FUCK YOU CHRIS CHRISTIE

[Ivytalk]

I guess dback wants Jim McGreevey back in office.

Will gay marriage hurt your life or your marriage?

Will it hurt yours?

[grizzaholic]

Do you think this is right?

Do you?

I like the sidestep. My views are apparent on this issue.


I think it is bullshit.....What say you? Don't worry, we all know what you and JSO believe.

[mainejeff]

Will gay marriage hurt your life or your marriage?

Will it hurt yours?

No, it would actually provide me with the same benefits under the law that you currently enjoy.

[AZGrizFan]

I just don't believe that 100% of the people that consider themselves gay, are so because of genetics.

Does anyone?

Most of the Hollywood gays are gay because it's fashionable. In Hollywood. To be gay.

[AZGrizFan]

Will it hurt yours?

No, it would actually provide me with the same benefits under the law that you currently enjoy.

Are you coming out of the closet here?

[grizzaholic]

No, it would actually provide me with the same benefits under the law that you currently enjoy.

Are you coming out of the closet here?

And a Break-Through has happened on CS today.

[mainejeff]

Does anyone?

Most of the Hollywood gays are gay because it's fashionable. In Hollywood. To be gay.

And all of this time I thought it was because they liked sucking dick and getting it up the butt...........

Silly me.

[Ibanez]

I don't think two dudes banging and sucking each other are "caught up in the scene" and are actually straight. I think you are retarded for saying that. DId you glue your mind shut?

Put a straight child and raise him/her in a strictly homosexual community and there is a chance that they will live a gay lifestyle later in life. I grew up at the beach but have no redneck tendencies. Had I been raised in the "country", I might have redneck tendencies. Environment plays a role in homosexuality, like everything else in life. I don't believe for a second that all gays were "born that way".
The point I am trying to make here is that it is difficult to distinguish between born gay and those that choose to be based on environmental influences. This is much different than racial minorities. To lump gays into the "minority" category is not as clear cut.

I was raised around rednecks and see them at my parents house often. I'm not a hick and I despise the rednecks.


Sent from my iPhone.

[CAA Flagship]

Most of the Hollywood gays are gay because it's fashionable. In Hollywood. To be gay.

And all of this time I thought it was because they liked sucking dick and getting it up the butt...........

Silly me.

So it is clear that I am not the only one who believes that there are gay imposters. This is the problem with calling them minorities.

Sent from Buffalo Wild Wings

[89Hen]

I'm saying some don't have the "innate genetic predisposition" to......

Guess what then...........THEY'RE NOT GAY!

Wow. A heterophobic gay elitist. You're setting a new standard in intolerance.

[kalm]

And all of this time I thought it was because they liked sucking dick and getting it up the butt...........

Silly me.

So it is clear that I am not the only one who believes that there are gay imposters. This is the problem with calling them minorities.

Sent from Buffalo Wild Wings

Wait, does this mean I don't have to consider rap a legitimate form of music just because I like the Beastie Boys?

I'm confused.

[mainejeff]

And all of this time I thought it was because they liked sucking dick and getting it up the butt...........

Silly me.

So it is clear that I am not the only one who believes that there are gay imposters. This is the problem with calling them minorities.

Sent from Buffalo Wild Wings

I'll do a survey tonight.

Sent from gay bathhouse.

[mainejeff]

Guess what then...........THEY'RE NOT GAY!

Wow. A heterophobic gay elitist. You're setting a new standard in intolerance.

Intolerance??? Because I don't believe that people "choose to be gay"???

Intolerance would be if I thought that only genetically born "gays" should be able to get married. I think that legal marriage should be between 2 consenting adults.

[ASUMountaineer]

Christie wants every voting person in the State of New Jersey to decide through a referendum.

What exactly is wrong with that?

Can I vote on YOUR civil liberties?

You either don't get it, or choose not to, but this is what happens when you want the government to have more power. You have to beg it to grant you civil rights. If the gay community had any sense, it would seek to end government sanctioned marriage for everyone. That would give you equal rights. However, you can't put aside your desire for a strong, central government to bestow upon you "rights."

To answer your question, sure go ahead and vote on my civil liberties. Isn't that what civil rights are...rights granted by the government.

[ASUMountaineer]

First, don't begin to tell me that all gays are that way because of genetics. There are many that choose to be that way.

Second, two straight guys or two straight women can't marry each other either.

Many breeders that get married don't do it out of love or commitment to each other........but yet, they are legally allowed to do so because they are a man and a woman. I say that 2 consenting adults should be legally allowed to do so and should not be discriminated against due to the whims of religious based ideology in our federal and state laws.

I couldn't agree more. End government-sanctioned marriage.

[CAA Flagship]

Many breeders that get married don't do it out of love or commitment to each other........but yet, they are legally allowed to do so because they are a man and a woman. I say that 2 consenting adults should be legally allowed to do so and should not be discriminated against due to the whims of religious based ideology in our federal and state laws.

I couldn't agree more. End government-sanctioned marriage.

You do have a point there, in a way. Why not look to end the financial "benefits" of married couples? Why not question the "benefits" for being married? Tax breaks are somewhat understood for those with dependents. That would not be any different for gays. (I'm guessing here. I seek confirmation from the gay CS.com posters on this.)

[mainejeff]

If the gay community had any sense, it would seek to end government sanctioned marriage for everyone.

[ASUMountaineer]

I couldn't agree more. End government-sanctioned marriage.

You do have a point there, in a way. Why not look to end the financial "benefits" of married couples? Why not question the "benefits" for being married? Tax breaks are somewhat understood for those with dependents. That would not be any different for gays. (I'm guessing here. I seek confirmation from the gay CS.com posters on this.)

Ending government-sanctioned marriage would end the financial benefits of married couples. My question to you is, why do you think we should end the "financial" benefits but continue to seek a certificate of marriage from a government official? I've never heard a compelling argument as to why government should be involved in marriage. Perhaps you have one, and if so I'd be interested in hearing it.

This question also goes to dbackjon who supports government-sanctioned marriage.

[mainejeff]

Many breeders that get married don't do it out of love or commitment to each other........but yet, they are legally allowed to do so because they are a man and a woman. I say that 2 consenting adults should be legally allowed to do so and should not be discriminated against due to the whims of religious based ideology in our federal and state laws.

I couldn't agree more. End government-sanctioned marriage.

Ain't gonna happen. I don't see many breeders seeking to do that........I wonder why???

[mainejeff]

You do have a point there, in a way. Why not look to end the financial "benefits" of married couples? Why not question the "benefits" for being married? Tax breaks are somewhat understood for those with dependents. That would not be any different for gays. (I'm guessing here. I seek confirmation from the gay CS.com posters on this.)

Ending government-sanctioned marriage would end the financial benefits of married couples. My question to you is, why do you think we should end the "financial" benefits but continue to seek a certificate of marriage from a government official? I've never heard a compelling argument as to why government should be involved in marriage. Perhaps you have one, and if so I'd be interested in hearing it.

Duh........breeders love the "perks" that go with it!

[CAA Flagship]

You do have a point there, in a way. Why not look to end the financial "benefits" of married couples? Why not question the "benefits" for being married? Tax breaks are somewhat understood for those with dependents. That would not be any different for gays. (I'm guessing here. I seek confirmation from the gay CS.com posters on this.)

Ending government-sanctioned marriage would end the financial benefits of married couples. My question to you is, why do you think we should end the "financial" benefits but continue to seek a certificate of marriage from a government official? I've never heard a compelling argument as to why government should be involved in marriage. Perhaps you have one, and if so I'd be interested in hearing it.

This question also goes to dbackjon who supports government-sanctioned marriage.

I am not tuned in to this matter. Not sure, but would be interested in hearing both sides of this debate.

[ASUMountaineer]

If the gay community had any sense, it would seek to end government sanctioned marriage for everyone.

I am not surprised by your response. I'd also think you would have the capacity to provide a response to my entire post.

As a married man, I fully support ending government-sanctioned marriage. In addition, I feel no threat from gay marriage being legalized. If my state of North Carolina decided tomorrow to allow gays to marry, I'd be for that. In fact, an amendment to define marriage as "one man and one woman" in North Carolina will be voted on in May. I plan to vote against the amendment. While you like to provide child-like responses to people's stances, I will actually utilize my right to vote to support your cause.

Supporting a strong central government is why you can't marry another man at this point. The government prevents this from being possible, yet you'd try to force your way into the club rather than dismantling the club all together. I choose the latter.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jen-jones ... r=Politics

I would like to pose a question: why do you support government being in the marriage business?

[ASUMountaineer]

Ending government-sanctioned marriage would end the financial benefits of married couples. My question to you is, why do you think we should end the "financial" benefits but continue to seek a certificate of marriage from a government official? I've never heard a compelling argument as to why government should be involved in marriage. Perhaps you have one, and if so I'd be interested in hearing it.

Duh........breeders love the "perks" that go with it!

Cool story bro. I'm guessing non-breeders do too, which is why you support government-sanctioned marriage?

[mainejeff]

I am not surprised by your response. I'd also think you would have the capacity to provide a response to my entire post.

As a married man, I fully support ending government-sanctioned marriage. In addition, I feel no threat from gay marriage being legalized. If my state of North Carolina decided tomorrow to allow gays to marry, I'd be for that. In fact, an amendment to define marriage as "one man and one woman" in North Carolina will be voted on in May. I plan to vote against the amendment. While you like to provide child-like responses to people's stances, I will actually utilize my right to vote to support your cause.

Supporting a strong central government is why you can't marry another man at this point. The government prevents this from being possible, yet you'd try to force your way into the club rather than dismantling the club all together. I choose the latter.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jen-jones ... r=Politics

I would like to pose a question: why do you support government being in the marriage business?

When more breeders like yourself choose to take that stance and do something about it in numbers rather than providing lip service.......I'll gladly join you in fighting for that cause. How about this........allow ALL consenting adults to marry.......and then we'll all fight together to dismantle state sponsored marriage. Deal?

Or are you too afraid to stick your neck out even though you already have that right?

[ASUMountaineer]

Ending government-sanctioned marriage would end the financial benefits of married couples. My question to you is, why do you think we should end the "financial" benefits but continue to seek a certificate of marriage from a government official? I've never heard a compelling argument as to why government should be involved in marriage. Perhaps you have one, and if so I'd be interested in hearing it.

This question also goes to dbackjon who supports government-sanctioned marriage.

I am not tuned in to this matter. Not sure, but would be interested in hearing both sides of this debate.

Wow, really? Throughout this thread you have shown that you have very strong convictions on gay people, even claiming to know that some are only "caught up" in the lifestyle. Surely you jest when you say you're not "tuned in" to this matter. You seemed pretty confident earlier, go ahead let's hear what defines those convictions...