sarki dinle
klip izle
porno izle
porno

Bingo. Fundamental civil rights should never be decided at the behest of the people. The majority has no right to either give or deny rights to the minority. That very concept of legal equality is the very foundation of our country. To even hint at allowing a group of people to vote on the rights of another group of people is not only unconstitutional, it’s patently un-American.

“The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts. One’s right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections.” — Justice Robert H. Jackson (1892-1954), U. S. Supreme Court Justice
West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 US 624, 1943

“What…The…?”

Believe me, folks, not all Texans are brain damaged from excess neurotrophic chemical use, just some of the more prominent.

So the rest of you vote them into public office just to play a prank on the rest of us? Well, knock it off.

seslisohbet seslichat sesli sohbet sesli chat

What other stance on anything has he ever offered? This man illustrates the deficiencies of the Texas public school system and the results of Bush’s meddling in “edumacation.” Believe me, folks, not all Texans are brain damaged from excess neurotrophic chemical use, just some of the more prominent. After all, Longnecks (local beer) and the proximity of the Mexican border make for a potent combination of drugs.

Has anyone told the homophobes that gays want to marry in order to have a partner?

They don’t understand that. According to their belief system you’re only gay during the time your pooper-hole is actually occupied by somebody else’s wee-wee. As soon as it’s removed, you’re straight again and can go back to your family. And BJ’s don’t even count, provided you don’t know the guy’s name.

At least one. We did.

I gotta say zuch, that dude you married is really goofy looking. Cheers. :D

I don’t think culberson realizes that “Homosexual Behavior” is already legal thanks to Lawrence v. Texas.

As far as I can tell, Republicans understand the law about as well as they understand science, economics or diplomacy.

Second, I’m more reminded of Sarah Palin’s “We’re ill about this” response to Katie Couric last fall.

That only a very few people are discriminated against is hardly any absolution from the crime of discrimination.

Bingo.

And congrats!

[T]he trolls have tried to use it before. They seem to think that the fact that only a few thousand gay people were in relationships and at the stage in their relationships where they wanted to be married, for the brief time that they were legally allowed to be married in California, constitutes proof that this is a non-issue.

I wonder how many heterosexual couples applied for marriage licenses during that same time period…

At least one. We did. And I’m proud and glad to say that we got married at a time when this ceremony was available to all and sundry who wanted to do so.

FWIW though, it really doesn’t matter if few, most, or all those wanting to get married are gay. That only a very few people are discriminated against is hardly any absolution from the crime of discrimination. The majority doesn’t get discriminated against, as the Carolene Products famous footnote alludes to.

Cheers,

Oh, the actual Magna Carta is at the Reagan Library. Maybe the Republican Congress should take a field trip and start with the basics, since they can’t interpret our legal documents worth a tinkers damn!