Collarchat.com

Join Our Community
Collarchat.com

Home  Login  Search 

RE: An American dialogue


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: An American dialogue Page: <<   < prev  19 20 [21] 22 23   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: An American dialogue - 12/18/2017 2:07:47 PM   
DaddySatyr


Posts: 9381
Joined: 8/29/2011
From: Pittston, Pennsyltucky
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr
... and here is where you move the goal posts. Yes, there is no sin in feeding a sinner, but homosexuality (the action) is a sin.

I know this quote was in reply to Butch but there are things in it that are interesting to talk about.

I understand that you and some of the other forum posters believe this to be true. It's not my attempt to convince you to change your personal beliefs. At the same time, I'm sure you understand that not all Christians agree with it, even if it seems like most do. A person also has to ask themselves if homosexuality is a sin, and if we believe God creates all of us, why would God create gay people?


Just a couple of (my) posts back, I said that the act of homosexuality is a sin. Being homosexual isn't a sin.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact
There are also areas like the bible being written by men (humans) and all men are fallible (make mistakes), are we really sure this text has been translated properly over all these years and languages, and other questions of that type.


Well, you got me. As I said earlier (again) there is some measure of faith that is required to being a Christian. Specifically, I went into great detail about Leviticus and Jesus never mentioned homosexuality. It took me some time to write that post. I don't have that kind of time, now. It's there, though.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

If a homosexual couple came into a catering service that I owned and told me they were out of work and hungry, I'd offer them a meal (or pack a "care package" to last them a week or so) and a job (at least for the day) if I could afford to add new help.



quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact
To me, this is something that would be what any Christian should say or at least should be. Feeding the hungry, helping the sick, and all of the things that Christ did say that relate to our concept of charity is what we're supposed to be doing. So we agree on this part.



Well. Okay.


quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

If they want me to cater their wedding reception, I'd have to turn them down.

We're not talking about sustenance. We're talking about a desert (or a diabetic coma, waiting to happen).


quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

Leviticus 18:22 --------> Matthew 5:17-20 --------> John 8:7 --------> I Timothy 5:22 --------> Romans 14:13


quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact
I get that you posted these particular lines of scripture to support why you believe the way you do. My hang up about it is the way I've seen this scriptures used before when it came very specifically to passing Colorado law that said gay people were not a protected class. It was done in a rather sneaky way back then because when all the neat political ads were calling for people to vote for (then) Amendment Two, the people of Colorado were being told it was so that gays wouldn't have "special" rights. It was really about equal rights in things like employment, housing, etc. When it became law, gay people didn't have a legal redress if their landlord chose to no longer rent to them or their boss fired them based on sexual orientation. It took four years for this thing to get to SCOTUS and be struck down on the basis that it was unconstitutional.



I'm neither a Colorado law maker nor responsible for that law. I would say I disagree with it and I would add that no matter what slant you might want to put on it, there's a difference between housing/employment and a fucking wedding cake. I know you don't see it. That's fine, but the difference is there.


quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact
Something else that I want to add. A few pages back, JVoV ...


Nice try. No comment.







_____________________________

A Stone in My Shoe

Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) still RULE! Ya feel me?

"For that which I love, I will do horrible things"

(in reply to LadyPact)
Profile   Post #: 401
RE: An American dialogue - 12/18/2017 2:08:18 PM   
JVoV


Posts: 3226
Joined: 3/9/2015
Status: offline
The bakery owner claims that the couple cussed him out and flicked him off after he refused their business. He further claims that within 20 minutes, his phone lines were ringing off the hook with hateful comments directed at him and the bakery, including at least one death threat, and that bad reviews were published almost as quickly on Yelp and similar sites.

I will not provide the direct link for this (paraphrased) statement, because it is on a donations page that I vehemently refuse to support by promoting in any way, and I believe such links may go against this site's TOS.

(in reply to JVoV)
Profile   Post #: 402
RE: An American dialogue - 12/18/2017 2:09:10 PM   
bounty44


Posts: 6374
Joined: 11/1/2014
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyPact
There are also areas like the bible being written by men (humans) and all men are fallible (make mistakes), are we really sure this text has been translated properly over all these years and languages, and other questions of that type.


lp, though you are framing your thought roughly in the form of a question, what youre saying (or implying) is a canard.

(in reply to LadyPact)
Profile   Post #: 403
RE: An American dialogue - 12/18/2017 2:15:31 PM   
bounty44


Posts: 6374
Joined: 11/1/2014
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV
You have no human right to sell a custom decorated food.


try "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" the latter of which implies making a livelihood according to one's abilities, giftedness and inclinations.

its completely reprehensible to me that you and the other comrades here think its okay to force someone through the law, to either act in a way that violates the man religious principles, or to otherwise cause his business to suffer as a result of complying with the law.

waaaaaaahhh, we didn't get the cake we wanted.

go across town and get it from somewhere else.

the horrors!





(in reply to JVoV)
Profile   Post #: 404
RE: An American dialogue - 12/18/2017 2:43:36 PM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline
LOL the rights of a woman dont matter tho....


_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 405
RE: An American dialogue - 12/18/2017 3:08:14 PM   
Wayward5oul


Posts: 3314
Joined: 11/9/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

waaaaaaahhh, we didn't get the cake we wanted.

go across town and get it from somewhere else.

the horrors!






I am sure that the same thing was said about and to blacks a few decades ago.

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 406
RE: An American dialogue - 12/18/2017 3:20:38 PM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline
yeah, I think I heard about that!!!!
Some people still wish we were back there/


_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to Wayward5oul)
Profile   Post #: 407
RE: An American dialogue - 12/18/2017 3:34:19 PM   
bounty44


Posts: 6374
Joined: 11/1/2014
Status: offline
in case anyone is wondering what the catholic church position on homosexuality is:

quote:

Chastity and homosexuality

2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,141 tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered."142 They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.


http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a6.htm

quote:

Homosexuality is addressed in Catholic moral theology under two forms: homosexual orientation is considered an "objective disorder" because Catholicism views it as being "ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil", but not sinful unless acted upon.[1] Homosexual sexual activity, by contrast, is viewed as a "moral disorder"[1] and "homosexual acts" are viewed as "contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity."[2]

The Catholic Church teaches that marriage can be made only between a man and a woman,[3][4] and opposes introduction of both civil and religious same-sex marriage.[5][6][7][8][9] The Church holds that same-sex unions are an unfavorable environment for children and that the legalization of such unions is harmful to society.[10]


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_and_the_Catholic_Church


(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 408
RE: An American dialogue - 12/18/2017 3:44:38 PM   
JVoV


Posts: 3226
Joined: 3/9/2015
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV
You have no human right to sell a custom decorated food.


try "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" the latter of which implies making a livelihood according to one's abilities, giftedness and inclinations.

its completely reprehensible to me that you and the other comrades here think its okay to force someone through the law, to either act in a way that violates the man religious principles, or to otherwise cause his business to suffer as a result of complying with the law.

waaaaaaahhh, we didn't get the cake we wanted.

go across town and get it from somewhere else.

the horrors!


Ah, I see you're devolving back into old habits. Sad.

The pursuit of happiness is far too abstract a concept to ever be put into law. Nevermind how often that has been denied to many of us outright by law.

Cake makes me happy though. The thought of being able to celebrate the plan of spending the rest of my life with someone makes me happy, among other things. Having to deal with multiple businesses for each necessary service and being rejected for the same reason while trying to plan that celebration doesn't allow for much happiness to me.

I understand that some Christians believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. Ok. Then think of the event however you need to, use whatever language you need to. Call it a commitment cake in your mind, simply refer to it as the cake when you speak of it. Your church probably isn't involved in officiating the ceremony anyway, especially if that takes place out of state as in this case.

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 409
RE: An American dialogue - 12/18/2017 4:33:13 PM   
JVoV


Posts: 3226
Joined: 3/9/2015
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

in case anyone is wondering what the catholic church position on homosexuality is:

quote:

Chastity and homosexuality

2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,141 tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered."142 They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.


http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a6.htm

quote:

Homosexuality is addressed in Catholic moral theology under two forms: homosexual orientation is considered an "objective disorder" because Catholicism views it as being "ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil", but not sinful unless acted upon.[1] Homosexual sexual activity, by contrast, is viewed as a "moral disorder"[1] and "homosexual acts" are viewed as "contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity."[2]

The Catholic Church teaches that marriage can be made only between a man and a woman,[3][4] and opposes introduction of both civil and religious same-sex marriage.[5][6][7][8][9] The Church holds that same-sex unions are an unfavorable environment for children and that the legalization of such unions is harmful to society.[10]


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_and_the_Catholic_Church


How many choir boys would consider the Catholic Church a favorable environment for children?

But, out of curiosity, who is claiming to be Catholic in this case?

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 410
RE: An American dialogue - 12/18/2017 4:41:04 PM   
JVoV


Posts: 3226
Joined: 3/9/2015
Status: offline
Speaking of Catholics... I'm digging the new Pope.

https://www.ncronline.org/news/vatican/francis-christians-must-apologize-gay-people-marginalizing-them
quote:

In a press conference Sunday on the flight back to Rome after his weekend trip to Armenia, the pontiff said bluntly: "The church must say it's sorry for not having comported itself well many times, many times."

"I believe that the church not only must say it's sorry ... to this person that is gay that it has offended," said the pope. "But it must say it's sorry to the poor, also, to mistreated women, to children forced to work."

"When I say the church: Christians," Francis clarified. "The church is holy. We are the sinners."

The pope was responding to a question about remarks German Cardinal Reinhard Marx made last week that the Catholic church should apologize to the gay community for marginalizing them.

advent_0.jpg
Explore Advent reflections from our sister publication, Celebration.

"I will repeat the same thing I said on the first trip," Francis said today, referencing the press conference he held on a return flight from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in 2013. "I will also repeat what the Catechism of the Catholic Church says: that [gay people] should not be discriminated against, that they have to be respected, pastorally accompanied."

"The matter is a person that has that condition [and] that has good will because they search for God," said the pontiff.

"Who are we to judge them?" he asked, reframing his famous phrase from 2013 into the plural. "We must accompany well -- what the Catechism says. The Catechism is clear."

Francis also said that the culture in which he grew up in Argentina many years ago was a "closed Catholic culture," giving the example of how it was looked down upon to even enter the home of a couple who had been married civilly after one of the partners had previously divorced.

"The culture has changed -- and thank God!" the pope exclaimed. "Christians; we must say we are sorry many times; not only on this."

"This is the life of the church," said the pontiff. "We are all saints because we all have the Holy Spirit inside us. But we are also all sinners."


That dude would bake me a cake.

(in reply to JVoV)
Profile   Post #: 411
RE: An American dialogue - 12/18/2017 5:27:02 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub
quote:

You have no human right to force someone to sell you custom decorated food. What the fuck is wrong with you?!?

This is what is wrong... I do not have the right to make them sell anything... unless they sell to everyone but gays... then yes I do have the right to call them out for discrimination. They would be denying gays the same right they give to you...why are you special?.
Butch


They will sell any of their products to gays. Their products do not include custom decorated cakes celebrating homosexual marriage, Halloween, or divorce.

Homosexuals, heterosexuals, bisexuals, asexuals, etc. can purchase any of the products they do make and/or custom decorate.




_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to kdsub)
Profile   Post #: 412
RE: An American dialogue - 12/18/2017 5:30:18 PM   
JVoV


Posts: 3226
Joined: 3/9/2015
Status: offline
I believe the bakery has now found a loophole in continuing to sell wedding cakes to the couples it chooses to. There's a cake that looks very much like a traditional, tiered wedding cake in their Specialty category, with "J+D" decorated on it.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 413
RE: An American dialogue - 12/18/2017 5:31:36 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub
Dance much...lol... The baker is open for business to bake wedding cakes... open to the general public... until they say we are gay... that is denying a right that you have...a human right to purchase food. A right that the Christian religion does not deny to any one for any reason anywhere in any text.
If we are to believe the verse in question then being gay is the sin... not feeding a sinner.
Butch

Not as much as you dance.
Masterpiece Cakeshop has lost 40% of it's business because they stopped custom decorating cakes (and they aren't all wedding cakes, either). They sell other baked goods, too.

And I have brought a handful of the cakes they advertise on their website to the owners of the intellectual properties that have been used without a license. Disney & Mattel have both responded quickly to my emails, still waiting on a couple others.
This should be fun.


Probably not really fun. Spitefully satisfying, maybe....

quote:

quote:

You have no human right to force someone to sell you custom decorated food. What the fuck is wrong with you?!?
Mr. Phillips, it has been stated, said he'd sell them anything he makes, but wouldn't custom decorate a cake celebrating a gay wedding. The couple have no right to force him to customize a cake for them. They could have bought a cake. They decided not to buy a cake from the shop.

You have no human right to sell a custom decorated food.


No one said anyone does.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to JVoV)
Profile   Post #: 414
RE: An American dialogue - 12/18/2017 5:53:19 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV
quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44
quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV
You have no human right to sell a custom decorated food.

try "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" the latter of which implies making a livelihood according to one's abilities, giftedness and inclinations.
its completely reprehensible to me that you and the other comrades here think its okay to force someone through the law, to either act in a way that violates the man religious principles, or to otherwise cause his business to suffer as a result of complying with the law.
waaaaaaahhh, we didn't get the cake we wanted.
go across town and get it from somewhere else.
the horrors!

Ah, I see you're devolving back into old habits. Sad.
The pursuit of happiness is far too abstract a concept to ever be put into law. Nevermind how often that has been denied to many of us outright by law.
Cake makes me happy though. The thought of being able to celebrate the plan of spending the rest of my life with someone makes me happy, among other things. Having to deal with multiple businesses for each necessary service and being rejected for the same reason while trying to plan that celebration doesn't allow for much happiness to me.


You can have all the cake you want. You can celebrate the plan of spending the rest of your life with someone. You do not have any right to a custom decorated cake, unless the creator of the custom decorated cake agrees with your request and both you and the creator have come to an agreement on payment for the transfer of the right to that custom decorated cake.

quote:

I understand that some Christians believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. Ok. Then think of the event however you need to, use whatever language you need to. Call it a commitment cake in your mind, simply refer to it as the cake when you speak of it. Your church probably isn't involved in officiating the ceremony anyway, especially if that takes place out of state as in this case.


It's not about what it's called. LMFAO! Why, when I proposed that all civil rights be tied to "civil unions" and "weddings" be a subset of civil unions performed in a religious setting, was it disagreed with on these boards? I pointed out that a homosexual civil union performed in a church would be a wedding, but a civil union (regardless of the genders of the joining parties) outside of a religious ceremony (ie, going to a Justice of the Peace) would be a civil union. It was characterized as still making it a second class thing.

I DO oppose it being called a marriage, if it's done outside a religious ceremony. I do believe all civil benefits be tied to "civil unions" of which there are many iterations. A heterosexual civil union and a homosexual civil union, imo, should have no difference in the eyes of government, and a subset of civil unions (which a marriage would be if I had my way) had no more benefits than any other civil union.

I had a woman contact me on a quasi-dating site. She was "in need of money." She offered sex in trade for money. I said I would never pay for sex. She said to not look at it that way, but look at it as helping a friend out. If I were to decide that I wanted to "help a friend out" as she mentioned, wouldn't that still be paying for sex?


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to JVoV)
Profile   Post #: 415
RE: An American dialogue - 12/18/2017 6:32:28 PM   
JVoV


Posts: 3226
Joined: 3/9/2015
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

Probably not really fun. Spitefully satisfying, maybe....


I do own a few shares of Disney stock, so really I'm just protecting my investment.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 416
RE: An American dialogue - 12/18/2017 6:48:52 PM   
JVoV


Posts: 3226
Joined: 3/9/2015
Status: offline
Desi, the law cannot discern between a legal ceremony and a religious ceremony, because of that whole "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" thing, with a spoonful of the 14th Amendment for flavor.

But what the law & IRS call it has nothing to do with what someone else can call it. To me, it's a wedding. To you, it's defiling a religious sacrament. Poe-tay-toe, Pah-tah-toe. Gimme my cake.

And it's too late for that discussion anyway, since the Supreme Court has ruled in favor of gay marriage as a Constitutional right. The States could have provided civil unions before that, as some did, to make that case a non-issue, but many refused to do so.

(in reply to JVoV)
Profile   Post #: 417
RE: An American dialogue - 12/18/2017 7:04:08 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Probably not really fun. Spitefully satisfying, maybe....

I do own a few shares of Disney stock, so really I'm just protecting my investment.


Bullshit.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to JVoV)
Profile   Post #: 418
RE: An American dialogue - 12/18/2017 7:07:38 PM   
JVoV


Posts: 3226
Joined: 3/9/2015
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Probably not really fun. Spitefully satisfying, maybe....

I do own a few shares of Disney stock, so really I'm just protecting my investment.


Bullshit.



Oh. I do. But yeah, it's not like I flipped out over a couple bucks of revenue for the company over an Eeyore cake.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 419
RE: An American dialogue - 12/18/2017 7:15:01 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV
Desi, the law cannot discern between a legal ceremony and a religious ceremony, because of that whole "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" thing, with a spoonful of the 14th Amendment for flavor.
But what the law & IRS call it has nothing to do with what someone else can call it. To me, it's a wedding. To you, it's defiling a religious sacrament. Poe-tay-toe, Pah-tah-toe. Gimme my cake.


Actually, I have no problem with homosexuals getting hitched. None. What. So. Ever.

Why prevent them from the opportunity of being miserable like us heteros?

quote:

And it's too late for that discussion anyway, since the Supreme Court has ruled in favor of gay marriage as a Constitutional right. The States could have provided civil unions before that, as some did, to make that case a non-issue, but many refused to do so.


Here's the thing. The only real change was that homosexuals were allowed to enter into a category that conferred civil benefits. I agree that they should be, and should have been, allowed to do that. If "civil unions" (of which a "marriage" would have been a type of civil union) conferred civil benefits, then that actually separates church and state more than not. A religious ceremony would have no benefit greater (or lesser) than that of any other civil union, because it is nothing more than a civil union. If a couple gets married at the JoP, government would see it as a civil union (regardless of the genders of the couple). If a couple gets married as part of a religious ceremony, government would see it as a civil union (regardless of the genders of the couple).

You have, and should have had, the right to get hitched with whomever you chose (provided you and that person were/are of age of majority), imo. You should have and should have had the opportunity to enjoy all the civil benefits that getting hitched confers.
Period. Full stop.




_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to JVoV)
Profile   Post #: 420
Page:   <<   < prev  19 20 [21] 22 23   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: An American dialogue Page: <<   < prev  19 20 [21] 22 23   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2024
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.143