# gay marriage and our world.



## ezbite (May 25, 2006)

i know this thread isnt going to make it far. but what s your thoughts? heres a post i made on facebook, no offence ment..

https://www.facebook.com/#!/tom.turturice/posts/10205668647749914?notif_t=like


----------



## nixmkt (Mar 4, 2008)

On the confederate flag - you apparently are one that needs to read a history book. The fundamental basis of the Civil War was slavery. The honor and pride of defending the south that you refer to was defending slavery. Slavery is not honorable. It is the embodiment of hate. The history of the confederate battle flag representing the honor and pride of the south defending slavery is likely why it was adopted by a hate group to represent their agenda.



.


----------



## crappiedude (Mar 12, 2006)

Honestly, I don't care one way or the other but it seems it adds uniformity between the states.


----------



## supercanoe (Jun 12, 2006)

I don't do Facebook, so I don't know what you wrote. I could care less if gay people get married or not. They don't bother me. I don't understand how a man could not be attracted to a woman, but whatever. I have been in the homes and worked for many gay people. Most of them have been good people to work with. They usually have very clean, organized, and well maintained homes which is more than I can say for the general population.


----------



## jamesbalog (Jul 6, 2011)

Im glad gay people now have the right to be married, this is America; The land of the free.

but if it actually is the land of the free i dont understand why there is an issue with the confederate flag,


----------



## Snakecharmer (Apr 9, 2008)

What led to the outbreak of the bloodiest conflict in the history of North America?

A common explanation is that the Civil War was fought over the moral issue of slavery.

In fact, it was the economics of slavery and political control of that system that was central to the conflict.

A key issue was states' rights.

The Southern states wanted to assert their authority over the federal government so they could abolish federal laws they didn't support, especially laws interfering with the South's right to keep slaves and take them wherever they wished.

Another factor was territorial expansion.

The South wished to take slavery into the western territories, while the North was committed to keeping them open to white labor alone.

Meanwhile, the newly formed Republican party, whose members were strongly opposed to the westward expansion of slavery into new states, was gaining prominence.

The election of a Republican, Abraham Lincoln, as President in 1860 sealed the deal. His victory, without a single Southern electoral vote, was a clear signal to the Southern states that they had lost all influence.

Feeling excluded from the political system, they turned to the only alternative they believed was left to them: secession, a political decision that led directly to war.


----------



## nicklesman (Jun 29, 2006)

jamesbalog said:


> Im glad the gay people now have the right to be married, this is America; The land of the free.
> 
> but if it actually is the land of the free i dont understand why there is an issue with the confederate flag,


I agree with you 100%. As far as that flag goes...if you want to fly it that's on you. I guarantee though you will never see me with it.


----------



## triton175 (Feb 21, 2006)

crappiedude said:


> Honestly, I don't care one way or the other but it seems it adds uniformity between the states.


Unfortunately, that's a big part of the problem. There was never supposed to be "uniformity" between the states. Each state is supposed to be independent and able to make their own laws. The only exceptions to that are the specific areas that the Constitution names as powers of the Federal government. This principal is even reaffirmed by the tenth amendment. Things have gone very far astray from the powerful-State, weak-Federal government that our founders established. The Feds need to butt out.


----------



## flylogicsteelhead (Oct 4, 2006)

Snakecharmer's post is dead on concerning the civil war. I've read numerous books, taken numerous college courses, and many people have a hard time hearing the truth. 

As far as gay marriage. Many companies don't lend the same benefits to domestic partners as they do with married persons. I'm happy to see that changing.


----------



## FOSR (Apr 16, 2008)

States' rights was Jefferson's view, where each state was an independent entity. 

...That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do...

You have to admit, though, the USA could never be a world power if every state operated as an independent nation.


----------



## Photog (Jun 18, 2010)

As far as "gay marriage", it's now just "marriage" and I hope people can find happiness. I have quite a few friends who are gay. They have no agenda other than the fact they want to live as a wedded couple and now they can. Hope it goes better for them than it did for me!


----------



## buckzye11 (Jul 16, 2009)

I think if we are all on the exact same thought wave length we will be a warm fuzzy nation that abides firstly to political correctness opposed to individual freedom.
"Yes master I will do what you tell me"... That's the answer that is wanted. Sound familiar?
So I say fly a confederate flag if you want or fly a rainbow flag if you want. The choice should be your own.


----------



## monsterKAT11 (Jun 20, 2004)

I'm just glad I can marry my man now!


----------



## crappiedude (Mar 12, 2006)

triton175 said:


> Unfortunately, that's a big part of the problem. There was never supposed to be "uniformity" between the states. Each state is supposed to be independent and able to make their own laws. The only exceptions to that are the specific areas that the Constitution names as powers of the Federal government. This principal is even reaffirmed by the tenth amendment. Things have gone very far astray from the powerful-State, weak-Federal government that our founders established. The Feds need to butt out.


...but if someone were legally married in one state that marriage should be honored in all states. 
I say live and let live, we have bigger issues as a country to deal with.


----------



## Lucky Touch Charters (Jun 19, 2011)

I just to want to know when will the people who vote realize they were just stripped of their freedom. This decision was just made by the highest court in the world. That court controls the most powerful country in the world. It controls the land of free and the people of our great nation! Our freedom is under attack when a court who we cannot control, cannot contradict, and cannot vote out makes a decision that go against our voice. This is not about marriage. It is about the American people speaking through their voting and the supreme court overruling our vote! This concerns me. I am worried of what is next. The Government can be quite scary and now controlling.


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

It is what it is.

However I do sincerely hope that this ruling means an end to all of the gay pride parades and such. They no longer would serve a purpose, a means to an end. I am really tired of having someone's personal beliefs so aggressively shoved in my face. Go do what you want, just don't mess with my life while you're doing it and all is good.


----------



## SConner (Mar 3, 2007)

The rules regarding political and religious posts on this site are very clear. If you are not familiar with these regulations, now would be a good time to familiarize yourself with them.


----------



## brent k (Nov 10, 2013)

SConner said:


> The rules regarding political and religious posts on this site are very clear. If you are not familiar with these regulations, now would be a good time to familiarize yourself with them.


He does make a point guilty as charged for me. I just looked at the rules.


----------



## boatnut (Nov 22, 2006)

nixmkt said:


> On the confederate flag - you apparently are one that needs to read a history book. The fundamental basis of the Civil War was slavery. The honor and pride of defending the south that you refer to was defending slavery. Slavery is not honorable. It is the embodiment of hate. The history of the confederate battle flag representing the honor and pride of the south defending slavery is likely why it was adopted by a hate group to represent their agenda..


You're reading the wrong book. That's just what they want us to believe.

The War of Northern Aggression was about tariffs and northern economic imperialism. The North was protectionist. The South was free trade. The North wanted to finance its economic development by forcing the South to pay higher prices for manufactured goods. The North passed the Morrill Tariff which more than doubled the tariff rate to 32.6% and provided for a further hike to 47%. The tariff diverted the South’s profits on its agricultural exports to the coffers of Northern industrialists and manufacturers. The tariff was designed to redirect the South’s expenditures on manufactured goods from England to the higher cost goods produced in the North.

This is why the South left the union, a right of self-determination under the Constitution.

The purpose of Lincoln’s war was to save the empire, not to abolish slavery. In his first inaugural address Lincoln “made an ironclad defense of slavery.” His purpose was to keep the South in the Empire despite the Morrill Tariff. As for slavery, Lincoln said: “I have no purpose, directly or indirectly to interfere with the institution of slavery in the States where it exists. I believe I have no right to do so, and I have no inclination to do so.” This position, Lincoln reminded his audience, was part of the 1860 Republican Party platform. Lincoln also offered his support for the strong enforcement of the Fugitive Slave Act, which required Northerners to hunt down and return runaway slaves, and he gave his support to the Corwin Amendment to the Constitution, already passed by Northern votes in the House and Senate, that prohibited any federal interference with slavery. For Lincoln and his allies, the empire was far more important than slaves.


----------



## Overwatchmike (Mar 16, 2013)

What most people don't understand is that this is all a smoke screen for our government to do what they want while everyone is up in arms over a flag, gay marriage, men wanting to be women, and the list goes on and on.... The most important things are being kept hush, hush. Isis, our economy, and other more important things. The government has us as mushrooms, keep us in the dark and feed us @#!%.

BEST ONE I'VE SEEN YET ON FB.


----------



## polebender (Oct 29, 2011)

Approving gay marriage was inevitable at some point. I'm glad it's sooner than later. And as Lundy said it should quell all the in your face protests in the next few weeks. I am very neutral on this issue as I have relatives who are gay and have worked with many gays that aren't any different than anyone else, except for their sexuality. I also believe that it will bring stability to a culture that was rampant with immoralities and plagued by aids. Having monogamous relationships bound by marriage can only help and should cut down on these issues and ultimately make our world a better place for everyone.


----------



## bobk (Apr 30, 2004)

Very disappointed in "our" court system to approve such a thing.


----------



## TomC (Aug 14, 2007)

For me its not about religion,or a persons beliefs on what's right or wrong. I could of swore that there was something in this country about everyone being treated equally? I guess that doesn't work any more and is only allowed to go for certain topics.. But hey It passed and people can marry who ever they want, now if we could get everyone off all this racial tension and crap, it may get a little more peaceful in this country.


----------



## ezbite (May 25, 2006)

nixmkt said:


> On the confederate flag - you apparently are one that needs to read a history book. The fundamental basis of the Civil War was slavery. The honor and pride of defending the south that you refer to was defending slavery. Slavery is not honorable. It is the embodiment of hate. The history of the confederate battle flag representing the honor and pride of the south defending slavery is likely why it was adopted by a hate group to represent their agenda. .


----------



## FOSR (Apr 16, 2008)

As for the CSA flag, it turns out there were many versions. The "Confederate flag" we refer to is a battle flag designed to be distinguishable from the "infamous banner of Yankee vandals" - any of you other history dweebs look here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flags_of_the_Confederate_States_of_America


----------



## NCbassattack (May 5, 2014)

On the flag.
I had several ancestors in Lee's Army of Northern Virginia. None were slave owners. However, nearly all of them had farms robbed and homes burnt by Union troops. These were the men that drove the Federals from the field time after time, and finally, beaten and used up, they had to lay down their arms. Yes, I am very proud of these brave men. The first state to threaten secession was Massachusetts. Hardly a southern state.
The Klan and other hate groups that took up the flag dishonored its memory, as did that punk that murdered those poor souls in Charleston.
But, that being said, I guess I am glad we lost the war.
Because, as proud as I am to be southern, I am much more proud to be _American!
_And, the Flags of the Confederacy DO NOT BELONG on government property. It can be flown on private land I feel. 
The flag I served under was the Stars and Stripes, I was very proud to do so, as many, many southern boys have done since 1865!


----------



## Sr.Jigger (Feb 17, 2005)

Gosh, What a history lession I've received from reading all these posts !
So if I divorce my wife of 36 years and marry my fishing buddy can I go fishing more often and who ta hell has to clean the fish ??? My fishing buddy has a nicer boat 
I'm to old to worry about sex. I just want to not have a fight about my time spent going fishing.
A divorce would mean the wife would take all my money and most likely my boat and poles. The world is going to change no matter what I do or think. I just want to be left alone and still have the right to think, say and feel the way I do.


----------



## Ruminator (Apr 6, 2004)

Wow, I am really proud of OGF management for not "pulling the plug" on this thread; and everyone who has participated in this thread. Its been a civil discussion about two "hot" topics and everyone has kept their heads and not taken to insults.
We can actually reasonably voice our thoughts and have a civil discussion on topics that include aspects of, or touch upon banned topics.

Guys, no matter where you stand on the gay marriage topic, believe me when I say this is not even close to over! The marriage aspect may well be, but the ramifications are massive and may change this country into something we all don't like.

Read this excerpt from the Harvard law websight for the future battles that this is only the opening shot for and you'll see what I mean.
Traditional religious freedoms will continue to be targeted of most faiths, and then what other civil rights? I am concerned for our country and its future.

What long-term effects that all of this will have in our society remains to be seen. I don't see how all of them will be only good ones.

Please understand I am not saying that I support anything one way or the other in this post, just my concern at this point for what all of our future may hold as a nation. 

http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No3_Severinoonline.pdf


----------



## ironman172 (Apr 12, 2009)

triton175 said:


> Unfortunately, that's a big part of the problem. There was never supposed to be "uniformity" between the states. Each state is supposed to be independent and able to make their own laws. The only exceptions to that are the specific areas that the Constitution names as powers of the Federal government. This principal is even reaffirmed by the tenth amendment. Things have gone very far astray from the powerful-State, weak-Federal government that our founders established. The Feds need to butt out.


This is how I feel....it shouldn't be up to 9 people(supreme court)....it should be up to the states and the population that live in them....put it on the ballet and vote for it up or down....if it doesn't work out how you would like move to a state that has it.....it is a federal law against pot....but how many states is it legal in now....but still illegal by the fed's standards .....what will be next on the agenda, headed down the slippery slop they have started


----------



## viper1 (Apr 13, 2004)

Totally agree with you! Why should they be all that is allowed to speak out. Sent you a friend request also.


----------



## fastwater (Apr 1, 2014)

Scary times we live in right now. When the Supreme court can rule on something such as gay marriage or Obamacare and with their decisions impose Federal law over all states...a slippery slope indeed. Not even considering the possibility that the majority in a particular state may not want the new law. 
Maybe they will go after our guns next in the same manner...very scary.


----------



## streamstalker (Jul 8, 2005)

While the Confederate Flag may no longer fly over the state capital of South Carolina as determined by the duly elected officials of that state (including Strom Thurmond's son), the chances of the Supreme Court denying anyone's right to display it on their own person or property are as likely as...well, it just ain't happening. You have the right to fly the rainbow, stars and bars, swastika, hammer and sickle, Chief Wahoo, ...you even have the right to wear Old Glory as a diaper and take a crap in it...at least that is what the Supreme Court says.

If you don't like it, vote for a president who thinks as you do and hope for the best... He or she may get an appointment or two. Things may change in a generation or two or three or four...kind of how things have worked around here for 227 years.


----------



## Eastside Al (Apr 25, 2010)

The citiy people rule the country folks as there are more of them now and how they vote changes laws.
Look at how everything is done. Just a shame the usa is in such disamay from what the founding fathers vision was.


----------



## supercanoe (Jun 12, 2006)

What the Supreme Court has done several times now seems awfully close to taxation without representation.


----------



## Seaturd (Apr 14, 2004)

Since my first post got deleted I'll try again. I couldn't give less of a crap about gay marriage or what flag you choose to fly. I am sick of the Feds overstepping their boundaries.


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

Eastside Al said:


> Look at how everything is done. Just a shame the usa is in such disamay from what the founding fathers vision was.


The supreme court was established in 1790, by constitutional act. Whether any of us agree with or like any of their rulings or not, past, present or in the future does not change the fact that the supreme court is doing exactly what it was designed and empowered to do by the "founding fathers"


----------



## streamstalker (Jul 8, 2005)

Lundy said:


> The supreme court was established in 1790, by constitutional act. Whether any of us agree with or like any of their rulings or not, past, present or in the future does not change the fact that the supreme court is doing exactly what it was designed and empowered to do by the "founding fathers"


Yes, exactly what the founding fathers vision was...I am not dismayed in the least.


----------



## Bonecrusher (Aug 7, 2010)

This thread is exactly why I deleted my Facebook page. Don't care don't want to hear about it. Our votes don't mean a thing... Keep on fishing and watch out for you and yours. That's all this country has become.


----------



## Shortdrift (Apr 5, 2004)

Lundy said:


> It is what it is.
> 
> However I do sincerely hope that this ruling means an end to all of the gay pride parades and such. They no longer would serve a purpose, a means to an end. I am really tired of having someone's personal beliefs so aggressively shoved in my face. Go do what you want, just don't mess with my life while you're doing it and all is good.


Right on! Well said.


----------



## buckeyebowman (Feb 24, 2012)

Lundy said:


> The supreme court was established in 1790, by constitutional act. Whether any of us agree with or like any of their rulings or not, past, present or in the future does not change the fact that the supreme court is doing exactly what it was designed and empowered to do by the "founding fathers"


Mmmmm, not so fast my friend! I think the Supreme Court is doing exactly what John Marshall intended, and in the manner that he intended. John Marshall was a Chief Justice of the Supreme Court who envisioned much greater scope and power for the Court's activities than did the Founders, and he basically told the Legislative and Executive branches of government that that's how it was, by God, going to be! Instead of slapping him down and picking a fight, they went along with it. So, you plant corn, you get corn.

Snakecharmer and Boatnut, among others, made some great points. The issues that led to secession, and the creation of the CSA, are much more numerous and complex than the simple issue of slavery. I have a book that I'll have to dig out, don't feel like it now, about Lincoln and the causes (plural) of the Civil War. In it is quoted a paper written by Lincoln when he was either still a lawyer, or a Congressman from Illinois, that's defends the right of any state to secede from the union, quoting, of all things, our Declaration of Independence! Especially the part that says, something like, "when a people find a form of government to be intolerable, it is their right to abolish it and to establish for themselves a form of government more to their liking". I'm paraphrasing, of course.

That may have been Lincoln's sentiment at the time, but when he became President his overarching concern became preserving the Union. In that book he is quoted as saying that if he could preserve the Union without freeing a single slave he would do it! Preserving the Union became a consuming idea for him. 

A note to the mods. Thank you for keeping this thread open. Yes, it's a tad political, but it has become very historical, and interesting to boot! We seem to be having a civil discussion about current, and past, issues. If someone gets out of line, maybe give a thought to deleting just their post and not locking the entire thread. Thank you.

BTW. I'll have to make a mental note to, in November, tell you the true story of Thanksgiving, and not the pap that's been fed to schoolkids for a long time. At least since I was a kid!


----------



## Big Joshy (Apr 26, 2004)

http://www.ohiogamefishing.com/threads/ogfs-terms-of-service-tos-link.222375/


----------



## boatnut (Nov 22, 2006)

this is a good example of the quandry that all this flag b.s. puts us in. You can have a cake decorated at Walmart with an ISIS flag but not a confederate flag? I call for a boycott of any business that would do this.


----------



## Mushijobah (May 4, 2004)

The world changes around us, for better or for worse. Preserving traditional behaviors and customs just won't happen when a group feels oppressed and others recognize the oppression. I do find it slightly alarming that public opinion on many matters can change on a dime these days. It tells me how powerful the media is as a propaganda machine to the vulnerable masses.

One of my real concerns is that the majority of our citizens are losing touch with reality. I see post after post after post on facebook about social issues here in the States that are relatively trivial compared to the things that are happening in this world. Life and death things. People being slaughtered because of their religions or their ethnicity. Not a single action of a police officer or a lone wolf lunatic that our media seems to focus on. We lose focus on things such as the multi-national terrorist attacks claiming lives, and effecting economies and quality of life worldwide. It isn't an impossibility that we fall into a situation when we do not have the luxury to gush/rant over social changes or questionable killings of someone who is a criminal or resisting arrest. Our economy is not strong, we are no longer the world's #1 economic power, and we are allowing groups to terrorize and manipulate the free world. I'm not saying we need to be the world's police, but we need to maintain perspective and stay vigilant. Worshiping petty issues may be our downfall.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/27/world/middleeast/terror-attacks-france-tunisia-kuwait.html?_r=0


----------



## Lucky Touch Charters (Jun 19, 2011)

Mike, that is a great point. thank you for making me aware.






Overwatchmike said:


> What most people don't understand is that this is all a smoke screen for our government to do what they want while everyone is up in arms over a flag, gay marriage, men wanting to be women, and the list goes on and on.... The most important things are being kept hush, hush. Isis, our economy, and other more important things. The government has us as mushrooms, keep us in the dark and feed us @#!%.
> 
> BEST ONE I'VE SEEN YET ON FB.


----------



## I Fish (Sep 24, 2008)

crappiedude said:


> ...but if someone were legally married in one state that marriage should be honored in all states.
> I say live and let live, we have bigger issues as a country to deal with.


Yea, and to add a twist, the way the ruling is worded, it can easily be applied to gun laws. Basically, it could nullify ones states more restrictive laws, in favor of another states more lax laws. At the very least, it could mean automatic reciprocity concealed carry from one state to the next.

In other words, this ruling could have ramifications far beyond what was intended, or, was that the intention? Opening the door to much broader federal intrusion?




buckeyebowman said:


> BTW. I'll have to make a mental note to, in November, tell you the true story of Thanksgiving, and not the pap that's been fed to schoolkids for a long time. At least since I was a kid!


You'll have about as much luck with that as trying to convince people the Civil War wasn't about slavery, lol. Don't even mention the Pilgrim's failure was due to a Socialist/Communist form of government that failed them miserably, as they always do.


----------



## NCbassattack (May 5, 2014)

SCOTUS is there to interpret the law as written by the legislative branch, not write it as it fits their agenda.


----------



## Snakecharmer (Apr 9, 2008)

Mushijobah said:


> The world changes around us, for better or for worse. Preserving traditional behaviors and customs just won't happen when a group feels oppressed and others recognize the oppression. * I do find it slightly alarming that public opinion on many matters can change on a dime these days. It tells me how powerful the media is as a propaganda machine to the vulnerable masses.*


I am starting to feel like a frog in a pot of water. It seems to be getting warmer.....


----------



## brent k (Nov 10, 2013)

One thing still stands in my book. Dont know who originally said it but....YOU CAN HAVE MY GUNS...BULLETS FIRST.
AND YOU CAN HAVE MY GUNS WHEN YOU PRY THEM FROM MY COLD DEAD FINGERS.

Really what i mean is i dont think the gun law will be changed that easily. I figure there is 100% of other gun owning americans that feel the exact same way and will stand up when congress trys to overstep their boundries on that department. Otherwise i honestly dont feel like congress tramped on anyones freedoms here i just feel like they should have left it up to the states. They have bigger fish to fry and should have dealt with bigger problems in America right now.


----------



## Alaskan (Jun 19, 2007)

Lundy said:


> It is what it is.
> 
> However I do sincerely hope that this ruling means an end to all of the gay pride parades and such. They no longer would serve a purpose, a means to an end. I am really tired of having someone's personal beliefs so aggressively shoved in my face. Go do what you want, just don't mess with my life while you're doing it and all is good.


Let's see. Cake shops sued for choosing not to make a cake for a gay wedding due to the beliefs of the owner. How long before a rainbow couple sues a conservative pastor for refusing to do the service? The slippery slope turns to ice. I agree on the point they got what they want. Now get out of my face. I doubt it stops there.


----------



## I Fish (Sep 24, 2008)

Alaskan said:


> How long before a rainbow couple sues a conservative pastor for refusing to do the service? The slippery slope turns to ice. I agree on the point they got what they want. Now get out of my face. I doubt it stops there.


I hear this a lot, but I really doubt it will get much traction. You can't force a church to take down the Ten Commandments. You can't force a Pastor to preach things that are adverse to their religion. However, I don't think arresting or suing a preacher or pastor is going to happen, unless of course, they figure out a way to circumvent the First Amendment: 

_Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances._

Now, if a public official, say a mayor or judge, refuses to do the ceremony, sure, a lawsuit may be in order, due to Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment:

_All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws._


----------



## ducman491 (Oct 31, 2011)

That's how it will happen. Bullets first. They've already started with the restrictions on certain types of ammo and the different government agencies buying huge quantities creating a shortage. Now that gay marriage is behind us expect the gun control people to step it up. 

I'm ok with Gay Marriage but it should have remained a State issue. Put it on the ballot and let each State vote it's own opinion. The thing that gets me is the hypocrisy of the supporters is that now that the SCOTUS has ruled they are saying "you lost, get over it". But when the state votes did lose they didn't "get over it". 

The method slowly turning up the heat is effective and that is exactly what is happening.


----------



## Sciotodarby (Jul 27, 2013)

I wonder what the divorce rate is going to be on gay marriages?


----------



## Bluewalleye (Jun 1, 2009)

_


They have been crapping on the constitution for decades. There is only a pseudo constitution for the country anymore. Like I said before (why was my post deleted?) this is only the beginning. But some people don't want to hear the truth. Obviously why my post was deleted... _[/QUOTE]


----------



## chris1162 (Mar 12, 2008)

monsterKAT11 said:


> I'm just glad I can marry my man now!


I love you always and forever!!!


----------



## murphy13 (Jun 30, 2013)

ducman491 said:


> That's how it will happen. Bullets first. They've already started with the restrictions on certain types of ammo and the different government agencies buying huge quantities creating a shortage. Now that gay marriage is behind us expect the gun control people to step it up.


 I worked on behalf of the N.R.A. scarring the older demographic into thinking their guns rights were under attack by Obama. It's all a load of crap to get you to BUY BUY BUY! 
It's like they want you to forget that democrats(liberals) also have guns.


----------



## Meerkat (Aug 10, 2008)

This ruling on same sex marriage is far from the end of it. In fact it is just the beginning. We are just at the top of that slippery slope and who knows what lies at the bottom. See the attached article in this link from Politico making the case for Polyamory.http://www.politico.com/magazine/st...ge-decision-polygamy-119469.html#.VZA8V5XbIdV

To me the fundamental problem here is that we have allowed ourselves to become governed (dare I say ruled?) by an unelected judiciary. And if you think a Priest or Pastor is not going to be prosecuted for refusing to officiate at a same sex marriage then think again. It is already happening in Canada & if you doubt me, go ask your Pastor is he is afraid of what is coming next.


----------



## ducman491 (Oct 31, 2011)

The leaders of the party don't care what the moderate, gun owning, members want. When it's all said and done, after the moderates have voted for the politicians that the extreme left leaders of the party have chosen, those people will be looking at each other saying "How did this happen?"


----------



## ducman491 (Oct 31, 2011)

Meerkat said:


> This ruling on same sex marriage is far from the end of it. In fact it is just the beginning. We are just at the top of that slippery slope and who knows what lies at the bottom. See the attached article in this link from Politico making the case for Polyamory.http://www.politico.com/magazine/st...ge-decision-polygamy-119469.html#.VZA8V5XbIdV
> 
> To me the fundamental problem here is that we have allowed ourselves to become governed (dare I say ruled?) by an unelected judiciary. And if you think a Priest or Pastor is not going to be prosecuted for refusing to officiate at a same sex marriage then think again. It is already happening in Canada & if you doubt me, go ask your Pastor is he is afraid of what is coming next.


In the UK there is a group making a case for pedophilia.


----------



## Whaler (Nov 16, 2004)

Ezbite, this thread got a lot farther than you figured. I've noticed lately that the moderators seem to let political and other controversial issues stay on here a lot longer than ever before.
I wonder why ?


----------



## robertj298 (Feb 23, 2009)

As far as the Walmart ISIS cake. Walmart already apologized for that. The employee didn't know what the flag was and I think most people wouldn't know what that design was. As far as the civil war not being about slavery all anyone has to do is read the confederate states articles of secession and then tell me the war wasn't over slavery.


----------



## NCbassattack (May 5, 2014)

boatnut said:


> this is a good example of the quandry that all this flag b.s. puts us in. You can have a cake decorated at Walmart with an ISIS flag but not a confederate flag? I call for a boycott of any business that would do this.


That's insane. I already told my wife no more Wal Mart....


----------



## NCbassattack (May 5, 2014)

robertj298 said:


> As far as the Walmart ISIS cake. Walmart already apologized for that. The employee didn't know what the flag was and I think most people wouldn't know what that design was. As far as the civil war not being about slavery all anyone has to do is read the confederate states articles of secession and then tell me the war wasn't over slavery.


Not ALL about slavery. 90% of the soldiers owned no slaves, and were fighting for their rights and to protect their homes.


----------



## Lundy (Apr 5, 2004)

Whaler said:


> Ezbite, this thread got a lot farther than you figured. I've noticed lately that the moderators seem to let political and other controversial issues stay on here a lot longer than ever before.
> I wonder why ?


Well. frankly this one has stayed this long because it has up until recently it's been a pretty tame conversation with no name calling or deep political rhetoric. It was much more a conversation about a cultural topic than a political topic, if those two in this instance can truly be separated. It toed the line for some time but alas that has changed rapidly more towards the end of this thread. We all have our own strongly held views and opinions of this subject and a whole multitude of others that affect us all in some way daily. Expressing them here won't change anyone's mind, your personal passions or the realities of the recent rulings, the confederate flag removals or anything else. There are better venues to express your support or opposition to any issue.

Thanks for keeping a civil dialogue as long as your did, However per the TOS, this one needs to be closed now.

Thanks


----------

