Glad to hear that after much maligned by the mainstream media, two prominent backers of gay marriage refuse to yield in supporting groups and individuals who promote causes and ideals near and dear to them:
In interviews with National Review Online, Koch executives responded to the incident and pledged to “not stop” supporting free-enterprise initiatives, even as opponents attempt to sully the Koch name and the groups that brothers David and Charles Koch, the company’s co-owners, support. They also noted that David Koch and the governor have never met or spoken.
“With the Left trying to intimidate the Koch brothers to back off of their support for freedom and signaling to others that this is what happens if you oppose the administration and its allies, we have no choice but to continue to fight,” says Richard Fink, the executive vice president of Koch Industries. “We will not step back at all. We firmly believe that economic freedom has benefited the overwhelming majority of society, including workers, who earn higher wages when you have open and free markets. When government grows as it has with the Bush and Obama administrations, that is what destroys prosperity.”
Emphasis added. Jane Mayer notwithstanding, seems the Koch Brothers are motivated by a desire to make the world a better place. John Hinderaker who alerted me to the piece quoted above finds it
. . . remarkable that at this late date, when Communism and socialism have been wholly discredited around the world, businessmen who run one of the world’s most respected companies, have created many thousands of jobs and vast amounts of wealth, and have paid taxes in amounts that are incomprehensible to the rest of us, are demonized for pointing out the obvious benefits of free enterprise.
Indeed.
Anyone find this somewhat, ‘Liebermanesque’? I mean we have a pair of billionairs who support
1. decriminalize drugs,
2. legalize gay marriage,
3. repeal the Patriot Act,
4. end the police state,
5. cut defense spending.
and yet they’re being demonized by the left for supporting steps to control the government spending.
Tell me Paula, Dooms, Counterfail, why do you oppose gay marriage supporters?
Damn, Livewire. You beat me to it.
The one notion above all others that is bankrupting our country is the one that someone else ought to pay for our health care.
Everything else is detail.
V, great point.
I tie it in with a theory of my own, that Big Government supporters are infantilized people (whiners) looking for the perfect Mommy-Daddy they never had. “Take care of me! Give to me for free! You owe me! Love me and care for me, just for my being here! I shouldn’t have to do or be anything to earn it!”
That stuff is true, in one relationship and one time of life: The parent-baby relationship. As adults, these people still want it. But, as adults, they band together to take over the government and compel others tyrannically, thus destroying others’ life / liberty / property.
Or, ILC, they were infantilized by their parents, who never required anything of them, and have gravitated to the Obama Party, which believes people should get preferential treatment based on minority status.
Why is religion a protected class?
Why do you hate gay marriage supporters Dooms?
Why do you support religious bigots?
I’m not supporting you Dooms, and your clear bigotry against religion is evident.
As to your question #7 don’t let the big words of the First Ammendment daunt you. The make a version with pictures.
Lol, you do realize the first amendment speaks to protection from the government. Being a protected class means no one can discriminate against you. So you’re cute little answer fails to address his question.
aj, you do realize that the lack of discrimination is hardwired elsewhere in the document.
i’d also point out that it’s pretty clear that people of faith are discriminated against. Heck, look at Doom’s stupid little rant. it’s pretty clear his hatred and fear of anyone who doesn’t worship him is allowed.
The first ammendment protects the right of Dooms to make an ass of himself.
No where in the constitution is religion made a “protected class”. The government cannot hinder it, but being elevated to a protected class offers a lot more protection than what the constitution offers. Your post still fails in that regard.
Why is religion a protected class?
Why should homosexuality be, when examples such as Jim McGreevey, “Bishop” Gene Robinson, and Anne Heche demonstrate that sexual orientation is fluid and easily changeable when one tires of one’s previous sex partners? Even the latest Hollywood throwaway LGBT film, The Kids Are All Right, shows how gays and lesbians can easily have relationships and sex with the opposite gender.