JohnnyD
-
Content
2,195 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never -
Feedback
0%
Everything posted by JohnnyD
-
I'm calling bullshit on that. Can you substantiate it?
-
No, I feel tradition and definition are important. Civil unions so all can have legal standing under law is all I want. Men and women get married. What do you prefer it to be called when people of different races marry? That used to be illegal until we redefined marriage. What do you prefer it to be called when women vote? That used to be illegal too. Do you think that President Obama should have some sort of different special title? When we first had presidents, black people were still considered property. And where in all the cases you list was a defiinition changed? Answer, no where. ??? A marriage between a black person and a white person of the opposite sex was not recognized as a legal marriage until 1967. Today when a black person and a white person of the opposite sex get married, we call that a marriage. That is a change in the definition of marriage. Quite simple really. The definition was expanded to include people who were historically excluded.
-
Marc – would you suggest/cite/link to some of those research sources that I haven’t looked at previously? Seriously. What have you seen that I have missed? And where specifically do you see evidence that torture worked? You do realize that information obtained from KSM that being touted as having “prevented an attack on LA” was obtained (1) by the FBI agents using traditional interrogation before the CIA contractors arrived, and (2) supplemented by information recovered from a computer hard drive, yes? VR/Marg SOME, of the info was obtained by traditional interrogation. I cant remember the name of the CIA chief on Fox a couple of weeks ago denied that most of the info was obtained that way. He stated that some was but he stopped. The most actionable was recieved when other methods were used. i will see if I can find the transcript He was Fox News Sunday and others that same day Very substantive.
-
No, I feel tradition and definition are important. Civil unions so all can have legal standing under law is all I want. Men and women get married. What do you prefer it to be called when people of different races marry? That used to be illegal until we redefined marriage. What do you prefer it to be called when women vote? That used to be illegal too. Do you think that President Obama should have some sort of different special title? When we first had presidents, black people were still considered property.
-
Because currently, We do not all have the same rights and protections available to us under the law. Granted, but fixing that does not need to redifine what marriage is. That makes zero sense.
-
??? I agree that you can't go around doing whatevertheheck. Both partners agree, so there is no problem. If one disagreed, huge problem.
-
Or until you get divorced, whichever comes first. If both parties agree, who cares?
-
The hair makes me think of leslie - can't remember what her screen name was and haven't noticed her posting for a while.
-
Do you drive a Miata? Starting to get embarrassing.
-
Skydivers Annoy neighbors - Press clipping
JohnnyD replied to PhreeZone's topic in General Skydiving Discussions
Not so. In every jurisdiction I've encountered, a person can't retain the property of another simply because it ended up on their property. She doesn't have to let you retrieve it. She could retrieve it herself. In some courts, she could also be held liable for damage to your property if she chooses to remove it herself. Either way, police should be called to protect yourself Correct - and sensible. You've got to be kidding. The first time the police have to show up to facilitate the retrieval of a cut away main they are going to be pissed. The second time they are going to begin making sure there isn't a third time. Guess who's going to lose on that one. -
Peppermint?
-
Bumping this. I've actually avoided the flashlight apps for fear that something bad would happen to my phone if I repeatedly used it. Anyone use this?
-
I hope Serra CRUSHES Hughes and he finally takes his holier than thou crappy attitude into retirement and obscurity (until his HoF induction) BTW - Maia v. Marquardt at UFC 102. WAR NATE!!!
-
Not unexpected. It was biblical times and you simply did not mess with another man's donkey. Just didn't. Leviticus was a rock star. He probably had a beard and smoked a pipe. Sure Noah had the ark and Moses parted the red sea, but Leviticus had two chicks at once and put it in the bible. Respect.
-
[stir shit]Literally, I think that particular passage is only applicable to male bisexuality. [/stir shit] It does pretty much say that doesn't it? Yep. Man + Man = Death Girl + Girl = Twice as nice. It's right there in the bible people. Johnny...ur not paying attention. Man + Man + Woman = Death for the men. No, I'm on it. This is pretty technical, but you are correct: Man + Man + Woman = Death Man + Woman + Man = High fives. The bible is my new favorite book. If only I can convince my wife that: Woman + Man + Woman = Eternal Redemption
-
Man + Man = Death Girl + Girl = Twice as nice. It's right there in the bible people. That should be a T-Shirt. Yeah, I never understood why Leviticus is so underrated. Peter, Paul, and John never gave a biblical blessing to girl on girl action.
-
[stir shit]Literally, I think that particular passage is only applicable to male bisexuality. [/stir shit] It does pretty much say that doesn't it? Yep. Man + Man = Death Girl + Girl = Twice as nice. It's right there in the bible people.
-
On April 19, 1775 British marched to Concord to----
JohnnyD replied to wayneflorida's topic in Speakers Corner
I'm in favor of skydiving "controls". I don't want to take away all of your parachutes--just the square ones. Not quite. That would be like saying you want to take away shotguns and hunting rifles, but we can keep muzzle loaders. I'm actually curious about this. I've never heard anyone even remotely credibly say they are working toward gun eradication. It seems to me that the fight is over control, not eradication. I can't envision the possibility of gun eradication, but it is constantly thrown out as a line in the sand by the pro side even though I can't ever remember it being brought up by the control side. -
On April 19, 1775 British marched to Concord to----
JohnnyD replied to wayneflorida's topic in Speakers Corner
Ask that question in England or Australia. First it was the "scary" guns, then it was the less scary, then it was all the guns. Interesting. If that is the case in England and Australia, I would say it is very relevant and might go a very long way to changing the way I view the situation. -
On April 19, 1775 British marched to Concord to----
JohnnyD replied to wayneflorida's topic in Speakers Corner
You know because he told you so? -
Without question. If you don't possess the common sense to understand the crowd your speaking to - at huge detriment to your reputation and career, you're an idiot. A proud graduate of the Steve Stiffler school of public speaking, but still an idiot. What an incredibly broad yet completely irrelevant statement.
-
On April 19, 1775 British marched to Concord to----
JohnnyD replied to wayneflorida's topic in Speakers Corner
Would "confiscate the weapons hidden by the Colonists" be the right answer? Just another group of gun grabbers Serious question for the gun nuts: When has anyone ever said they want to get rid of all guns? I've heard people supporting gun control, but never have I ever heard someone call for gun eradication. -
Actually she did the next morning in an interview. She said she was being "biblically correct", which is calling for the mass execution of all homosexuals. Well that changes everything! Still think you're grasping tho. She said she was being "biblically correct". That is a call for the mass execution of all homosexuals. Don't blame me - I didn't write it.
-
Actually she did the next morning in an interview. She said she was being "biblically correct", which is calling for the mass execution of all homosexuals.
-
Do you have equal respect for the leader of Iran when he denies the holocost or says that Isreal should be wiped off the map? From gay marriage to the mass execution of an entire people? Is it not "biblically correct" to call for the mass execution of all homosexuals?