Comments on: The Personal Validation Argumentfor State Recognition of Same-Sex Marriage

By: bob (aka boob)

bob (aka boob) — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 22:53:40 +0000

if you knew how to read, you would see that i made actual arguments and didn’t simply resort to insults and “playing schoolmarm.”

By: Peter Hughes

Peter Hughes — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 16:36:16 +0000

#30 – LW, it is proof positive that when libtards can’t engage in a battle of wits, they have to resort to infantile prattle.

Of course, it’s partially my fault that I chose to fight a battle of wits with an unarmed boob.

Regards,
Peter H.

By: The Livewire

The Livewire — Fri, 06 Mar 2009 12:21:50 +0000

And again, bob is reduced to insults and playing schoolmarm.

Which coming from him would be funny, were it not so pathetic.

By: bob (aka boob)

bob (aka boob) — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 23:36:29 +0000

oh, and livewire: not knowing how to spell “argument” is not a typo. htis is a typo.

By: bob (aka boob)

bob (aka boob) — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 23:35:45 +0000

no, peter, it’s your fault that you’re so dense.

By: Peter Hughes

Peter Hughes — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 16:05:15 +0000

#14 – “actually, peter, my point is perfectly clear and coherent. youâ€™re apparently too dumb to understand it.”

So in other words, it’s my fault that you are too ignorant to actually put together a clear thought process?

Try again.

Regards,
Peter H.

By: arturo fernandez

arturo fernandez — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 15:44:44 +0000

“Thank goodness arturo is here to tell us Gryphâ€™s opinions. Oh, how I cannot survive without that.”

GPW is either lying about Michael Barone not believing in “validation through government.” Or Michael Barone is only interestested in the government validating his kind. So conservatives are liars. And you ILC obviously have nothing useful to add, like you said at the beginning, so keep your promise and shut up.

By: The Livewire

The Livewire — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 12:03:40 +0000

See bob, it’s called a typo. I have to use IE at work, no spell check like safari.

But you intentionally don’t use capitalization and correct English. And make a typo of your own in your juvenile attempt to prove yourself surperior to everyone else, making you look more the fool.

And the classic canard of “I’ve made pleanty of arguments, look them up.” *yawn*

By: bob (aka boob)

bob (aka boob) — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 11:45:45 +0000

funny how you all accuse me of being stupid about eight times a day, but then if i correct someone else’s evidence of stupidity, i’m accused of arrogance.

By: ThatGayConservative

ThatGayConservative — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 10:02:15 +0000

i think â€œargumentâ€ is the word youâ€™re looking for, livewire.

As if we didn’t know you were an arrogant bastard as it is.

if do a little research on this blog, youâ€™ll see that iâ€™ve articulated plenty of reasons for gay marriage, FYI.

And lazy to boot.

By: ILoveCapitalism

ILoveCapitalism — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 07:54:50 +0000

Thank goodness arturo is here to tell us Gryphâ€™s opinions. Oh, how I cannot survive without that.

By: arturo fernandez

arturo fernandez — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 06:55:23 +0000

So Michael Barone doesn’t believe in “validation through government”? He doesn’t believe government should validate “the heterosexual ideal” by keeping marriage between a man and a woman? He doesn’t believe government should validate a child’s need to be raised “by his mother and father”? Conservatives are such liars.

By: bob (aka boob)

bob (aka boob) — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 03:57:25 +0000

if *you

By: bob (aka boob)

bob (aka boob) — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 03:57:03 +0000

i think “argument” is the word you’re looking for, livewire.

and i think i’m allowed to give my opinion as to why i disagree with a particular opinion on gay marriage without being obligated to then give a ten-point plan for gay marriage.

if do a little research on this blog, you’ll see that i’ve articulated plenty of reasons for gay marriage, FYI.

By: The_Livewire

The_Livewire — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 03:10:16 +0000

and if bob thinks…

but then bob’s one of those who can’t make an arguement for it, just demonising those who disagree w/him

By: bob (aka boob)

bob (aka boob) — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 02:58:04 +0000

and if *he thinks…

By: bob (aka boob)

bob (aka boob) — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 02:57:34 +0000

and if thinks they do exist, that means he is assuming he knows the motives of other people.

newsflash: he doesn’t.

By: bob (aka boob)

bob (aka boob) — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 02:56:48 +0000

my point (for the denser among us) is that GPW acts as though there are tons of people out there fighting for marriage solely because they want some sort of vindication from the gov’t. my point is that these people don’t exist — at least not in large numbers.

By: bob (aka boob)

bob (aka boob) — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 02:54:57 +0000

actually, peter, my point is perfectly clear and coherent. you’re apparently too dumb to understand it.

By: ThatGayConservative

ThatGayConservative — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 01:54:29 +0000

this is a total straw man. marriage for validationâ€™s sake is not a strong argument for same-sex marriage, but i have not ever heard anyone claim that it is.

I’ve not seen/heard any evidence to the contrary. And surely folks who support it should have NO problem convincing others why they should too.

But I guess screaming “NIGGER” in WeHo takes less time and energy.