JohnnyD

What could I be thinking? We are in the midst of a war that to date has cost us thousands of lives and hundreds of billions of dollars. We started the war based on one reason and we were 100% wrong. I guess pointing out the incredibly obvious and wanting accountability is unintelligent president bashing? Seriously, right and wrong is more important than right and left. To some people, anyway.

Then why are so many gays upset that they can't marry? Just call the governor of your state and get it fixed. As I said, the polluted hand of religion has touched our legal system and the courts will not recognize the contract without being expressly forced to. Before I get taken off track about the polluted thing, I say that because there are many positives about religion, one of which is not its intermingling with our legal system or government.

I did not mean to insinuate that intelligence can or should be 100% accurate, however, when making a decision to take this country to war, to shed the blood of tens of thousands, to spend hundreds of billions of dollars, to cause our young men and women to give the ultimate sacrifice, you better be 100% sure. You do not get a free pass to say oops, my bad on that. In the making of that decision, the intelligence must be 100% correct. No exceptions or excuses. That is really the fundamental difference between us. You insist on saying left and right. I only care about right and wrong. I would say the exact same thing if a Democrat or Independent was president. I don't think you would.

We will simply never agree. The young men and women who put their lives on the line every day for us don't ask for much. What they do ask for is that if they have to lay down their lives, it will be worth it. Your suggestion that sometimes the intelligence is wrong is NOT GOOD ENOUGH. Not even close.

And polygamists? A fair question that can be simply answered with another question. -What is a marriage?- It is a contract between two people of the required age that grants certain legal rights, such as the transferrence of real property rights. This contract can be between only two people of the required age, so it excludes animals, which can not legally enter into a contract, children who have not reached the required age, and polygamists, because the contract can be between two people only. The issue people have is that it is commonly misconstrued that marriage has some basis in religion. It does not. In the past, it was difficult to get a judge to a certain place at a certain time, as they had to travel frequently from town to town. The absence of judges to perform the legal ceremony (signing and filing of the license) caused them to give authority to religious figureheads who are readily available and supposedly trust worthy to do so. Also, most marriage ceremonies were held in church, since it served as a community gathering place and there was no such thing as a banquet hall back then. The contract requires no religious endorsement and as such, you retain a lawyer and appear before a judge to end the contract. The belief that marriage must be redefined or altered to include same-sex participants is incorrect and a result of the influence of religion on our legal system.

Your planet has been scheduled for demolition to make way for an intergalactic expressway. Happy Holidays!

so what exactly would you call it whenever you simply type "Bwwwhaaaaaaaaa" in response to someone? I would say the typing equivelent of laughing in someone's face is insulting. And you do it ALL THE TIME. And I say Happy Holidays to you on whatever planet you're living on, assuming your tinfoil hat will not block out well wishes.

Yes, and you misspelled though. Happy Holidays on whatever planet you are living on.

> ....trying hard not to be "stuck on stupid".... How that going for you?

Thanks. Bummer that they let him out. Maybe we will still grab him, but we are awfully thin about now. Can't help thinking that this would not have turned out this way 5 years ago. Edit: Maybe someone from Germany can put this into context for us? I know that in America the guy would never see the light of day again, so the release would be very unusual. Is this an unusual thing in Germany?

Start with the first thing on the list: the reason for going to war. Oops, my bad. It is saddening to me that seemingly intelligent people do not have the ability to think for themselves or the backbone to say we fucked up and we fucked up big time. If all you can do is blindly support the administration, parrot Rush, and desperately cling to ANYTHING positive in this thoroughly screwed up mess, you are destined to repeat the errors that have relegated us to being the country people are afraid of instead of the country that people want to follow and emulate.

You can't be serious.

Linky no worky. Another source or a copy and paste?

Glad you can find humor in a situation that has been fucked up so badly that the Democratic Party as a whole can't even take a position on it. I have some friends over there -again- who don't think it's so damned funny.

Well bully for you, Mother Theresa! Hell, I've seen bikers pass the hat for one of their own who goes down uninsured, yet I see this smug "I'm insured--so screw you if you're not" attitude." Lemme guess: do you just happen to work for a company that provides insurance and/or are a person who is relatively "comfortable" financially?? There's always some jar out somewhere for some poor SOB who needs a liver/kidney/[insert organ here]. Should we tell them to F-off because they drank, ate junk food, did drugs? Is it the "circle-the-wagons" syndrome of distancing anyone who becomes a liability to skydiving? Skydivers generally claim to be against rules and regulations, yet I'm hearing the tacit implication that insurance (life, disability, vision, dental, loss-of-income, fire, theft, flood, mudslide . . . .) should be checked along with one's rig at manifest. Swell idea. Skydiving will grow by leaps and bounds--skysurfing anyone?? Conclusion: a skydiver pranged herself bigtime. She's broke/needs help with her medical bills. She's not a crying, lawsuit-happy "Scott Lutz", for Christ's sake! What's wrong with asking the public to VOLUNTARILY help out? Where's the love, man?

I don't give money to panhandlers, whether they are on the street corner or on my tv.

All I can think is: Dude, I put the fucking lotion in the fucking basket. Now let me out of this goddamn hole and put that fucking camera away!

This baffles me. How could you be considered a "member of the scientific community" if the best you can come up with is: Fuck, I don't know. This is too complicated for me to understand, so I give up. God must have done it.

Then why not make a stand and call off your personal Xmas outside of attending mass?

Yes it does, and that you can't say it directly without it being a pa speaks volumes about his character.

Good businessmen/women capitalize on opportunities. The reason Xmas is so commercialized is because people do most of their spending at that time of the year. btw - Athiest and we celebrate Xmas every year. Our families are all over the place and abroad. It is the time of year we all get together and slow down and reflect and spend time together. Xmas is that time because of the time off and such. If we didn't have a holiday week called Xmas, we would have to make something else up to ensure that we could spend time together.

My thoughts on this - to cleanse. I was shocked and really disturbed to read some of the crap in this and a few other similar threads floating around. The level of fear and blind hate that continues to manifest itself in some of us is truly frightening. Admittedly, I was at first angry, then sad. I have returned to a feeling of comforting hopefulness with the realization that, in time, such fear and hate will be overcome just as it has been in the past. Certainly not fast enough for those who are beyond such blatantly ugly emotions, but common decency will eventually prevail. To the feeble minded cowards out there, I say Happy Holidays and enjoy your perverted seclusion because your kind will eventually fade from good conscience.

If blacks were wrongly associated by the public with child molestors, then it certainly would be in their best interest to do so. But they are not, so it is not relevant. I'm hoping that someone with applicable knowledge will chime in here and be able to set us straight as to what portion of the population actually believes that homosexuals are predisposed to being child molestors.

During every gay rights event, they could make their position clear during speeches, for instance. It is an unfair burden for them to have to do so, but their interests are at stake. I see where you're coming from, but I believe they want their central message to be "We deserve equal treatment under the law", not "We are not child molestors". Still, an interesting subject. How strange would it be to hear a MLK speech and hear: Free at last, free at last - oh yeah, black people aren't child molestors.

Interesting viewpoint and I'm sure to some people, its valid. How would you recommend this to be done?