Cross another hypocrite off the list

[Downthestretch55]

Originally Posted by Cardus

I love liberals. All you have to do is let them open their mouths, and they will reveal their idiocy. For instance, one of my favorite people in America is Howard Dean. I love listening to him speak! I know that he will embarrass himself. (Well, he should be embarrassed by his drivel.)

Somerfrost might become my second most favorite person in America.

People are equal under the law. However, you cannot compare people who live with one another with married couples. Apples and oranges. Why? Marriage is defined by a union of man and woman. There is nothing wrong with that definition, just as there is nothing wrong with not permitting those who are not man and woman choosing to live together not to receive the same legal, and economic, acknowledgments.

When you juxtapose "Jim Crow" laws with the idea that a majority of Americans oppose gay marriage and are subjecting people to second-class status -- and by definition gay marriage cannot exist -- then I know you have a weak argument.

And please, Downthestretch, leave Matt Sheppard out of this debate; perhaps you should acknowledge all of the horrific tales of NAMBLA types torturing young boys that are not reported by the "enlightened" media, but need to be exposed by intellectually honest columnists like Michelle Malkin. Where are those stories -- Malkin's work is court-documneted -- treated with the same exposure as that of a Matthew Sheppard incident?

Now that is hypocrisy.

Cardus,
Talk about apples and oranges!
All I said was that I wished for Matthew Sheppard to RIP.
I said nothing about NAMBLA.
Twist, twist, twist and spin.
As Danzig stated, ALL people should share the same rights. I agree.
Tell me, who do you think is undeserving?

[Downthestretch55]

Originally Posted by Cardus

Oh, come on. Placing Matthew Sheppard in that post isn't loaded? That was a random line?

All people, by law, do share the same rights. All married people have the same rights.

Cardus,
Go back and read what I said. Matthew loved, others hated.
Am I wrong?
Now about all people sharing the same rights...are you "qualifying" that premise by saying that those that are married have the same rights, or ALL people?
You might have just defined hypocracy...but I'll let you sort it out.
the question remains..."who is undeserving of rights"?
And why?

[Downthestretch55]

Originally Posted by Cardus

How do you know that Matthew "loved?" Close personal friend?

Or, because he was gay, it is assumed that he "loved?" Maybe he was a miserable person who happened to be gay.

Cardus,
Those that murdered Matthew demonstrated hatred...is this not correct?
Again, you didn't answer the questions I asked.
1) Who should have their rights denied?
2) Why do you believe so?

[Downthestretch55]

Originally Posted by Cardus

And some murderers do not demonstrate hatred?

Your point????
Your answers to the other two questions????