ADVERTISEMENT

Fallout...

Even in the old days we never got along much, rifle - simply because I lean hard right. As for Marshall's reputation, it is fine.

Here in Indiana we just got roasted and threatened by liberals for passing a freedom of religion law that matches the federal stature because the gays said we were after them. Unlike libs, we said in advance why the law was being considered - which was to put Christians on equal footing with Muslims. But the gays wanted attention, so they lied to get it and they had their friends do the same.

Lets end the group grope and put America back on the path of individual freedom instead of pretending that all blacks, all spanish-speakers and all homosexuals - minorities all for the time being - are treated badly by whitey. Time for dependency on government giveaways to end - but that will not happen until the crooks like Obama are run out of office.

Indiana has ended union domination with Right to Work passage, has repealed the Common Wage law, and has rescinded the right of public unions to negotiate wages. WV needs to do something about union domination as well with Obama killing off the coal industry. Everybody in the state needs to fight the weirder than homosexual folks, the environmentalists that would ban life-giving carbon dioxide.

There really are things that are more important than MarshalI's reputation. I don't get involved with the daily lives of gays and lesbians, nor do I normally say anything about their unnatural lifestyle, but the articles in The Daily Beast and BuzzFeed ticked me off. The BS about WV not having a hate crime law is beyond the pale - so tell me: Who can read another mind to determine hate?

I guess Welfare wasnt around before Obama came into office you ****ing idiot.
 
And im all for gays to have civil unions and have the rights of straight MARRIED couples. They just shouldnt be allowed to be classified as Married because no matter the religion, marriage takes place in the eyes of God and coming to him as a gay couple is like spitting in his face
 
  • Like
Reactions: angelo54
Because religion is certainly a solid basis for whether or not a couple can be married in the eyes of the government. Especially since the church has no obligation to acknowledge a legal marriage as being valid

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

Of course, if you make a sound argument against it without pulling religion into the issue, I would be glad to hear it.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT