@MuD3:

We've all been there :p

@sSubZerOo:

I am not saying that at all, and if that's all you got from that then I guess one of us is possibly an idiot. (Seriously, I may not be getting across what I mean) What hypocrisy do you mean, exactly? I thought hypocrisy is when you say one thing, but act not in accordance with that.. what hypocrisy and who? If me, then how?

Gettin nowhere...

Anyway, the reason I brought up segregation is because someone else did.. I demonstrated the misery afflicted to blacks for an imaginable amount of time and the fact is it is different from gays. If you can not see that, you must be either incredibly dumb or blind with bias.

Also, I apologize if I sound rude, I'd hope you not to take it personally.

@toast_burner:

So, you gonna go weed out discrimination with your gang of liberators? Shoot, man, it's an opinion; deal with it. It's not okay to discriminate against gays. It's also not okay to say people can't; free country. Your last post had no point. You just tried to sneak gay marriage into the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and an 1888 SCOTUS decision. And no comparing blacks situation at all to gays' is a straw-man; I'm just showing you how weak.

"One of the founding foundational.." - Hilary Clinton

Democrats are so funny. They get upset when they see politicians lying! Politicians? Lying, you don't say? These guys' jobs are to pander at whoever gives them votes and campaign funds. Shoot, bet people still vote Hilary .

@toast_burner:

Gay marriage is not in there, nor in that Supreme Court decision (not that I've read it, but obviously this wouldn't be an issue if that was the case.) Segregation of gays and blacks are soooooo different. Again, one is discrimination against a race-that was enslaved; shipped in boats and chained! forced to toil under the sun for no pay; in every country, raped women, beaten, for centuries. I understand you must respect the rights of blacks for praising the end of segregation and harking it back to this issue, but they are completely different in their historical contexts and ti doesn't make sense to liken them to the extent you do; they barely overlap. It's effective though-to reconjure up images of oppressed blacks not being allowed to get a sandwich at the counter in order to guilt people into eating up this gay marriage stuff. Effective, but without honor; either that or full of naiveity.

@toast_burner:

It was never a "basic" right... out of the blue everyone's outraged as though something was taken away. Not a basic right, here, in U.S.A. People listed countries here wherein the practice is allowed; why don't gays go those places? Plenty of places looks like to me.... nope. Young kids need something to do, guess.

@toast_burner:

I don't know. I agree it's a bit wrong too deny someone the right to marry in this day in age, but the way it's being handled seems ridiculous; the majority topples all. It's kind of scary so many people and no opinions diverge; I'm actually "sort of" bi, and I still don't think it should be legal on a National scale. If you don't like it, move. I mean, you can't get everything you want; that goes for everyone.
The big problem I have with it is that it may lead to other things like cross-dressers, "equal bathrooms," and all that crap. I don't want to take my son to the toilette and have him ask me why that hairy-bearded lady was in there.

Maybe not "real" damage in a court of law, but that other kind; it's been a while since I read any law theory, I mean the damage that isn't considered physical or to one's property- the damage homosexual and bi-persons claim outlawing gay marriage does. I think Christians receive some damage, too. I guess bygones will be bygones though. Personally, I don't care if they marry or not. I rather they not, but I don't care.