Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Straw Man on March 15, 2013, 08:46:17 AM
-
Why is it that Repubs have no problem changing their long held religious beliefs as soon as it effects someone in their own family. I mean if you really truly are against gay marriage, think marriage should only be between one man and one women, think it's a sin, etc.. then why would you change your mind just because you find out your son is gay.
Is Jesus's Dad really going to understand that given that he allowed his own son to be tortured to death. What's next Mr. Portman. I guess you now believe a man should be able to marry a dog. Isn't that how the Repub line of thinking works
Maybe we just need some Republican congress people to have some of their loved ones (perhaps their darling grand children) literally shot to pieces at point blank range so that they can finally have a change of heart on some forms of gun legislation.
Republican Rob Portman Supports Gay Marriage
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/republican-rob-portman-supports-gay-marriage/story?id=18736731
By MICHAEL FALCONE (@michaelpfalcone) and Z. BYRON WOLF (@zbyronwolf)
March 15, 2013
U.S. Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, once on the short-list to be Mitt Romney's 2012 running mate, has reversed his opposition to gay marriage, revealing that his own son is gay.
Portman Thursday told reporters from several Ohio newspapers that when his son, Will, 21, informed him that he was gay two years ago, "It allowed me to think of this issue from a new perspective, and that's of a dad who loves his son a lot and wants him to have the same opportunities that his brother and sister would have, to have a relationship like Jane and I have had for over 26 years," according to an interview with the Cleveland Plain Dealer.
-
Why is it that Repubs have no problem changing their long held religious beliefs as soon as it effects someone in their own family. I mean if you really truly are against gay marriage, think marriage should only be between one man and one women, think it's a sin, etc.. then why would you change your mind just because you find out your son is gay.
Is Jesus's Dad really going to understand that given that he allowed his own son to be tortured to death. What's next Mr. Portman. I guess you now believe a man should be able to marry a dog. Isn't that how the Repub line of thinking works
Maybe we just need some Republican congress people to have some of their loved ones (perhaps their darling grand children) literally shot to pieces at point blank range so that they can finally have a change of heart on some forms of gun legislation.
Republican Rob Portman Supports Gay Marriage
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/republican-rob-portman-supports-gay-marriage/story?id=18736731
By MICHAEL FALCONE (@michaelpfalcone) and Z. BYRON WOLF (@zbyronwolf)
March 15, 2013
U.S. Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, once on the short-list to be Mitt Romney's 2012 running mate, has reversed his opposition to gay marriage, revealing that his own son is gay.
Portman Thursday told reporters from several Ohio newspapers that when his son, Will, 21, informed him that he was gay two years ago, "It allowed me to think of this issue from a new perspective, and that's of a dad who loves his son a lot and wants him to have the same opportunities that his brother and sister would have, to have a relationship like Jane and I have had for over 26 years," according to an interview with the Cleveland Plain Dealer.
Of course he should have been open to the idea from the outset as it only makes logical sense to support it, but at least he has now had his epiphany. Sometimes it has to hit close to home for people to wake up. Good for him at least.
-
Why is it that Repubs have no problem changing their long held religious beliefs as soon as it effects someone in their own family. I mean if you really truly are against gay marriage, think marriage should only be between one man and one women, think it's a sin, etc.. then why would you change your mind just because you find out your son is gay.
Is Jesus's Dad really going to understand that given that he allowed his own son to be tortured to death. What's next Mr. Portman. I guess you now believe a man should be able to marry a dog. Isn't that how the Repub line of thinking works
Maybe we just need some Republican congress people to have some of their loved ones (perhaps their darling grand children) literally shot to pieces at point blank range so that they can finally have a change of heart on some forms of gun legislation.
Republican Rob Portman Supports Gay Marriage
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/republican-rob-portman-supports-gay-marriage/story?id=18736731
By MICHAEL FALCONE (@michaelpfalcone) and Z. BYRON WOLF (@zbyronwolf)
March 15, 2013
U.S. Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, once on the short-list to be Mitt Romney's 2012 running mate, has reversed his opposition to gay marriage, revealing that his own son is gay.
Portman Thursday told reporters from several Ohio newspapers that when his son, Will, 21, informed him that he was gay two years ago, "It allowed me to think of this issue from a new perspective, and that's of a dad who loves his son a lot and wants him to have the same opportunities that his brother and sister would have, to have a relationship like Jane and I have had for over 26 years," according to an interview with the Cleveland Plain Dealer.
Your argument on gun control is stupid. If someone is shot to pieces, chances are it was because someone broke into your house and you were unarmed or had no way of defending yourself.
-
Hahah..as if we couldn't predict this shit. Watch them all come around to this, to 'immigration reform', and to 'gun control'.
Fucking flakes.
-
What happens when people don't have these so-called "epiphanies"? Notice that the media LOVES to play up a Republican, supporting gay "marriage"......as if every single Democrat support this.
We know that the lion's share of the Dems' most blindly faithful voting block vehemently opposed this.
And how many times has Obama flip-flopped on this issue?
Didn't Joe Biden vote for the Defense of Marriage Act, as a senator? And which president signed it into law?
-
What happens when people don't have these so-called "epiphanies"? Notice that the media LOVES to play up a Republican, supporting gay "marriage"......as if every single Democrat support this.
We know that the lion's share of the Dems' most blindly faithful voting block vehemently opposed this.
And how many times has Obama flip-flopped on this issue?
Didn't Joe Biden vote for the Defense of Marriage Act, as a senator? And which president signed it into law?
These guys are flakes, no doubt about it.
-
Of course he should have been open to the idea from the outset as it only makes logical sense to support it, but at least he has now had his epiphany. Sometimes it has to hit close to home for people to wake up. Good for him at least.
I just find it hilarious how quickly they abandon their firmly held religious beliefs as soon as it effects them personally. I wonder how many fundies have secretly gotten an abortion
-
Your argument on gun control is stupid. If someone is shot to pieces, chances are it was because someone broke into your house and you were unarmed or had no way of defending yourself.
those kids at Sandy Hook were literally dismembered by being shot multiple times and I think if one of those kids was Rob Portmans precious little grandchild he would suddenly be in favor of some of the very modest proposals being suggested
I think we should have shown the photos of the carnage in that school on TV and in every paper
If we can handle guns in this country then we can handle looking at the photos of the effects of using those guns
I assume no one on this board would have a problem with that
-
I just find it hilarious how quickly they abandon their firmly held religious beliefs as soon as it effects them personally. I wonder how many fundies have secretly gotten an abortion
You mean like Obama, abandoning his faith?
-
You mean like Obama, abandoning his faith?
the only difference is that it was driven by selfishness due to now having it personally effect his own family
Portman finds out his son is gay and suddenly wants HIS CHILD to have the same opportunities as others. That's why he had a change of heart
-
the only difference is that it was driven by selfishness due to now having it personally effect his own family
Portman finds out his son is gay and suddenly wants HIS CHILD to have the same opportunities as others. That's why he had a change of heart
And this wasn't driven by selfishiness? Obama gets told by his gay benefactors that they ain't coughing up their cash, unless he goes full-bore on gay "marriage". Then, he supposedly evolves in support of it.
-
And this wasn't driven by selfishiness? Obama gets told by his gay benefactors that they ain't coughing up their cash, unless he goes full-bore on gay "marriage". Then, he supposedly evolves in support of it.
ok, if you want to believe that Obama only had a change of heart to get donors to give him money then go right ahead
I know you're still in the grieving and rationalization process over the last election
-
those kids at Sandy Hook were literally dismembered by being shot multiple times and I think if one of those kids was Rob Portmans precious little grandchild he would suddenly be in favor of some of the very modest proposals being suggested
I think we should have shown the photos of the carnage in that school on TV and in every paper
If we can handle guns in this country then we can handle looking at the photos of the effects of using those guns
I assume no one on this board would have a problem with that
What does showing pictures of dead children do for someone who wants to defend his home with a gun where the nearest police or law enforcement official is in another county, 20 miles away?
-
Since when has there been any correlation between gay marriage and gun violence? Of course, you have to use one to support the other in a lame emotional appeal completely devoid of logic.
So a Republican abandons his position and takes up another because it hit close to home. So what, really? The voting base of each respective party does not necessarily reflect their party's stances on gay marriage among many other things. Blacks and Catholic Hispanics, which make up a big swathe of the Democratic bloc, vehemently oppose gay marriage. Many Republicans, especially those that consider themselves Libertarian, support gay marriage or are merely indifferent to the issue.
-
the only difference is that it was driven by selfishness due to now having it personally effect his own family
Portman finds out his son is gay and suddenly wants HIS CHILD to have the same opportunities as others. That's why he had a change of heart
Obama was selfish for pandering to the religious by claiming to be against gay marriage.
-
ok, if you want to believe that Obama only had a change of heart to get donors to give him money then go right ahead
I know you're still in the grieving and rationalization process over the last election
Dead wrong, again, Straw. I'm in the "I told you so" phase, watching Obama and his policies fail to deliver anything but pain and dysfunction. Thus far, he's way ahead of schedule.
You're chirping about people, changing their long-held religious belief, out of convenience. Yet, your beloved Obama did the exact same thing. His opposition to gay "marriage" in 2008 was for RELIGIOUS REASONS.
As usual, you make excuses for Obama, when his hypocrisy and utter failure to deliver what he advertised come to the forefront.
The only difference between him and Portman is one did so for political expeidence and the other for personal one (though, one could argue that Portman is doing this for policital reasons, too).
-
Dead wrong, again, Straw. I'm in the "I told you so" phase, watching Obama and his policies fail to deliver anything but pain and dysfunction. Thus far, he's way ahead of schedule.
You're chirping about people, changing their long-held religious belief, out of convenience. Yet, your beloved Obama did the exact same thing.
The only difference between him and Portman is one did so for political expeidence and the other for personal one (though, one could argue that Portman is doing this for policital reasons, too).
Obama all along supported gay marriage, the ruse is that he claimed to be against it on religious grounds. Obama is not a religious person and uses religion as a tool. Perhaps that enrages you more, I don`t know.
-
Obama all along supported gay marriage, the ruse is that he claimed to be against it on religious grounds. Obama is not a religious person and uses religion as a tool. Perhaps that enrages you more, I don`t know.
That means you and Straw voted for a bald-faced LIAR!! Color me shocked!!! ::)
-
What does showing pictures of dead children do for someone who wants to defend his home with a gun where the nearest police or law enforcement official is in another county, 20 miles away?
nothing being proposed would prevent you or anyone from defending their home with a gun
I assume you know this
-
nothing being proposed would prevent you or anyone from defending their home with a gun
I assume you know this
I want an extended magazine and an assault rifle in case I have to deal with multiple intruders. They want to take that away. I assume you know this.
-
Since when has there been any correlation between gay marriage and gun violence? Of course, you have to use one to support the other in a lame emotional appeal completely devoid of logic.
So a Republican abandons his position and takes up another because it hit close to home. So what, really? The voting base of each respective party does not necessarily reflect their party's stances on gay marriage among many other things. Blacks and Catholic Hispanics, which make up a big swathe of the Democratic bloc, vehemently oppose gay marriage. Many Republicans, especially those that consider themselves Libertarian, support gay marriage or are merely indifferent to the issue.
never said their was one
did you really think that I was making that point
let me make it as clear as possible
the point I was making is that Repubs seem to have no problem reversing their long held beliefs on issues as soon at is PERSONALLY EFFECTS THEM
that was my point
-
That means you and Straw voted for a bald-faced LIAR!! Color me shocked!!! ::)
As did you with Romney. What else is new?
-
As did you with Romney. What else is new?
Wrong again, I didn't vote for Romney, based on any alleged deception.
YOU, claimed Obama was lying from jump, back in 2008. And, YOU voted for him TWICE.
-
I want an extended magazine and an assault rifle in case I have to deal with multiple intruders. They want to take that away. I assume you know this.
are you expecting an assault on your fortress
you can have as many guns as you want and you'll have no problem defending yourself against the mob you seem to be expecting
I can't recall any cases (perhaps you know of some) where extended magazines were needed to defend ones self of home
On the other hand we have examples at least a few times a year where these extended magazines allow nuts to massacre many people in a matter of seconds
-
are you expecting an assault on your fortress
you can have as many guns as you want and you'll have no problem defending yourself against the mob you seem to be expecting
I can't recall any cases (perhaps you know of some) where extended magazines were needed to defend ones self of home
On the other hand we have examples at least a few times a year where these extended magazines allow nuts to massacre many people in a matter of seconds
Home invasions with multiple intruders happen on a daily basis. Most Home Invasions in fact occur with multiple intruders.
http://www.kcra.com/news/3-wounded-one-intruder-dead-in-Sacramento-home-invasion/-/11797728/17875642/-/2o7y1hz/-/index.html
3 wounded, one intruder dead in Sacramento home invasion
Police: Homeowner exchanged gunfire with intruders
UPDATED 2:35 PM PST Dec 23, 2012
(Dec. 22, 2012)
Leticia Ordaz/KCRA 3
VIEW LARGE
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (KCRA) —Sacramento police are investigating a home invasion robbery on Haven Court that left one intruder dead and three others injured on Saturday.
Police have arrested Thomas Ordonaz, 21. He is charged with assault with a deadly weapon and accessory after the fact.
The incident happened at 3:30 a.m. in the Pocket neighborhood.
Investigators said during the course of the robbery, gunfire was exchanged and total of four people were shot.
Police confirmed one man, who was an intruder, died at the scene; three others were transported to the hospital and are expected to be OK.
At this time, Sacramento police will not release the identity of the shooter or victims.
Several frantic parents showed up to the crime scene to find the street shut down for the investigation.
One man who did not want to be identified said his 12-year-old had spent the night at the house and was there when the shooting took place.
He was waiting to pick him up.
A woman came by to pick up a 1-year-old boy in the home.
Read more: http://www.kcra.com/news/3-wounded-one-intruder-dead-in-Sacramento-home-invasion/-/11797728/17875642/-/2o7y1hz/-/index.html#ixzz2Nd3SchGY
-
nothing being proposed would prevent you or anyone from defending their home with a gun
I assume you know this
There are many proposals being made that would prevent, or severely inhibit, preventing you from acquiring a firearm to defend your home. Some are at the state and local level, others at the federal level.
- A New York Congressman proposed a liability insurance imposed on gun owners, costing upwards of $2000 a year........this is a LOT of money for many American families, enough that the cost alone would prevent many from buying a gun (or sacrificing food or electricity for their family)
- California has proposed the elimination of magazines altogether, requiring a gun to be loaded one bullet at a time.
- New background checks would eliminate many from being able to legally purchase a weapon.
- Proposals made to force buyers of ammunition purchases to attend anger management classes is overreaching.
-
Statistically speaking, a home invasion with multiple intruders is much more likely to happen and affect you than a random school shooting. I`d rather use the most pertinent set of facts than emotion.
-
are you expecting an assault on your fortress
you can have as many guns as you want and you'll have no problem defending yourself against the mob you seem to be expecting
I can't recall any cases (perhaps you know of some) where extended magazines were needed to defend ones self of home
On the other hand we have examples at least a few times a year where these extended magazines allow nuts to massacre many people in a matter of seconds
How many bullets would you like me to have?
-
How many bullets would you like me to have?
is there a proposal to limit the number of bullets you can have?
I'm not aware of one
-
is there a proposal to limit the number of bullets you can have?
I'm not aware of one
A proposal to limit how many bullets I am able to place in my magazine which goes in my gun. So how many do you want me to be able to place in a Magazine? ???
-
Wrong again, I didn't vote for Romney, based on any alleged deception.
YOU, claimed Obama was lying from jump, back in 2008. And, YOU voted for him TWICE.
Notice how Gollum ignored this comment.
-
Wrong again, I didn't vote for Romney, based on any alleged deception.
YOU, claimed Obama was lying from jump, back in 2008. And, YOU voted for him TWICE.
Oh, you voted for Obama then because you are black. Knew it all along.
-
Notice how Gollum ignored this comment.
Not only did he allege Obama was lying, he was BRAGGING about it, that it was cool for him to deceive the American people (as long as he got elected).
Oh, you voted for Obama then because you are black. Knew it all along.
I hope this is just your pitiful attempt at sarcasm.
Oh, that's right! YOU floated the idea that Obama was a closet atheist, which made it cool for him to lie about his opposition to gay "marriage", based on religious reasons.
-
I just find it hilarious how quickly they abandon their firmly held religious beliefs as soon as it effects them personally. I wonder how many fundies have secretly gotten an abortion
HEHEHE! MCWAY slapping the stupid out of you.
What happens when people don't have these so-called "epiphanies"? Notice that the media LOVES to play up a Republican, supporting gay "marriage"......as if every single Democrat support this.
We know that the lion's share of the Dems' most blindly faithful voting block vehemently opposed this.
And how many times has Obama flip-flopped on this issue?
Didn't Joe Biden vote for the Defense of Marriage Act, as a senator? And which president signed it into law?
-
There are many proposals being made that would prevent, or severely inhibit, preventing you from acquiring a firearm to defend your home. Some are at the state and local level, others at the federal level.
- A New York Congressman proposed a liability insurance imposed on gun owners, costing upwards of $2000 a year........this is a LOT of money for many American families, enough that the cost alone would prevent many from buying a gun (or sacrificing food or electricity for their family)
- California has proposed the elimination of magazines altogether, requiring a gun to be loaded one bullet at a time.
- New background checks would eliminate many from being able to legally purchase a weapon.
- Proposals made to force buyers of ammunition purchases to attend anger management classes is overreaching.
I'm sure there are some absurd proposals but I have no problem with most of the stuff you just mentioned
-
HEHEHE! MCWAY slapping the stupid out of you.
go back and read what I wrote and try again
-
Not only did he allege Obama was lying, he was BRAGGING about it, that it was cool for him to deceive the American people (as long as he got elected).
I hope this is just your pitiful attempt at sarcasm.
Oh, that's right! YOU floated the idea that Obama was a closet atheist, which made it cool for him to lie about his opposition to gay "marriage", based on religious reasons.
I`m not bragging nor did I say it were "cool" for him to lie about anything. You "floated" that one. Obama is a complete phony when it comes to religion.
-
Not only did he allege Obama was lying, he was BRAGGING about it, that it was cool for him to deceive the American people (as long as he got elected).
I hope this is just your pitiful attempt at sarcasm.
Oh, that's right! YOU floated the idea that Obama was a closet atheist, which made it cool for him to lie about his opposition to gay "marriage", based on religious reasons.
So you didn`t vote for Obama or Romney. You sat on your hands did you?
-
go back and read what I wrote and try again
We know what you wrote. You were blasting a Republican, who initially opposed gay "marriage" for religious reasons, for changing his tune for personal (and perhaps, political) expediency.
Yet, you voted for a guy who, initially opposed gay "marriage" for religious reasons (to a pastor's face, no less), but later changed his tune for political (and perhaps, personal) expediency.
-
I`m not bragging nor did I say it were "cool" for him to lie about anything. You "floated" that one. Obama is a complete phony when it comes to religion.
YES YOU DID, basically!! And your justification was that no atheist could ever be elected president.
You condoned lying, as long it was someone who was not religious, pretending that he is, to get a leg up politically.
-
go back and read what I wrote and try again
I did. You are a stupid hypocrite. Now you are trying to split hairs between the motivation that drives a Democrat and a Republican to switch stances.
Flip floppers exist on both sides of the aisle. The biggest one is the idiot in chief. Bill Clinton is a close second.
Again, MCWAY slapped the stupid out of you!
-
YES YOU DID, basically!! And your justification was that no atheist could ever be elected president.
You condoned lying, as long it was someone who was not religious, pretending that he is, to get a leg up politically.
MCWAY, everybody lies, even you. Its just how much are we willing to put up with is what matters.
-
So you didn`t vote for Obama or Romney. You sat on your hands did you?
I did vote for Romney. So, you miss on that one.
I did NOT vote for someone I knew (or at least, highly suspected) to be a liar. YOU DID....TWICE!!!
-
MCWAY, everybody lies, even you. Its just how much are we willing to put up with is what matters.
More excuse-making, to cover your embarrasingly exposed hind quarters, on this one.
I did. You are a stupid hypocrite. Now you are trying to split hairs between the motivation that drives a Democrat and a Republican to switch stances.
Flip floppers exist on both sides of the aisle. The biggest one is the idiot in chief. Bill Clinton is a close second.
Again, MCWAY slapped the stupid out of you!
Sorry, Dario. Even I don't hit that hard.
-
First off, proliferation of guns has very little to nothing to do with violent crime rates. Violent crime rates have been steadily decreasing since the 1980s(there was a spike in the early 90s) and there is no correlating effect between implemented gun laws between that time and now. Draconian anti-gun measures are proposed based solely upon emotional appeal to the lemmings, and not on facts and logic(many of these facts and logic do not correlate with politicians' "truths"). Correlation does not equal causality. There are many hundreds of factors as to why gun violence increases/decreases, and the actual truths of it are going to severely upset many people's firmly held beliefs.
The Virginia Tech shooter had a Glock and Walther P22 with magazine capacities of 10 and 15, along with a myriad of other blunt object weapons. So in what way would a law requiring magazines holding no more than 8 rounds do to prevent the 35 deaths at this massacre? A bad guy intent on doing something like this cannot somehow obtain magazines that hold more than 8 rounds? A bad guy, even if confined to 8 round magazines, cannot simply carry a few more on his person. A bad guy, cannot swap out a new magazine in a second(I, for one, can swap in a fresh mag in my 9mm in about that time, easy)?
Anyway, gay marriage....gets attention because there is big money behind the gay lobby. Lets forget the civil rights of others.
-
A proposal to limit how many bullets I am able to place in my magazine which goes in my gun. So how many do you want me to be able to place in a Magazine? ???
try being more specific next time
I've already made my views on high capacity magazines many times
-
I did vote for Romney. So, you miss on that one.
I did NOT vote for someone I knew (or at least, highly suspected) to be a liar. YOU DID....TWICE!!!
Romney never lied in your eyes. My how gullible you are! You are like a horse with blinders on, take them off and he refuses to go anywhere until you put them back on again.
-
I did vote for Romney. So, you miss on that one.
I did NOT vote for someone I knew (or at least, highly suspected) to be a liar. YOU DID....TWICE!!!
hahahahah Romney was caught in lie after lie and is the biggest flip flopper in history.
-
try being more specific next time
I've already made my views on high capacity magazines many times
How many bullets should a magazine hold in your opinion and where is your evidence that it would stop anything?
-
Romney never lied in your eyes. My how gullible you are! You are like a horse with blinders on, take them off and he refuses to go anywhere until you put them back on again.
You condoned lying, period. Trying to weasel your way out of it, by accusing me of being gullible, is yet another attempt to deflect from your pitiful statements.
hahahahah Romney was caught in lie after lie and is the biggest flip flopper in history.
"I did NOT have sexual relations with that woman"
"I voted for the $87 billion before I voted against it".
“You know, I have to say this was not — a decision that went up to the White House,”
"If you like you healthcare plan, you can keep it."
-
I'm sure there are some absurd proposals but I have no problem with most of the stuff you just mentioned
Then you effectively support the prevention of law-abiding citizens the right to ownership of a firearm in the defense of their home. You stated that you did not. Don't make vague statements, then toss up red herrings, and ultimately deflect the argument.
-
Sorry, Dario. Even I don't hit that hard.
HAHHAHAHA!!
-
those kids at Sandy Hook were literally dismembered by being shot multiple times and I think if one of those kids was Rob Portmans precious little grandchild
he would suddenly be in favor of some of the very modest proposals being suggested
I think we should have shown the photos of the carnage in that school on TV and in every paper
If we can handle guns in this country then we can handle looking at the photos of the effects of using those guns
I assume no one on this board would have a problem with that
Lol I bet your libtard ass would be up in arms if some anti abortionist group started showing aborted babies on tv and in newspapers
But as long as it pushes your agenda right, Feinstein would be proud bro
-
Lol I bet your libtard ass would be up in arms if some anti abortionist group started showing aborted babies on tv and in newspapers
But as long as it pushes your agenda right, Feinstein would be proud bro
a thread about queer mariage moving on to gun control but currently about the results of some heterosexual activities.
-
We know what you wrote. You were blasting a Republican, who initially opposed gay "marriage" for religious reasons, for changing his tune for personal (and perhaps, political) expediency.
Yet, you voted for a guy who, initially opposed gay "marriage" for religious reasons (to a pastor's face, no less), but later changed his tune for political (and perhaps, personal) expediency.
Political expediency is merely your ASSUMPTION and not at all his stated reason and I certainly don't agree with your assumption (and it's fucking stupid assumption at that as if somehow supporting gay marriage it going HELP Obama when in the past others, perhaps even you had suggested it would hurt him because of the belief that the majority of people were against it)
On the other hand Portmans stated reason is now that it effects someone in his family he's all for it where in the past it only effected other people and he was against it
-
Then you effectively support the prevention of law-abiding citizens the right to ownership of a firearm in the defense of their home. You stated that you did not. Don't make vague statements, then toss up red herrings, and ultimately deflect the argument.
false
I see no need for a high capacity magazine as a necessity to defend ones home
feel free to show me real life examples where it was necessary
The only real life examples I see are of nutbags using them to massacre many people in a matter of seconds
I also have no problem with strict background checks, waiting periods, training, etc...
I've been over all this before so I really don't want to waste my time going over it again
-
false
I see no need for a high capacity magazine as a necessity to defend ones home
feel free to show me real life examples where it was necessary
The only real life examples I see are of nutbags using them to massacre many people in a matter of seconds
I also have no problem with strict background checks, waiting periods, training, etc...
I've been over all this before so I really don't want to waste my time going over it again
http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2012/12/22/police-say-1-dead-3-wounded-in-sac-home-invasion/
Watch the video.
-
false
I see no need for a high capacity magazine as a necessity to defend ones home
feel free to show me real life examples where it was necessary
The only real life examples I see are of nutbags using them to massacre many people in a matter of seconds
I also have no problem with strict background checks, waiting periods, training, etc...
I've been over all this before so I really don't want to waste my time going over it again
Home invasions are rarely just one suspect. Its usually multiple. If you live somewhere where the nearest police officer or law enforcement is 20 or so miles away (which a lot of people in the United States do), you will want as much firepower as you can get just in case because nobody but yourself will be there to protect you.
-
Political expediency is merely your ASSUMPTION and not at all his stated reason and I certainly don't agree with your assumption (and it's fucking stupid assumption at that as if somehow supporting gay marriage it going HELP Obama when in the past others, perhaps even you had suggested it would hurt him because of the belief that the majority of people were against it)
On the other hand Portmans stated reason is now that it effects someone in his family he's all for it where in the past it only effected other people and he was against it
Yet again, you're ducking the point of the matter: Both Obama and Portman CONVENIENTLY changed their tunes on gay "marriage", which they previously opposed for religious reasons.
The fact that you're doing the pretzel routine on yourself, blasting Portman's flipping while excusing that of Obama, just reeks of your typical excuse-laden kneepadding for Obama.
Obama doesn't have to say he did it for political reasons. His gay donors, breathing down his neck threatening to dry up the spigots (coupled with Biden's spilling the beans too early and getting reamed for it), tell the story.
-
Yet again, you're ducking the point of the matter: Both Obama and Portman CONVENIENTLY changed their tunes on gay "marriage", which they previously opposed for religious reasons.
Quick Question: Why do you think an endorsement of an ability to get married translates as an endorsement of the marriage itself?
You seem to lose the distinction of those in your anti-gay-marriage posts.
-
Quick Question: Why do you think an endorsement of an ability to get married translates as an endorsement of the marriage itself?
You seem to lose the distinction of those in your anti-gay-marriage posts.
Quick Answer: You can't get or have something without that something being clearly defined. Both Obama and Portman defined marriage as "one man and one woman", initially.
-
Home invasions with multiple intruders happen on a daily basis. Most Home Invasions in fact occur with multiple intruders.
http://www.kcra.com/news/3-wounded-one-intruder-dead-in-Sacramento-home-invasion/-/11797728/17875642/-/2o7y1hz/-/index.html
3 wounded, one intruder dead in Sacramento home invasion
Police: Homeowner exchanged gunfire with intruders
UPDATED 2:35 PM PST Dec 23, 2012
(Dec. 22, 2012)
Leticia Ordaz/KCRA 3
VIEW LARGE
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (KCRA) —Sacramento police are investigating a home invasion robbery on Haven Court that left one intruder dead and three others injured on Saturday.
Police have arrested Thomas Ordonaz, 21. He is charged with assault with a deadly weapon and accessory after the fact.
The incident happened at 3:30 a.m. in the Pocket neighborhood.
Investigators said during the course of the robbery, gunfire was exchanged and total of four people were shot.
Police confirmed one man, who was an intruder, died at the scene; three others were transported to the hospital and are expected to be OK.
At this time, Sacramento police will not release the identity of the shooter or victims.
Several frantic parents showed up to the crime scene to find the street shut down for the investigation.
One man who did not want to be identified said his 12-year-old had spent the night at the house and was there when the shooting took place.
He was waiting to pick him up.
A woman came by to pick up a 1-year-old boy in the home.
Read more: http://www.kcra.com/news/3-wounded-one-intruder-dead-in-Sacramento-home-invasion/-/11797728/17875642/-/2o7y1hz/-/index.html#ixzz2Nd3SchGY
Don't waste your time with these naive anti gun fools. You won't accomplish anything
-
Quick Answer: You can't get or have something without that something being clearly defined. Both Obama and Portman defined marriage as "one man and one woman", initially.
But I see no inconsistency between "I think a marriage should be only between a man and a woman" and "homosexuals should have a chance to get married."
Aren't those two basically Obama's statements? (I don't follow everyday politics much).
-
But I see no inconsistency between "I think a marriage should be only between a man and a woman" and "homosexuals should have a chance to get married."
Aren't those two basically Obama's statements? (I don't follow everyday politics much).
No, they are not. He stated on MTV, during his 2008 campaign to the "Rock the Vote" crew that he did not believe in same-sex marriage. At no time did he state, BACK THEN, that "homosexuals should have a chance to get married". The closest he got was civil unions and that was more to do with visitation rights in hospitals and the like.
My point is that both Portman and Obama changed their tune for expediency. What's laughable is Straw's ripping Portman for such while excusing Obama, especially since BOTH claim their initial opposition was based on RELIGIOUS GROUNDS.
Obama stated, to Pastor Warren's face, "I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman. Now, for me as a Christian, it is also a sacred union. God's in the mix."
-
false
I see no need for a high capacity magazine as a necessity to defend ones home
feel free to show me real life examples where it was necessary
The only real life examples I see are of nutbags using them to massacre many people in a matter of seconds
I also have no problem with strict background checks, waiting periods, training, etc...
I've been over all this before so I really don't want to waste my time going over it again
how can someone with such a strong opinion on this subject be so woefully uneducated on it.
-
Hahaha, barely 3 posts into this thread it's veered off-topic from gay marriage to gun control? ADHD much? lol
I doubt it was any great epiphany, but rather a case of adhering to the GOP message.
Is he claiming his son was in-the-closet all these years and he didn't know? ::) ::)
Looks like political expediency to me. It's like so many other politicians finally finding their balls and coming out in favour of medicinal marijuana only AFTER they've won re-election.
-
We will see it become a default position, with any politician, to avoid opposition to 'immigration reform', 'gun control', and 'gay marriage'.
-
Glad this guy thinks like a normal person, what's your point?
-
geezus.
OP was about GOP peep coming out for gay marriage.
then it became gun issue thread.
either bring up the Bible or get back on the OP.
-
geezus.
OP was about GOP peep coming out for gay marriage.
then it became gun issue thread.
either bring up the Bible or get back on the OP.
what even more hardback bible humping?
-
geezus.
OP was about GOP peep coming out for gay marriage.
then it became gun issue thread.
either bring up the Bible or get back on the OP.
No, OP made it about guns in the first post of his thread when he stated:
"Maybe we just need some Republican congress people to have some of their loved ones (perhaps their darling grand children) literally shot to pieces at point blank range so that they can finally have a change of heart on some forms of gun legislation. "
-
what even more hardback bible humping?
hmmmmmmmmmm.
humping the bible?
now that's one I've never thought of before.
and I've thought of lots of things.
guess I'm still naive in 333386's mind.
-
and I've thought of lots of things.
guess I'm still naive in 333386's mind.
go wash your mind out read the expanded edition of the telephone numbers collected wisdom.