Hugh Hewitt’s new book slams the Fair Tax. I find Hugh wrong about 25% of the time, and this might be one of those times… Rush Limbaugh on Monday’s third hour: if Obama isn’t responsible for the Bay of Pigs,……

In other words, that’s not the definition. The government has no business redefining either term.

Likewise, Perez says they shouldn’t have to settle for anything less than or “unequal” to marriage. Legally, a civil union is largely equal to marriage and this is supported by politicians on the left and right like Palin, Biden, etc. What Perez really means is he’s upset that it’s not the same as marriage.
Well guess what, Nancy, it’s not. And name-calling a mature, thoughtful woman who has shown you no animosity a dumb b___ and a c___ only undermines your own cause. Grow up.

If they do not like what the majority thinks about their disgusting behavior, that is too bad IMHO.Majority rules and they should shut the hell up.

The notion that this freak was allowed to be a judge in a beauty pageant is outrageous and Trump should fire whom ever allowed this moron to sit on the panel.

I am sick and tired of the 2% that call themselves homosexuals shoving their agenda down my throat.
By definition they are abbbynormal and there is no reason that we should have to accommodate their illness.

For the record, I don’t think government should be in the marriage business at all. We’d be better off having everyone use partnership agreements that will get treated better than marriage contracts ever do these days in court, and leave the question of marriage to religious institutions. No-fault divorce destroyed any argument that government should protect the sanctity of marriage, and unless I’ve missed a deep groundswell for eliminating that, government does more to damage marriage now than it helps.

I’ve made basically the same point here recently and I’m in complete agreement.

From what I understand there are some tax benefits to being married (correct me if I am wrong). If so, is this what it is really all about? Does it all boil down to money as most things do or is this really an “equal rights” issue?

Do homosexuals want equal rights for the state/federal benefits and do certain classes of heterosexuals want to prevent it because it will be a further burden on them (i.e. less money back because of more people married)?

I agree (for now at least) that the government shouldn’t be involved and leave “marriage” up to religion. If this is just about the word “marriage” and being labeled as having equal rights then this all seems pointless.

Does this make sense? I welcome responses and want to understand the underlying issues, arguments, motives etc.

I just had a scary thought…

If a mentally challenged clown like Al Franken can win a Senate seat, is this mentally challenged clown far behind?

TheMightyMonarch on April 23, 2009 at 12:02 PM

Barney Frank.

If a mentally challenged clown like Al Franken can win a Senate seat, is this mentally challenged clown far behind?

while Perez mostly whines about his feelings.

This is the crux of the entire “gay agenda”, Ed.

You do realize this…don’t you?

He’s an attention whore, and there’s only one way to deal with attention whores – ignore them.

This is about “thought” control … the Miss USA pageant is closed to anyone that believes as Prejean. Either lie, pass or don’t apply.

Or perhaps a question on choice for prospective Ms. America is next? Girls remember, there is only one acceptable answer.

My question is why did Perez Hilton ask this question of Ms. California? Did he see her bio, know she was a Christian and go, hmmmm, this might be really good? Perez should be careful bandying around the “c” word because it actually applies only to one individual at the pagent, and it isn’t Ms. California or any of the contestants.

I would vote for gay marriage. But this is NOT the way for those promoting gay marriage as a political option to make their point. The question was BS from the start. This just alienates and acts like a wedge.

This is a guy who makes vehemently putting down people who disagree with him his daily bread and butter, and who has singlehandedly turned character assassination into an art form of sorts.

Putting him on the air in front of a national audience is exactly what he wants, and attempting to debate him on issues like this are a complete waste of time.

The only way to turn his loud mouth off is to not give him such and to just ignore anything he has to say.

By the way, Perez(Mario)Hilton should just go back into the closet before he does the gay movement any more harm…He’s a disgusting human being. And that has nothing to do with him being gay….

The biggest reason not to advocate gay marriage: We will save some poor dude from foolishly “marrying” Perez Hilton.

Leave marriage to religious institutions? Wow. Do you really think that solves the problem Ed? Gays will go after them next, you can count on that. The agenda goes far beyond gay marriage.

It works as long as religious freedom is upheld.

If it gets to the point where courts are violating religious freedom in order to accommodate the homosexual view, we have much bigger problems on our hands.

Does Heterosexual marriage benefit society? Yes? Then why shouldn’t society recognize and support it?

I think the real question you should be asking yourself is why you’re equating “society” with “government”. I find the idea of government dictating societal norms distasteful.

Government should be there to protect property and custody rights, nothing more.

Does Heterosexual marriage benefit society? Yes? Then why shouldn’t society recognize and support it?