Santorum Wins/winning Huge In Co, Mo, And Mn
-
Oh God here we go again... I'm gonna answer this and then you're gonna try to twist it all around with like 40 other questions and then try to make it sound like I agree with you.
It doesn't matter what I think. He equated to people making love that line each other to a guy fucking a dog. Saying there is no difference between doing it with someone u love and a dog. That's horrible.
This guy will get torn apart if he goes up against Obama
-
... and equating gay sex with bestiality?
Sorry to post a question, but do you think that beastieality is immoral?
WSS
Sorry to post a question, but do you think that beastieality is immoral?
WSS
I'll bite. This question is not as cut-and-dry as people make it out to be. If you bend over in front of an animal, is it hurting the animal? Probably not. It might hurt you, if it's a horse (and potentially rip open your colon causing you to die from internal bleeding). If you take an animal from behind are you hurting it? Well, if so, it's probably going to struggle or kick you (again, if it's a horse, bad news). The difference here is a matter of consent. Humans are able to give consent or refuse. If you don't have consent, then what you are doing is rape. Since an animal is unable to give explicit consent, I'd argue that beastiality should either not be legislated or it should be made illegal. On the other hand, human children are able to consent to sex as well, however, it can, and often does, lead to stunting of emotional development and can cause serious mental health issues. Because of this, most societies place a minimum age of consent.
Is fucking an animal immoral? Probably. Is getting fucked by an animal immoral? Probably not. Should they be legal? I don't think so. Should we waste any resources prosecuting a sheep fucker? Maybe if he's raping your sheep, so it shouldn't go any higher than a municipal or county level.
-
VT we've had a few discussions in the past about moral relativism Ana I'm a little surprised you took the stance you did on this issue. I mean no ones really being harmed and it's making someone happy, right? But it creeps us out so we try and find some way to make it wrong. Same thing with underage. Because it pisses us off to think of our children making it with the 40 year oldear old we make it immoral.
Still among the over 18 set you and I have both seen probably dozens of relationships with emotional imbalance, correct? And those are by no means against the law.
In the past you yourself have pointed out the differences in different cultures.
And speaking of emotions can you imagine a 15 year old being a lot more cruel than a 45 year old possibly?
And that's not it against the law.
Bottom line is this: we make up our morality according to the things that affect us emotionally and physically. Then we try to assign universal right and wrong to those things.
Besides beastieality there are dozens of fetishes that would probably turn our stomachs.
And all of that is before you even address nature.
WSS
www.westsidesteve.com www.myspace.com/westsidestevemusic www.cdbaby.com/artist/westsidestevesimmons -
Point is Santorum is an ass and will get torn up in the general election because of this statement, if he makes it that far
-
Point is Santorum is an ass and will get torn up in the general election because of this statement, if he makes it that far
Point is Santorum is an ass and will get torn up in the general election because of this statement, if he makes it that far
First he probably won't make it that far.
Second I don't think many people care about the gay issues.
Third the presidents most dedicarted voting block is more anti gay then most.
Fourth most americans are against gay marriage.
But in the end if its that big an issue for you then you should vote your conscience.
WSS
www.westsidesteve.com www.myspace.com/westsidestevemusic www.cdbaby.com/artist/westsidestevesimmons -
VT we've had a few discussions in the past about moral relativism Ana I'm a little surprised you took the stance you did on this issue. I mean no ones really being harmed and it's making someone happy, right? But it creeps us out so we try and find some way to make it wrong. Same thing with underage. Because it pisses us off to think of our children making it with the 40 year oldear old we make it immoral.
Still among the over 18 set you and I have both seen probably dozens of relationships with emotional imbalance, correct? And those are by no means against the law.
In the past you yourself have pointed out the differences in different cultures.
And speaking of emotions can you imagine a 15 year old being a lot more cruel than a 45 year old possibly?
And that's not it against the law.
Bottom line is this: we make up our morality according to the things that affect us emotionally and physically. Then we try to assign universal right and wrong to those things.
Besides beastieality there are dozens of fetishes that would probably turn our stomachs.
And all of that is before you even address nature.
WSS
VT we've had a few discussions in the past about moral relativism Ana I'm a little surprised you took the stance you did on this issue. I mean no ones really being harmed and it's making someone happy, right? But it creeps us out so we try and find some way to make it wrong. Same thing with underage. Because it pisses us off to think of our children making it with the 40 year oldear old we make it immoral.
But it's not simply that. A 12 year old will very likely not understand the implications of a sexual relationship. Not in this culture anyways.
Still among the over 18 set you and I have both seen probably dozens of relationships with emotional imbalance, correct? And those are by no means against the law.
But one cannot ignore the correlation between sexual abuse as a minor and mental health issues as they go through puberty. The problems from this are typically far more severe than what you get in a sexual relationship as an adult. Are there problems with any relationship? Yes, but the type of problems that you're going to expose a minor to are not something they may understand. I understand this argument has its holes, ie. a 17 year old is going to understand the implications of a sexual relationship better than a 12 year old, but as a society, you need to place an age limit somewhere.
In the past you yourself have pointed out the differences in different cultures.
And speaking of emotions can you imagine a 15 year old being a lot more cruel than a 45 year old possibly?
And that's not it against the law.
There's a difference between being cruel and having the capacity to fuck up a person's life who is unable to grasp the consequences.
Bottom line is this: we make up our morality according to the things that affect us emotionally and physically. Then we try to assign universal right and wrong to those things.
Besides beastieality there are dozens of fetishes that would probably turn our stomachs.
Naturally, morality is going to arise from things that affect us physically and emotionally. Some of it is hardwired into our genes (ie. seeing another person in distress releases stress hormones, seeing another person smile releases feel-good hormones) due to the nature of our evolution through group fitness. Some of it is also emergent, this one's a little hard to nail, but I think you'd agree with me that morality is subjective. Other fetishes require consent. Don't google BME Pain Olympics. If you're into S&M, that's your deal, but you consent to those things. Bestiality, however, you'll never get explicit consent.
-
Point is Santorum is an ass and will get torn up in the general election because of this statement, if he makes it that far
First he probably won't make it that far.
Second I don't think many people care about the gay issues.
Third the presidents most dedicarted voting block is more anti gay then most.
Fourth most americans are against gay marriage.
But in the end if its that big an issue for you then you should vote your conscience.
WSS
Fourth most americans are against gay marriage.
WSS
Really? You sure...
and I'll vote based off of my brain, I'll use intelligence and common sense. Not emotion, not cuz the guy is part of the party I blindly follow (though I don't follow any parties), not any of that.
I'm an engineer motha fucka
-
Here is the breakdown on delegates Overall.
Romney has 112
Santorum has 72*
Gingrich has 32
Paul has 9
*The Missouri Republican Party will hold a caucus on March 17th which will determine the delegates sent to the 2012 GOP convention
Members of the Republican National Committee who automatically attend the party's national convention can support any candidate they choose.
-
Gay marriage has majority support now, according to Gallup.
-
Gay marriage has majority support now, according to Gallup.
Gay marriage has majority support now, according to Gallup.
And who cares?
Why do you promote it heck?
I dont support it. And I will not compromise my position.
-
Gay marriage has majority support now, according to Gallup.
And who cares?
Why do you promote it heck?
I dont support it. And I will not compromise my position.
And who cares?
Why do you promote it heck?
I dont support it. And I will not compromise my position.
Who cares? Steve just posted that a majority of Americans oppose it. That doesn't seem to be true any more. At the very least, it's a close call in terms of popular support.
As for your position, I wasn't imagining that you were going to change your mind, and I wasn't discussing it with you anyway. I already know what you don't think.
Why do I promote it? Because, in my mind, it's correcting an obvious wrong, and one our society needs to move beyond. And we're doing it. This simply will not be an issue in another 10-15 years, and it might not even take that long.
Gay rights is the last big civil rights struggle in America.
-
Go Rick go!
"Early indications from two polls in the field -- Public Policy Polling and Gallup -- show Rick Santorum either taking over the lead among Republican voters nationally or at least tied with Mitt Romney.
A new Fox News poll also shows Santorum surging and in the last two days the poll was in the field he moved into a dead heat with Romney, 30% to 30%."
-
No, "gay rights" is not a civil rights issue. It's a morality issue. If libs really cared about civil rights, they would be against abortion, especially
partial birth abortion. They would DEMAND that unborn, and BORN children be granted their civil rights. But, those children have no vote... and they
are expendable.
Like the Jews in Germany. They had no rights, they didn't matter, and they were expendable.
All this in the name of "kinder, gentler, compassionate" ? Since when to gays have the right to establish gay tyranny over
our society - including the children? And schools? And free speech? and American Families?
"gay rights" is just the latest attack on American society. The same stupid, inane arguments they always use, can apply to that org
that demands man-boy legitimacy. Next it will be multiple spouses. And getting married to cars and animals.
Gay "occupiers" were throwing condoms at young Catholic school girls. What the hell ? How about the civil rights of those children? The parents?
Harrassment and intimidation is FINE with libs, as long as they are the Nazis in charge. Then, when THEY decide that other's are to be denied their civil rights...
well, they just blabber and justify it with some kind of slur about wall street, or "the man".
So, there ya go, they don't care at all. If libs cared about civil righrts, they wouldn't be against building a factory in S. Carolina,
because they are a right to work state. Civil rights is equal people being treated equally, and having the same freedom. The color of peoples' skin is
incidental, is of no consequence in the grand scheme of American Freedom.
Changing the mores of our entire American society is of GREAT consequence. The perverted, warped attraction to the same sex is an unnatural
incidence in nature. It it were the "norm", then we'd have no population explosion problem - hell, we'd have no population.
You can see far more clearly now, of what some of us have been saying now. It isn't just gay bs... it's global warming and taxing activities, to get money
to buy allegiance from those who want a free ride in society, with no responsibilites nor consequences.
It's going after God, and Christians, and going after the churches. It's going after free speech, and going after the money if they decide that somebody
has enough and should give the rest up.
It's the undermining of our 2nd Amendment. Why? Because it's there. The same warped fools who demand "gay rights and gay freedom", are the same ones
who want to deny freedom to others, and deny them their 2nd Amendment rights. And no matter what you say, or what you do, they will find a way to criminalize it,
and fine it, and control it.
It's the undermining of the family, of the parents' rights to raise and teach their children in their own ways. It's an all out assault on our American culture of freedom and independence. Libs want to turn everything upside down and inside out... just to own and control whatever it is they can own and control.
-
Thank God you're a small small portion of America
-
Thank God you're a small small portion of America
You read that?
-
Thank God you're a small small portion of America
You read that?
You read that?
I skimmed
-
Bunker said:
in the eyes of perverts being queer is okay.
i will borrow this from another blog
and for the ignorant the word he in the mentioned quote means Jesus.
it's a shame that we live in a day and age where right is wrong and wrong is right. but that is only in the minds of those with small brains.
.... lol
You guys are getting past pathetic into funny
-
I love the Republican field... IF unemployment keeps dropping it wont matter who the Republicans put up.
IF it is Santorum or Gingrich.... neither of those two will win the moderate independents or women.
Romney/Rubio has the best chance and even that is suspect once the left start the class warfare attack lines linking Romney with being out of touch wall street guy.
Keep it up with the infighting.... this is going to be interesting money lost on infighting just to lose in the general election and further alienate the public from government.
-
And obamao and Higgardly didn't "infight"
hah.
-
Gay marriage has majority support now, according to Gallup.
Gay marriage has majority support now, according to Gallup.
Maybe those issues will do better at the ballot box in the future.
At any rate now we can watch the president backpedal...
WSS
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login