Comments & Feedback

Dave & Daisy: It began on Clinton's watch. Granted Bush made mistakes, but let's get to the bottom line.

— Justine-1230606

If our elected officials were as informed as you are, we wouldn't still be wasting time, money, and resources on the alleged drug war.
Thank you for sharing an informed and intelligent perspective on what is still a touchy subject for the "educated and informed" among us that somehow still get the attention.
If the rest of the country just took a moment to learn the truth, I believe there would be a backlash that our politicians could not ignore, since their only true concern is their career.

A "Tip O' The Hat" to you sir...

— Lost Lou

They do have the equal chance. The smarter species is prevailing.

— Bud Ellenberg

Dave it is quite simple. I am not religous but I do believe in a GOD. I have many gay friends, my wife has a gay cousin and he is as cool as they come. Today I found out that I have a lesbian cousin, I would have never thought it but it is true. I do not feel any different towards her than I did yesterday. But here is the thing, you say to tell why without a religous view why Gay marriage is wrong or why the court's decicion is correct. 1st of all marriage is sacred not just a piece of paper, like most people now believe. In some state if you look closely at the laws sex outside of marriage is illeagal. Sodomy should always be illeagal. Children need both a mother and father, Not a mother and mother or a father and father. Mothers nuture children care for them and baby them, fathers make children strong and tough, teach them to be men, What woman could teach a boy to be a man? What man can teach a girl to be a woman? I have both a son and daughter and I know that without my wife I could not be the father that I am because I do not know what it is like to be a woman. That is my wife's job. My wife could raise my son but she could never teach him to be a man. Then again. Where does it end. Why should gays have the right to marry but Mormans not have the right to multiple marriages. Can a brother and sister marry too? How about 2 women and 1 man? How about a woman and a dog, a man and a sheep? A man, woman , sheep and a dog? What about their civil rights. You see Dave you can not have one without the other. You can not say that gays have the right to get married, because truthfully nobody has the right. The state issues a marriage liscence therefore the state decides whether you marry or not. The state of California said NO to gay marriage. The State said NO to Triad marriages, the state said NO to humans and animals getting married, the state of California said no to multiple marriages. Plain and simple. Sit back and think of everyone's rights not just the gay agenda. They have been givin the right to have civil unions that is something that those people who wish to marry animals don't have. That is a right that pedafiles that want to marry 7 year olds don't have. Think with your own mind for a change and remember that this is an agenda it has nothing to do with civil rights. If you truly believe their agenda then ask any gay activist what they think about 30 year old men marrying 7 year old girls or for them 7 year old boys? What about triad marriages, multi marriages, animal marriages, family marriages, marriages to a statue, or the Sun or Moon. Sounds crazy but so does gay marriage.

— Jorge Alvear

Thomas Jefferson said " Tyranny shall never stand in these United States so long as the whole of the armed populous constitutes a force greater than the regular army".

Alexander Hamilton said "while we can not allow individuals or corporation to maintain private standing armies which could pose a threat to the people or the republic, we can not assume militias controlled by the government will protect the people from the government"

First we should stop the police from murdering people and claiming they died of delusional paranoia in the "war on drugs". Am I the only person who recognizes that city, county & state governments are corporations maintaining standing armies (police) which are often a greater threat to the people than any foreign terrorist will ever be!

Then we should amend the constitution so that the "regular army" which no longer has weapons equivalent to those KEPT by the people from ever being used against the people. Remember WACO?

— Eric-1053918

I am in complete agreement. Well put.

— Linda S. - Ohio

Leave a comment ...

As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.

Stop Tracking

Back To Top