Prop 8, Yes or No?.

[USMCM16A2]

Guys,


It is apparent that certain members of calguns seem to think that people who post Pro Prop-8 signs on their front lawns only to have them stolen are biggots. Well these emptyheads are biggots in their own right, why?.
They are biggots because someone steals another persons sign, shows predjudice against the sign owners right to express their Constitutional right to free speech. Person A might think that marriage is a pact between man/woman/God, a basic building block of Christian society. Person B might think that men can marry men, women can marry women and all is well.
So with that said, any microcephalic who condones the theft as proof of the sign owners biggotry, is he/she themselves a mindless brain donor, and the statement made about biggotry is a shining example of "put your mind in gear before you put the pie-hole in motion'. USMCM16A2

[Fjold]

How could someone who uses "microcephalic" in a semi-correct sense still have such horrible grammar and spelling?

[USMCM16A2]

fj,



It has been a long day, et tu. USMCM16A2

[Hopi]

I don't think your post reflects the question in the title.

I will vote no on 8, although it means nothing either way. I could vote 'present' and it will be just as useful as any 'yes' or 'no' vote.....




IBTQL

[Pronghorn]

Yes on 8.

I don't care for homosexuals, and I don't want my kids to think it's ok to be homosexual.

[Tumerboy]

god, not another thread that is destined to be closed. . .:TFH:

[jamesob]

i read your post a couple of times and each time i read it, it started to look more like a bowl of alphabet soup. oh and that a big 10-4 on prop8.

[AYEAREFIFTEEN]

Although I don't believe this is the appropriate forum, this topic does have a lot to do with individual rights in general.

Unfortunately a topic like this will stir much controversy on a site like this filled with people ranging from moderately religious to ultra religious, and who will tell you how a "No" vote will hurt religious freedom.

To those people I say what if gays were told they weren't allowed to own firearms. I'm sure no one here would stand for it. Think about that before you vote.

[DedEye]

:banghead: Hasn't this been covered enough already?

:beatdeadhorse5:

[ukdkbr]

Who cares? Me personally, I really don't care if a man marries a man or a woman marries a woman. It has no effect on me personally, I typically vote no on propositions if they enact another useless law or they ask for more money, that's it. I can give 2 ****s if a person is gay, really I don't care one way or the other, but if an individual is saying they want to commit to someone and they have the right to reap the tax benefits let them do it! If it's a religious issues that people have a problem with then take it up with your church.

This is one thing I don't understand about (some) Republicans ... we say we're for less taxes and here is a group of people that can use existing laws for a tax break and yet some repubs are against this because of some religious views ... the 2 issues should be brought up separately in their appropriate venues.

[Pronghorn]

Although I don't believe this is the appropriate forum this topic does have a lot to do with individual rights in general.

Unfortunately a topic like this will stir much controversy on a site like this filled with people ranging from moderately religious to ultra religious, and who will tell you how a "No" vote will hurt religious freedom.

To those people I say what if gays were told they weren't allowed to own firearms. I'm sure no one here would stand for it. Think about that before you vote.


I don't see anything in the constitution that gives gays the right to get married. There is this part about keeping, and bearing arms.

[M. Sage]

This was already covered, then locked, in the Election '08 forum.