody and admits to the crime. Should be death pretty soon after the confession, not never or not 15 years later and not after he needs to kill two other inmates and a guard to finally convince the state to pull the switch or depress the plunger.

He made huge contribution to Hopkins to help label his research as authentic to win more gun control. And it's not working. He didn't get the assault weapons ban. Bloomberg is an alumnus (sorry; that means "a graduate") of Johns Hopkins. He has donated $1.1 Billion to Johns Hopkins since his graduation. Anyone who thinks most of that comes from an anti-gun agenda is as much a fool as Bloomberg is not. He's in the information business. It doesn't take a Hopkins graduate, even though I am one, to figure possible motives, including tax deductions as he's making so much money. He has a liberal slant. Why not conduct research about how well a conservative agenda suits the country, including teaching young kids the respect for life and the use of firearms and competitions with such? Instead he wants to ruin sport. Maybe he should come down on the food manufacturers (stock firms) if he could for tainting food that makes it additive? They put sugar in spaghetti sauce when only carrots will take away the bite.

You missed the point. It is a result of science that would allow better decision making. Things that happened in the past can't be undone that science revealed. Now tell us how the 12 year olds hair got in his bed, or was it not her hair?

It would also be fun if you could select "all of the above". Aside from questions of the value/legitimacy of asking for the information in the first place, the choices don't really allow for mixed race, which is more and more common. So the "data" gained is inherently inaccurate, in a way that allows it to be twisted to whatever agenda the group collecting the data may desire. For example, is Obama black? Is he white? Depends on who is doing the asking, and the answer they want to get. It's time to stop asking about race. I do think there are legitimate questions that could be asked, such as "does this school system prepare kids adequately for college", but that requires tracking the academic success of individuals, not races. Don Yea what leverage, being black and white at the same time... But the truth is: we all have DNA from African ancestors. HENCE WE ARE ALL BLACK. Get use to it, and the way things are going---we're heading back to tribal!

He made huge contribution to Hopkins to help label his research as authentic to win more gun control. And it's not working. He didn't get the assault weapons ban.

Do you believe that every action that is less than noble should be a crime? What is the benefit to society to prosecute and imprison every person who strays from their marriage vows? Adultery is a civil matter, not a crime; it is a violation of a contract, and in the legal sense it is best treated as a contract matter in divorce proceedings, should the couple decide to divorce over the matter. For that matter, do you believe divorce should be legal? If so, you obviously are against the institution of marriage. Whatever. You mean, like human/troll marriage? Those cross-species pairings open the door to all kinds of crazy shit, and so they absolutely should be banned. Don Good. Open the flood gates and make it: ANYTHING GOES. Forget morals, respect and decencency. Forget laws and social contracts. Here we had a AIDS epidemic and people knew that if they were sexually promiscuous they would contract a disease and die. And guess what, people were sexually promiscous and they did die and they are dying still. Let's just turn this dog and pony show into a dog a pony show, with people doing what ever in the hell they want, without any recourse about who they might offend or even amuse if people are so interetested in watching the show. We are trending towards a liberal society where as someone on here put it: "The nuclear family is over." Whatever that is suppose to mean in an attempt that what was the norm, is now not the norm. I'm going out now to get a porpoise tail graphed to my ass so that I can swim back to the ocean were we all came from to try and learn why we're making this turn towards an idea that for the most part, is not normal for the masses, yet due to advertising and marketing, made to seem as though all this is so normal. (I gather college socialology and sexual deviat behavior text books are being re-written to accomodate these new found mores.) And perhaps there soon won't be any deviat behavior as any and all behavior will be labeled normal.

Although you may get lots of hits, including this one, important conversations have been sidelined: http://www.jewishworldreview.com/1011/supreme_court_gay_adoption.php3#.UVA3qxw4uSo Again, as many who are keen on gays getting married, I doubt the results would be the same for gay adoption. The matter right now before the Supreme Court is same sex marriages, not gays adoption of children. I suspect that will come at a later date once gays are given the right to legally marry. Oh to think of custody battles over a young baby boy between two combatant gay dudes. In any event, divorce lawyers are salivating. As many more people get married, they'll be more cases to litigate.

I'll admit it takes a bit of sophistication to distinguish between one's personal beliefs and the best policy for making laws, but many people seem to manage it. There are a lot of things that people believe that I think are silly, and some that I think may be dangerous. Nevertheless, I would not vote for a law that would force those people to abandon their beliefs and adopt mine, because I can recognize the larger harm (loss of freedom) that would come from having the state impose my point of view on everybody else. So, for me at least, it is quite conceivable that I might vote against a law even if that law supported my beliefs. Here's an example that has some similarity to the gay marriage issue. I believe that adultery is immoral. It is a behavior that I have never engaged in, and it would cause me to lose trust in and respect for someone if I found they were cheating on their spouse. Despite that, I do not believe adultery should be a crime. Don If you believe Adultery should not be a crime then I suspect then you are against the institution of marrage? Adultery is in violation of the marriage contract. So then don't get married if you want to have sex with multiple sex partners. This is where marriage between bisexuals gets tricky. Where does adultery come in to play, or perhaps as things might progress, there will be marriage between multiple sex partners appealing to those who want rights associated with being married to multiple people. What will be the limits of what society will accept? The fact is folks, once you stray from marriage between a man and a women a whole host of new issues evolve.

It's really not. Did you actually read the article? You know, all of it. Granted, there are no pictures to hold one's attention. What?

Publishing the flaw is what got him into trouble. These hackers wouldn't be anything if they didn't publish what they learn. They need to be shut down. They have no right to the information intended to be secure and private.

RE: Same Sex Marriage http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/03/24/days-early-a-line-forms-at-the-supreme-court/

Well it appears this is not outlawed in some countries and who knows, how men and women will progress... [/url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoophilia[url]

If you think it's a challenge now, figuring out whose allowed to marry who, just wait till people want to marry their pets. Believe me, it's coming.... Why? People love their pets more than their spouses! http://positiveminded.hubpages.com/hub/Animal-human-Marriages

. . . . . . . . Three hot lesbian chicks. (Too greedy?) Funny how much you don't know. Better it be bisexual ladies, otherwise you'll be watching TV while the fun is over there...

Maybe by poll but not by law. And world wide, jury is definitely out regarding adoption. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_by_country_or_territory The right to Petitioning is different than having adoption rights. Petitioning might not produce an adoption. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_adoption_in_the_United_States#Recognition_of_adoption_by_other_states Yes it is true many more people support gay marriage but discussion about adoption is absent. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/03/18/gay-marriage-support-hits-new-high-in-post-abc-poll/

You are the bigot and you seem so stressed you can't control your own behavior when speaking about how gay you are. And you don't have a clue about what portion of the billion NY got went to Coney Island. Which is what this thread is about. Now run along back to the other thread. NY got 1.77b or so. [/url] http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/06/nyregion/first-part-of-hurricane-sandy-aid-is-to-be-released.html?_r=0[url]

http://www.brooklynpaper.com/stories/35/46/bn_cyclone_2012_11_16_bk.html "The cyclone didn’t hurt the Cyclone! The legendary Coney Island roller coaster was covered with some ocean muck, but the city-owned ride survived Hurricane Sandy’s wrath unscathed, according to operator Central Amusements. “There wasn’t any significant damage, just a lot of clean-up,” said Chloe Gallo, spokeswoman for Central Amusements, which also runs Coney Island’s Luna Park.' Or...... In the backwoods bayou that you hail from there was 60 billion dollars in damage to the coaster caused by a gay transgender storm named Sandy that probably wanted to marry gay. So why was it announced the ride was open again on NBC? The ride was closed due to the storm. On point two, and in addressing your posts in other threads, why not simply posts some detailed informative content instead of AVOIDING central themes by your name calling? Perhaps if you have first hand knowledge about lgbt you might shed some light on any discussion that would aid those of us who know little about it, our understanding. Cheers. Happy riding the Cyclone! While some people may enjoy feeding bigoted trolls I find more enjoyment in pointing out the bigotry. This one was just too easy to skip since it was blatantly false. I think Andy pointed out your propensity to just post totally false stuff and put it forward as fact in another one of your well researched threads. Hey BV, is this one of the people you refered me to who has answers to the LBGT community. If so, the person, demonstrates exactly what I said: Not too many answers and a lot of BS. More name calling and little facts. The Federal Gov't supplied the NE 60 billion dollars. The Red Cross supply a lot of money too. And this one example, is the first that I've heard, that has been reported on national news of something that has been restored. Brian (NBC) even commented it was open if anyone was there to ride it or not.... There was a report too that parts to the Seaside Heights Boardwalk was also restored. 60 billion dollars, boardwalk, amusment rides. Nice to have the funding to restore a business due to a storm. How about some money for businesses lost due to wall street shenangians for the financial crisis they created with their bank ponzi.

There may be no responsibilty but don't you think the child is deserving of having a mom, or is the culture so narcissictic the interest of the child comes secondary to the mere fact that Frank and Tom want to raise a kid. I wonder why Islam is the fastest growing religion when they have the most strick laws regarding homosexuality. World wide I think you might be wrong in saying most agree that it's OK that homosexuals adopt kids. In fact, since gay marriage is so knew I suspect most American's haven't even thought about gays raising kids to form any opinion.

There you go twisting things around to suit your motive. I've not done any name calling. I have attempted to learn but there's been little information except for BS. How are we suppose to learn about the gay community if no answers are provided. You will admit the gay community in the 70's and 80's had quite a steamy reputation with all the Baths in San Fran, sex in public places etc. that now all of a sudden, the community wants to look responsible, enough so to raise kids. All we know is this: gay marrage is a recent phenomenom. Not all states allow it. In many states it's on the referundum to be voted on. It would seem that if gays want to get married they might act in a manner that might get people on their side. And that is not what is being done here. About gays raising kids, this is not an isolated conversation that only I brought up. It's being talked about around the world, and it may interest you that as gay marriage is allowed in some places, adoption of childred is prohibited. Also, looking at the colored map, the gay community might be thankful they live here instead of in the Middle East where homosexuality practice can be punnished by death. Here you go, states that say OK to marriage but the jury is out about reasing kids in some circumstances. And if it's OK that gays get married, what's the hold up in adopting kids or producing kids via IFV, is the question. There must be a reason... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_by_country_or_territory In the instance of two male homosexual married men who want to adopt a child, what right does the child have to be raised by a female? What is societies responsiblity in this instance to allow the child to be raised by a female instead of a surogate female, a homosexual male. And if the gay community can't tolerate being asked these questions, and provide meaningful answers then their plight to adopt kids might be delayed. At least from this dialogue I'm still out with the jury.