If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Crooks & Liars)   Chris Christie vetoed civil rights. Now listen to the Newark mayor raise holy hell about putting the rights of minorities up for popular vote   (crooksandliars.com) divider line 17
    More: Cool, Chris Christie, Martin O'Malley, state senate, two-thirds majority, marriage certificate, Jon Corzine, civil rights, delegated voting  
•       •       •

6428 clicks; posted to Politics » on 18 Feb 2012 at 3:37 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Funniest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-02-18 03:46:02 PM
5 votes:
Gay marriage is for homos.
2012-02-18 05:30:16 PM
2 votes:
Premise 1: "Traditional" means "way old"

Premise 2: India is way older than 'Merica

Premise 3: In India people marry snakes and goats

Conclusion: "Traditional Marriage" means "marrying snakes and goats"
2012-02-18 10:42:42 AM
2 votes:

FlyingLizardOfDoom: Its not about civil rights, its about updating/changing the definition of marriage from being about procreation to being about love.


Even if true, how is that a bad thing?
2012-02-18 08:47:24 PM
1 votes:

SkinnyHead: That "stop interfering in my life" argument don't fly. If you want to be left alone, don't apply for a marriage license. When you apply for a marriage license, you are inviting the government into your life. You make your private life everyone's business when you do that.


That's the entire point you nitwit. The government interferes with people. The government excludes unmarried couples from various privileges and benefits that married couples have. If the government says some couples can't get married, there ought to be some powerful goddamn justification for denying them those benefits. Of course, in the case of same-sex marriage, as with interracial marriage, there is no such justification. At all.
2012-02-18 07:59:40 PM
1 votes:
i42.photobucket.com
2012-02-18 07:10:00 PM
1 votes:

SkinnyHead: That "stop interfering in my life" argument don't fly. If you want to be left alone, don't apply for a marriage license.


Same with those uppity Negroes, right Adolf?
2012-02-18 06:26:10 PM
1 votes:

MyRandomName: Equal rights... hahahahhahaha... Try suing for discrimination when not in a protected class. Rights have never been equal.


Thanks Mr. Duke.
2012-02-18 05:38:09 PM
1 votes:
When the Mayor of Newark puts up a similar shiatstorm about the right of free citizens to defend themselves and possess the modern tools to effectively do so, even if it is unpopular within the community, I'll give a damn.

Mr. Mayor only cares and bothers to blow some hot air when it's a minority right being trampled that he personally sympathizes with... or, more likely, which the voting bloc he depends on for re-election sympathizes with.

Christie is an asshole.

So is Booker.

Fark them both with a rusty chainsaw coated in Tabasco sauce and angry spiders.
2012-02-18 04:44:11 PM
1 votes:

Mugato: Rambino: Mugato: Marriage has always been about land and property. The church only got into it because they wanted a cut.

I thought marriage was about family alliances.

Now we're just splitting hairs heirs.


FTFY.
2012-02-18 04:16:04 PM
1 votes:

The_Sheriff_Is_A_Niiii: quatchi: Descartes: Civil Rights? I'm pretty sure it was about gay marriage... (checks article). Yep, gay marriage.

The Marriage rights debate is an equal rights debate.

Equal rights = Civil rights

You are fighting a war you've already lost according to demographic charts on support for this issue.

Why do you remain on the wrong side of history and morality?

It's absolutely hilarious being lectured about morality by those arguing and shilling for a moral abomination like gay rights.


Why so butthurt? Did Bruce the Moose forget the safe word at your CPAC after party?

By the way, your alt is only 3 days old. All your arguments are invalid.
mhd
2012-02-18 04:16:03 PM
1 votes:

FlyingLizardOfDoom: Its not about civil rights, its about updating/changing the definition of marriage from being about procreation to being about love.


Less procreation in NJ?

i.imgur.com
2012-02-18 02:43:50 PM
1 votes:

kronicfeld: FlyingLizardOfDoom: For all of human civilization, marriage was about procreation and creating heirs.

Which is why it's always been denied to the infertile and sterile.


I noticed you didn't get a response to this.

He must've just overlooked it.

/It's about RELIGION!
//Which is why it's always denied to atheists.
2012-02-18 02:05:14 PM
1 votes:

SkinnyHead: If the voters have no business deciding whether to change the definition of marriage, then who does get to decide?


The courts.

Not been paying attention?
2012-02-18 10:33:41 AM
1 votes:

FlyingLizardOfDoom: For all of human civilization, marriage was about procreation and creating heirs.


Which is why it's always been denied to the infertile and sterile.
2012-02-18 10:22:54 AM
1 votes:

kronicfeld: FlyingLizardOfDoom: changing the definition of marriage from being about procreation

A definition it has never had. Thanks for contributing literally nothing to the conversation.


For all of human civilization, marriage was about procreation and creating heirs. Having it be about love is a relatively new concept.
2012-02-18 10:16:31 AM
1 votes:

FlyingLizardOfDoom: changing the definition of marriage from being about procreation


A definition it has never had. Thanks for contributing literally nothing to the conversation.
2012-02-18 10:12:19 AM
1 votes:
Its not about civil rights, its about updating/changing the definition of marriage from being about procreation to being about love.
 
Displayed 17 of 17 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report