CDIH

that's OK, at least I got the 200th reply!

you and alkie are one

we are both ESTP!!!!!

GonzoStyle Wrote:

Quote:We draw the distinction that a man is different than a woman. Why?? Why don't we just call them both men? Does that distinction mean that men are pure, and women are inferior? Well, I guess so!

He's black, he's white. Obviously, the white man is better than the black man!

So you don't believe that for as long as man has existed that women have been characterized as inferior to men? It's not about calling them both the same, you are being retarded now with that point, it's not a debate about men using womens bathrooms or vice versa, ofcourse women are different from men in apperance. The point is that as long as man has been around and as long as man will be around he will always have someone to call inferior. Which he has done to women, women to this day are not viewed as having the ability to be equal to men in the work force. I am not talking about heavy work like construction, I mean work as in the board room.

Whether its women, blacks, jews, gays, other races, other religions.

I mean distinctions have nothing to do with this, yes a female is not a male but you are going sooooooo beyond any logic with your argument.

Women until maybe the last 15-20 years were nowhere near as commonplace in the workforce as they are today. Women couldn't be leaders, executives, lawyers because men made them feel inferior.

You really need to step back and think about this really thoroughly.

Let's just make seperate categories for marriage then for race, religion and sexual orientation by your standards since its ok to split things up.

We are talking about two different things. The point about women being looked down as inferior to men? That is a cultural issue. The government cannot make laws which which infringe upon the rights of others; they cannot make laws which say who is better and who is inferior. It is the culture which says that one is superior, the other inferior.

I am not even talking about the culture of a people. I have simply been trying to look at it from a matter of law, rights, etc that are protetected by the Constitution.

You can't make a law that tells people to think in a certain way.

Quote:Even though as you said before "they had the same legal rights", rights are one thing but its the ability to enforce them fully thats another thing.

I'm not even trying to get into how they enforce rights, I'm just trying to make an arguement has to how both would receive the same rights by law. I havent a clue how the culture would receive the idea of having a gay marriage and a straight marriage which received the same rights, because gay marriages/civil unions with the same rights and benefits are not allowed to happen yet.

Quote:Let's just make seperate categories for marriage then for race, religion and sexual orientation by your standards since its ok to split things up.

I don't understand. We already do this. There's African-American, Causcasian, Asian, Arab, etc. There's Catholic, Jewish, Anglican, Muslim, Buddist, etc. There's heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, etc.

I mean, what ever happened to the idea of celebrating the differences of one another?

Quote:I mean, what ever happened to the idea of celebrating the differences of one another?

Good point. Let's celebrate and split a couple a homos' heads open!

Quote:The government cannot make laws which which infringe upon the rights of others; they cannot make laws which say who is better and who is inferior.

wow, you really are clueless.

Th Jay's Wrote:

Quote:The government cannot make laws which which infringe upon the rights of others; they cannot make laws which say who is better and who is inferior.

Tell Jim crow that.



Edited By Black Lazerus on 1077309403

So women always had the right to vote, segregation between white and black never happened, and gays can get married.

cool!!

GonzoStyle Wrote:So women always had the right to vote, segregation between white and black never happened, and gays can get married.

cool!!

That is the stuff i get so pissed about when white people complain how unfair life is.

11 years before I was Born blacks in this country were not allowed to vote without going through discriminatory registration or voting practices.

and I am 28 years old

It reminds me of when a kid in history class said "what can the president really do, not like he can have anyone killed or over throw a goverment"

and this was in college.

GonzoStyle Wrote:So women always had the right to vote, segregation between white and black never happened, and gays can get married.

cool!!

That's not what I meant. I know that those things happened, and those were wrong. We know that those things were wrong.

Do you believe that the government has the right to tell people who is inferior and who is not?

I do not.

I just don't understand how hard it is to see the distinction and similarity.

gays can not get married anywhere but in vermont

straights can

gays cant get married in a church

starights can

If that doesn't mean they arent viewed as inferior than I dunno what it is. The fags wanna march in a parade and they get crucified, so yeah they are viewed as equals.

women were always equal tho, as were blacks in jays opinion tho. The goverment never infringed on their rights....

Someone shoulda told the women sufferage people, aboloishonists, marcus garvey, and dr. king that the goverment couldnt make laws to infringe on peoples rights, saved them some time and their lives.

Quote:Do you believe that the government has the right to tell people who is inferior and who is not?

I do not.

Not at all... this never happened...

GonzoStyle Wrote:

Quote:The government cannot make laws which which infringe upon the rights of others; they cannot make laws which say who is better and who is inferior.

wow, you really are clueless.

How can the government do it? The Constitution says you can't make laws that infrige upon the rights of others.

The legislature does, and have made laws that infringe upon the rights of others, and the executive branch has enforced those laws, and it is the job of the judicial branch to deem those laws unconstitutional.

Quote:How can the government do it? The Constitution says you can make laws that infrige upon the rights of others.

and those idiots fought a civil war all for nothin, stoops.

I'm leaving now but i'll be back later, I am writing a letter to a few publishers of history texts and let them know how wrong they been.

Quote:women were always equal tho, as were blacks in jays opinion tho. The goverment never infringed on their rights....

NO! Women and blacks ARE equal, not WERE. Everyone is equal, everyone was not always equal, though. I am not trying to ignore the past. Stop trying to change my words around. I am not saying that.

GonzoStyle Wrote:

Quote:How can the government do it? The Constitution says you can make laws that infrige upon the rights of others.

and those idiots fought a civil war all for nothin, stoops.

That was a typo, I meant can't. I edited it. They can't.

you been saying that for the last dozen posts.

The Jays Wrote:

GonzoStyle Wrote:

Quote:The government cannot make laws which which infringe upon the rights of others; they cannot make laws which say who is better and who is inferior.

wow, you really are clueless.

How can the government do it? The Constitution says you can't make laws that infrige upon the rights of others.

The legislature does, and have made laws that infringe upon the rights of others, and the executive branch has enforced those laws, and it is the job of the judicial branch to deem those laws unconstitutional.

This is how Jay's...
Gerald Herbert/AP Photo
Bush Installs Judge by Bypassing Senate
By JEFFREY McMURRAY
Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - Bypassing Senate Democrats who have stalled his judicial nominations, President Bush installed Alabama Attorney General William Pryor on the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday.
Bush praised Pryor as "this leading American lawyer" and complained that the Senate had unfairly blocked him and other White House nominees.

"A minority of Democratic senators has been using unprecedented obstructionist tactics to prevent him and other qualified nominees from receiving up-or-down votes," Bush said. "Their tactics are inconsistent with the Senate's constitutional responsibility and are hurting our judicial system."

Pryor was immediately sworn in in Alabama.