Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Way to go, Minnesota!!!

Fu*king liberals.........I hope Minnesota is the next Michigan.........

ALPHAGRIZ1 wrote:Fu*king liberals.........I hope Minnesota is the next Michigan.........

We are coming for you, Alphie!


Since you bought me a drink, you will be allowed your choice of husbands: Ursus, Polson, Grizo or Chris.

Yea fudgepacking!!!

dbackjon wrote:Way to go, Minnesota!!!

HOORAY FOR COOTER RUBBING!

dbackjon wrote:

ALPHAGRIZ1 wrote:Fu*king liberals.........I hope Minnesota is the next Michigan.........

We are coming for you, Alphie!


Since you bought me a drink, you will be allowed your choice of husbands: Ursus, Polson, Grizo or Chris.

Its a sad fu*king day when I would have to flip a quarter to decide between Grizo and Ursus.................

ALPHAGRIZ1 wrote:

dbackjon wrote:

We are coming for you, Alphie!


Since you bought me a drink, you will be allowed your choice of husbands: Ursus, Polson, Grizo or Chris.

Its a sad fu*king day when I would have to flip a quarter to decide between Grizo and Ursus.................

Basically boils down to herpes or syphilis.

Is this really even newsworthy at this point?

Let's get a pool going on who will the LAST state left standing against gay marriage. I live in South Carolina and I say it's between us, Alabama and Tennessee.

I was gonna say Georgia, but Atlanta.................
I was gonna say Texas, but Austin....................

Who's gonna be the banker?

psychoCAT wrote:Let's get a pool going on who will the LAST state left standing against gay marriage. I live in South Carolina and I say it's between us, Alabama and Tennessee.

I was gonna say Georgia, but Atlanta.................
I was gonna say Texas, but Austin....................


Who's gonna be the banker?

Go ahead and send your money to me. I'll hold it.

ALPHAGRIZ1 wrote:Fu*king liberals.........I hope Minnesota is the next Michigan.........

I don't get the connection....

AZGrizFan wrote:Is this really even newsworthy at this point?

Not when its a blue state. Iowa is probably the least blue of the 12, but they were one of the 3-4 states that had gay marriage forced upon them by a handful of unelected judges.

BDKJMU wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:Is this really even newsworthy at this point?

Not when its a blue state. Iowa is probably the least blue of the 12, but they were one of the 3-4 states that had gay marriage forced upon them by a handful of unelected judges.

And yet red/bible belt states still watch the most gay porn...go figure.

BDKJMU wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:Is this really even newsworthy at this point?

Not when its a blue state. Iowa is probably the least blue of the 12, but they were one of the 3-4 states that had gay marriage forced upon them by a handful of unelected judges.

I meant that after TWELVE states have passed it, at which point does this become NOT news? It's like saying XXXXXXX is the 12th black QB in the NFL.

kalm wrote:

BDKJMU wrote:
Not when its a blue state. Iowa is probably the least blue of the 12, but they were one of the 3-4 states that had gay marriage forced upon them by a handful of unelected judges.

And yet red/bible belt states still watch the most gay porn...go figure.

According to a guy from Harvard who based that off of subscriptions to only one porn company. And it was total porn, gay and straight, not just gay.

AZGrizFan wrote:

BDKJMU wrote:
Not when its a blue state. Iowa is probably the least blue of the 12, but they were one of the 3-4 states that had gay marriage forced upon them by a handful of unelected judges.

I meant that after TWELVE states have passed it, at which point does this become NOT news? It's like saying XXXXXXX is the 12th black QB in the NFL.

Who's XXXXXXX? Man, those black names keep getting weirder and weirder.

BDKJMU wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:Is this really even newsworthy at this point?

Not when its a blue state. Iowa is probably the least blue of the 12, but they were one of the 3-4 states that had gay marriage forced upon them by a handful of unelected judges.

And if put to an election here it would pass...as it would in the state congress.


Something like 60+% of Iowans say they would vote to allow it.

We've had it for over 4 years now, and literally none of the dooms day issues the anti-gay movement has thrown out exists here.

kalm wrote:

BDKJMU wrote:
Not when its a blue state. Iowa is probably the least blue of the 12, but they were one of the 3-4 states that had gay marriage forced upon them by a handful of unelected judges.

And yet red/bible belt states still watch the most gay porn...go figure.

They also tend to have the highest divorce rates.


Also, there has been more than just 1 study done on who watches the most porn....red states and "conservative Christians" rank at or near the top in every one.

Screamin_Eagle174 wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
I meant that after TWELVE states have passed it, at which point does this become NOT news? It's like saying XXXXXXX is the 12th black QB in the NFL.

Who's XXXXXXX? Man, those black names keep getting weirder and weirder.

Malcom's great, great, great, great, great, great, great grandson.

clenz wrote:

BDKJMU wrote:
Not when its a blue state. Iowa is probably the least blue of the 12, but they were one of the 3-4 states that had gay marriage forced upon them by a handful of unelected judges.

And if put to an election here it would pass...as it would in the state congress.


Something like 60+% of Iowans say they would vote to allow it.

We've had it for over 4 years now, and literally none of the dooms day issues the anti-gay movement has thrown out exists here.

1st of all, its not 60%+ according to Public Policy Polling from just 3 months ago this Feb:
"Iowans support same sex marriage by a 46/43 margin.

Q19 Do you think same-sex marriage should be
legal or illegal?
Legal............................................................... 46%
Illegal .............................................................. 43%
Not sure .......................................................... 11%"
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main ... ction.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Plus when these things are voted on during referendum, it doesn't matter what the a poll of all people think, or even a poll of registered voters think, but what registered voters who bother to go vote think. And if its a mid term election like we have coming up next year it is a much smaller subset of voters than during a presidential election. And don't forget the Bradley effect. It doesn't sound like it would pass in Iowa in a mid term referendum.

As as far as would it pass the Iowa legislature, that seems dubious, as I see the Iowa Sentate is democrat controlled but the house is republican controlled with a republican governor.

If it wasn't for the liberal judges forcing it, Iowa wouldn't have it now. The 1st in the midwest would have been Minnesota, whose state govt is totally donk controlled.

AZGrizFan wrote:

Screamin_Eagle174 wrote:
Who's XXXXXXX? Man, those black names keep getting weirder and weirder.

Malcom's great, great, great, great, great, great, great grandson.

Jesus, you think it'll take that long? My great great grandfather was born in 1780!

BDKJMU wrote:

clenz wrote: And if put to an election here it would pass...as it would in the state congress.


Something like 60+% of Iowans say they would vote to allow it.

We've had it for over 4 years now, and literally none of the dooms day issues the anti-gay movement has thrown out exists here.

1st of all, its not 60%+ according to Public Policy Polling from just 3 months ago this Feb:
"Iowans support same sex marriage by a 46/43 margin.

Q19 Do you think same-sex marriage should be
legal or illegal?
Legal............................................................... 46%
Illegal .............................................................. 43%
Not sure .......................................................... 11%"
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main ... ction.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Plus when these things are voted on during referendum, it doesn't matter what the a poll of all people think, or even a poll of registered voters think, but what registered voters who bother to go vote think. And if its a mid term election like we have coming up next year it is a much smaller subset of voters than during a presidential election. And don't forget the Bradley effect. It doesn't sound like it would pass in Iowa in a mid term referendum.

As as far as would it pass the Iowa legislature, that seems dubious, as I see the Iowa Sentate is democrat controlled but the house is republican controlled with a republican governor.

If it wasn't for the liberal judges forcing it, Iowa wouldn't have it now. The 1st in the midwest would have been Minnesota, whose state govt is totally donk controlled.

That's a lot of typing just to whine.

BDKJMU wrote:

clenz wrote: And if put to an election here it would pass...as it would in the state congress.


Something like 60+% of Iowans say they would vote to allow it.

We've had it for over 4 years now, and literally none of the dooms day issues the anti-gay movement has thrown out exists here.

1st of all, its not 60%+ according to Public Policy Polling from just 3 months ago this Feb:
"Iowans support same sex marriage by a 46/43 margin.

Q19 Do you think same-sex marriage should be
legal or illegal?
Legal............................................................... 46%
Illegal .............................................................. 43%
Not sure .......................................................... 11%"
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main ... ction.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Plus when these things are voted on during referendum, it doesn't matter what the a poll of all people think, or even a poll of registered voters think, but what registered voters who bother to go vote think. And if its a mid term election like we have coming up next year it is a much smaller subset of voters than during a presidential election. And don't forget the Bradley effect. It doesn't sound like it would pass in Iowa in a mid term referendum.

As as far as would it pass the Iowa legislature, that seems dubious, as I see the Iowa Sentate is democrat controlled but the house is republican controlled with a republican governor.

If it wasn't for the liberal judges forcing it, Iowa wouldn't have it now. The 1st in the midwest would have been Minnesota, whose state govt is totally donk controlled.

It wasn't a bunch of "liberal" judges that forced it. If anything most of them are conservative with the majority being appointed by a Republican Governor.

Iowa has a history of doing what is right long before other states. They rejected slavery in 1839, ended segregation in 1868, admitted women to the bar in 1869, ruled against racial discrimination in 1869, along with the gay marriage decision in 2009.

As clenz noted all the doom and gloom the jesus freaks were predicting about fire and brimstone coming down from the skies, Rivers and seas boiling, Forty years of darkness, Earthquakes, volcanoes, te dead rising from the grave, human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together... mass hysteria! Didn't happen and now the majority don't care.

SuperHornet wrote:

ALPHAGRIZ1 wrote:Fu*king liberals.........I hope Minnesota is the next Michigan.........

I don't get the connection....

I will add that to the list

BDKJMU wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:Is this really even newsworthy at this point?

Not when its a blue state. Iowa is probably the least blue of the 12, but they were one of the 3-4 states that had gay marriage forced upon them by a handful of unelected judges.

Judges in Iowa are elected, no?