The party of tolerance (political)

Pages

467 posts / 0 new
Last post
eyexer's picture
eyexer
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 2/28/07

 been in mesa for the past few days.  can't believe how relaxing it is.  don't think about the damn oil patch at all lol.  don't think I could retire here because I would get bored.  need to be tinkering with stuff outside in the yard or whatever.  don't like cactus and sand.  started looking at rural properties in Oklahoma and found fifty properties with homes an horse facilities that are at least 20 acres and run to 300 acres.  Some are beautiful homes.  But the one thing I noticed with all of them was how unbelievably low the property taxes were on all these places in comparison to ND.  It's was staggering.  

 

espringers's picture
espringers
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 7/25/07

low taxes, decent land prices and homes priced at $100/ft or less all over just a couple of states south of us.  when i visit with a couple of friends and family from kansas, they can't believe how bad we get screwed.  i used to think it was all construction differences in insulation and footings, etc.. but, after long talks about what guys have for insulation and the fact that they have to dig footings too, i am at a loss for an explanation.   

EDIT:   other than the fact than i'd much rather live here than there of course.  :)

eyexer Said:
 been in mesa for the past few days.  can't believe how relaxing it is.  don't think about the damn oil patch at all lol.  don't think I could retire here because I would get bored.  need to be tinkering with stuff outside in the yard or whatever.  don't like cactus and sand.  started looking at rural properties in Oklahoma and found fifty properties with homes an horse facilities that are at least 20 acres and run to 300 acres.  Some are beautiful homes.  But the one thing I noticed with all of them was how unbelievably low the property taxes were on all these places in comparison to ND.  It's was staggering.  

Born to hunt and fish... Forced to work!

Crackshot.'s picture
Crackshot.
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 7/14/09

Buy a little farm down there and rent me a spot just big enough for a motorhome and a small greenhouse..               It's unreal the deals there are out there,  If I didn't have a place here to look after I would be gone in a flash.  

eyexer Said:
 been in mesa for the past few days.  can't believe how relaxing it is.  don't think about the damn oil patch at all lol.  don't think I could retire here because I would get bored.  need to be tinkering with stuff outside in the yard or whatever.  don't like cactus and sand.  started looking at rural properties in Oklahoma and found fifty properties with homes an horse facilities that are at least 20 acres and run to 300 acres.  Some are beautiful homes.  But the one thing I noticed with all of them was how unbelievably low the property taxes were on all these places in comparison to ND.  It's was staggering.  

 

 

 

Life is good
 

 

 

 

Plainsman's picture
Plainsman
Offline
AMATEUR
Joined: 6/19/03
In todays world of political correctness far too many people simply don't do this because of the fear of "offending" someone.

The installation of political correctness to the degree we have seen it evolve in this country is a silencing of freedom of speech in and of itself . 

Ironic how it is the "party of tolerance" that is driving it.

gst 2014

gst you are absolutely beyond any shadow of a doubt 100% correct. 

eyexer's picture
eyexer
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 2/28/07

 

espringers Said:
low taxes, decent land prices and homes priced at $100/ft or less all over just a couple of states south of us.  when i visit with a couple of friends and family from kansas, they can't believe how bad we get screwed.  i used to think it was all construction differences in insulation and footings, etc.. but, after long talks about what guys have for insulation and the fact that they have to dig footings too, i am at a loss for an explanation.   

EDIT:   other than the fact than i'd much rather live here than there of course.  :)

eyexer Said:
 been in mesa for the past few days.  can't believe how relaxing it is.  don't think about the damn oil patch at all lol.  don't think I could retire here because I would get bored.  need to be tinkering with stuff outside in the yard or whatever.  don't like cactus and sand.  started looking at rural properties in Oklahoma and found fifty properties with homes an horse facilities that are at least 20 acres and run to 300 acres.  Some are beautiful homes.  But the one thing I noticed with all of them was how unbelievably low the property taxes were on all these places in comparison to ND.  It's was staggering.  

it's inexplainable.  I am finding so many properties in OK that have houses with same acreage and same size home that are paying less than a third of what I'm paying in property taxes.  And they have the same damn services for them taxes.  I'm going to eventually relocate there because I've had enough of grabbing my ankles.  Currently Williston or western ND have nothing on any other state down there like they used to have.  

 

eyexer's picture
eyexer
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 2/28/07

 

Geothermal Said:
Buy a little farm down there and rent me a spot just big enough for a motorhome and a small greenhouse..               It's unreal the deals there are out there,  If I didn't have a place here to look after I would be gone in a flash.  
eyexer Said:
 been in mesa for the past few days.  can't believe how relaxing it is.  don't think about the damn oil patch at all lol.  don't think I could retire here because I would get bored.  need to be tinkering with stuff outside in the yard or whatever.  don't like cactus and sand.  started looking at rural properties in Oklahoma and found fifty properties with homes an horse facilities that are at least 20 acres and run to 300 acres.  Some are beautiful homes.  But the one thing I noticed with all of them was how unbelievably low the property taxes were on all these places in comparison to ND.  It's was staggering.  

exactly what I'm going to do.  have a buddy in MN that is big into cutting horses stuff.  he is going to get a little place down there and hang out there all winter working with horses.  he's a roofer and it's slow as hell in MN in the winter.  His wife is a school teacher and she'll just sub teach.  I told him I'd buy a place (many I've found already have second homes or trailer houses on the property) and let him stay there all winter.

 

eyexer's picture
eyexer
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 2/28/07

 

aba's picture
aba
Offline
Joined: 12/16/01

Plainsman Said:

In todays world of political correctness far too many people simply don't do this because of the fear of "offending" someone.

The installation of political correctness to the degree we have seen it evolve in this country is a silencing of freedom of speech in and of itself . 

Ironic how it is the "party of tolerance" that is driving it.

gst 2014

gst you are absolutely beyond any shadow of a doubt 100% correct. 

The world is coming to an end

espringers's picture
espringers
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 7/25/07

I know... I looked out my office window to see if hell hath frozen over after spitting coffee on my computer

Born to hunt and fish... Forced to work!

gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

aba Said:

Plainsman Said:

In todays world of political correctness far too many people simply don't do this because of the fear of "offending" someone.

The installation of political correctness to the degree we have seen it evolve in this country is a silencing of freedom of speech in and of itself . 

Ironic how it is the "party of tolerance" that is driving it.

gst 2014

gst you are absolutely beyond any shadow of a doubt 100% correct. 

The world is coming to an end

All it took was 598 pages!

Foamit's picture
Foamit
Offline
Joined: 12/7/13

 

eyexer Said:
 
espringers Said:
low taxes, decent land prices and homes priced at $100/ft or less all over just a couple of states south of us.  when i visit with a couple of friends and family from kansas, they can't believe how bad we get screwed.  i used to think it was all construction differences in insulation and footings, etc.. but, after long talks about what guys have for insulation and the fact that they have to dig footings too, i am at a loss for an explanation.   

EDIT:   other than the fact than i'd much rather live here than there of course.  :)

eyexer Said:
 been in mesa for the past few days.  can't believe how relaxing it is.  don't think about the damn oil patch at all lol.  don't think I could retire here because I would get bored.  need to be tinkering with stuff outside in the yard or whatever.  don't like cactus and sand.  started looking at rural properties in Oklahoma and found fifty properties with homes an horse facilities that are at least 20 acres and run to 300 acres.  Some are beautiful homes.  But the one thing I noticed with all of them was how unbelievably low the property taxes were on all these places in comparison to ND.  It's was staggering.  

it's inexplainable.  I am finding so many properties in OK that have houses with same acreage and same size home that are paying less than a third of what I'm paying in property taxes.  And they have the same damn services for them taxes.  I'm going to eventually relocate there because I've had enough of grabbing my ankles.  Currently Williston or western ND have nothing on any other state down there like they used to have.  

the taxes all come down to population and efficiency... oklahoma has 5x our population... ok city metro alone has almost 2x the nd population in about 5 counties... lots more people paying taxes down there...

on the building... start with a new lot in nw williston (single family home)... $75k... well for a 1500' home that's $50 a sf just for the dirt with services stubbed in... $150 a sf to build and you're at $300k... supply and demand... just like the 22lr thread...

BringingTheRain's picture
BringingTheRain
Offline
Joined: 1/5/10

 

gst Said:

 

BringingTheRain Said:

Given you have admitted it is not about equality of rights thru a civil union, but rather infiltrating and undermining of the traditional title.

Would it dismay you to see a Federal court, say the SCOTUS, rule that gay marriage must be legal in all states even if ND was the last state in the union to legalize it? Yes.

gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

I read where in Oregon, a privately owned business that declined to make a wedding cake for a gay couple was cited with violating their "civil rights".

http://marriage.laws.com/gay/state-laws/oregon-gay-marriage

The state of Oregon does not grant marriage licenses to gay couples because of state law which the people upheld in a vote, yet a judge rules it is a gay couples "civil right" to force a private business to make a wedding cake ?

Read the article and see were the "rights" a married couple have were given to gay couples in Oregon, but yet that is not enough.

So again, what "rights" are they fighting for in Oregon?

Old Jake's picture
Old Jake
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 2/18/08

gst Said:
I read where in Oregon, a privately owned business that declined to make a wedding cake for a gay couple was cited with violating their "civil rights".

http://marriage.laws.com/gay/state-laws/oregon-gay-marriage

The state of Oregon does not grant marriage licenses to gay couples because of state law which the people upheld in a vote, yet a judge rules it is a gay couples "civil right" to force a private business to make a wedding cake ?

Read the article and see were the "rights" a married couple have were given to gay couples in Oregon, but yet that is not enough.

So again, what "rights" are they fighting for in Oregon?

So the next time someone points to the sign that says "WE RESERVE THE RIGHT TO REFUSE SERVICE TO ANYONE" I should tell them that is a violation of my rights? Or is that only if I'm a minority or a protected class of citizen?

eyexer's picture
eyexer
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 2/28/07

 

Foamit Said:
 
eyexer Said:
 
espringers Said:
low taxes, decent land prices and homes priced at $100/ft or less all over just a couple of states south of us.  when i visit with a couple of friends and family from kansas, they can't believe how bad we get screwed.  i used to think it was all construction differences in insulation and footings, etc.. but, after long talks about what guys have for insulation and the fact that they have to dig footings too, i am at a loss for an explanation.   

EDIT:   other than the fact than i'd much rather live here than there of course.  :)

eyexer Said:
 been in mesa for the past few days.  can't believe how relaxing it is.  don't think about the damn oil patch at all lol.  don't think I could retire here because I would get bored.  need to be tinkering with stuff outside in the yard or whatever.  don't like cactus and sand.  started looking at rural properties in Oklahoma and found fifty properties with homes an horse facilities that are at least 20 acres and run to 300 acres.  Some are beautiful homes.  But the one thing I noticed with all of them was how unbelievably low the property taxes were on all these places in comparison to ND.  It's was staggering.  

it's inexplainable.  I am finding so many properties in OK that have houses with same acreage and same size home that are paying less than a third of what I'm paying in property taxes.  And they have the same damn services for them taxes.  I'm going to eventually relocate there because I've had enough of grabbing my ankles.  Currently Williston or western ND have nothing on any other state down there like they used to have.  

the taxes all come down to population and efficiency... oklahoma has 5x our population... ok city metro alone has almost 2x the nd population in about 5 counties... lots more people paying taxes down there...

on the building... start with a new lot in nw williston (single family home)... $75k... well for a 1500' home that's $50 a sf just for the dirt with services stubbed in... $150 a sf to build and you're at $300k... supply and demand... just like the 22lr thread

using your theory ND would have the highest property taxes in the nation.  we don't.  but per capita I'd bet we rank pretty high.  we are one of the highest for percentage of valuation.  and we really have nothing to show for it like other states.  look at MN.  they have about the same property taxes as we do now per % of valuation.  they have far more to show for their tax dollars than we do.  Let me ask you this.  How many dollars in surplus funds do you think the state should be allowed to hoard away?

 

BringingTheRain's picture
BringingTheRain
Offline
Joined: 1/5/10

 

gst Said:
I read where in Oregon, a privately owned business that declined to make a wedding cake for a gay couple was cited with violating their "civil rights".

http://marriage.laws.com/gay/state-laws/oregon-gay-marriage

The state of Oregon does not grant marriage licenses to gay couples because of state law which the people upheld in a vote, yet a judge rules it is a gay couples "civil right" to force a private business to make a wedding cake ?

Read the article and see were the "rights" a married couple have were given to gay couples in Oregon, but yet that is not enough. Domestic Partnership was created specifically to differentiate from marriage. It is a 2nd class status. 

So again, what "rights" are they fighting for in Oregon? Gays in Oregon want to be able to get 'married'

"Oregon law bans discrimination against gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people in jobs and in places that serve the public, such as restaurants and bakeries."

gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

btr says:"Domestic Partnership was created specifically to differentiate from marriage. It is a 2nd class status. "

Come btr, I thought it was about having the same "rights" as a traditional married couple?

At least be honest, it is NOT about gaining "rights", it is about gaining the TITLE which means they will have dismantled what is accepted as traditional marriage.

The gay community will not rest until they have accomplished this.

So cut the bullshit about how they are not "forcing" anything onto anyone.

If it was just about the "rights" they could achieve this without touching traditional marriage.

"Gays in Oregon want to be able to get 'married'

So btr, what are you going to do when the 40 year old man wants to "marry" a 13 year old girl here in ND? Advocate for his "rights" like you do gay "rights"?

Or does that go against the gain of what YOU believe is right or wrong?

Oh wait, it is not about "rights" but the "status" of how people look at something.

So why then should not the "status" this 40 year old man is viewed under be considered the same as two guys?

BringingTheRain's picture
BringingTheRain
Offline
Joined: 1/5/10

 

gst Said:
btr says:"Domestic Partnership was created specifically to differentiate from marriage. It is a 2nd class status. "

Come btr, I thought it was about having the same "rights" as a traditional married couple? Domestic Partnership is not Marriage. It is a second class status. Buy agreeing to only allow gays a domestic parternership, and deny them marriage, you are basically stating that heterosexual couples are better than gay couples, and we all know that obviously isn't the truth.. 

At least be honest, it is NOT about gaining "rights", it is about gaining the TITLE which means they will have dismantled what is accepted as traditional marriage. Just the between the 'man and woman' part? the multiple other changes in marriage since the beginning the the 20 century doesn't bother you?

The gay community will not rest until they have accomplished this. So you think gay couple, Ed and Ted down the street from you want to ruin your marriage? By wanting that same important title, they are are some how trying to also ruin it at the same time? 

So cut the bullshit about how they are not "forcing" anything onto anyone. How does two gay gays getting married affect your marriage? Gay couples are now married in multiple states and countries. The definition of marriage now includes same sex couples. How has this affected you and your marriage?

If it was just about the "rights" they could achieve this without touching traditional marriage.

"Gays in Oregon want to be able to get 'married'

So btr, what are you going to do when the 40 year old man wants to "marry" a 13 year old girl here in ND? Advocate for his "rights" like you do gay "rights"? A 13 year old can not consent. Is 18 the exact correct age? Not necessarily.

Or does that go against the gain of what YOU believe is right or wrong?Yes, and there are valid reasons for it.

Oh wait, it is not about "rights" but the "status" of how people look at something. It is about a same sex couple being able to exercise the same privilege of marriage that heterosexual couples do. 

So why then should not the "status" this 40 year old man is viewed under be considered the same as two guys?

Because a child is not an adult. An animal is not a consenting adult. Animals and kids cannot sign a contract. Polygamy? Good question, I'm not sure it shouldn't be legal. 
Pinecone, JR.'s picture
Pinecone, JR.
Offline
Joined: 10/8/10

I haven't been following, but which one of you is gay

I'll catch more eye's than you

johnr's picture
johnr
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 2/18/04

Maybe both. But I would put my money on the sensitive liberal.

Neat

701FishSlayer's picture
701FishSlayer
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/5/09

Ya, gay thread is might gay. Let it die.

 

 

 

 

gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

Christ almight btr, you really can not comprehend simple things or you are simply not willing to be honest.

It started out claiming they wanted the same "rights". If a domestic partnership gives gays the same "rights" then this claim was a lie.

Where did you ever draw the conclusion that gay marriage affects my marriage?

Even an idiot would not jump to that asinine conclusion from what was posted.

It is the religious sanctity of marriage that the gays now want after they are given the same legal rights. The title itself as a means to breakdown long held religious standards. 
 
Second class my ass. It is soley about shoving down the throats of the people that have opposed their being able to be married in a vindictive attempt to shatter the longstanding tradition of marriage based on religious standards.

At least be honest to admit that as it is glaringly easy to see.

So btr, what are you going to do when the 40 year old man wants to "marry" a 13 year old girl here in ND? Advocate for his "rights" like you do gay "rights"? A 13 year old can not consent. Is 18 the exact correct age? Not necessarily.

"Or does that go against the gain of what YOU believe is right or wrong?Yes, and there are valid reasons for it"

Once again the very same hypocritical bullshit multi tried defending his position with.

"Oh wait, it is not about "rights" but the "status" of how people look at something. It is about a same sex couple being able to exercise the same privilege of marriage that heterosexual couples do. "

Quit lying btr. it is NOT about the "privilege of marriage" when a domestic partnership gives that very "privilege"  to them. Try being honest here for once.

So why then should not the "status" this 40 year old man is viewed under be considered the same as two guys? Because a child is not an adult. An animal is not a consenting adult. Animals and kids cannot sign a contract. Polygamy? Good question, I'm not sure it shouldn't be legal. 

Did you bother to read the links to New Hampshires marriage laws? One last time, New Hampshire says children CAN get married. States can make their own laws just as they can with gay marriage. But yet YOU claim they should not be able to make laws that they have regarding this one restriction of marriage.

I thought you supported states making THEIR own laws?

honesty goes a long ways towards credibility.

BringingTheRain's picture
BringingTheRain
Offline
Joined: 1/5/10

 

gst Said:
Christ almight btr, you really can not comprehend simple things or you are simply not willing to be honest. 

It started out claiming they wanted the same "rights". If a domestic partnership gives gays the same "rights" then this claim was a lie. Marriage is not domestic partnership. It was created for specifically to keep people away from marriage.

Where did you ever draw the conclusion that gay marriage affects my marriage? If it doesn't affect heterosexual couples marriage and it doesn't affect society, then why attempt to deny it from gays? Because you just don't like it. 

Even an idiot would not jump to that asinine conclusion from what was posted. Ok. So your best reason to not allow gays to marry, is because you feel marriage is a tradition reserved for heterosexual couples? I think that is what you are getting at. One thing is fore sure, and that is completely normal for traditions to change. Marriage hasn't been exempt to it over time either. 

It is the religious sanctity of marriage that the gays now want after they are given the same legal rights. The title itself as a means to breakdown long held religious standards. No. That is the simple answer. No doubt, some christian gays would love to be able to get married in a church. No doubt, there are some gays that would like to stick it to Christains and be able to get married in a church. But that isn't what it is about. Religion does not own marriage. Marriage is not religious unless you want it to be. 
 
Second class my ass. It is soley about shoving down the throats of the people that have opposed their being able to be married in a vindictive attempt to shatter the longstanding tradition of marriage based on religious standards. I hope that isn't what you've been talking about this whole time, "religious marriage", because this whole debate would've been nipped in the butt a long time ago. 

At least be honest to admit that as it is glaringly easy to see. Um, no. Like I said, the church has no authority over marriage. You sure seem to think everyone is out to get you

So btr, what are you going to do when the 40 year old man wants to "marry" a 13 year old girl here in ND? Advocate for his "rights" like you do gay "rights"? A 13 year old can not consent. Is 18 the exact correct age? Not necessarily.

"Or does that go against the gain of what YOU believe is right or wrong?Yes, and there are valid reasons for it"

Once again the very same hypocritical bullshit multi tried defending his position with. Again,It isn't hypocrititcal when you have valid reasons.

"Oh wait, it is not about "rights" but the "status" of how people look at something. It is about a same sex couple being able to exercise the same privilege of marriage that heterosexual couples do. "

Quit lying btr. it is NOT about the "privilege of marriage" when a domestic partnership gives that very "privilege"  to them. Try being honest here for once. Gst, please don't get upset. If I wasn't being honest, I wouldn't go out of my way on this overwhelmingly conservative site just to debate against highly conservative Christians about something I don't agree with. When I see things written that I don't agree with or are just flat out wrong, I tend to respond. No different than you. Yet, I don't go around calling you a liar.

So why then should not the "status" this 40 year old man is viewed under be considered the same as two guys? Because a child is not an adult. An animal is not a consenting adult. Animals and kids cannot sign a contract. Polygamy? Good question, I'm not sure it shouldn't be legal. 

Did you bother to read the links to New Hampshires marriage laws? One last time, New Hampshire says children CAN get married. States can make their own laws just as they can with gay marriage. But yet YOU claim they should not be able to make laws that they have regarding this one restriction of marriage. Again,I have never said the people of any state do not have the right to make marriage laws. What I have done, is disagree with their reasoning behind those laws. 

I thought you supported states making THEIR own laws? Obviously, since I have stated it multiple times now. The next few times you decide to ask me this question again, just refer to my earlier posts. 

honesty goes a long ways towards credibility. I agree. Trying to call someone a liar most certainly doesn't, however.

There is a difference between supporting the state's right to marriage and disagreeing with the peoples opinion. 10 years ago, the people of this state voted to ban gay marriage. I have no problem with the process, but that most certainly doesn't mean I have to agree with the reasoning behind the decision. 5, 10, 20 years from now, In this state, there is a good chance you could find yourself on the losing side of a same sex marriage vote. 

BringingTheRain's picture
BringingTheRain
Offline
Joined: 1/5/10

 

johnr Said:
Maybe both. But I would put my money on the sensitive liberal.

Sensitive? You won't have to look to hard on this site to find a thread where after awhile, the conservatives couldn't help but to get all pouty, sensitive, and start spitting out vitriol in response to me.

eyexer's picture
eyexer
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 2/28/07

 you guys need some face time

 

gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

btr, the simple fact that can not be denied is the "claim" by national gay rights groups was all about "rights" . Survivorship rights, healthcare rights ect.....

gay couples can be given these "rights" thru civil unions, domestic partnerships ect...
and yet now that is not enough.

Lie to yourself if you wish to convince yourself this is NOT about incrementally dismantling Christian values, but when you start to lie to others what this is really about to achieve an agenda is when I take exception.

For YOU personally it might not be about dismantling Christian values and traditions, but for the national gay movement it is indeed about that.

I am sure most people see the irony in YOU claiming YOUR reasons to disagree with others states laws that allow 13 year olds to marry 40 years olds are "valid", but the views they hold regarding gay marriage are not.

So btr please explain why when one state passes laws to allow 13 year olds and 40 year olds to marry, there exists "valid" concerns to oppose this, but when a state passes a law to prevent two men from marrying there are NO "valid" reasons to support this OUTSIDE YOUR PERSONAL VEIWS.

Then explain why YOUR views are any more "valid" than anyone else's. 
 
Explain what age you believe is able to give "consent" legally.

I probably do not disagree with you on the subject of laws restricting the age of when people can marry, and why, but clearly in other states there are other views that have been "valid" enough to influence state law.

So the point you seem to be missing here, as these traditional views and values are dismantled, (marriage between a man and a woman, marriage younger than 18 or even 16) to the point we now legally have men marrying men and 13 year old girls marrying 40 year old men, are we really that far from a state passing a law that a 40 year old man can legally marry a 14 year old boy?

How will we argue a law like this is wrong when we have allowed gay marriage, and 13 and 40 year old heterosexual marriage?

Should not gays have the same age laws regarding marriage as heterosexuals do???

If a gay group filed suit on this in New Hampshire, where gay marriage is legal and a 40 year old man can legally marry a 13 year old girl, how would a judge be forced to rule?

You mention that I may be on the losing "side" 10, 15, 20 years from now on gay marriage, the whole point is that if we continue to allow these incremental changes to traditions and law regarding marriage, we may BOTH be on the losing side in arguments regarding other restrictions on marriage down the road as well. 

So btr, where do we stop and say that is not right?

History has shown in the downfall of most every great society, the incremental degrading of moral values has played a large part.  

So btr, where does your "tolerance" level start and stop?

What will YOU do when others wish to push their ideals past that point?

Why will that be any different than what those that support traditional marriage are doing right now?

johnr's picture
johnr
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 2/18/04

BringingTheRain Said:
 

johnr Said:
Maybe both. But I would put my money on the sensitive liberal.

Sensitive? You won't have to look to hard on this site to find a thread where after awhile, the conservatives couldn't help but to get all pouty, sensitive, and start spitting out vitriol in response to me.

Sorry, didnt mean to be insensitive...

Neat

Candiru's picture
Candiru
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 8/2/06

 gst,  What is with your obsession about dirty old men marrying teenagers?

It does not say this is wrong in the bible.   If it is in there please provide chapter and verse.   I thought the bible is this great guide to life and morality.   Where do you get the idea from that this is wrong - if you believe it is wrong?

beminoid31's picture
beminoid31
Offline
Joined: 12/26/08

 Gst-we get it you don't gay marriage to happen for fear of pedophilia and beastiality. Go out to the pasture and get another horse

cant drink all day unless you start in the morning.
Im only one man
GET SOME!!!!!

gst's picture
gst
Offline
GREENHORN
Joined: 3/12/09

Candiru Said:
 gst,  What is with your obsession about dirty old men marrying teenagers?

It does not say this is wrong in the bible.   If it is in there please provide chapter and verse.   I thought the bible is this great guide to life and morality.   Where do you get the idea from that this is wrong - if you believe it is wrong?

Thought perhaps you would have ben perceptive enough to understand it being used as an example of laws that regulate marriage that those that demand THEIR views on certain laws that regulate marriage be accepted as the "norm" refuse to accept as standing marriage laws due to THEIR own ideals.  

Perhaps you have missed the fact I do not tie this discussion to the Bible and what is written in it.

Beminoid, it seems you have missed the point as well.

On a side note though, The Gov. Of New York has gone on record saying if some one is pro life, pro assault weapons, and anti gay, as an "extreme" conservative they have no place in the state of New York.

Indeed the "party of "tolerance".

Yet one more lie.

Pages