Rick Santorum booed for suggesting gay marriage 'harms' children

Jan 6, 2012 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Daily Mail

Santorum booed for suggesting gay marriage 'harms' children as he defends 2003 interview linking homosexuality to 'man on dog' sex But Newt Gingrich said he is willing to go before the NAACP and urge blacks to demand paychecks, not food stamps Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum engaged in a hostile exchange over gay marriage on ... (more)

Comments (Page 88)

Showing posts 1,741 - 1,760 of2,008
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

Since: Oct 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1952
Apr 6, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Go read DOMA
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
Federal law forbids states from making laws abridging the rights of US citizens, and requires states to provide all persons within their jurisdiction equal protection of the laws. Nothing you have ever said has negated this simple fact.
Go read the 14th Amendment.

“Unconvinced”

Since: Nov 09

Seattle, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1953
Apr 6, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Honest AbeL wrote:
Go read DOMA
Which parts? The few parts that still stand, the parts that are currently being brought to court for being unconstitutional, or the parts that have already been declared unconstitutional?

Since: Oct 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1954
Apr 6, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Don't worry Scalia will straighten all of those little problems out
EdmondWA wrote:
<quoted text>
Which parts? The few parts that still stand, the parts that are currently being brought to court for being unconstitutional, or the parts that have already been declared unconstitutional?

“Unconvinced”

Since: Nov 09

Seattle, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1955
Apr 6, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Honest AbeL wrote:
Don't worry Scalia will straighten all of those little problems out
He's got his work cut out for him. You've gotta be REALLY motivated against gay people to try to interpret the Constitution as a document intended to exclude people.

Since: Oct 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1956
Apr 6, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

1

He doesn't need to do that. All he needs to do is remember the meaning of the word marriage which I am sure he is capable of
EdmondWA wrote:
<quoted text>
He's got his work cut out for him. You've gotta be REALLY motivated against gay people to try to interpret the Constitution as a document intended to exclude people.

“Unconvinced”

Since: Nov 09

Seattle, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1957
Apr 6, 2012
 

Judged:

3

3

2

Honest AbeL wrote:
He doesn't need to do that. All he needs to do is remember the meaning of the word marriage which I am sure he is capable of
Oh right, because the Conservative Dictionary trumps the Constitution, I forgot. Definitions NEVER have ambiguity, nuance or multiple meanings, and they're always etched in titanium, so that a definition from the 12th Century will have the same meaning in the 21st. Society is much better served by such rigidity and absolutism.

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1958
Apr 6, 2012
 
FaFoxy wrote:
<quoted text>
All my cats have been DSH's except the last who's a BIG long-haired cat named Grayson. I dopted him and a 6-week old yiny kitten about a year and half ago.
Years ago, all 3 of my ctas went outside everydy to play, but here in AZ it's too dangerous to let any of them outisde because of all the WILDlife here.
There's nothing poisonous in Michigan, where we live, but our cats don't go outside. Nothing poisonous, but we live in the woods and do have foxes, coyotes, and bobcats. In Arizona - wow, lots of dangerous things.
Had one cat that lived 22 years. She was very special.

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1959
Apr 6, 2012
 
EdmondWA wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh right, because the Conservative Dictionary trumps the Constitution, I forgot. Definitions NEVER have ambiguity, nuance or multiple meanings, and they're always etched in titanium, so that a definition from the 12th Century will have the same meaning in the 21st. Society is much better served by such rigidity and absolutism.
Good one. Made me smile.

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1960
Apr 6, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

rick who????????

“ WOOF !”

Since: Oct 10

Coolidge, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1961
Apr 6, 2012
 
Louise2 wrote:
<quoted text>
There's nothing poisonous in Michigan, where we live, but our cats don't go outside. Nothing poisonous, but we live in the woods and do have foxes, coyotes, and bobcats. In Arizona - wow, lots of dangerous things.
Had one cat that lived 22 years. She was very special.
All my cats have been strays. My BEST cat lived to be 20 years old. He went outside to play nearly every day of his life. His "best friend" who he used to hang out with each day was the dachshund next door.

I just moved to Arizona this January. There have been a numbr of incidents the newspaper here has written about where domestic cats have been killed by coyotes IN THE CITY LIMITS OF TUCSON, and there were witnesses present.

The vet I use now is directly across the street from me so I can walk there (Never lived this close to a vet before). They have warned me not to ever let any of my 4 cats outside as even around this area, just north of the Tucson city limits are coyotes, bobcats, Javelina (never even HEARD of them before !), wolves, mountain lions, and eagles and hawks.

I even by chance found a video on youtube of an eagle IN ARIZONA swooping down and grabbing a domestic cat and it tried to carry it away, but the cat escaped thank goodness.

Only my big long-haired cat, Grayson, is annoyed at being kept inside all the time.

I hope to buy a house nearby here this year, adn I'm thinking of building a fenced-in enclosure so I can put my cats in the fresh air outside while hopefullly keeping them safe from the wildlife here.

Since: Oct 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1962
Apr 6, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

You love your little labeling game. You are even calling a dictionary names. He was trying to use verbiage that was not even thought of at the time of the ruling. The constitution does not say that there should be no restrictions on marriage. Sorry but you are completely wrong on that one
EdmondWA wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh right, because the Conservative Dictionary trumps the Constitution, I forgot. Definitions NEVER have ambiguity, nuance or multiple meanings, and they're always etched in titanium, so that a definition from the 12th Century will have the same meaning in the 21st. Society is much better served by such rigidity and absolutism.

Since: Jul 11

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1963
Apr 6, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

Honest AbeL wrote:
You love your little labeling game. You are even calling a dictionary names. He was trying to use verbiage that was not even thought of at the time of the ruling. The constitution does not say that there should be no restrictions on marriage. Sorry but you are completely wrong on that one
<quoted text>
if it did you would have been specifically mentioned

Since: Jun 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1964
Apr 6, 2012
 
FaFoxy wrote:
<quoted text>
All my cats have been strays. My BEST cat lived to be 20 years old. He went outside to play nearly every day of his life. His "best friend" who he used to hang out with each day was the dachshund next door.
I just moved to Arizona this January. There have been a numbr of incidents the newspaper here has written about where domestic cats have been killed by coyotes IN THE CITY LIMITS OF TUCSON, and there were witnesses present.
The vet I use now is directly across the street from me so I can walk there (Never lived this close to a vet before). They have warned me not to ever let any of my 4 cats outside as even around this area, just north of the Tucson city limits are coyotes, bobcats, Javelina (never even HEARD of them before !), wolves, mountain lions, and eagles and hawks.
I even by chance found a video on youtube of an eagle IN ARIZONA swooping down and grabbing a domestic cat and it tried to carry it away, but the cat escaped thank goodness.
Only my big long-haired cat, Grayson, is annoyed at being kept inside all the time.
I hope to buy a house nearby here this year, adn I'm thinking of building a fenced-in enclosure so I can put my cats in the fresh air outside while hopefullly keeping them safe from the wildlife here.
I read your post to my husband and he has some enclosure advice for you (hope you don't mind).

He built an outside enclosure for our chickens years ago - and since we have both bald and golden eagles - he built it with a top.

First we put 4 x 4 inch, six foot tall fencing on all four sides, buried a foot into the ground. Then chicken wire around the bottom half to prevent escape. The final touch was fencing across the top to keep the eagles and chicken hawks out. Then he put an old piece of plywood over part of it for shade and rain protection. Our chickens loved it and were safe. We still locked them inside at night because we also have weasels.
:-)

“ WOOF !”

Since: Oct 10

Coolidge, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1965
Apr 6, 2012
 
Louise2 wrote:
<quoted text>
I read your post to my husband and he has some enclosure advice for you (hope you don't mind).
He built an outside enclosure for our chickens years ago - and since we have both bald and golden eagles - he built it with a top.
First we put 4 x 4 inch, six foot tall fencing on all four sides, buried a foot into the ground. Then chicken wire around the bottom half to prevent escape. The final touch was fencing across the top to keep the eagles and chicken hawks out. Then he put an old piece of plywood over part of it for shade and rain protection. Our chickens loved it and were safe. We still locked them inside at night because we also have weasels.
:-)
Thank you for advice. I appreciate it.

Although in the past my cats spent all days outdoors, I called them in to sleep each nite, and 99% of the time they came in, and I have never intentionally left any of my cats outside at nite.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1966
Apr 7, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Honest AbeL wrote:
Go read DOMA
I have a better idea. Why don't you read the 10th Amendment? When you're done, and I realize it may take a while, then cite EXACTLY where the US Constitution delegates the federal government the power to regulate marriage.

You cannot, because it does not. Do you know what that means? The DOMA is unconstitutional.
1 post removed

“ WOOF !”

Since: Oct 10

Coolidge, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1968
Apr 7, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

lides wrote:
<quoted text>
I have a better idea. Why don't you read the 10th Amendment? When you're done, and I realize it may take a while, then cite EXACTLY where the US Constitution delegates the federal government the power to regulate marriage.
You cannot, because it does not. Do you know what that means? The DOMA is unconstitutional.
You're correct. This has been the understaanding here for centuries, and I have pointed tis out here repeatedly.

And since you mention the 10th Amendment, please show me where the
US Constitution delegates the federal government the power to regulate health care or authorizes Obamacare or where it requires U.S. citizens to purchase ANYTHING they don't want to.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1969
Apr 7, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

FaFoxy wrote:
You're correct. This has been the understaanding here for centuries, and I have pointed tis out here repeatedly.
And since you mention the 10th Amendment, please show me where the
US Constitution delegates the federal government the power to regulate health care or authorizes Obamacare or where it requires U.S. citizens to purchase ANYTHING they don't want to.
One could arguably cite article 1 Section 8 "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;"

General welfare being the operative phrase.

But we digress...

“ WOOF !”

Since: Oct 10

Coolidge, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1970
Apr 7, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

lides wrote:
<quoted text>
One could arguably cite article 1 Section 8 "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;"
General welfare being the operative phrase.
But we digress...
I disagree. One of the main purposes of the U.S. Constitution was to put limits on teh federal govrnment by specifying what it could and could not do. Hence teh need for the 9th Amendment AND the 10th Amendment which were added LATER, SPECIFICALLY TO pit a limit on governmental action.

Is the "general welfare" clause SO EXPANSIVE that there is NO LIMIT on what congress and the federal government can do ? I think the 9th Amendment and the 10th Amendment specifically precludes that. They say that ANYTHING not specifically delegated to the federal government is reserved to the states or to the people. Those 2 amendments are all-encompassing.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1971
Apr 7, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

FaFoxy wrote:
<quoted text>
I disagree. One of the main purposes of the U.S. Constitution was to put limits on teh federal govrnment by specifying what it could and could not do. Hence teh need for the 9th Amendment AND the 10th Amendment which were added LATER, SPECIFICALLY TO pit a limit on governmental action.
Is the "general welfare" clause SO EXPANSIVE that there is NO LIMIT on what congress and the federal government can do ? I think the 9th Amendment and the 10th Amendment specifically precludes that. They say that ANYTHING not specifically delegated to the federal government is reserved to the states or to the people. Those 2 amendments are all-encompassing.
I said it was arguable, I didn't say that it was finite, nor did i say that I support it. Regardless, it is irrelevant to the topic at hand.

“ WOOF !”

Since: Oct 10

Coolidge, AZ

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1972
Apr 7, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

lides wrote:
<quoted text>
I said it was arguable, I didn't say that it was finite, nor did i say that I support it. Regardless, it is irrelevant to the topic at hand.
Not really.

1. I was responding to your post where you cited this.

2. Santorum, and others like him, are saying that gay marriage somehow is something that the federal government does, and should have, control over. The 10th Amendment, part of the Bill Of Rights which so many people profess to support (even though most probably have no idea what it says and means) seems to preclude that. And marriage laws, BECAUSE OF THE 10th Amendment HAVE BEEN the states' responsibility for centuries.

So it's not irrelevant.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 1,741 - 1,760 of2,008
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
•••
•••