In all those zero times the Bible actually talked about homosexuality.
Advertisement

by Edlichbury » Wed Jun 26, 2013 9:42 am

by Of the Free Socialist Territories » Wed Jun 26, 2013 9:42 am
Helvereos wrote:Mr Summertime Noposts wrote:
I agree entirely. It's amazing how alike we are.
Actually, I got that line from this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxLnCJJB_Jg
Hope you enjoy it.


by Zokorias personal views » Wed Jun 26, 2013 9:42 am

by Neo Art » Wed Jun 26, 2013 9:42 am

by Aldheim » Wed Jun 26, 2013 9:43 am

by The Black Forrest » Wed Jun 26, 2013 9:43 am

by Greed and Death » Wed Jun 26, 2013 9:43 am

by Olivaero » Wed Jun 26, 2013 9:44 am

by Helvereos » Wed Jun 26, 2013 9:44 am
Of the Free Socialist Territories wrote:Helvereos wrote:
Actually, I got that line from this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxLnCJJB_Jg
Hope you enjoy it.
"Rucka Rucka Ali Super AIDS"
Clearly a work that manages to be both intellectual and hilarious, much like the other clearly wonderful song of his endorsing rape that cropped up on the sidebar.

by The Black Forrest » Wed Jun 26, 2013 9:44 am

by Edlichbury » Wed Jun 26, 2013 9:48 am

by Greed and Death » Wed Jun 26, 2013 9:48 am
Neo Art wrote:greed and death wrote:I would rather have had the state of California defend the law. I have and continue to have reservations when elected officials decline to defend the law and this is one of the reasons.
They did defend the law. At the district court. They lost. Proposition 8 was ruled illegal. You can not compel an official to defend a law that has been deemed illegal.

by Vettrera » Wed Jun 26, 2013 9:49 am

by Edlichbury » Wed Jun 26, 2013 9:49 am

by Neo Art » Wed Jun 26, 2013 9:50 am
Aldheim wrote:greed and death wrote:I would rather have had the state of California defend the law. I have and continue to have reservations when elected officials decline to defend the law and this is one of the reasons.
Does this ruling mean that if a state doesn't defend a law, then no one can?
Because if so, it seems like it might have some unintended consequences.

by Of the Free Socialist Territories » Wed Jun 26, 2013 9:50 am

by Neo Art » Wed Jun 26, 2013 9:50 am

by AiliailiA » Wed Jun 26, 2013 9:51 am
Divair wrote:Ifreann wrote:Christian Democrats has been posting about the language of one of the decisions suggesting that SCOTUS would leave same sex marriage(and the definition of marriage generally) up to the states if such a question were to come before them. Which is hardly the delicious tears I was promised.
He's taking it so well.
Christian Democrats wrote:LGBT individuals should be treated the same as everybody else. They should be subject to the same laws as other people; and society is under no obligation to make special accommodations for their personal preferences, sexual or otherwise, whether natural from birth or acquired during the course of life.
Cannot think of a name wrote:"Where's my immortality?" will be the new "Where's my jetpack?"
Maineiacs wrote:"We're going to build a canal, and we're going to make Columbia pay for it!" -- Teddy Roosevelt
Ifreann wrote:That's not a Freudian slip. A Freudian slip is when you say one thing and mean your mother.

by Edlichbury » Wed Jun 26, 2013 9:51 am
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Dimetrodon Empire, Dogmeat, Emotional Support Crocodile, Ifreann, Independent Galactic States, Mtwara, Spirit of Hope, Sunlit Uplands, Tillania
Advertisement