But when they support the faggot agenda then lie and say it is conservative. They are worthless to me.

I can't speak for Pete but he has sugested he abhors homosexuality, too. All he has ever said is that it is their right to screw if that is their preference; he has claimed that he doesn't want any knowledge of the vulgar acts.

Don't give him facts,it only confuses him.

He thinks that the only people who have rights are the people who he likes or who agree with him on every issue.

Either that or he doesn't understand what the word "rights" means.

Peter thinks two men can be married.

No,the BILL OF RIGHTS AND THE US SUPREME COURT think two men,or two women have a RIGHT to marry if that is what they want to do.

But when they support the faggot agenda then lie and say it is conservative.

So,to clarify matters,YOU think the Bill of Rights only applies to the people you approve of?

That's about as "conservative" as Mussolini,Hitler,the DNC,and the ACLU.

So,to clarify matters,YOU think the Bill of Rights only applies to the people you approve of?

Pete that is why I criticize you. Because you are a liar. Faggots getting pretending to be married are not in the Bill of Rights. You really are that stupid and immoral aren't you.

Where in the Bill of Rights you fucking idiot piece of crap?

So,to clarify matters,

You're like diarrhea in a toilet bowl. You can't be clarified. You have to flush.

Where in the Bill of Rights you fucking idiot piece of crap?

It's called "equal treatment under the law. Guess what,Bubba? If homosexuals don't have the right to marry,neither do you.

The reason you get so hysterical over this is you KNOW I am right,but don't can't face the truth because you KNOW in your heart what you want is a religious dictatorship.

With YOUR cult the head cult,that is. You damn sure don't want to live in a country ran by a religion that isn't your own ideal of a fascist police state.

I agree with you

You don't believe our government has a mandate to treat us all equally when it comes to legal matters and rights?

Which do you prefer,communism or fascism,because those are your only other options. We are either all free to live our lives in peace,or none of us are free.

you think Hillary would be ok.

You never tire of making false claims about me.

How is Trump a crony capitalist? Hmm Mr. Globalist.

Which end of the Soros / Sachs turd is the clean end again?

=======================================

Mnuchin started his career in the early 1980s at Salomon Brothers. He moved to Goldman Sachs in 1985. Mnuchin was one of the instrumental people in the promotion of financial instruments like Collateralized Debt Obligations (CDO) and Credit Default Swaps (CDS).

Mnuchin spent 17 years at Goldman Sachs Group Inc., becoming partner and head of the mortgage department before working with Hank Paulson in 1999 as the firm’s Chief Information Officer.

Mnuchin cashed in on the Goldman Sachs’ IPO in 2002 and left to join Lampert’s ESL Investments hedge fund as vice chairman — he knew Eddie Lampert (whose equity firm owns Sears Holdings and K-Mart) from his time at Yale, where they were roommates.

In 2003 he started new fund with $1 billion from George Soros. In 2004, with two other ex-Goldman Sachs partners, he combined his fund holdings to form hedge fund Dune Capital Management, which led a group (which also included George Soros) that in 2009 raised $1.55 billion to acquire what was left of collapsed mortgage loan bank IndyMac from the FDIC receivership — it was renamed OneWest Bank, and in 2015 acquired by CIT Group for $3.4B.

Partly due to this purchase he was subjected to 2011 protests on the lawn of his Bel Air mansion by foreclosed homeowners.

Mnuchin’s father, Robert Mnuchin, was a partner at Goldman Sachs in the 1960s.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3427812/posts? page=288#288

It's called "equal treatment under the law.

The word "equal" appears nowhere in the Bill of Rights.

If homosexuals don't have the right to marry,neither do you.

A homosexual has the same right as I do to marry a member of the opposite sex.

Marriage is a religious (Christian) institution, not a government one, and as such it is not a constitutional right.

Equal treatment? No - they want the rest of us to give up our rights. You MUST bake a cake for queers. You MUST open bathrooms to transgenders.

You MUST NOT not speak out against homosexuality or they will retaliate.

Homosexuals are the new fascists.

If they want to start their own "church" and perform unions there, fine by me.

But it's not a marriage in any sense of the word.

The reason you get so hysterical over this is you KNOW I am right,but don't can't face the truth because you KNOW in your heart what you want is a religious dictatorship.

I totally agree with you on this.

But when they support the faggot agenda then lie and say it is conservative.

In that case, the lie is a self-evident contradiction of natural law.

"Truth is great and will prevail"
--Thomas Jefferson

That's what differentiates what you're providing for the public benefit here -
- as opposed to what TOS has been doing with its active pro- Trump/[candidate of the cycle] censorship.

What's going on over there isn't what Jefferson had in mind; nor is it the electronic democracy David Hughes envisioned circa 1981:

=============================

...

Electronic Democracy

And it was primarily dedicated to the purposes of Electronic Democracy. One section was called 'Rogers Bar' - for the actual Rogers Bar in Old Colorado City two blocks away was always the place that Democratic Westside Union Politics were debated.

I became the defacto 'Electronic Bartender' - who kept peace, moderated discussions, and posted LOCAL issues worth debating online. It was not IN Roger's Bar, but ABOUT the political discussions that took place there.

I had thought hard about the American political process. That seemed to me had three components - first the distibution of information or issues to the public. Newspapers books, magazines and television did a credible job doing that. And in the end, individuals cast their ballots or took action. But in between Americans had to Discuss, Debate, Argue, Listen to others, and finally Decide, before casting their ballots. And through such debate, asking questions, expressing opinions they make up their minds.

What the Electronic Democracy Bulletin Board could do was foster and encourage the vital DEBATE phase of the democratic process. For it linked INDIVIDUALS to each other ASYCHRONOUSLY (not just in real time) - not just to institutions, or just let 'News Anchors' or 'experts' or candididates tell them - in one way slick ads - what to think. Before my BBS, (and then much later what are called 'Blogs') most individuals only discussed political issues and matters with a small local, face to face circle - family, friends, maybe at work. The rest of the time they were beseiged  some could say brainwashed - by mass media.

...
http://davehugheslegacy.net/ index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=420

 

What you're operating reflects the tradition of Col. Hughes.   Jim Robinson OTOH - Not. So. Much.

Thank you for the voice!

Marriage is a religious (Christian) institution, not a government one, and as such it is not a constitutional right.

In a secular context it's a state-established mechanism for manipulating the reproductive fitness of the collect herd/hive.

That's the spirit of anti-Christ, not the union Christ defined and illustrated with himself as the head of His church.

Make America Great Again!

Makes a good sound byte - but Trump [and his followers] consistently fail to articulate the conservative ideological precepts that differentiated the U.S.A. from the ideals of the U.S.S.R. - personified by Soviet Communists such as Vlad Putin and Viktor Yanukovytch.

http://www.google.com/? gws_rd=ssl#q=Trump+Manafort+Yanukovych

Why is that?

Make America Great Again!

Makes a good sound byte - but Trump [and his followers] consistently fail to articulate the conservative ideological precepts that differentiated the U.S.A. from the ideals of the U.S.S.R.

The slogan (and the implied promise) is just as empty as "Hope and Change".

just as empty as "Hope and Change".

Yep.

His consistent inability to articulate a worldview that reflects America's fundamental founding precepts, or to articulate the fundamental differences between the U.S.A. and the U.S.S.R., ought to be a clue. (Ronald Reagan never had that problem)

A campaign manager who tried to prop up Soviet Communist thug Vikto Yanukovytch; and a Soros/Sachs finance chairman... Ought to be big Red waving oligarchic flags.

But, evidently that doesn't matter to the Reality TeeVee Tsar's fans.

I'm definitely voting for the guy who can score a fine woman like that.

TRUMP2016(don't be a pussy, just score the best pussy)

A homosexual has the same right as I do to marry a member of the opposite sex.

I suppose that is what passes for logic and wit in your circles?

I agree with what you said about "equal treatment under the law", but not when it comes to marriage. The State has no business regulating or getting involved in it.

Well,the state does have the right to prevent an adult from marrying a child,or a brother from marrying a sister if the sister is able to conceive. Other than extremes like that,I agree.

Marriage is a religious (Christian) institution,

And your train just left the tracks. Marriage existed long before Christianity,and will still exist when Christianity withers away and dies from lack of interest.

not a government one, and as such it is not a constitutional right.

BullBush. "Freedom of Association".

Equal treatment? No - they want the rest of us to give up our rights.

People want all sorts of things they will never get.

You MUST bake a cake for queers. You MUST open bathrooms to transgenders.

Neither is of any legitimate concern to the government. In fact,the government is violating it's own laws by trying to force people to do these things against their will.

You MUST NOT not speak out against homosexuality or they will retaliate.

And you can defend yourself. Free speech,and all dat.

Homosexuals are the new fascists.

Just one of many. There seems to be no shortage of fascists floating around in the 21st Century.

If they want to start their own "church" and perform unions there, fine by me.

They don't even need to do that. They can have a judge or a JP wed them in a civil ceremony. NONE of their rights are being infringed upon by being refused church weddings.

But it's not a marriage in any sense of the word.

It's a marriage in every sense of the word.

In a secular context it's a state-established mechanism for manipulating the reproductive fitness of the collect herd/hive.

Only partially. Not everybody that gets married wants to have children,or are even able to have children.

For example there was a news story a month or so ago about a couple in their late 90's getting married at the senior center where they both live. Call me a pessimist if you want,but I ain't predicting any children for that couple.

Trump [and his followers] consistently fail to articulate the conservative ideological precepts that differentiated the U.S.A. from the ideals of the U.S.S.R. - personified by Soviet Communists such as Vlad Putin and Viktor Yanukovytch.

Putin has become an adult now,and morphed into being a fascist. Not only that,but by all the reports I have seen,he's loving the change.

I'm definitely voting for the guy who can score a fine woman like that.

All it takes is money.

I ain't predicting any children for that couple.

Even so such a marriage still has an impact on the socio-biological fitness of a culture by the behavior it models.

he's loving the change.

He exemplifies the line of Reality Tee Vee Tsars that go all the way back through history to Sargon.

Reality Tee Vee Tsars that go all the way back through history to Sargon

Ok,ya got me there. I have no idea who that guy is. The only Sargon I ever heard of died a few thousand years before teebee was invented.

Thanks dude, Mrs Trump is one fine woman to look at early in the morning.

I'm definitely voting for the guy who can score a fine woman like that.

What was the typical career path for "super models" groomed by their father's fellow communists circa 1989?

The only Sargon I ever heard of died a few thousand years before teebee was invented.

That's the one. The word Sar-gon means sun-prince.

http://www.google.com/search? q=sargon+akkadian+%22sun+prince%22

The same Akkadian root that's found in CaeSAR, KaiSAR, tSAR, cZAR, NebuchadnezZAR.

In Russian the old joke:

Ne Bu Chad Neh Zar: "There is no god but the Tzar".

http://www.google.com/search? q=Nebuchadnezzar+"no+god+but+the+tzar"

The cunneiform symbol for the king?  A Star.

Hence when a king was deposed (like Nebuchadnezzar in Isaiah 14:12) his "star is fallen" - and scratched off the walls of the local palace.

They all pretended to be "gods" atop the state pyramid scheme.

Same ol' state-established Ba'alshyte, different municipal toilet.

"A homosexual has the same right as I do to marry a member of the opposite sex."

I suppose that is what passes for logic and wit in your circles?

What's illogical about it? Is it not a correct statement?

"A homosexual has the same right as I do to marry a member of the opposite sex."

I suppose that is what passes for logic and wit in your circles?

What's illogical about it? Is it not a correct statement?

No,it's not logical because a homosexual man has no more interest in marrying a woman than you do in marrying another man. The only people that have a choice are bi-sexuals.

They all pretended to be "gods" atop the state pyramid scheme.

Well,they think they ARE "gods" today,and only pretend to be modest about it.

"A homosexual has the same right as I do to marry a member of the opposite sex."

No,it's not logical because a homosexual man has no more interest in marrying a woman than you do in marrying another man.

So if I have no interest in exercising a certain right, I don't really have that right?

So if I have no interest in exercising a certain right, I don't really have that right?

No,it means that right is irrelevant to you,just like the rights of other people to marry who they want to marry instead of who YOU want them to marry is irrelevant to you.

You are really and truly an idiot if you really believe saying "They have the same right to marry a woman that I do" is profound. Even most Kennedy's are bright enough to know better than that.

And you need to change your screen name,also. Maybe to something like "Conserving ONLY the freedoms *I* approve of!"

No,it means that right is irrelevant to you

But nonetheless a right I possess.

You are really and truly an idiot if you really believe saying "They have the same right to marry a woman that I do" is profound.

Where did I say or imply it was profound? It's a fact, and it rebuts your claim, "If homosexuals don't have the right to marry,neither do you."

And you need to change your screen name,also. Maybe to something like "Conserving ONLY the freedoms *I* approve of!"

I support the rights of adult perverts to do in private whatever disgusting things they mutually agree to. Since marriage is not a creation of government but a recognition by government of a pre-existing societal institution, there is no "right" to have government fabricate a never-existed institution for perverts.

Well,they think they ARE "gods" today,and only pretend to be modest about it.

Modern instances of the wise fools described in Romans chapter 1.

Nature hasn't changed since then.

He is sick in the head. He is immoral. He is a fool.

I support the rights of adult perverts to do in private whatever disgusting things they mutually agree to. Since marriage is not a creation of government but a recognition by government of a pre-existing societal institution, there is no "right" to have government fabricate a never-existed institution for perverts.

Wise and true words spoken to a degenerate.

So if I have no interest in exercising a certain right, I don't really have that right?

Nobody can deny you a right you have no interest in exercising.

Where did I say or imply it was profound? It's a fact, and it rebuts your claim, "If homosexuals don't have the right to marry,neither do you."

HorseHillary. You are lying to yourself in order to blindly support your bigotry because you want your bigotry to be the law so the government will punish people you don't like and whose conduct you don't approve.

Pete is the closet queer of the site. He would defend a queer to the death. That is why he is also known as sneakapeter.

He is sick in the head. He is immoral. He is a fool.

If there is anybody on this site in the closet it is you and Fire Island,and it is the guilt and shame you both feel over being homosexual or bi-sexual that causes you both to foam at the mouth anytime the word is mentioned.

Tell me,if your God is "all-seeing" like you claim,how is it you think think you can deny your true nature to him so you don't end up spending an eternity burning in Hell's Fire?

Since you can't fool your God and nobody else cares,don't you think it's time for you to act like an adult instead of a guilty child?

Wise and true words spoken to a degenerate.

"Love your fellow man!"

Jesus

You're sick in the head geeezer. Your parents would be ashamed of you. Your mama probably would wonder why she didn't smother you at birth.

I'm asking myself. Why do I let a degenerate piece of shit like yourself post here. When all you do is attack the first amendment and say it is for superstitious people. When you attack superior American culture and want it replaced by Sodom and Gomorrah Sneakapeter culture.

I really should ban you forever. All you do is promote sicko stuff. You're the new meguro.

At some point I will ban you forever. Maybe today. You just get on my nerves with your anti American lies. Then you say the founders thought faggots should marry. You are a lying sack of shit.

Your days are numbered. Hell is your destination and you will soon be kicked to the curb here.

"Love your fellow man!"

That doesn't mean to lie to a sinner and say it is ok.

It is people like YOU that use your religious bigotry as a weapon who are busy destroying the American culture,and this is THE very reason the Founding Fathers made sure there were be no official religion in this country,and that religion had no role in governing.

You closeted buttboys always call others what you are when you are called on it.

That describes you and Fire Island perfectly.

You're sick in the head geeezer. Your parents would be ashamed of you. Your mama probably would wonder why she didn't smother you at birth.

Ahhh,more of your Christian compassion and love of your fellow man (in a heterosexual way) on display. I bet your preacher pays you money to not name your cult on the internet.

Maybe you could point out to us the place in the Bible where Jesus suggested mothers murder their infants?

I'm asking myself. Why do I let a degenerate piece of shit like yourself post here. When all you do is attack the first amendment and say it is for superstitious people.

No,you dummy. I say it is dummies like you who are attacking the First Amendment by using your superstitious beliefs as a weapon to DEMAND we create different classes of Americans,with some having fewer freedoms and rights than others,and try to use your God as a hammer to smite others by sending us to hell forever for not agreeing with you.

When you attack superior American culture and want it replaced by Sodom and Gomorrah Sneakapeter culture.

You seem to have this strange obsession with sneaking peters. Maybe the one you hate the most is yourself?

I really should ban you forever.

That's because you want an echo chamber where everyone agrees with you. You want to be the new Jim Rob,but just don't have enough members to get away with it. There are only a few dozen people that post here anyhow,so if 15 or 20 drop out or get banned you would be posting to yourself. That ain't no way to become the New Messiah,is it?

All you do is promote sicko stuff.

Yeah,we don't need all that stinking freedom stuff,do we? Not when we have you and your obsessions to tell us what to think and to do.

You're the new meguro.

Hate to disappoint you,but I'm not a homosexual.

You just get on my nerves with your anti American lies.

Yeah,I can see where the Bill of Rights gets in your way. That's why we have it,to prevent dictators and tyrants from taking over the country.

Then you say the founders thought faggots should marry.

Where have I EVER claimed that ANYONE should get married other than parents of children,never mind homosexuals?

C'mon,post my quote with a link to that thread,or admit you are lying.

You are a lying sack of shit.

No,but you are. What you hate most of all is people that point out your hypocrisy,inconsistencies,and outright lies in support of a religion that even YOU don't follow according to your own words and actions. You CONSISTENTLY "preach" hate and promote punishments and loss of rights and freedoms for anyone who doesn't agree with you. I got news for you,Bubba. If there is a hell and I go there,I fully expect to see you showing up,too.

Hell,compared to you,*I* am the one that follows the teachings of Jesus!

Bigot,heal thyself!

Hell is your destination ....

I'll save you a seat.

"Love your fellow man!"

That doesn't mean to lie to a sinner and say it is ok.

You can't even agree with one of the most basic tenets of Christianity,and you call yourself a Christian?

What is the denomination you allege to follow?