floplag

The thing is, you can be selective, the law is the law until such time as it is changed.  Whether you agree with it or not doesnt change that simple fact.

The better question is why the fed ruling has anything to do with the states jurisdiction, that to me has implication far beyond this issue.

I would love to see this mans wishes honered, but there is a right way amd a wrong way yto make these changes, and a federal judge telling the state what to do on this matter is not the right way.

What does India have to do with anything?

 

j\k red.

 

Clearly this would be completely unconstitutional.  A church should marry whomever they wish.  The government needs to stay out of the church, completely.

when the church gets out of government i guess right?  it goes both ways.

churches need to forfeit the exempt status or stfu

why would a convention be needed, this shit is already illegal... i dont know how you could change it with more laws... what, double secret probation?

this is just dumb.. they know its wrong by the secrecy, they know its illegal, and yet they do it anyway?  who gave them that kind of power?

Change?    lololololololololol

I would argue that basic morals are religous. Where else would people come up with them?

common sense?  WTF really?  you really feel that people who are not religious have no marals?  how tolerant of you.

So Flop thinks there is no moral basis for being a proponent of gay marriage

WTF?  please dont try to assume or put words in my mouth.

perhaps you dont realize that i am a proponent and gay right supporter.

that post was in response to some nonsnese about morality implying that it requireed religion or some shit...

if you want to think its a moral basis thats up to yiou, i think its a matter of persecution for idealism that the religious right try to force other to bend to their will and it disgusts me.

religion doesnt get to claim morality... one can have morals and bea moral person without being religios so..

other than that dont ever assume to put words in my mouth, you dont know me, you have never cared to try. so you can save all that

They have morals?

why would you assume that just becasue a person isnt religious they dont have morals?  morality doesnt require religion so...

So the agnostic left are ok keep their agenda going while molesting young boys?

i dont se a lot of the agnostioc left shoving their morality down our throats... but if they were im sure you can guess the answer

i love how the fundraiser in chief took the political capital opportinity to call the couple involved?  yeah theres no hidden agenda there, lol

aside from that this is no shock to anyone as it is clearly a violation of rights to shove the conservative views of the religious right down the throats of others.... personally i think the religious right should STFU til they stop molesting young boys.. might carry some weight then

this woman is an idiot, but one could clearly come up with equal arguments for any politician on the planet so... yeah not surpriising

You assume the Angels will let that happen?

You assume they will have a choice?

It;s kinda up to the player as far as i know.  If he decides to go that route there is little we can do to change it.

It's funny... everyone always thiks you can improve without giving away quality.

I've been guilty of it too.. but lets be honest... what do we have that we could traede, that would bring back anything of real help?

Lets start with need... SP?  your not going to get much better than what we have trading Kendrick and Schuck.

What the organization needs is a change.. it ideology, methiodology.. something.  Whatever the message is, it isnt getting thru at this point. 

Watching this team play is like watching some kid thats dad forced him to go play little league when he would rather be playing his PS3.  They look disinterested, going thru the motions, and generally acting like they dont give a shit if they win or lose.

You cant trade for attitude.

At this point i would honestly consider nothing untouchable.. why keep trout and miss the playoffs every year.  If we truly are this bad then make changes and get some people in here that have the balls to want to win.

We have nothing on the farm of any real value to trade.

How do you change this club without giving away something you dont want to?  answer, you cant.  I dont want to trade the Trouts or Trumbos but you have to at least consider offers... its the name on the front that matters, not the back.  Are we really prepared to give trout the combined value of Hamilton and Pujols in the nest few years. that has to be considered as well?

Logically, the introduction of or act of voting for this kind of a bill when knowing that it won't become law is pretty much a terrible idea for anybody that thinks life begins at conception.

What any group believes does not make it fact.  There are numerous "beliefs" as to when life begins, none can claim any absolute fact, other than opinion.

Im not supporting this legislation, but i think the bigger issue is one group forcing their beliefs on others, which is what this is all about.

turnaround my ass!
and i pray to god that never happens

yeah.. calling bullshit on this as nothing more than an attempt to deflect it.. i do not know one person who can say their rates have dropped under this.. and if they have its becaseu their hours have also dropped making it moot or worse on the net income

...meet the new boss... same as the old boss.

Im sorry i still laugh at anyone who thinks there is any difference whatever between political parties in this country.

Between this and the fact that they are also now monitoring Internet traffic, we have no right to privacy anymore and as far as im concerned have completely lost our identity as a nation.

Another victory for the Corporate States of America 

this.. as the middle class still toils left out of the pie.

yeah... not sure i buy that, smell fresh ink on that one casue noone i know that was out of work i any better off, some have now lost benefits or been cut... i guess thats it, those who can no longer claim have fallen off.

I think the conclusion regarding gun is logical in the sense that it is simply a tool chosen by a demented person against targets of opportunity, however, how do you actually address prevention mental health?

checking everyone like breast cancer or other screenings?  how could you tell?  psychiatry isnt exactly and exact science so to speak, they cant say with certainty that a person will do something bad even if they have traits of those who do... thats a hell of a stigma to attach to a person.

This isnt exactly something that happens every day in every city.... tragic sure, but in terms of something preventable i would imagine it waaaaay down the line from others things that do happen every day we seem to ignore.

For me i keep coming back to the fact that we are trying to rationally understand or logically explain something that has no basis in rationality or sanity, how does a sane person undertand an insane act? 

I think its over reaction and nonsense to think we can predist or prevent these things.  Put guards in scholl malls become targets, or whatever.

while i think it being a crime is ludicrous, there is a time and place for religious dicussions... places that are not religious in nature or have nothing to do with personal beliefs, are not it. 

The military is an example of not it, but a court matialable offeense is just downright silly.

The idiocy is thinking either party is any different from the other

ive been looking at gettoing out of this state for many reasons... this type of silliness among them

If the older brother had survived, I say yes to him being tried as an enemy combatant. For now, I'll say no for the younger one.

see, this is the part i find troubling... you cannot make exceptions, we either follow our own laws and apply them equally to all, or we stop pretending we are a nation based on self eviodent triutchs.

I do not always agree with MT on these forums, but when i do i do so emphatically.

We cannot and must not continue the path we are going down giving away everything we supposedly stand for in the name of "security".. who they are or what they have done are irrelvant to the ideals we claim to hold dear, they must be followed no matter what the crime.

I am strictly commenting on background checks flop. Do you have an argument against them? Why is limiting sales within a family a dangerous precident? 

Buying or selling a gun is not illegal in this country, are ok with the government telling one family member they cannot do something legal within the family?  do you not see this a something that can be a so-called slippery slope?

as far as the background checks i think the issue is twofold: 

#1 How far they are expanded, what is the goal, what part of the current process doesnt work or needs expanding?  or is the real intent to further limit who can own one?

#2 The issue of the bans that were added to the bill that were largely responsible for its defeat moreso than the background checks in my opinion, but the media has glommed onto the background check issue rather than the rider.

Frankly i think its all nothing more than political election capital that serves no purpose other than garnering votes or creating sound bites in upcoming Novembers.