Previous 11 - 20 Next
It was not always pleasant by modern standards, no. But it was always an agreement concerning a man and a woman. Perhaps an individual could have several of such agreements depending on the culture and time period, but that particular - male on side, female on the other - has been constant.
"Prove Gay Marriage infringes on the rights of Straight People or Christians or anyone else; it doesn't. Not by any legal or reasonable definition." I'm not set against gay marriage, but I think I understand the argument. Basically, if we define marriage as a union of one man and one woman, it connects marriage to its broad, cultural history; the label of "marriage" will mean more or less what it's always meant. If we change the meaning so that it does not have to have a man and a woman, we are fundamentally changing what the label of "marriage" means and fundamentally changing how it's connected to the ancient tradition of marriage.
"He DID say he gives the author of that article the benefit of the doubt." He certainly did say that. He then went on to compare him to Goebbels. Doesn't sound like he's actually giving him the benefit of the doubt.
With someone as over-sensitive and antagonistic as Barber purporting to speak for the Christian Right, maybe Barber should be less surprised that people want to silence the Christian Right. And again, that pitchfork line makes the satire pretty obvious.
With someone as over-sensitive and antagonistic as Barber purporting to speak for the Christian Right, maybe Barber should be less surprised that people want to silence the Christian Right. And again, that pitchfork line makes the satire pretty obvious.
"If you did you'd see that many people didn't see the satire in the article. Most of the comments were blatantly hate filled towards Christians & advocated the "silencing" of Christians." And with people as caustic as Barber appearing as the face of the Christian Right, it's not so hard to see why people would want to silence the Christian Right. He marvels at how Christians could ever be viewed as grumpy and over-sensitive while trying his damnedest to make them seem grumpy and over-sensitive.
Barber: Since I took it seriously, it was intended seriously. It's not satire if I say it isn't. Why are we all accepting this logic? The last line of Saletan's piece makes it pretty clear.
Name 5 conservative comedians.
In response to:

Is the GOP Suicidal?

jwilliams Wrote: Mar 24, 2014 5:50 PM
"Apart from abortion, the ONLY issue that gets today's social conservatives excited is sodomite marriage" That's not how conservative or liberal news outlets portray it. Other social issues that social conservatives seem to get excited about are... -the replacement of "Merry Christmas and Happy New Year" with "Happy Holidays" -the teaching of evolution to the exclusion of creationism -allowing openly gay teenagers to remain in the Boy Scouts -de-emphasis of Christianity values in schools, in government, and in general
In response to:

Is the GOP Suicidal?

jwilliams Wrote: Mar 24, 2014 4:52 PM
"That is why the electorate rejects it at every opportunity." Like they rejected it in May, Maryland, and Washington? You can keep telling yourself that most people are against it, but more and more this is an issue that the GOP cannot afford to stand on. Like I said: you can support a cause without supporting its most extremist supporters. Further proof: http://www.dailytexanonline.com/news/2014/03/20/majority-of-young-conservatives-accept-same-sex-marriage
In response to:

Is the GOP Suicidal?

jwilliams Wrote: Mar 24, 2014 4:43 PM
Because big government will keep people going to church?
Previous 11 - 20 Next