Chick Fil a - thank you

Status
Not open for further replies.
TXgolfer said:
Nope, the question changed. Since I asked him the question directly, why not let him answer for himself?
Click to expand...

same answer, different questions. all points to quibbling and double-talking...

I am letting him to answer it for himself and he can correct me if I'm wrong. and why not let me point it out?
 
TXgolfer said:
Not even close.
Click to expand...

I disagree but we can agree to disagree as I'm not interested in continuing this as we both know you're just out in here cherry-picking around for your amusement.
 
Jiro said:
same answer, different questions. all points to quibbling and double-talking...

I am letting him to answer it for himself and he can correct me if I'm wrong. and why not let me point it out?
Click to expand...

He's just attacking me with different words so I'm not impressed about how he was asking for.
 
Foxrac said:
The federal never grant the civil unions and they will never, just only capable to expand the marriage to include same sex.

It is very obviously that you want see as word/vocabulary issue, that which I'm not accepted. I just want MARRIAGE to have ALL FEDERAL RIGHTS, that what current system have one, PERIOD.

Time for respect between me and my partner.
Click to expand...

The federal government may not have passed laws recognizing civil unions in the past but that certainly doesn't mean they never will.

I am asking you a hypothetical question. If the federal government decided to recognize civil unions and grant full federal rights.....everything exactly the same except they are called civil unions....would you object to that?
 
Jiro said:
I disagree but we can agree to disagree as I'm not interested in continuing this as we both know you're just out in here cherry-picking around for your amusement.
Click to expand...

:cool2:
 
TXgolfer said:
The federal government may not have passed laws recognizing civil unions in the past but that certainly doesn't mean they never will.

I am asking you a hypothetical question. If the federal government decided to recognize civil unions and grant full federal rights.....everything exactly the same except they are called civil unions....would you object to that?
Click to expand...

I already answered.

Foxrac said:
I want MARRIAGE so I want have FULL federal rights, PERIOD, and stop treat us as second class citizen.
Click to expand...

I'm not going let you to obstructing my reason so my answer is stands as above.
 
TXgolfer said:
I am not attacking you at all. I am asking you a question.
Click to expand...

Some of my posts are ridiculous and embarrassed because of you.

Now, it isn't going happen anymore because I tightened up my mind.
 
TXgolfer said:
The federal government may not have passed laws recognizing civil unions in the past but that certainly doesn't mean they never will.

I am asking you a hypothetical question. If the federal government decided to recognize civil unions and grant full federal rights.....everything exactly the same except they are called civil unions....would you object to that?
Click to expand...

lol wow... asking it 3x already when in fact he has already answered it?

if his answer does not really answer your question, then explain so that maybe he can answer you better.
 
Foxrac said:
I already answered.



I'm not going let you to obstructing my reason so my answer is stands as above.
Click to expand...

Ok, got it. So in your opinion, having full rights is unacceptable unless it is called marriage as well. :cool2: That's all I wanted to know. See, no attack. :)
 
Jiro said:
lol wow... asking it 3x already when in fact he has already answered it?

if his answer does not really answer your question, then explain so that maybe he can answer you better.
Click to expand...

This whole thread reminds me of WWF tag team wrestling. :laugh2:
 
TXgolfer said:
Ok, got it. So in your opinion, having full rights is unacceptable unless it is called marriage as well. :cool2: That's all I wanted to know. See, no attack. :)
Click to expand...

Reword my post? :ugh:

I hate to see separate the group from other group - marriage and civil unions.

Even, I believe in marriage, and doesn't see civil unions as existed.
 
TXgolfer said:
Then why not a civil union?
Click to expand...

And around and around we go. I brought this very point up in post #78.
They really just want to have a "religious" marriage, the federal/state marriage is just icing on the cake for them. They don't want a religion to tell them they can not get married in the eyes of God, even of they can get married in the eyes of the government.
 
rolling7 said:
And around and around we go. I brought this very point up in post #78.
They really just want to have a "religious" marriage, the federal/state marriage is just icing on the cake for them. They don't want a religion to tell them they can not get married in the eyes of God, even of they can get married in the eyes of the government.
Click to expand...

I have to ask if you believe human is fallible.
 
rolling7 said:
And around and around we go. I brought this very point up in post #78.
They really just want to have a "religious" marriage, the federal/state marriage is just icing on the cake for them. They don't want a religion to tell them they can not get married in the eyes of God, even of they can get married in the eyes of the government.
Click to expand...

You have choice - private marriage (religious) or public marriage (government) so it is existing on our system, however for receive full benefits/rights so you have pick a public marriage.

I don't support civil unions because they are Jim Crow style. No surprise about you are from Texas and it was once to separate but equal, that's no-no for us.
 
Foxrac said:
I hate to see separate the group from other group - marriage and civil unions.
Click to expand...

I know, I understood what you meant

Even, I believe in marriage, and doesn't see civil unions as existed.
Click to expand...

I am aware of that, which is why I asked the question as a hypothetical. :ty: for answering.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top