• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

VOTE AGAINST

deac04 seems like you just want to make a scene without really caring about the law.

If you want to see how it changes the law, read the thread.
 
deac04 seems like you just want to make a scene without really caring about the law.

If you want to see how it changes the law, read the thread.

I read the comments. Those are just folks' opinions. The proposal is very short. The state would acknowledge marriage between one man and one woman.
 
deac04 seems like you just want to make a scene without really caring about the law.

If you want to see how it changes the law, read the thread.

By saying not to encourage keeper I don't care about the law? I am just saying there's no point in arguing with him because it never leads to anything rational, just a lot of hatred. I care about the law, but I won't be stupid about who I argue it with.
 
By saying not to encourage keeper I don't care about the law? I am just saying there's no point in arguing with him because it never leads to anything rational, just a lot of hatred. I care about the law, but I won't be stupid about who I argue it with.

Potential is key word. Hatred? You must have me confused with bobknightfan concerning VP Cheney.
 
By saying not to encourage keeper I don't care about the law? I am just saying there's no point in arguing with him because it never leads to anything rational, just a lot of hatred. I care about the law, but I won't be stupid about who I argue it with.

that was directed toward keeper, sorry
 
NC House speaker acknowledges the amendment will probably be repealed. Good thing he's forcing people to spend time and money fighting it anyway.

http://pulse.ncpolicywatch.org/2012/03/27/tillis-if-amendment-one-passes-it-will-be-repealed/

What gets me is that the whole reason for the amendment (according to them) is "to make it harder to reverse in the future" but the house speaker states that it will be changed in the near future...what a joke and what a waste of time and money.
 
What gets me is that the whole reason for the amendment (according to them) is "to make it harder to reverse in the future" but the house speaker states that it will be changed in the near future...what a joke and what a waste of time and money.

If she believes it will be repealed in 20 years, why the hell did he vote for it? That makes no damn sense.
 
Proposed laws of the land is everybody's business.

Nice way to utterly side-step the question. What business does the government have in legislating who people marry? Why is it any of your business whom someone else marries? That's the question.
 
Nice way to utterly side-step the question. What business does the government have in legislating who people marry? Why is it any of your business whom someone else marries? That's the question.

It is not my business.
 
So, you say it isn't your business....but you are voting to make it your business, by government fiat.

It isn't my business who someone marries as long as it is legal. Just like I don't care how fast you drive as long as it is legal. I don't care what you eat, drink or smoke as long as it is legal.
 
It isn't my business who someone marries as long as it is legal. Just like I don't care how fast you drive as long as it is legal. I don't care what you eat, drink or smoke as long as it is legal.

If you vote against this amendment, gay marriage will still be illegal.

Plus, you'll be protecting women against domestic violence.
 
If you vote against this amendment, gay marriage will still be illegal.

Plus, you'll be protecting women against domestic violence.

A violent attack is a violent attack and will always be against the law. Please.
 
Back
Top