From: Paul Duca 

in article Q2RMh.14$un.7{at}trnddc03, Patriot Games at Crazy_Bastard{at}Yahoo.com
wrote on 3/23/07 9:59 AM:

> "Paul Duca"  wrote in message
> news:C2289E3A.E14A%p.duca{at}comcast.net...
>> in article ZUyMh.10382$8B1.5144{at}trnddc04, Patriot Games at
>> Crazy_Bastard{at}Yahoo.com wrote on 3/22/07 1:19 PM:
>>> "Free Lunch"  wrote in message
>>> news:hhe303ho10923ag7ia800kiiqr79f430t6{at}4ax.com...
>>>> On Wed, 21 Mar 2007 14:30:47 GMT, in alt.atheism
>>>> "Patriot Games"  wrote in
>>>> :
>>>>> "thomas p." 
wrote in message
>>>>> news:1174429846.481190.298540{at}e1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>>>>>> On 20 Mar., 19:00, "Patriot Games"
 wrote:
>>>>>>> "Free Lunch"
 wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:59otv2dbqtdocspvvl9hnnu6jd9mk5a904{at}4ax.com...
>>>>>>>> On Mon, 19 Mar 2007 19:06:33 GMT, in alt.atheism
>>>>>>>> "Patriot Games"
 wrote in
>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>> "raven1"
 wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>
news:uitrv29ob3gkte8cf007g2r6fdbkntk5jd{at}4ax.com...
>>>>>>>>>> On 18 Mar 2007 17:19:30 -0700,
"Sound of Trumpet"
>>>>>>>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Vatican Prelate: Catholics
will "do everything possible" to
>>>>>>>>>>> prevent
>>>>>>>>>>> Homosexual Civil Unions
>>>>>>>>>> I agree. The idea of gay
"civil unions" is ridiculous: gay
>>>>>>>>>> *marriage*
>>>>>>>>>> is the answer.
>>>>>>>>> Fag "marriage" is
impossible.  Marriage is only for a man and a
>>>>>>>>> woman.
>>>>>>>> It's a social convention.
>>>>>>> No, its not a "convention" its a
tradition, a heritage, invented by
>>>>>>> men
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> women FOR men and woman.
>>>>>> It makes no difference if it is called a
convention, a tradition or a
>>>>>> heritage.  As you say, it was invented by men;
therefore men can
>>>>>> change it, as they have changed other things that
existed for
>>>>>> thousands of years.
>>>>> And "men," not fags, have made it clear that
it won't be changed by
>>>>> banning
>>>>> Fag Marriage in 37 states.
>>>>>>>> There's no reason to refuse to give the
>>>>>>>> benefits and responsibilities of marriage to gays.
>>>>>>> I happen to agree (to the angst of all my
conservative friends) that
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> "benefits and responsibilities"
could be given to fags SO LONG AS its
>>>>>>> never
>>>>>>> called "Marriage."
>>>>>> There is no rational reason not to call it marriage.
>>>>> Of course there is.  Marriage = Man + Woman.
>>>> Really? So the plural marriages of the Bible didn't happen?
>>> The topic is FAGS.  If you'd like to discuss POLYGAMY then feel free to
>>> swish your blasted ass over there and start a new Thread.
>>>> Still, there's nothing that stops the legal definition from allowing
>>>> gays to marry. Nothing at all.
>>> Other than it ALREADY being BANNED in MOST of America....
>>>>> Fags can call it anything they want, they can even
invent a brand new
>>>>> word,
>>>>> but the M-word ("Marriage") is already
reserved for Men-Women.
>>>> Please keep your religiously inspired bigotry from making
it impossible
>>>> for you to think.
>>>>> Perhaps they call it Marriage in your Cocksucker Country?
>>>>> Not here.
>>>> Once again, a supposedly moral person makes it quite clear
that he is
>>>> quite immoral and full of hate. You clearly have no use for Jesus's
>>>> teachings.
>>> Stop whining, God still loves you.
>> So...it's not like He kept Mrs. Games' tits from sagging.
>
> Nope, He really didn't help with that at all.
>
> He doesn't do a lot of things we mistakenly think He should.
>
> Instead, a healthy lifestyle and a little nip-n-tuck took care of that.
>
>


        What would you have done if you couldn't afford to do that...or
trade her in on something young and firm?



Paul

--- BBBS/LiI v4.01 Flag