FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.
Posted on 06/29/2015 12:46:16 PM PDT by Kaslin
Agree.
I don’t think you understand how much heterosexual support homosexuals have in the USA. Just like the amount of white support for Obama
I don’t think you understand how much heterosexual support homosexuals have in the USA.
_______________
that is so true. Recently went to a training seminar. there was a young effeminate man, a nice enough kid, being playful and dramatic during a demonstration.
The comments on the periphery made by all the women with big smiles were: isn’t he adorable, he is so sweet, I just love him.
I found those comments frankly demeaning and infantilizing to the young man who lapped it up. We live in a bizarre world.
A friend of mine brought that up yesterday.
I'd say your prediction is a sound one.
FReepmail me to subscribe to or unsubscribe from the SCOTUS ping list.
I think you’re right.
It is probably correct. For one, only about 1 to 3% of the population identifies as "gay." For another, being "gay" is about a lifestyle more than a sexual orientation. And that lifestyle does not include monogamy, which seems to be very rare among homosexuals, especially male homosexuals.
We’ve known that the SC is a political institution since FDRs time. Yet, no GOP strategy has been invented to get around Democrat obstinacy in appointing a conservative. We have to appoint a stealth candidate who later turns out to be a lefty because they control the academes and the ABA. Yet the left gets to appoint radicals even Obama’s latest appointments were unopposed and there was no filibuster against them.
Obama admitted that he’d appoint a Souter or a Breyer himself. The list that Obama perused and considered for appointment is a who’s who of liberal jurisprudence, much of it radical. We knew that Sotomayor and Kagan weren’t going to issue legal opinions, but political ones. Yet they get the votes. Why?
A story in Tuesday’s papers says no county clerks in TX have yet to voice any opposition at all to their new tasks. They are probably thinking of the new revenue source.
Two of their biggest boosters come from “conservative” states of UT and SC, Orrin Grant Hatch and Loveable Lindsey Graham.
You’d be surprise how much monogamy means when there’s a joint tax return option awaiting, instead of the higher amount “single” designation.
Oddly, no Bush appointee sided with Anthony and His Friends in the decision.
Already happening and when has the MSM told the true story of Gay Pride parades or the devastating lives of children in same sex marriages?
Civil unions in Illinois were miniscule. It was never about legal protections, but about attacking Christianity and destroying the family. Only the state, that’s the goal.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.