John Adams Posted November 5, 2008 Share Posted November 5, 2008 You have that option. Many people don't. I understand that many people priortize their lives such that they don't have that option. What I'm saying is that I'd home school before trusting the government to educate my daughter. When times have been tough, my wife and I debated selling our house and moving into a small apartment to keep the option. Other people have different priorities. If people choose to trust the government to raise their kids, that's what they do. Hopefully they live in a good district that appropriately thumbs its nose at its overseer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted November 5, 2008 Share Posted November 5, 2008 I understand that many people priortize their lives such that they don't have that option. What I'm saying is that I'd home school before trusting the government to educate my daughter. When times have been tough, my wife and I debated selling our house and moving into a small apartment to keep the option. Other people have different priorities. If people choose to trust the government to raise their kids, that's what they do. Hopefully they live in a good district that appropriately thumbs its nose at its overseer. Again....that is a personal choice that you make. We have made ours Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SageAgainstTheMachine Posted November 5, 2008 Share Posted November 5, 2008 Sabbath is on a Saturday.... Is it? I was raised atheist, I always thought it was Sunday. Well, just change my post to say that those who interpret the Bible literally can't watch college football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elegantelliotoffen Posted November 5, 2008 Share Posted November 5, 2008 "But what about the children!!!!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted November 5, 2008 Share Posted November 5, 2008 So gays shouldn't be able to marry because you're a lousy father who doesn't know how to talk to his kids? Exactly the kind of insight I would expect from a guy who thinks battered women usually deserve what they get. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elegantelliotoffen Posted November 5, 2008 Share Posted November 5, 2008 Exactly the kind of insight I would expect from a guy who thinks battered women usually deserve what they get. But that's only because I don't know how to explain battered women to your son. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted November 5, 2008 Share Posted November 5, 2008 But that's only because I don't know how to explain battered women to your son. Hate to break your heart, but I'm not one to get upset by the childish online comments of a guy who believes it's okay to beat women. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elegantelliotoffen Posted November 5, 2008 Share Posted November 5, 2008 Hate to break your heart, but I'm not one to get upset by the childish online comments of a guy who believes it's okay to beat women. I don't know, you seem pretty upset. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted November 5, 2008 Share Posted November 5, 2008 I don't know, you seem pretty upset. You may be right. I mean, few people can spot an upset person faster than a guy who can justify beating women. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gmac17 Posted November 5, 2008 Share Posted November 5, 2008 currently running on this thread (if you aren't logged in) - all sorts of ads relating to gay marriage. gotta love content targeting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted November 5, 2008 Share Posted November 5, 2008 currently running on this thread (if you aren't logged in) - all sorts of ads relating to gay marriage. gotta love content targeting. The Google thanks you for your support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted November 5, 2008 Share Posted November 5, 2008 So gays shouldn't be able to marry because you're a lousy father who doesn't know how to talk to his kids? WTF are you serious with this comment? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Coli Posted November 5, 2008 Share Posted November 5, 2008 I think you Californians are going to be in for a long legal battle, during which thousands more gays will get "married." The ban doesn't go into effect until the election is certified, and that's not coming for a while (read there are hundreds of thousands of provisional ballots, absentee ballots, etc, to be counted). I really don't think the whim of the people will hold up in court once tens of thousands of people will have their rights infringed upon. You had over 18,000 gay couples married in the five months since they could, probably going to be a mad rush for thousands and thousands more before the election gets certified. Not sure the State can just invalidate all of those marriages. It's one thing to ban these marriages in States who don't already have it, its another to invalidate 25,000 couples' marriages based on the vote of the masses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted November 5, 2008 Share Posted November 5, 2008 I think you Californians are going to be in for a long legal battle, during which thousands more gays will get "married." The ban doesn't go into effect until the election is certified, and that's not coming for a while (read there are hundreds of thousands of provisional ballots, absentee ballots, etc, to be counted). I really don't think the whim of the people will hold up in court once tens of thousands of people will have their rights infringed upon. You had over 18,000 gay couples married in the five months since they could, probably going to be a mad rush for thousands and thousands more before the election gets certified. Not sure the State can just invalidate all of those marriages. It's one thing to ban these marriages in States who don't already have it, its another to invalidate 25,000 couples' marriages based on the vote of the masses. This is the second time the state has voted for the ban. I guess in some ways someone somewhere might consider that "the whim of the people." Maybe the third time will be the charm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted November 5, 2008 Share Posted November 5, 2008 I think you Californians are going to be in for a long legal battle, during which thousands more gays will get "married." The ban doesn't go into effect until the election is certified, and that's not coming for a while (read there are hundreds of thousands of provisional ballots, absentee ballots, etc, to be counted). I really don't think the whim of the people will hold up in court once tens of thousands of people will have their rights infringed upon. You had over 18,000 gay couples married in the five months since they could, probably going to be a mad rush for thousands and thousands more before the election gets certified. Not sure the State can just invalidate all of those marriages. It's one thing to ban these marriages in States who don't already have it, its another to invalidate 25,000 couples' marriages based on the vote of the masses. What do you think LA....do people have a reading problem around here or what. I am admittedly not the brightest or most up to speed person on PPP or anywhere close to it but please read WE DONT CARE IF THEY GET MARRIED......I DONT GAF! I just dont want gay marriage taught to my kids in schools (or any for that matter) that is MY job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted November 5, 2008 Share Posted November 5, 2008 What do you think LA....do people have a reading problem around here or what. I am admittedly not the brightest or most up to speed person on PPP or anywhere close to it but please read WE DONT CARE IF THEY GET MARRIED......I DONT GAF! I just dont want gay marriage taught to my kids in schools (or any for that matter) that is MY job. He hasn't been reading the thread, I suspect. Personally I hope he can harness all his good mojo and carry it into the one thing that will probably make this the best week of his life: the Bills upsetting NE* at Foxboro. Obama-Pelosi-Reid-Bills Upset NE* in Foxboro all in one week? To a Democratic Bills fan, that's gotta be better than porn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted November 5, 2008 Share Posted November 5, 2008 But YOU explained it to them when it was time. And I reserve the right to do the same damn thing. I don't want the government telling me when that discussion should take place. You somehow think this is about me worrying about screwing up my son by teaching him about homosexuality. That's just ridiculous. It has nothing to do with that. It has to do with me doing it on my own terms. If he comes home tomorrow from school and wants to know why his friend has two daddies, then I'LL be the one to explain it to him. Not the government. That's my issue here. Thank you. Perfect post. I dont know how many different ways you can explain it to his ass, but this one seems to me to be the knock out punch. Hey John Adams you're freaking wrong, man!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Coli Posted November 5, 2008 Share Posted November 5, 2008 What do you think LA....do people have a reading problem around here or what. I am admittedly not the brightest or most up to speed person on PPP or anywhere close to it but please read WE DONT CARE IF THEY GET MARRIED......I DONT GAF! I just dont want gay marriage taught to my kids in schools (or any for that matter) that is MY job. You voted for the ban. The ban will invalidate probably 25,000 marriages. The ban wasn't "Banning the teaching about gay marriage to John from Hemet's kids." It was "Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry." EDIT: You people voting for the ban were aware that you were invalidating thousands of legal marriages, right? You know, when you cast your vote to save your kids from reading "My Two Dads." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bills_fan Posted November 5, 2008 Share Posted November 5, 2008 I understand that many people priortize their lives such that they don't have that option. What I'm saying is that I'd home school before trusting the government to educate my daughter. When times have been tough, my wife and I debated selling our house and moving into a small apartment to keep the option. Other people have different priorities. If people choose to trust the government to raise their kids, that's what they do. Hopefully they live in a good district that appropriately thumbs its nose at its overseer. I am completely with you here John. I would cut any luxury and just about every necessity, save the true basics, I have to send my son to a great private school. But understand LA's point...he, as the parent, wants to be the one to explain gay marriage to his son, just like you did for your daughter. No one should tell LA when the appropriate time is for him to explain it to his son, just like nobody told you when to explain it to your daughter. Thats the point, it should be left to the parents. Based upon the comments here, California seems as slimy as NYS when it comes to loopholes. I would not trust NYS with any loophole either, especially if it involved my son, that usurped my parental right to teach my son what I want him to know and when. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted November 5, 2008 Share Posted November 5, 2008 You voted for the ban. The ban will invalidate probably 25,000 marriages. The ban wasn't "Banning the teaching about gay marriage to John from Hemet's kids." It was "Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry." He voted the way he did because of how it affected him and his family, DUH!!! What a bad man John in Hemut is...........Christ!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts