Senate Confirms New Lesbian Federal Judge

Fantastic news! As long as gay people keep infiltrating prominent positions in society, gay marriage will be a future certainty. What are your thoughts on this?

i only believe in traditional  biblical marriage.

that's why i have 8 wives 3 of which i inherited from dead brothers.

Trying out a new gimmick, I seeJML897

Indeed. I should change my sig and avatar to match.

i only believe in traditional  biblical marriage.

that's why i have 8 wives 3 of which i inherited from dead brothers.

Riverwolf007

Can I buy one of your daughters?

I have some really fat cattle we can trade.

[QUOTE="JML897"]Trying out a new gimmick, I seemoneymatterz

Indeed. I should change my sig and avatar to match.

And? Good for her. Gay marriage should be legal, whether judges are gay or straight. 

[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]

i only believe in traditional  biblical marriage.

that's why i have 8 wives 3 of which i inherited from dead brothers.

br0kenrabbit

Can I buy one of your daughters?

I have some really fat cattle we can trade.

it would be a sin to marry outside the family.

And? Good for her. Gay marriage should be legal, whether judges are gay or straight. 

meatgrinderz

Spot-on my dude. And we should care if judges are gay because they're more likely to rule on the side of gay marriage and such. In fact, we should force non-gay judges out (through elections, slander, or other) until gay marriage is reality.

Why are you so bitter, tc?dave123321

the election was months ago, man

[QUOTE="dave123321"]Why are you so bitter, tc?Aljosa23

the election was months ago, man

What election?

Why are you so bitter, tc?dave123321

[QUOTE="meatgrinderz"]

And? Good for her. Gay marriage should be legal, whether judges are gay or straight. 

moneymatterz

Spot-on my dude. And we should care if judges are gay because they're more likely to rule on the side of gay marriage and such. In fact, we should force non-gay judges out (through elections, slander, or other) until gay marriage is reality.

only if we are closely related, anything further out than 1st cousins and forget it.

it would be a sin to marry outside the family.

Riverwolf007

k so I just take ur $hit and enslave ur womens like The Bible says I can since we aren't related.

As long as gay people keep infiltrating prominent positions in society

moneymatterz

Why are you so bitter, tc?dave123321

I'm not bitter. Perhaps I just have a way of forcing myself down your throat.

She needs to praise Jesus more.

hey tc, to hell with tolerance right? Who needs laws that protect the peoples right to equal treatment. After all, a small government can't exist unless it's socially oppressive.

I guess it's in gods court now. Oh I do hope he isn't in a vengeful mood.

hey tc, to hell with tolerance right? Who needs laws that protect the peoples right to equal treatment. After all, a small government can't exist unless it's socially oppressive.

SirWander

Already got some: 14th Amendment, Civil Rights Act. That's more than enough as it is. 

[QUOTE="meatgrinderz"]

And? Good for her. Gay marriage should be legal, whether judges are gay or straight. 

moneymatterz

Spot-on my dude. And we should care if judges are gay because they're more likely to rule on the side of gay marriage and such. In fact, we should force non-gay judges out (through elections, slander, or other) until gay marriage is reality.

 What are your thoughts on this?

moneymatterz

I think I'm gonna praise Jesus.

[QUOTE="moneymatterz"]

[QUOTE="meatgrinderz"]

And? Good for her. Gay marriage should be legal, whether judges are gay or straight. 

ghoklebutter

Spot-on my dude. And we should care if judges are gay because they're more likely to rule on the side of gay marriage and such. In fact, we should force non-gay judges out (through elections, slander, or other) until gay marriage is reality.

You know what I said is exactly how you think. Given the option of equally qualified gay jude vs straight judge, you would pick the gay one. Why? In hopes that the gay agenda becomes more socially acceptable and so they can use their power on the bench to rule in favor of gays.

[QUOTE="ghoklebutter"][QUOTE="moneymatterz"]

Spot-on my dude. And we should care if judges are gay because they're more likely to rule on the side of gay marriage and such. In fact, we should force non-gay judges out (through elections, slander, or other) until gay marriage is reality.

moneymatterz

You know what I said is exactly how you think. Given the option of equally qualified gay jude vs straight judge, you would pick the gay one. Why? In hopes that the gay agenda becomes more socially acceptable and so they can use their power on the bench to rule in favor of gays.

[QUOTE="ghoklebutter"][QUOTE="moneymatterz"]

Spot-on my dude. And we should care if judges are gay because they're more likely to rule on the side of gay marriage and such. In fact, we should force non-gay judges out (through elections, slander, or other) until gay marriage is reality.

moneymatterz

You know what I said is exactly how you think. Given the option of equally qualified gay jude vs straight judge, you would pick the gay one. Why? In hopes that the gay agenda becomes more socially acceptable and so they can use their power on the bench to rule in favor of gays.

[QUOTE="dave123321"]Why are you so bitter, tc?moneymatterz

I'm not bitter. Perhaps I just have a way of forcing myself down your throat.

[QUOTE="ghoklebutter"][QUOTE="moneymatterz"]

Spot-on my dude. And we should care if judges are gay because they're more likely to rule on the side of gay marriage and such. In fact, we should force non-gay judges out (through elections, slander, or other) until gay marriage is reality.

moneymatterz

You know what I said is exactly how you think. Given the option of equally qualified gay jude vs straight judge, you would pick the gay one. Why? In hopes that the gay agenda becomes more socially acceptable and so they can use their power on the bench to rule in favor of gays.

[QUOTE="moneymatterz"]

What are your thoughts on this?

theone86

I think I'm gonna praise Jesus.

Humans won't be able to hide behind Jesus forever. Sooner or latter god is going to stop listening to his hippie half-breed son and then the smack down is going to come. Oh yes it will.

I think we're missing the bigger issue here, which is that this judge is a WOMAN. Why couldn't Obama have nominated a nice gay man? Why does he always have to pander to women by giving them prominent roles in society and such? Now we have to pay for this woman's birth control with my tax moneyiez.-Sun_Tzu-

I think we're missing the bigger issue here, which is that this judge is a WOMAN. Why couldn't Obama have nominated a nice gay man? Why does he always have to pander to women by giving them prominent roles in society and such? Now we have to pay for this woman's birth control with my tax moneyiez.-Sun_Tzu-

Good point while this woman is in the courtroom somewhere a man has gone hungry because he has no woman in his kitchen. People don't think about these kinds of consequences and their lack of caring absolutely sickens me.

As long as she upholds the constitution then good.

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"]I think we're missing the bigger issue here, which is that this judge is a WOMAN. Why couldn't Obama have nominated a nice gay man? Why does he always have to pander to women by giving them prominent roles in society and such? Now we have to pay for this woman's birth control with my tax moneyiez.ghoklebutter

Thanks Maobama

LOL how do you know they were equally qualified? maybe the lesbian judge was MORE qualified? or is that not possible in your realm of thinking? meatgrinderz

That's why I said in my scenario that they are equally qualified. Perhaps math/science escapes you, but there is a such thing as holding variables constant to isolate the effect of, in this case, a single characteristic (sexuality).

Nope, sorry. It's fun to assume that you know everyone's views, but sadly it often doesn't work. A judge's sexual orientation has nothing to do with his/her competence, so I don't care about it.ghoklebutter

You do care about it. Because you perceive that you'll get some benefit out of an option between two equally qualified/competent judges who only differ in their sexual persuasion. By you siding with the gay judge (which you would) you'd get a feeling that strides can be made to more social acceptance of the gay culture and/or the holy grail that is gay marriage.

I think we're missing the bigger issue here, which is that this judge is a WOMAN. Why couldn't Obama have nominated a nice gay man? Why does he always have to pander to women by giving them prominent roles in society and such? Now we have to pay for this woman's birth control with my tax moneyiez.-Sun_Tzu-

op is a mean name. Rich3232

Which one?

[QUOTE="-Sun_Tzu-"]I think we're missing the bigger issue here, which is that this judge is a WOMAN. Why couldn't Obama have nominated a nice gay man? Why does he always have to pander to women by giving them prominent roles in society and such? Now we have to pay for this woman's birth control with my tax moneyiez.TruthMinister

Good point while this woman is in the courtroom somewhere a man has gone hungry because he has no woman in his kitchen. People don't think about these kinds of consequences and their lack of caring absolutely sickens me.

You do care about it. Because you perceive that you'll get some benefit out of an option between two equally qualified/competent judges who only differ in their sexual persuasion. By you siding with the gay judge (which you would) you'd get a feeling that strides can be made to more social acceptance of the gay culture and/or the holy grail that is gay marriage.

moneymatterz

[QUOTE="meatgrinderz"]LOL how do you know they were equally qualified? maybe the lesbian judge was MORE qualified? or is that not possible in your realm of thinking? moneymatterz

That's why I said in my scenario that they are equally qualified. Perhaps math/science escapes you, but there is a such thing as holding variables constant to isolate the effect of, in this case, a single characteristic (sexuality).

You do care about it. Because you perceive that you'll get some benefit out of an option between two equally qualified/competent judges who only differ in their sexual persuasion. By you siding with the gay judge (which you would) you'd get a feeling that strides can be made to more social acceptance of the gay culture and/or the holy grail that is gay marriage.

moneymatterz

Oops. It looks like I didn't make myself clear, so I'll repeat myself: "A judge's sexual orientation has nothing to do with his/her competence, so I don't care about it."

See, I even underlined it and made it bold! Would you like me to make it red as well? Or perhaps would a color less harsh on the eyes be better? 

In any case, I hope you pay attention to what I have to say. 

Oops. It looks like I didn't make myself clear, so I'll repeat myself: "A judge's sexual orientation has nothing to do with his/her competence, so I don't care about it."

See, I even underlined it and made it bold! Would you like me to make it red as well? Or perhaps would a color less harsh on the eyes be better? 

In any case, I hope you pay attention to what I have to say. 

 ghoklebutter

[QUOTE="moneymatterz"]

You do care about it. Because you perceive that you'll get some benefit out of an option between two equally qualified/competent judges who only differ in their sexual persuasion. By you siding with the gay judge (which you would) you'd get a feeling that strides can be made to more social acceptance of the gay culture and/or the holy grail that is gay marriage.

Aljosa23

Nothing wrong a "what do I get out of it" mentality. Humans are hard-wired that way. I take issue with people who try to pretend otherwise (ghokebutler).

Oops. It looks like I didn't make myself clear, so I'll repeat myself: "A judge's sexual orientation has nothing to do with his/her competence, so I don't care about it."

See, I even underlined it and made it bold! Would you like me to make it red as well? Or perhaps would a color less harsh on the eyes be better? 

In any case, I hope you pay attention to what I have to say. 

 ghoklebutter

Perhaps math/science escapes you, but there is a such thing as holding variables constant to isolate the effect of, in this case, a single characteristic (sexuality).

He has a habit of projecting his thoughts on to others. It's quite adorable, actually.

Aljosa23

Bet you're quite adorable yourself. Wouldn't mind drooling over one of your pics. ;)

[QUOTE="moneymatterz"]

[QUOTE="meatgrinderz"]LOL how do you know they were equally qualified? maybe the lesbian judge was MORE qualified? or is that not possible in your realm of thinking? meatgrinderz

That's why I said in my scenario that they are equally qualified. Perhaps math/science escapes you, but there is a such thing as holding variables constant to isolate the effect of, in this case, a single characteristic (sexuality).

Because gay people happen to be the most vitriolic vocal agenda-pushing minority out there. It's religious discrimination to allow gay marriage. It discriminates because marriage is a religious ceremony.

[QUOTE="Aljosa23"]

[QUOTE="moneymatterz"]

You do care about it. Because you perceive that you'll get some benefit out of an option between two equally qualified/competent judges who only differ in their sexual persuasion. By you siding with the gay judge (which you would) you'd get a feeling that strides can be made to more social acceptance of the gay culture and/or the holy grail that is gay marriage.

moneymatterz

Nothing wrong a "what do I get out of it" mentality. Humans are hard-wired that way. I take issue with people who try to pretend otherwise (ghokebutler).

I hope this is easier for you to read:

"A judge's sexual orientation has nothing to do with his/her competence, so Idon't care about it."