In article om,
says...

On 12/9/2012 7:56 PM, BAR wrote:
In article ,
says...

On 12/9/12 7:33 PM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Sun, 9 Dec 2012 18:53:56 -0500, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

On 12/9/12 1:06 PM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Sun, 9 Dec 2012 10:37:44 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 8 Dec 2012 11:47:49 -0800, "Califbill" wrote:

"GuzzisRule" wrote in message
...

On Fri, 7 Dec 2012 14:40:34 -0800, "Califbill"
wrote:

"Califbill" wrote in message
...

GuzzisRule wrote:
On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 15:55:36 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 11:03:07 -0500, GuzzisRule
wrote:

This article sums it up pretty well. Of course, I didn't write it, but
hopefully you'll get the
drift.

http://tinyurl.com/a3a6gfy

Sorry you're disappointed, but it's not the first time and probably
won't be the last.

====

Judging from that article I'd have to say that the author, and
probably you, share some confusion about the difference between
values, religious beliefs and political beliefs. Sometimes reasonable
people with high values have to agree to disagree. More importantly,
it is inappropriate to try and impose your religious beliefs on others
and then accuse them of lacking "values".

Other than, possibly, the first one, there is nothing religious there. I
don't consider the first
one a religious position. 'Marriage' was an institution that had some
meaning. Now liberals,
especially, have made it a sham. And, I agree that 'it is 'it is
inappropriate to try and impose
your religious beliefs on others', and that includes atheists imposing
theirs. If you can't read
that and determine what 'values' are being discussed, then I can
understand your comments.

Religious beliefs are fine. Just do not force them on others, but
likewise, others should not infringe your religious freedoms. And marriage
has been different things through the years. Lots of the profits in the
bible had multiple wives. In the 1800's you could marry multiple spouses
in Texas, Alabama and another regions also. And not even have to be
Mormon. Texas about we're married if you announced it in front of 20
witness's or signed in to a hotel as Mr. And Mrs. No church or state
involved. It is supposed to be a free country. You want to marry same
sex? Go for it. Just do not require the rest of unto pay for your
lifestyle. Same goes for most drugs, do them, die if that happens, but do
not expect society to pay for your medical bills.


-----------------
dang Ipad and the spelling corrections.

You've referred several times to differences in the number of wives. Not a
lot of instances in the
bible of male prophets marrying other males, goats, or whatever. Ditto with
Texas, Alabama, and
other regions. I have a gay niece living with her girlfriend. They will
probably invite me to a
'wedding' soon. I won't attend because I think the 'ceremony' is a sham.


-----------------------------

It is supposed to be a free country. If you pay your taxes, do not force
your views on someone else, and the partners are not children and are in
agreement, then just let it be. Does not concern most of us, except maybe
in your views, but their views are allowable also.

I agree. They were both here for a 'Thanksgiving' dinner the week before Thanksgiving. No problem.
But, I won't attend their wedding - if and when it occurs.

You're just a bigoted asshole, Racist John.

If not believing in 'Gay Marriage' makes me a bigoted asshole, then I reckon you're right, Kevin.



There are many reasons why you are a bigoted asshole.

If John is a bigoted asshole, he is a taxing paying bigoted asshole.

That's a true statement.


You're probably only taxing to your family and a bigoted asshole to
everyone else. Drag any Latinos in chains behind your truck yet?

The IRS didn't have to come to his door with an $80K+ tax bill.



Krause's financial problems have been mitigated by his wife's securing a
fairly good job with the Bricklayers union in Washington DC. She has a
pretty rough commute into the big city, but that's not his worry. In
fact, he's happy to have her out of his hair (what little of it there
is) for large chunks of time.

With his wife gone so much of the day Harry can watch his collection of
"movies" that he keeps on his home storage server. Most people have them
on tape or DVD. I wonder where Harry got his.

On 12/10/2012 10:52 PM, BAR wrote:
In article om,
says...

On 12/9/2012 7:56 PM, BAR wrote:
In article ,
says...

On 12/9/12 7:33 PM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Sun, 9 Dec 2012 18:53:56 -0500, BAR wrote:

In article ,
says...

On 12/9/12 1:06 PM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Sun, 9 Dec 2012 10:37:44 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 8 Dec 2012 11:47:49 -0800, "Califbill" wrote:

"GuzzisRule" wrote in message
...

On Fri, 7 Dec 2012 14:40:34 -0800, "Califbill"
wrote:

"Califbill" wrote in message
...

GuzzisRule wrote:
On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 15:55:36 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 11:03:07 -0500, GuzzisRule
wrote:

This article sums it up pretty well. Of course, I didn't write it, but
hopefully you'll get the
drift.

http://tinyurl.com/a3a6gfy

Sorry you're disappointed, but it's not the first time and probably
won't be the last.

====

Judging from that article I'd have to say that the author, and
probably you, share some confusion about the difference between
values, religious beliefs and political beliefs. Sometimes reasonable
people with high values have to agree to disagree. More importantly,
it is inappropriate to try and impose your religious beliefs on others
and then accuse them of lacking "values".

Other than, possibly, the first one, there is nothing religious there. I
don't consider the first
one a religious position. 'Marriage' was an institution that had some
meaning. Now liberals,
especially, have made it a sham. And, I agree that 'it is 'it is
inappropriate to try and impose
your religious beliefs on others', and that includes atheists imposing
theirs. If you can't read
that and determine what 'values' are being discussed, then I can
understand your comments.

Religious beliefs are fine. Just do not force them on others, but
likewise, others should not infringe your religious freedoms. And marriage
has been different things through the years. Lots of the profits in the
bible had multiple wives. In the 1800's you could marry multiple spouses
in Texas, Alabama and another regions also. And not even have to be
Mormon. Texas about we're married if you announced it in front of 20
witness's or signed in to a hotel as Mr. And Mrs. No church or state
involved. It is supposed to be a free country. You want to marry same
sex? Go for it. Just do not require the rest of unto pay for your
lifestyle. Same goes for most drugs, do them, die if that happens, but do
not expect society to pay for your medical bills.


-----------------
dang Ipad and the spelling corrections.

You've referred several times to differences in the number of wives. Not a
lot of instances in the
bible of male prophets marrying other males, goats, or whatever. Ditto with
Texas, Alabama, and
other regions. I have a gay niece living with her girlfriend. They will
probably invite me to a
'wedding' soon. I won't attend because I think the 'ceremony' is a sham.


-----------------------------

It is supposed to be a free country. If you pay your taxes, do not force
your views on someone else, and the partners are not children and are in
agreement, then just let it be. Does not concern most of us, except maybe
in your views, but their views are allowable also.

I agree. They were both here for a 'Thanksgiving' dinner the week before Thanksgiving. No problem.
But, I won't attend their wedding - if and when it occurs.

You're just a bigoted asshole, Racist John.

If not believing in 'Gay Marriage' makes me a bigoted asshole, then I reckon you're right, Kevin.



There are many reasons why you are a bigoted asshole.

If John is a bigoted asshole, he is a taxing paying bigoted asshole.

That's a true statement.


You're probably only taxing to your family and a bigoted asshole to
everyone else. Drag any Latinos in chains behind your truck yet?

The IRS didn't have to come to his door with an $80K+ tax bill.



Krause's financial problems have been mitigated by his wife's securing a
fairly good job with the Bricklayers union in Washington DC. She has a
pretty rough commute into the big city, but that's not his worry. In
fact, he's happy to have her out of his hair (what little of it there
is) for large chunks of time.

With his wife gone so much of the day Harry can watch his collection of
"movies" that he keeps on his home storage server. Most people have them
on tape or DVD. I wonder where Harry got his.



Already knows he's a thief, you know he stole them...

On Mon, 10 Dec 2012 10:44:33 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:

In article m,
says...

On 12/10/2012 9:15 AM, ESAD wrote:
On 12/10/12 9:02 AM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Sun, 09 Dec 2012 20:07:55 -0500, JustWait
wrote:

On 12/9/2012 6:53 PM, BAR wrote:
In article ,
says...

On 12/9/12 1:06 PM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Sun, 9 Dec 2012 10:37:44 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 8 Dec 2012 11:47:49 -0800, "Califbill"
wrote:

"GuzzisRule" wrote in message
...

On Fri, 7 Dec 2012 14:40:34 -0800, "Califbill"

wrote:

"Califbill" wrote in message
...


GuzzisRule wrote:
On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 15:55:36 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 11:03:07 -0500, GuzzisRule
wrote:

This article sums it up pretty well. Of course, I didn't
write it, but
hopefully you'll get the
drift.

http://tinyurl.com/a3a6gfy

Sorry you're disappointed, but it's not the first time and
probably
won't be the last.

====

Judging from that article I'd have to say that the author, and
probably you, share some confusion about the difference between
values, religious beliefs and political beliefs. Sometimes
reasonable
people with high values have to agree to disagree. More
importantly,
it is inappropriate to try and impose your religious beliefs
on others
and then accuse them of lacking "values".

Other than, possibly, the first one, there is nothing
religious there. I
don't consider the first
one a religious position. 'Marriage' was an institution that
had some
meaning. Now liberals,
especially, have made it a sham. And, I agree that 'it is 'it is
inappropriate to try and impose
your religious beliefs on others', and that includes atheists
imposing
theirs. If you can't read
that and determine what 'values' are being discussed, then I can
understand your comments.

Religious beliefs are fine. Just do not force them on others,
but
likewise, others should not infringe your religious freedoms.
And marriage
has been different things through the years. Lots of the
profits in the
bible had multiple wives. In the 1800's you could marry
multiple spouses
in Texas, Alabama and another regions also. And not even have
to be
Mormon. Texas about we're married if you announced it in
front of 20
witness's or signed in to a hotel as Mr. And Mrs. No church
or state
involved. It is supposed to be a free country. You want to
marry same
sex? Go for it. Just do not require the rest of unto pay for
your
lifestyle. Same goes for most drugs, do them, die if that
happens, but do
not expect society to pay for your medical bills.


-----------------
dang Ipad and the spelling corrections.

You've referred several times to differences in the number of
wives. Not a
lot of instances in the
bible of male prophets marrying other males, goats, or
whatever. Ditto with
Texas, Alabama, and
other regions. I have a gay niece living with her girlfriend.
They will
probably invite me to a
'wedding' soon. I won't attend because I think the 'ceremony'
is a sham.


-----------------------------

It is supposed to be a free country. If you pay your taxes, do
not force
your views on someone else, and the partners are not children
and are in
agreement, then just let it be. Does not concern most of us,
except maybe
in your views, but their views are allowable also.

I agree. They were both here for a 'Thanksgiving' dinner the
week before Thanksgiving. No problem.
But, I won't attend their wedding - if and when it occurs.

You're just a bigoted asshole, Racist John.

If not believing in 'Gay Marriage' makes me a bigoted asshole,
then I reckon you're right, Kevin.



There are many reasons why you are a bigoted asshole.

If John is a bigoted asshole, he is a taxing paying bigoted asshole.


Don't want to tell anyone what to do but I got invited to a Gay Marriage
back in the 90's. I was against it too, still am. I went to the ceremony
though. I figure if two people think they love each other and want to
spend their lives together, who the f am I? And as far as the moral
dilema, I figure God can decide how to judge them later... I was good
friends with the guy and explained it to him just like that, he knew I
didn't agree with his lifestyle, but realized that I too am a sinner and
a Christian like him, and he didn't judge my sins...

Yup. Well, I love my niece, play golf with her, watched her graduate
from the Naval Academy, cheered
when she became a Naval Aviator, and have had her and her 'spouse' for
dinner several times.

But, I won't participate in a 'marriage' between gays. Just don't
believe in it. Call it something
else, and I might go. Maybe - 'unionage', 'conjugage', 'amalgation',
or make up another word. I
guess I'm just a 'bigoted asshole', along with being, according to
H&K, a racist asshole.


"Participate"? You mean, attend the ceremony? No one is asking you to
marry a gay. You're a small-minded, bigoted, racist asshole.

He may be a bit bigoted. We all are. But what makes him a small minded,
racist asshole?

What makes him small minded is his constant far right wing bull**** and
his stance that everything right is good and everything left is bad.

What makes him a racist is his racism. He's made disparaging remarks
here about Mexicans in his neighborhood, he's repeated Mexican jokes
here as well.

If the Mexicans on the corner trashed their yard, and I say, "The Mexicans on the corner trashed
their yard," is that 'racist'? If so, then I'm guilty as charged, 'cause they trashed their f'ing
yard! But, they have cleaned it up in the past year. So, that's a good thing.

Cite the 'Mexican jokes', if you please!

On Mon, 10 Dec 2012 10:14:40 -0500, ESAD wrote:

On 12/10/12 10:03 AM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Mon, 10 Dec 2012 08:53:07 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:

In article , says...

On 12/9/2012 6:53 PM, BAR wrote:
In article ,
says...

On 12/9/12 1:06 PM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Sun, 9 Dec 2012 10:37:44 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 8 Dec 2012 11:47:49 -0800, "Califbill" wrote:

"GuzzisRule" wrote in message
...

On Fri, 7 Dec 2012 14:40:34 -0800, "Califbill"
wrote:

"Califbill" wrote in message
...

GuzzisRule wrote:
On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 15:55:36 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 11:03:07 -0500, GuzzisRule
wrote:

This article sums it up pretty well. Of course, I didn't write it, but
hopefully you'll get the
drift.

http://tinyurl.com/a3a6gfy

Sorry you're disappointed, but it's not the first time and probably
won't be the last.

====

Judging from that article I'd have to say that the author, and
probably you, share some confusion about the difference between
values, religious beliefs and political beliefs. Sometimes reasonable
people with high values have to agree to disagree. More importantly,
it is inappropriate to try and impose your religious beliefs on others
and then accuse them of lacking "values".

Other than, possibly, the first one, there is nothing religious there. I
don't consider the first
one a religious position. 'Marriage' was an institution that had some
meaning. Now liberals,
especially, have made it a sham. And, I agree that 'it is 'it is
inappropriate to try and impose
your religious beliefs on others', and that includes atheists imposing
theirs. If you can't read
that and determine what 'values' are being discussed, then I can
understand your comments.

Religious beliefs are fine. Just do not force them on others, but
likewise, others should not infringe your religious freedoms. And marriage
has been different things through the years. Lots of the profits in the
bible had multiple wives. In the 1800's you could marry multiple spouses
in Texas, Alabama and another regions also. And not even have to be
Mormon. Texas about we're married if you announced it in front of 20
witness's or signed in to a hotel as Mr. And Mrs. No church or state
involved. It is supposed to be a free country. You want to marry same
sex? Go for it. Just do not require the rest of unto pay for your
lifestyle. Same goes for most drugs, do them, die if that happens, but do
not expect society to pay for your medical bills.


-----------------
dang Ipad and the spelling corrections.

You've referred several times to differences in the number of wives. Not a
lot of instances in the
bible of male prophets marrying other males, goats, or whatever. Ditto with
Texas, Alabama, and
other regions. I have a gay niece living with her girlfriend. They will
probably invite me to a
'wedding' soon. I won't attend because I think the 'ceremony' is a sham.


-----------------------------

It is supposed to be a free country. If you pay your taxes, do not force
your views on someone else, and the partners are not children and are in
agreement, then just let it be. Does not concern most of us, except maybe
in your views, but their views are allowable also.

I agree. They were both here for a 'Thanksgiving' dinner the week before Thanksgiving. No problem.
But, I won't attend their wedding - if and when it occurs.

You're just a bigoted asshole, Racist John.

If not believing in 'Gay Marriage' makes me a bigoted asshole, then I reckon you're right, Kevin.



There are many reasons why you are a bigoted asshole.

If John is a bigoted asshole, he is a taxing paying bigoted asshole.


Don't want to tell anyone what to do but I got invited to a Gay Marriage
back in the 90's. I was against it too, still am. I went to the ceremony
though. I figure if two people think they love each other and want to
spend their lives together, who the f am I? And as far as the moral
dilema, I figure God can decide how to judge them later... I was good
friends with the guy and explained it to him just like that, he knew I
didn't agree with his lifestyle, but realized that I too am a sinner and
a Christian like him, and he didn't judge my sins...

Where is it written that marriage is between a man and a woman?

Dictionary.com

mar·riage [mar-ij] Show IPA
noun
1.a.the social institution under which a man and woman establish their decision to live as husband
and wife by legal commitments, religious ceremonies, etc. Antonyms: separation.

And, of course, you can probably find secondary and tertiary meanings that include gays, dogs,
goats, etc.



If you weren't such a small-minded, bigoted asshole, you'd realize there
are dozens and dozens of definitions for the coupling of marriage, and
that they are not necessarily secondary meanings.

There are, for example, communal marriages, a system prevailing amongst
some primitive peoples, by which within a small community all the men
are regarded as married to all the women, and vice versa; sometimes
called group marriage.


There's Scotch marriage: a marriage according to the Scots law, effected
by a mutual declaration before witnesses, without other formality;
chiefly applied to the runaway marriages (formerly frequent) of couples
who crossed from England into Scotland in order to escape the
restrictions imposed by English law on the marriage of minors without
the consent of their guardians.




Gosh, more examples of men and women. You folks need some examples of men and goats to *really* make
your point!

On 12/11/12 8:34 AM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Mon, 10 Dec 2012 10:44:33 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:

In article m,
says...

On 12/10/2012 9:15 AM, ESAD wrote:
On 12/10/12 9:02 AM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Sun, 09 Dec 2012 20:07:55 -0500, JustWait
wrote:

On 12/9/2012 6:53 PM, BAR wrote:
In article ,
says...

On 12/9/12 1:06 PM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Sun, 9 Dec 2012 10:37:44 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 8 Dec 2012 11:47:49 -0800, "Califbill"
wrote:

"GuzzisRule" wrote in message
...

On Fri, 7 Dec 2012 14:40:34 -0800, "Califbill"

wrote:

"Califbill" wrote in message
...


GuzzisRule wrote:
On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 15:55:36 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 11:03:07 -0500, GuzzisRule
wrote:

This article sums it up pretty well. Of course, I didn't
write it, but
hopefully you'll get the
drift.

http://tinyurl.com/a3a6gfy

Sorry you're disappointed, but it's not the first time and
probably
won't be the last.

====

Judging from that article I'd have to say that the author, and
probably you, share some confusion about the difference between
values, religious beliefs and political beliefs. Sometimes
reasonable
people with high values have to agree to disagree. More
importantly,
it is inappropriate to try and impose your religious beliefs
on others
and then accuse them of lacking "values".

Other than, possibly, the first one, there is nothing
religious there. I
don't consider the first
one a religious position. 'Marriage' was an institution that
had some
meaning. Now liberals,
especially, have made it a sham. And, I agree that 'it is 'it is
inappropriate to try and impose
your religious beliefs on others', and that includes atheists
imposing
theirs. If you can't read
that and determine what 'values' are being discussed, then I can
understand your comments.

Religious beliefs are fine. Just do not force them on others,
but
likewise, others should not infringe your religious freedoms.
And marriage
has been different things through the years. Lots of the
profits in the
bible had multiple wives. In the 1800's you could marry
multiple spouses
in Texas, Alabama and another regions also. And not even have
to be
Mormon. Texas about we're married if you announced it in
front of 20
witness's or signed in to a hotel as Mr. And Mrs. No church
or state
involved. It is supposed to be a free country. You want to
marry same
sex? Go for it. Just do not require the rest of unto pay for
your
lifestyle. Same goes for most drugs, do them, die if that
happens, but do
not expect society to pay for your medical bills.


-----------------
dang Ipad and the spelling corrections.

You've referred several times to differences in the number of
wives. Not a
lot of instances in the
bible of male prophets marrying other males, goats, or
whatever. Ditto with
Texas, Alabama, and
other regions. I have a gay niece living with her girlfriend.
They will
probably invite me to a
'wedding' soon. I won't attend because I think the 'ceremony'
is a sham.


-----------------------------

It is supposed to be a free country. If you pay your taxes, do
not force
your views on someone else, and the partners are not children
and are in
agreement, then just let it be. Does not concern most of us,
except maybe
in your views, but their views are allowable also.

I agree. They were both here for a 'Thanksgiving' dinner the
week before Thanksgiving. No problem.
But, I won't attend their wedding - if and when it occurs.

You're just a bigoted asshole, Racist John.

If not believing in 'Gay Marriage' makes me a bigoted asshole,
then I reckon you're right, Kevin.



There are many reasons why you are a bigoted asshole.

If John is a bigoted asshole, he is a taxing paying bigoted asshole.


Don't want to tell anyone what to do but I got invited to a Gay Marriage
back in the 90's. I was against it too, still am. I went to the ceremony
though. I figure if two people think they love each other and want to
spend their lives together, who the f am I? And as far as the moral
dilema, I figure God can decide how to judge them later... I was good
friends with the guy and explained it to him just like that, he knew I
didn't agree with his lifestyle, but realized that I too am a sinner and
a Christian like him, and he didn't judge my sins...

Yup. Well, I love my niece, play golf with her, watched her graduate
from the Naval Academy, cheered
when she became a Naval Aviator, and have had her and her 'spouse' for
dinner several times.

But, I won't participate in a 'marriage' between gays. Just don't
believe in it. Call it something
else, and I might go. Maybe - 'unionage', 'conjugage', 'amalgation',
or make up another word. I
guess I'm just a 'bigoted asshole', along with being, according to
H&K, a racist asshole.


"Participate"? You mean, attend the ceremony? No one is asking you to
marry a gay. You're a small-minded, bigoted, racist asshole.

He may be a bit bigoted. We all are. But what makes him a small minded,
racist asshole?

What makes him small minded is his constant far right wing bull**** and
his stance that everything right is good and everything left is bad.

What makes him a racist is his racism. He's made disparaging remarks
here about Mexicans in his neighborhood, he's repeated Mexican jokes
here as well.

If the Mexicans on the corner trashed their yard, and I say, "The Mexicans on the corner trashed
their yard," is that 'racist'? If so, then I'm guilty as charged, 'cause they trashed their f'ing
yard! But, they have cleaned it up in the past year. So, that's a good thing.

Cite the 'Mexican jokes', if you please!



Yeah, it is racist. Why would you say "the Mexicans on the corner."? Why
not just say "the people on the corner"?

On 12/11/12 8:37 AM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Mon, 10 Dec 2012 10:14:40 -0500, ESAD wrote:

On 12/10/12 10:03 AM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Mon, 10 Dec 2012 08:53:07 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:

In article , says...

On 12/9/2012 6:53 PM, BAR wrote:
In article ,
says...

On 12/9/12 1:06 PM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Sun, 9 Dec 2012 10:37:44 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 8 Dec 2012 11:47:49 -0800, "Califbill" wrote:

"GuzzisRule" wrote in message
...

On Fri, 7 Dec 2012 14:40:34 -0800, "Califbill"
wrote:

"Califbill" wrote in message
...

GuzzisRule wrote:
On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 15:55:36 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 11:03:07 -0500, GuzzisRule
wrote:

This article sums it up pretty well. Of course, I didn't write it, but
hopefully you'll get the
drift.

http://tinyurl.com/a3a6gfy

Sorry you're disappointed, but it's not the first time and probably
won't be the last.

====

Judging from that article I'd have to say that the author, and
probably you, share some confusion about the difference between
values, religious beliefs and political beliefs. Sometimes reasonable
people with high values have to agree to disagree. More importantly,
it is inappropriate to try and impose your religious beliefs on others
and then accuse them of lacking "values".

Other than, possibly, the first one, there is nothing religious there. I
don't consider the first
one a religious position. 'Marriage' was an institution that had some
meaning. Now liberals,
especially, have made it a sham. And, I agree that 'it is 'it is
inappropriate to try and impose
your religious beliefs on others', and that includes atheists imposing
theirs. If you can't read
that and determine what 'values' are being discussed, then I can
understand your comments.

Religious beliefs are fine. Just do not force them on others, but
likewise, others should not infringe your religious freedoms. And marriage
has been different things through the years. Lots of the profits in the
bible had multiple wives. In the 1800's you could marry multiple spouses
in Texas, Alabama and another regions also. And not even have to be
Mormon. Texas about we're married if you announced it in front of 20
witness's or signed in to a hotel as Mr. And Mrs. No church or state
involved. It is supposed to be a free country. You want to marry same
sex? Go for it. Just do not require the rest of unto pay for your
lifestyle. Same goes for most drugs, do them, die if that happens, but do
not expect society to pay for your medical bills.


-----------------
dang Ipad and the spelling corrections.

You've referred several times to differences in the number of wives. Not a
lot of instances in the
bible of male prophets marrying other males, goats, or whatever. Ditto with
Texas, Alabama, and
other regions. I have a gay niece living with her girlfriend. They will
probably invite me to a
'wedding' soon. I won't attend because I think the 'ceremony' is a sham.


-----------------------------

It is supposed to be a free country. If you pay your taxes, do not force
your views on someone else, and the partners are not children and are in
agreement, then just let it be. Does not concern most of us, except maybe
in your views, but their views are allowable also.

I agree. They were both here for a 'Thanksgiving' dinner the week before Thanksgiving. No problem.
But, I won't attend their wedding - if and when it occurs.

You're just a bigoted asshole, Racist John.

If not believing in 'Gay Marriage' makes me a bigoted asshole, then I reckon you're right, Kevin.



There are many reasons why you are a bigoted asshole.

If John is a bigoted asshole, he is a taxing paying bigoted asshole.


Don't want to tell anyone what to do but I got invited to a Gay Marriage
back in the 90's. I was against it too, still am. I went to the ceremony
though. I figure if two people think they love each other and want to
spend their lives together, who the f am I? And as far as the moral
dilema, I figure God can decide how to judge them later... I was good
friends with the guy and explained it to him just like that, he knew I
didn't agree with his lifestyle, but realized that I too am a sinner and
a Christian like him, and he didn't judge my sins...

Where is it written that marriage is between a man and a woman?

Dictionary.com

mar·riage [mar-ij] Show IPA
noun
1.a.the social institution under which a man and woman establish their decision to live as husband
and wife by legal commitments, religious ceremonies, etc. Antonyms: separation.

And, of course, you can probably find secondary and tertiary meanings that include gays, dogs,
goats, etc.



If you weren't such a small-minded, bigoted asshole, you'd realize there
are dozens and dozens of definitions for the coupling of marriage, and
that they are not necessarily secondary meanings.

There are, for example, communal marriages, a system prevailing amongst
some primitive peoples, by which within a small community all the men
are regarded as married to all the women, and vice versa; sometimes
called group marriage.


There's Scotch marriage: a marriage according to the Scots law, effected
by a mutual declaration before witnesses, without other formality;
chiefly applied to the runaway marriages (formerly frequent) of couples
who crossed from England into Scotland in order to escape the
restrictions imposed by English law on the marriage of minors without
the consent of their guardians.




Gosh, more examples of men and women. You folks need some examples of men and goats to *really* make
your point!


What's the matter with you? You seem to have some real hangups about
human interpersonal relationships that in reality have nothing to do
with you. Why are you so offended by gay marriage? It's not as if you
are a religious guy, following the teachings of jesus, because you
aren't. No one is pressuring you to "turn gay," (as if that is
possible), and I doubt gays are harassing you at the shopping malls.

Why can't you just go to the wedding and wish your relative well in her
new life?

In article 2041499723376809105.460406bmckeenospam-
, says...

ESAD wrote:
On 12/8/12 8:48 PM, Califbill wrote:
ESAD wrote:


I don't care who people marry or what color people are or their country of origin.

Actually you always preach hate at people who come from a country or state
you seem to dislike.



I have little tolerance for most of today's right-wing extremist
politicians and the people who elect them. Many of these right-wing
extremist politicians have shown they don't like women, they don't like
gays, they don't like blacks, they don't like latinos, they don't like
science and yet they are in positions of power and attempt to push their
backwards beliefs on the rest of us. I don't "hate" them, as you claim,
but I have no respect for these politicians or the people who elect them.
I'm glad to see Jim DeMint toddle himself out of the U.S. Senate, though
I suspect the governor of that state will name an interim U.S. Senator
who is just as much a backwards asshole as DeMint.

Seems to be both sides of the aisle are preaching hate and intolerance.
You just like your intolerance.

A lot of truth to that! I just can't figure out why the extremes on both
sides can't grasp the concept that their party is part of the problem.

In article ,
says...

In article ,
says...

On 12/10/12 9:02 AM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Sun, 09 Dec 2012 20:07:55 -0500, JustWait wrote:

On 12/9/2012 6:53 PM, BAR wrote:
In article ,
says...

On 12/9/12 1:06 PM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Sun, 9 Dec 2012 10:37:44 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 8 Dec 2012 11:47:49 -0800, "Califbill" wrote:

"GuzzisRule" wrote in message
...

On Fri, 7 Dec 2012 14:40:34 -0800, "Califbill"
wrote:

"Califbill" wrote in message
...

GuzzisRule wrote:
On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 15:55:36 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 11:03:07 -0500, GuzzisRule
wrote:

This article sums it up pretty well. Of course, I didn't write it, but
hopefully you'll get the
drift.

http://tinyurl.com/a3a6gfy

Sorry you're disappointed, but it's not the first time and probably
won't be the last.

====

Judging from that article I'd have to say that the author, and
probably you, share some confusion about the difference between
values, religious beliefs and political beliefs. Sometimes reasonable
people with high values have to agree to disagree. More importantly,
it is inappropriate to try and impose your religious beliefs on others
and then accuse them of lacking "values".

Other than, possibly, the first one, there is nothing religious there. I
don't consider the first
one a religious position. 'Marriage' was an institution that had some
meaning. Now liberals,
especially, have made it a sham. And, I agree that 'it is 'it is
inappropriate to try and impose
your religious beliefs on others', and that includes atheists imposing
theirs. If you can't read
that and determine what 'values' are being discussed, then I can
understand your comments.

Religious beliefs are fine. Just do not force them on others, but
likewise, others should not infringe your religious freedoms. And marriage
has been different things through the years. Lots of the profits in the
bible had multiple wives. In the 1800's you could marry multiple spouses
in Texas, Alabama and another regions also. And not even have to be
Mormon. Texas about we're married if you announced it in front of 20
witness's or signed in to a hotel as Mr. And Mrs. No church or state
involved. It is supposed to be a free country. You want to marry same
sex? Go for it. Just do not require the rest of unto pay for your
lifestyle. Same goes for most drugs, do them, die if that happens, but do
not expect society to pay for your medical bills.


-----------------
dang Ipad and the spelling corrections.

You've referred several times to differences in the number of wives. Not a
lot of instances in the
bible of male prophets marrying other males, goats, or whatever. Ditto with
Texas, Alabama, and
other regions. I have a gay niece living with her girlfriend. They will
probably invite me to a
'wedding' soon. I won't attend because I think the 'ceremony' is a sham.


-----------------------------

It is supposed to be a free country. If you pay your taxes, do not force
your views on someone else, and the partners are not children and are in
agreement, then just let it be. Does not concern most of us, except maybe
in your views, but their views are allowable also.

I agree. They were both here for a 'Thanksgiving' dinner the week before Thanksgiving. No problem.
But, I won't attend their wedding - if and when it occurs.

You're just a bigoted asshole, Racist John.

If not believing in 'Gay Marriage' makes me a bigoted asshole, then I reckon you're right, Kevin.



There are many reasons why you are a bigoted asshole.

If John is a bigoted asshole, he is a taxing paying bigoted asshole.


Don't want to tell anyone what to do but I got invited to a Gay Marriage
back in the 90's. I was against it too, still am. I went to the ceremony
though. I figure if two people think they love each other and want to
spend their lives together, who the f am I? And as far as the moral
dilema, I figure God can decide how to judge them later... I was good
friends with the guy and explained it to him just like that, he knew I
didn't agree with his lifestyle, but realized that I too am a sinner and
a Christian like him, and he didn't judge my sins...

Yup. Well, I love my niece, play golf with her, watched her graduate from the Naval Academy, cheered
when she became a Naval Aviator, and have had her and her 'spouse' for dinner several times.

But, I won't participate in a 'marriage' between gays. Just don't believe in it. Call it something
else, and I might go. Maybe - 'unionage', 'conjugage', 'amalgation', or make up another word. I
guess I'm just a 'bigoted asshole', along with being, according to H&K, a racist asshole.


"Participate"? You mean, attend the ceremony? No one is asking you to
marry a gay. You're a small-minded, bigoted, racist asshole.

It figures you wouldn't know what happens at a religious ceremony. There
is a reason that marriages are performed in public.

What are those reasons? And are you saying that two persons can't get
married in a private ceremony???

On Mon, 10 Dec 2012 20:43:49 -0500, ESAD wrote:

On 12/10/12 8:36 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 12/10/2012 7:47 PM, BAR wrote:
In article ,
says...

On 12/10/12 10:03 AM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Mon, 10 Dec 2012 08:53:07 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:

In article , says...

On 12/9/2012 6:53 PM, BAR wrote:
In article ,
says...

On 12/9/12 1:06 PM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Sun, 9 Dec 2012 10:37:44 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 8 Dec 2012 11:47:49 -0800, "Califbill"
wrote:

"GuzzisRule" wrote in message
...

On Fri, 7 Dec 2012 14:40:34 -0800, "Califbill"

wrote:

"Califbill" wrote in message
...


GuzzisRule wrote:
On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 15:55:36 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 11:03:07 -0500, GuzzisRule
wrote:

This article sums it up pretty well. Of course, I didn't
write it, but
hopefully you'll get the
drift.

http://tinyurl.com/a3a6gfy

Sorry you're disappointed, but it's not the first time
and probably
won't be the last.

====

Judging from that article I'd have to say that the
author, and
probably you, share some confusion about the difference
between
values, religious beliefs and political beliefs.
Sometimes reasonable
people with high values have to agree to disagree. More
importantly,
it is inappropriate to try and impose your religious
beliefs on others
and then accuse them of lacking "values".

Other than, possibly, the first one, there is nothing
religious there. I
don't consider the first
one a religious position. 'Marriage' was an institution
that had some
meaning. Now liberals,
especially, have made it a sham. And, I agree that 'it is
'it is
inappropriate to try and impose
your religious beliefs on others', and that includes
atheists imposing
theirs. If you can't read
that and determine what 'values' are being discussed, then
I can
understand your comments.

Religious beliefs are fine. Just do not force them on
others, but
likewise, others should not infringe your religious
freedoms. And marriage
has been different things through the years. Lots of the
profits in the
bible had multiple wives. In the 1800's you could marry
multiple spouses
in Texas, Alabama and another regions also. And not even
have to be
Mormon. Texas about we're married if you announced it in
front of 20
witness's or signed in to a hotel as Mr. And Mrs. No
church or state
involved. It is supposed to be a free country. You want
to marry same
sex? Go for it. Just do not require the rest of unto pay
for your
lifestyle. Same goes for most drugs, do them, die if that
happens, but do
not expect society to pay for your medical bills.


-----------------
dang Ipad and the spelling corrections.

You've referred several times to differences in the number
of wives. Not a
lot of instances in the
bible of male prophets marrying other males, goats, or
whatever. Ditto with
Texas, Alabama, and
other regions. I have a gay niece living with her
girlfriend. They will
probably invite me to a
'wedding' soon. I won't attend because I think the
'ceremony' is a sham.


-----------------------------

It is supposed to be a free country. If you pay your taxes,
do not force
your views on someone else, and the partners are not
children and are in
agreement, then just let it be. Does not concern most of
us, except maybe
in your views, but their views are allowable also.

I agree. They were both here for a 'Thanksgiving' dinner the
week before Thanksgiving. No problem.
But, I won't attend their wedding - if and when it occurs.

You're just a bigoted asshole, Racist John.

If not believing in 'Gay Marriage' makes me a bigoted asshole,
then I reckon you're right, Kevin.



There are many reasons why you are a bigoted asshole.

If John is a bigoted asshole, he is a taxing paying bigoted asshole.


Don't want to tell anyone what to do but I got invited to a Gay
Marriage
back in the 90's. I was against it too, still am. I went to the
ceremony
though. I figure if two people think they love each other and want to
spend their lives together, who the f am I? And as far as the moral
dilema, I figure God can decide how to judge them later... I was good
friends with the guy and explained it to him just like that, he
knew I
didn't agree with his lifestyle, but realized that I too am a
sinner and
a Christian like him, and he didn't judge my sins...

Where is it written that marriage is between a man and a woman?

Dictionary.com

mar·riage [mar-ij] Show IPA
noun
1.a.the social institution under which a man and woman establish
their decision to live as husband
and wife by legal commitments, religious ceremonies, etc. Antonyms:
separation.

And, of course, you can probably find secondary and tertiary
meanings that include gays, dogs,
goats, etc.



If you weren't such a small-minded, bigoted asshole, you'd realize there
are dozens and dozens of definitions for the coupling of marriage, and
that they are not necessarily secondary meanings.

What is your definition for and benefit of marriage? Is it to get a tax
advantage or is it someone to co-mingle your finances so that your
"spouse 2" can pay off your tax bills?

There are, for example, communal marriages, a system prevailing amongst
some primitive peoples, by which within a small community all the men
are regarded as married to all the women, and vice versa; sometimes
called group marriage.

I'll bet that you want a communal marriage so you can **** the wifes and
husbands of everyone else.

There's Scotch marriage: a marriage according to the Scots law, effected
by a mutual declaration before witnesses, without other formality;
chiefly applied to the runaway marriages (formerly frequent) of couples
who crossed from England into Scotland in order to escape the
restrictions imposed by English law on the marriage of minors without
the consent of their guardians.

Now you understand why people attend marriages, to be witnesses to the
act.





Well, like I said... in my case I made it clear to Sheldon (RIP Buddy)
that I didn't agree with it but it wasn't really my call anyway so I was
not gonna' judge. That being said, all I had to do is decide if I was
gonna' support my neighbor and friend or not when he called me and asked
a favor. Who knows, maybe I was the token "townie", s'ok with me, didn't
cost me much. He was a good guy, and as he showed me, just another
flawed christian like me so yeah, I went to the wedding. And for the
record, it was kinda' silly and I probably told him that later too


Gee whiz. I don't agree with Christianity and never have, but I've never
even considered turning down an invite to a wedding because I didn't
think much of the religious practices of the participants. I've been to
a lot of Christian funerals, too, and even a few christenings.

Weddings and christenings are good times to share with friends, no
matter their religious beliefs, and funerals are to say goodbye to
friends, no matter their religious beliefs.

It must be nice being a 'perfect' deadbeat.

In article ,
says...

On 12/10/12 8:36 PM, JustWait wrote:
On 12/10/2012 7:47 PM, BAR wrote:
In article ,
says...

On 12/10/12 10:03 AM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Mon, 10 Dec 2012 08:53:07 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:

In article , says...

On 12/9/2012 6:53 PM, BAR wrote:
In article ,
says...

On 12/9/12 1:06 PM, GuzzisRule wrote:
On Sun, 9 Dec 2012 10:37:44 -0500, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

On Sat, 8 Dec 2012 11:47:49 -0800, "Califbill"
wrote:

"GuzzisRule" wrote in message
...

On Fri, 7 Dec 2012 14:40:34 -0800, "Califbill"

wrote:

"Califbill" wrote in message
...


GuzzisRule wrote:
On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 15:55:36 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Wed, 05 Dec 2012 11:03:07 -0500, GuzzisRule
wrote:

This article sums it up pretty well. Of course, I didn't
write it, but
hopefully you'll get the
drift.

http://tinyurl.com/a3a6gfy

Sorry you're disappointed, but it's not the first time
and probably
won't be the last.

====

Judging from that article I'd have to say that the
author, and
probably you, share some confusion about the difference
between
values, religious beliefs and political beliefs.
Sometimes reasonable
people with high values have to agree to disagree. More
importantly,
it is inappropriate to try and impose your religious
beliefs on others
and then accuse them of lacking "values".

Other than, possibly, the first one, there is nothing
religious there. I
don't consider the first
one a religious position. 'Marriage' was an institution
that had some
meaning. Now liberals,
especially, have made it a sham. And, I agree that 'it is
'it is
inappropriate to try and impose
your religious beliefs on others', and that includes
atheists imposing
theirs. If you can't read
that and determine what 'values' are being discussed, then
I can
understand your comments.

Religious beliefs are fine. Just do not force them on
others, but
likewise, others should not infringe your religious
freedoms. And marriage
has been different things through the years. Lots of the
profits in the
bible had multiple wives. In the 1800's you could marry
multiple spouses
in Texas, Alabama and another regions also. And not even
have to be
Mormon. Texas about we're married if you announced it in
front of 20
witness's or signed in to a hotel as Mr. And Mrs. No
church or state
involved. It is supposed to be a free country. You want
to marry same
sex? Go for it. Just do not require the rest of unto pay
for your
lifestyle. Same goes for most drugs, do them, die if that
happens, but do
not expect society to pay for your medical bills.


-----------------
dang Ipad and the spelling corrections.

You've referred several times to differences in the number
of wives. Not a
lot of instances in the
bible of male prophets marrying other males, goats, or
whatever. Ditto with
Texas, Alabama, and
other regions. I have a gay niece living with her
girlfriend. They will
probably invite me to a
'wedding' soon. I won't attend because I think the
'ceremony' is a sham.


-----------------------------

It is supposed to be a free country. If you pay your taxes,
do not force
your views on someone else, and the partners are not
children and are in
agreement, then just let it be. Does not concern most of
us, except maybe
in your views, but their views are allowable also.

I agree. They were both here for a 'Thanksgiving' dinner the
week before Thanksgiving. No problem.
But, I won't attend their wedding - if and when it occurs.

You're just a bigoted asshole, Racist John.

If not believing in 'Gay Marriage' makes me a bigoted asshole,
then I reckon you're right, Kevin.



There are many reasons why you are a bigoted asshole.

If John is a bigoted asshole, he is a taxing paying bigoted asshole.


Don't want to tell anyone what to do but I got invited to a Gay
Marriage
back in the 90's. I was against it too, still am. I went to the
ceremony
though. I figure if two people think they love each other and want to
spend their lives together, who the f am I? And as far as the moral
dilema, I figure God can decide how to judge them later... I was good
friends with the guy and explained it to him just like that, he
knew I
didn't agree with his lifestyle, but realized that I too am a
sinner and
a Christian like him, and he didn't judge my sins...

Where is it written that marriage is between a man and a woman?

Dictionary.com

mar·riage [mar-ij] Show IPA
noun
1.a.the social institution under which a man and woman establish
their decision to live as husband
and wife by legal commitments, religious ceremonies, etc. Antonyms:
separation.

And, of course, you can probably find secondary and tertiary
meanings that include gays, dogs,
goats, etc.



If you weren't such a small-minded, bigoted asshole, you'd realize there
are dozens and dozens of definitions for the coupling of marriage, and
that they are not necessarily secondary meanings.

What is your definition for and benefit of marriage? Is it to get a tax
advantage or is it someone to co-mingle your finances so that your
"spouse 2" can pay off your tax bills?

There are, for example, communal marriages, a system prevailing amongst
some primitive peoples, by which within a small community all the men
are regarded as married to all the women, and vice versa; sometimes
called group marriage.

I'll bet that you want a communal marriage so you can **** the wifes and
husbands of everyone else.

There's Scotch marriage: a marriage according to the Scots law, effected
by a mutual declaration before witnesses, without other formality;
chiefly applied to the runaway marriages (formerly frequent) of couples
who crossed from England into Scotland in order to escape the
restrictions imposed by English law on the marriage of minors without
the consent of their guardians.

Now you understand why people attend marriages, to be witnesses to the
act.





Well, like I said... in my case I made it clear to Sheldon (RIP Buddy)
that I didn't agree with it but it wasn't really my call anyway so I was
not gonna' judge. That being said, all I had to do is decide if I was
gonna' support my neighbor and friend or not when he called me and asked
a favor. Who knows, maybe I was the token "townie", s'ok with me, didn't
cost me much. He was a good guy, and as he showed me, just another
flawed christian like me so yeah, I went to the wedding. And for the
record, it was kinda' silly and I probably told him that later too


Gee whiz. I don't agree with Christianity and never have, but I've never
even considered turning down an invite to a wedding because I didn't
think much of the religious practices of the participants. I've been to
a lot of Christian funerals, too, and even a few christenings.

Weddings and christenings are good times to share with friends, no
matter their religious beliefs, and funerals are to say goodbye to
friends, no matter their religious beliefs.

Well, everyone here knows who the bigots are.