• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Federal government recognizes same-sex marriages in six more states [W:70,126]

Mr.Nick said:
In what universe do you believe I should even acknowledge your stupid ****?
Click to expand...

AGain so you think how the government protects contracts is stupid? why?
who should protect them? are you against legal contracts?
 
AGENT J said:
AGain so you think how the government protects contracts is stupid? why?
who should protect them? are you against legal contracts?
Click to expand...

You ever think you're wrong?

Did that concept even enter your ****ing _____mind?
 
Mr.Nick said:
1.)You ever think you're wrong?
2.)Did that concept even enter your ****ing _____mind?
Click to expand...

1.) me? I havent given you any opinions yet to be wrong, Im discussing facts and trying to find out YOUR solutions lol
2.) of course not since theres currently nothign for me to be wrong about

again

i ask you, do you think how the government protects contracts is stupid, why?
who should protect them(contracts)? are you against legal contracts?

theres nothing here to be wrong about so your strawman fails lol
we are waiting for your answer, thanks
 
AGENT J said:
1.) me? I havent given you any opinions yet to be wrong, Im discussing facts and trying to find out YOUR solutions lol
2.) of course not since theres currently nothign for me to be wrong about

again

i ask you, do you think how the government protects contracts is stupid, why?
who should protect them(contracts)? are you against legal contracts?

theres nothing here to be wrong about so your strawman fails lol
we are waiting for your answer, thanks
Click to expand...

Oh, I have a solution alright.

You're not worthy of a debate.

You tow the progressive line.
 
Mr.Nick said:
I wouldn't do business with labor unions...............
Click to expand...

Nobody asked if you would. However, should the government not enforce contracts between workers and their employers? Because that's essentially what you're arguing when you say "The government has no business in marriage". A marriage is a contract. Services, responsibilities, and priorities are exchanged in them. Does the federal government have no business enforcing that? If so, what other contracts shouldn't it enforce? Adoption papers? Custody papers? Business contracts?
 
Mr.Nick said:
1.)Oh, I have a solution alright.

You're not worthy of a debate.

You tow the progressive line.
Click to expand...

1.) then please present it, we are waiting
2.) you are free to have that opinion but that doesnt answer the question. A failed personal attack is just another dodge. ALso we arent "debating" anything we are wiaiting for your solution to the questions LMAO thank you for further proving you do not understand this topic.
3.) see #2


staying on topic and getting back to the questions.

do you think how the government protects a contracts is stupid, why?
who should protect them(contracts)? are you against legal contracts?
 
AGENT J said:
1.) then please present it, we are waiting
2.) you are free to have that opinion but that doesnt answer the question. A failed personal attack is just another dodge. ALso we arent "debating" anything we are wiaiting for your solution to the questions LMAO thank you for further proving you do not understand this topic.
3.) see #2


staying on topic and getting back to the questions.

do you think how the government protects a contracts is stupid, why?
who should protect them(contracts)? are you against legal contracts?
Click to expand...

I suppose you could go back in the thread and see my position on the topic.

You're probably too lazy tho...

Right..... Just don't miss mamma's dinner - it's good.
 
Mr.Nick said:
I suppose you could go back in the thread and see my position on the topic. You're probably too lazy tho...

Right..... Just don't miss mamma's dinner - it's good.
Click to expand...

1.) we all saw your position hence the questions LMAO, thank you for AGAIN proving you dont know about this topic. Your position is what generated the questions we have. LOL I bet the questions are dodged again.

do you think how the government protects a contracts is stupid, why?
who should protect them(contracts)? are you against legal contracts?
 
AGENT J said:
1.) we all saw your position hence the questions LMAO, thank you for AGAIN proving you dont know about this topic. Your position is what generated the questions we have. LOL I bet the questions are dodged again.

do you think how the government protects a contracts is stupid, why?
who should protect them(contracts)? are you against legal contracts?
Click to expand...


Ok... It's apparent that you value eating and sleeping more than others...
 
Mr.Nick said:
Ok... It's apparent that you value eating and sleeping more than others...
Click to expand...

Translation: you still cant defend your failed solutions and claims. We will continue to wait.
Please let us know when you can, thank you.

what is your solution to the marriage contract and lack of equal rights?
 
Mr.Nick said:
Ok... It's apparent that you value eating and sleeping more than others...
Click to expand...

Apparently you don't bother to look at the details of the laws you object to, otherwise you would be able to cite the constitutional authority the laws claim to be invoking.
 
AGENT J said:
Translation: you still cant defend your failed solutions and claims. We will continue to wait.
Please let us know when you can, thank you.

what is your solution to the marriage contract and lack of equal rights?
Click to expand...

Give me one reason to stone you>

Your flagrant dummy **** and wanna-b pseudo-nonsense wont get you fat...
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
Apparently you don't bother to look at the details of the laws you object to, otherwise you would be able to cite the constitutional authority the laws claim to be invoking.
Click to expand...

Since when do progressives post details?
 
Mr.Nick said:
Give me one reason to stone you>

Your flagrant dummy **** and wanna-b pseudo-nonsense wont get you fat...
Click to expand...

Still no solution huh, we knew that already.
are there any other contracts you want the government to start ignoring?
are there other groups of people who equal rights dont matter to you?
 
AGENT J said:
Still no solution huh, we knew that already.
are there any other contracts you want the government to start ignoring?
are there other groups of people who equal rights dont matter to you?
Click to expand...

Give me one good reason to claim that progressives are high on toilet water.
 
Mr.Nick said:
Give me one good reason to claim that progressives are high on toilet water.
Click to expand...

grouping people all together is also another instant way to make your posts fail lol

again, so what was your solution to the marriage contract again?
are there any other contracts you want the government to start ignoring?
are there other groups of people who equal rights dont matter to you?
 
AGENT J said:
grouping people all together is also another instant way to make your posts fail lol

again, so what was your solution to the marriage contract again?
are there any other contracts you want the government to start ignoring?
are there other groups of people who equal rights dont matter to you?
Click to expand...

Yeah?.....

Where did I ever speak ill of homosexuals?


Sorry, I cant endorse homosexuality - it will never happen.
 
Mr.Nick said:
Yeah?.....

1.) Where did I ever speak ill of homosexuals?
2.)Sorry, I cant endorse homosexuality - it will never happen.
Click to expand...

1.) didnt claim you did in any of my questions but you have many times in your post history, i even have a qoute of you in my sign that proves this fact
2.) never asked you to, nor do you have to

now back to the topic and questions

are you against all legal contracts?
are there any other contracts you want the government to start ignoring?
what is your solution to the marriage contract?
are there other groups of people who's equal rights dont matter to you?
 
AGENT J said:
1.) didnt claim you did in any of my questions but you have many times in your post history, i even have a qoute of you in my sign that proves this fact
2.) never asked you to, nor do you have to

now back to the topic and questions

are you against all legal contracts?
are there any other contracts you want the government to start ignoring?
what is your solution to the marriage contract?
are there other groups of people who's equal rights dont matter to you?
Click to expand...


You claimed a lot of bull**** homie.

No more !'s and 2's either - the just don't work.
 
Mr.Nick said:
1.)You claimed a lot of bull**** homie.

No more !'s and 2's either - the just don't work.
Click to expand...

please point these claims out and then factually prove them to be BS, thanks, my guess is this request will be dodged also because its another posted lie. Each time you dodge these question it further proves you cant defend you claims and just results in another post of yours failing to be supported.

are you against all legal contracts?
are there any other contracts you want the government to start ignoring?
what is your solution to the marriage contract?
are there other groups of people who's equal rights dont matter to you?
 
Peter King said:
Sorry for being Dutch. It is nice to hear that freedom of speech and the world wide web is only there for you and people you want to post here.

If you don't like me posting, don't read my messages/ignore my messages.
Click to expand...

translation: you cant defend your failed and reidiculous post so you deflect and try to use ANOTHER strawman that also fails

hint: never even HINTED that i don't like you posting or that your speech isnt welcome LMAO

ill will ask again since you dodged the question: remind us all again why the word has to be in there? we wait your answer.
 
AGENT J said:
translation: you cant defend your failed and reidiculous post so you deflect and try to use ANOTHER strawman that also fails

hint: never even HINTED that i don't like you posting or that your speech isnt welcome LMAO

ill will ask again since you dodged the question: remind us all again why the word has to be in there? we wait your answer.
Click to expand...

I apologize and will remove my last post, just woke up after a very bad night with heavy bouts of trigeminus neuralgia (which I suffer from) and misread the word "word" with "world". Again, I apologize.

And the word does not have to be in there, somebody states that gay marriage isn't in the constitution and I just responded that not even the word marriage is mentioned there. Not meant much of anything with that to be honest.
 
Peter King said:
I apologize and will remove my last post, just woke up after a very bad night with heavy bouts of trigeminus neuralgia (which I suffer from) and misread the word "word" with "world". Again, I apologize.

And the word does not have to be in there, somebody states that gay marriage isn't in the constitution and I just responded that not even the word marriage is mentioned there. Not meant much of anything with that to be honest.
Click to expand...

LOL it happens
apology 100% accepted AND respect is always earned and given for anybody that admits a mistake, it shows integrity!:thumbs::respekt:

seems we both made mistakes and misunderstood!
you are correct the word does not have to be in there
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom