The only guy who seems legit is Ron Paul. I wish that he would get a legitimate backing

I would take Johnson over him.

I love the answer that start with... Well the Bible says... That's great but it was written thousands of years ago. People/society evolve and I see no reason why it would upset you if Bill and Bill get married.

 

So since the Bible was written a long time ago we should do away with it because people evolve?

 

So we should do away with the U.S. Constitution since it was written a long time ago and people evolve. Sounds like an Obama plan right there.

Don't know enough about him, but I'd be willing to bet at some point, yes.

I'd personally be a little surprised. An even better example would be Gatewood Galbraith. The one man I feel beyond a shaddow of a doubt that was truly honest in his positions

So since the Bible was written a long time ago we should do away with it because people evolve?

 

So we should do away with the U.S. Constitution since it was written a long time ago and people evolve. Sounds like an Obama plan right there.

No. Like the constitution it evolves.

So since the Bible was written a long time ago we should do away with it because people evolve?

 

So we should do away with the U.S. Constitution since it was written a long time ago and people evolve. Sounds like an Obama plan right there.

 

See Constitutional amendments. Constitutional evolution in action.

On the other hand Mitt Romney as a member of the Morman faith believes that marriage is between a man and a woman and a woman and a woman and a woman .............

 

Or occasionally, between a man and a girl and a girl and a girl and a girl...

I asked a very simple straight-forward question. Why has no one that is against this attempted to answer it?

An even better example would be Gatewood Galbraith. The one man I feel beyond a shaddow of a doubt that was truly honest in his positions

 

From what I've read about him, I'd probably be in agreement.

I asked a very simple straight-forward question. Why has no one that is against this attempted to answer it?

 

I'm going with...they don't have one.

From the " I can't make this up" department, here is one guy's statement as to potential issues should North Carolina allow for gay marriages:

 

 

Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary professor of Christian ethics Daniel Heimbach made the following statement about the consequences of gay marriage and his reasons for supporting Amendment One.

 

“It would lead people who love dogs to marry dogs and people who love ice cream to marry ice cream.”

 

Dogs and ice cream | Honest NC

 

Obviously, he was trying to say once it's no longer man and woman then all bets are off. I find that logic lacking in thought.

From the " I can't make this up" department, here is one guy's statement as to potential issues should North Carolina allow for gay marriages:

 

 

Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary professor of Christian ethics Daniel Heimbach made the following statement about the consequences of gay marriage and his reasons for supporting Amendment One.

 

“It would lead people who love dogs to marry dogs and people who love ice cream to marry ice cream.”

 

Dogs and ice cream | Honest NC

 

Obviously, he was trying to say once it's no longer man and woman then all bets are off. I find that logic lacking in thought.

I have never understood that either. That is the same with any law in place. "If they raise the speed limit to 65, then it may go all the way to 100."

My pop psychology degree says that based on all of your posts about the First Lady you have an issue with strong black women. Fascinating.

 

Hmmm. Clyde, I find you to be reasonable and informed. However, I think you jumped a bit out of bounds on this one. I remember the same thing being said about Hillary and Bill. I don't see the original post saying anything about race.

Hmmm. Clyde, I find you to be reasonable and informed. However, I think you jumped a bit out of bounds on this one. I remember the same thing being said about Hillary and Bill. I don't see the original post saying anything about race.

 

I'm talking specifically about Mt Ref and his problems with Mrs. Obama. IMO it goes way beyond the fact she's a female. Again, pure speculation on my part but I feel strongly that deep down I'm right.

From the " I can't make this up" department, here is one guy's statement as to potential issues should North Carolina allow for gay marriages:

 

 

Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary professor of Christian ethics Daniel Heimbach made the following statement about the consequences of gay marriage and his reasons for supporting Amendment One.

 

“It would lead people who love dogs to marry dogs and people who love ice cream to marry ice cream.”

 

Dogs and ice cream | Honest NC

 

Obviously, he was trying to say once it's no longer man and woman then all bets are off. I find that logic lacking in thought.

 

Theoretically... I marry my half-gallon of Blue Bell Ice Cream (Vanilla of course, since we wouldn't want miscegenation among the desserts would we, North Carolina). If an hour later, I eat that delicious vanilla ice cream... will I be prosecuted for uxoricide?

I'm talking specifically about Mt Ref and his problems with Mrs. Obama. IMO it goes way beyond the fact she's a female. Again, pure speculation on my part but I feel strongly that deep down I'm right.

 

Got it.