Washington D.C. and Mexico City legalize same-sex marriage and adoption,

The point is everything had to have a beginning sometime.
Your point keeps changing on the fly.

2 things:
1. Why does everything had to have a beginning? Isn't God everything? But he's outside time, so he can't have a beginning. Lets not flee into vagueties and cop-outs and just fess up that you nor I know.
2. Even if everything has to have a beginning, why is God the only explanation? How can you claim to have looked at all possibilities of an event we have no knowledge of?

I don't know. You don't know. No one knows. So lest stop pretending and start agreeing on reality. It would do the world a ... well, world of good :)
 
BUT BUT IT'S GOD! This why religion is so hypocritical, especially when it comes to criticising science, it holds everyone, but itself, to the rigours of it, and when challanged give simplistic, unprovable answers.
 
Your point keeps changing on the fly.

2 things:
1. Why does everything had to have a beginning? Isn't God everything? But he's outside time, so he can't have a beginning. Lets not flee into vagueties and cop-outs and just fess up that you nor I know.
2. Even if everything has to have a beginning, why is God the only explanation? How can you claim to have looked at all possibilities of an event we have no knowledge of?

I don't know. You don't know. No one knows. So lest stop pretending and start agreeing on reality. It would do the world a ... well, world of good :)
Fine then, you go your way but I'll stick to what I believe.:beer:


Then you concede that God must have had a beginning also.
You are the king of circular logic.:king:
 
Hey, let's apply rules to things, which we'll proceed to ignore ourselves!
 
I think that brings up the number of homosexuals that I know are definitely gay here to 3.
You know some homosexuals who aren't gay? :p

You, me and Lordgay (I knew that!)
Hey hey now, who told you I was gay?? Dude, I'm not gay. What, you think putting gay in my name and drooling over pics of hot, steamy, delicious guys makes me gay? Well... maybe.

What's funny is that you would think it pretty clear, yet some people here have still missed that I'm gay. :lol: It's easy to understand how others can be missed who aren't as obvious.
 
You know some homosexuals who aren't gay? :p


Hey hey now, who told you I was gay?? Dude, I'm not gay. What, you think putting gay in my name and drooling over pics of hot, steamy, delicious guys makes me gay? Well... maybe.

What's funny is that you would think it pretty clear, yet some people here have still missed that I'm gay. :lol: It's easy to understand how others can be missed who aren't as obvious.

omg your part of the gay conspiracy, turning everythink pink and camp! help me god hes betrayed us!11!
 
What's funny is that you would think it pretty clear, yet some people here have still missed that I'm gay. :lol: It's easy to understand how others can be missed who aren't as obvious.

Maybe they assume you're just happy. :mischief:

It fits me! I'm almost never depressed. :D

Then again, I have this special candy from the medicine cabinet... but there certainly isn't a correlation. Even if I do occasionally wake up and don't remember how I got there...

So apart from persecution in Malawi, there's no real developments in the LGBT rights field? :(
 
DADT will be repealed sometime between now and 2016.

It will be one of the parts of the Obama Presidency that I will cheer and remember for all time. And also a moment where I will have to turn on my right-wing allies.

I hate being in the middle. "He who walks the middle of the road gets hit from both sides." :cry:

I wonder if the Court will ever change composition so DOMA can finally be struck down like there's no tomorrow. That's the most blatant crapping on the Constitution I've ever seen. You can't just get rid of a provision of the Constitution without an Amendment that gets rid of said provision.
 
Scalia and Kennedy are both fairly old. If one of them dies sometime between now and 2016, the balance of the court can be altered.
 
Scalia and Kennedy are both fairly old. If one of them dies sometime between now and 2016, the balance of the court can be altered.

As an advocate of divided government - obviously we'll butt heads on this one :p - I would certainly support a liberal Court provided the Republicans can secure one of the chambers of Congress in 2010.

I only support the current Court because they're the last vestige of conservatives in the government. Once that's not true... they can all go packing and DOMA can be struck down as the unconstitutional piece of crap it is.

If we could get some PR and multi-party systems going, I wouldn't have to focus so much on divided government, since it'd divide itself.

The roads in the US are weird :confused:

Or is it just we furries making the roads weird when we walk upon them? :mischief:

Alternatively, we moderates.
 
Top Bottom