Ditto!

Yes good work, and next year marriage can be expanded to mean as many partners as you want and will be paid for with those free Obama dollars from heaven , oh wait heaven is up, what's that down below place again?

I'm not saying I know lots about any of our representatives or delegates, but really? You're not going to vote for someone simply because she has the decency to let people live how they want to live?

Live and let live.

In my opinion, if you don't want to let others have the sanctity of marriage, then you shouldn't be permitted to marry either. End of story.

what a joke christina. you really think the gov't lets people "live how they want to live?" are you serious. Just another brain dead democrat.

Yes, Kathy and all her Democrat buddies have brought us a structural deficit and high taxes to pay for all their friends who are on the Democrat dole. Think gas prices are high now? Wait til the Dems get done raising the gas tax again, indexing the tax to inflation, and then subjecting gas sales to the sales tax. Yes, Kathy has done so much for us. This is just one more nail in the Maryland coffin. And I thought California was the land of fruits and nuts!!

Factually incorrect, the structural deficit was Ehrlich's gift to O'Malley.

Deficits did not start with Mr. Ehrlich. According to a Sun article in 2002, Mr. Glendening left office with a budget deficit of $500 million (Mr. Glendening's numbers) [Mr. Ehrlich said the deficit was actually $1.7 billion].

What we are repeating is not clear...

It's very clear. We're repeating the oppression of other people. We do it in the middle east. We do it here at home. Generation after generation, humanity and it's leadership fail.

You are absolutely correct Tim. What we are seeing here is the oppression of the middle class and what at one time were traditional American values. Our leadership is failing us at an incredible rate for their own personal gain (O'Malley's Political March). The country continues to pick extreme polar sides so if you live in the state of MD you are doomed to live with the Democratic nonsense due to their massive base of dependent voters. Many currently live in MD only because they have a job here and plan to get out once they retire (see Shrewsbury, PA for example) because, for those folks, the financial and ideological raping continues unabated. This is just one more squeeky wheel riding on the MD Democratic political bus to hell.

Paul: We've been seeing the oppression of the middle class since the early 80's with the introduction of TD Economics. Although we didn't realize it at the time, it was a reasonably fresh concept. We couldn't have known then what we know now (and what many refuse to see, even today).

Yes, I agree there are polar opposites that are just as bad, and we live in a state where it's experienced. You won't get too many arguments from me about O'Malley's reckless spending. Reasonable taxing I'm not against, it's the overtaxing due to irresponsible spending I am strongly against.

The specific thought in mind when I posted the other comment was the social oppression of gays, just another notch in the long line of 'subsets of people' oppressed by humanity over time.

I would have to say that gays don't help their case with the hetero side of society when a guy rollerblades down the street in a G-string and peacock feather hairdo during some Gay Day Parade. Or two girls try to do it on the hood of their car in front of the neighborhood kids, just to show everyone that "Hey, look at me 'cause I'm Gay!". The rest of society really doesn't want to see gays overcompensate in some outlandish way because they are insecure or trying to prove their gayness to the world.

Paul, I would admit that the g-string, peacock feather does occasionally happen. And there are some in the gay community who dislike those actions as much as you do. I would even venture to say there are more who dislike it than who do it. So, to use that as a stereotype that is something ALL gays do is just utterly misrepresenting who the gay community is. The is diversity in the gay community just like there is diversity in the Christian or heterosexual community or any other community for that matter.

Paul: No arguments from me there, but as in the rest of society - often times it's easy to let a few bad eggs...

@ Brandon We are repeating many ancient cultures who thought morality could be revised by humans. All of them failed. Greece, Rome, Sodom and Gomorah. The humanists look the other way because their way "feels good" to them. In the long run they all fall to pieces. Then these reality deniers try to blame the people who wanted to keep society together in the first place.

When the pet alligator gets married, he will be paying his federal taxes as "married - filing jointly".

I believe you forgot to include MAMBLA. Happy Hour starts at 5!

Brandon, I was right with you until you felt the need to resort to the name calling at the end of your post. Just couldn't stick to the high road?

Evets, there is no name calling in my post. Maybe you could point it out. My phrase, "sophomoric, middle-school condemnation of your neighbors" is not directed toward a person and it is not a name. it refers directly toward specific behavior. It you are talking about something else I've said, please point it out.

Hmmmm. Since one definition of 'normal' means to adhere to the median or average, and the average person is likely heterosexual, then you have no problem with gay or lesbian sexual activity being described as 'abnormal?" That would after all refer to a specific behavior, and it certainly is not a name.

left-handedness occurs regularly although to a minor degree compared to right-handedness. This is called diversity, not abnormal.

No, since it deviates from the norm (i.e.: right-handedness), it is abnormal. And since it deviates from the norm, it can also accurately be called deviant. I would not apply amy of these terms to gays or lesbians (except perhaps in a clinical discussion of statistacal data), nor would I use "sophomoric" or "middle school" to describe people who espouse opinions different from mine. You of course are wise enough to know that such language used in debate or forensics is termed an ad hominem attack, meaning to attack the person rather than the position.

At any rate, thanks for the opportunity to present my views here.

I would disagree with you on your attempt to use statistics do define normal or abnormal. Obama won with over 50% of the vote in 2008, so does that mean those who voted for McCain were abnormal? Of course not. Just because something occurs more than 50% of the time doesn't make it the norm, and everything else abnormal. The most frequent occurring blood type is O+, that doesn't make every other blood type abnormal, just less frequently occurring.

Evets, my comment using the terms "sophomoric, middle-school" refers diectly to name calling. Someone called me a "bone smoker". That is the direct reference and it is sophomoric and middle-school-ish to do so. I respect that you disagree with me as long as it remains a civil debate.

When that party shows up, count me in. Until then, I'll muck through with the D's at this point. Less crazy of the two groups (but both are lousy)

Just today I was reading an aticle about how Rick Santorum's wife Karen is telling people it's "God's Will" that Rick is doing as well as he is. That God is trying to put America on the right path again by using his omnipotent power to prop up Santorum.
Amazing stuff. Just amazing.

Yeah, I can't believe people believe that crap. According to the Mayans, the world isn't round. I won't even touch on what the Mormons believe...

As soon as the Big Guy in the Sky starts answering amputee's prayers I'm with him.

I am not the least bit religious, but is the implication of Mr. Amirault's post that the only acceptable answer to a prayer is "yes?"

Evets, I still like the history of your name as you explained it, really unique.

I'll admit to a touch of sarcasm in my post about the power of prayer. But the underlying point is sincere. It was designed to get one to actually think about the lack of power of prayer for amputees at least.

Perhaps the answer to their prayers isn't NO, but I GAVE HUMANS THE POWER OF FREE WILL AND HIGHER INTELLIGENCE IN THE HOPES THAT SUFFERING WOULD BE MINIMIZED. Amazing strides are being made in the development and use of artifical limbs. Would that the same strides were being made in ceasing the activities that cause people to lose limbs. Maybe prayer works and we are just praying for the wrong miracle...

That is the common answer, except when you find a "case" where prayers were answered. In this case, I believe you are mistaken, the answer is clear, He chooses not to grow the limb back, or can't grow the limb back, or isn't there to answer the prayer, there is no other false choice. That's why the limb has not grown back.

you point to one failing to support another

This is exactly the type of thinking that motivated me to leave the Republican party. The party is run by a bunch of "Good Christians" like Newt... How many "Good Christians" in Congress have cheated on their spouses or used their power for their own self interests rather than that of their constituents. How can anyone take Christians seriously when they can't even protect their own children from the predators in the Clergy. You are free to believe what you want, which is exactly why this type of thinking is dangerous. I don't ever claim that I'm right or wrong when it comes to moral issues... I believe that as long as I can live with who I am as a person that is all that matters. I live a moral life, but it's not dictated by some book or a Church full of hand waivers. You'll probably tell me to repent for this post, but I feel good knowing that I'm a much better person than most Catholics that I know!

Kenny, All Christians are not the same and many do not hold your views on this subject. The Methodist Church I belong to does much work in the areas of Social Justice which includes civil rights. Many of the Catholics I know do not align themselves with the Official position of the Roman Catholic Church on the issue of embracing and including LGBT people in the church. Many in both churches disagree with your or the media's presentation of the "Christian Position" on women's reproductive rights. And then there are those Christian denominations which openly embrace inclusion. The world is evolving and for the most part you are being left behind.

My personal view of how the philosophy you project works is that it drive Lesbian and Gay men away from the church. It drives young people away from all the other good that Christianity is capable of putting out there. Your effort would be more positive if you encouraged same sex couples to find a partner who wants to settle down and live their lives in a long lasting relationship. This would be the Christian thing to do.