crb

Marriage goes back to Adam and Eve, so I guess the religion of God started marriage, of course if you are an atheist you will discount me as crazy. So did government start the concept of marriage in your opinion? Were there marriages in caveman times? Did the caveman government approve them?

The Guy at fin, feather, and fur must not have known what the hell he was talking about! He should just have said "I don't know". Anyway I asked of I could use the higher capacity mags in the M&P and he said "no and the same for the glock. Sleeves are available for both so you can use higher cap mags in the subcompact models! Grrrrrr ignorant no good dead weight! I wasn't planning on buying there anyway they just have a larger selection.

Just added to tivo.

Okay so I want an alternate carry gun/HD gun since I sold my XDM, and hopefully have my M6 Scout sold. My main carry is a Sig 229R .40 XD subcompact or M&P? Opinion pls. I was looking at the glock line, but I like the being able to use the higher cap mags, with the sleeves(xgrip). Then the next question .40 which I have a stock pile of or go with the 9mm for capacity and start stock piling 9mm?

Didn't know she was 17. It is a stupid law that needs changed! You can own the higher capacity mags, but when you insert them then you can be charged. Most likely unless you are being charged with another crime, I doubt it will ever be an issue. Seems like one of those things a prosecutor just tacks on. I wonder if anyone has been charged with it? You can obtain a temporary permit to use: http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/2923.18 2923.18 (A) Upon application to the sheriff of the county or safety director or police chief of the municipality where the applicant resides or has his principal place of business, and upon payment of the fee specified in division (B) of this section, a license or temporary permit shall be issued to qualified applicants to acquire, possess, carry, or use dangerous ordnance, for the following purposes: (4) Financial institution and armored car company guards, with respect to automatic firearms lawfully acquired, possessed, carried, or used by any such person while acting within the scope of his duties; 2923.11 (E) “Automatic firearm” means any firearm designed or specially adapted to fire a succession of cartridges with a single function of the trigger. “Automatic firearm” also means any semi-automatic firearm designed or specially adapted to fire more than thirty-one cartridges without reloading, other than a firearm chambering only .22 caliber short, long, or long-rifle cartridges.

http://www.qando.net/details.aspx?Entry=4032 Quoted form above link. "From a libertarian standpoint, the fact that civil and divine marriage share the same name is irrelevant. They are separate and distinguishable. No religious person is obligated to accept a Civil Union as a Holy Union, nor are the non-religious obligated to accept a strictly Holy Union as a Civil Union. The ideal libertarian solution would be to have the government get out of the 'marriage' business altogether; to have government enforce civil contracts, and to have religions perform their religious ceremonies, if they choose to do so. But since we don't live in Libertopia, we're left with a purely civil legal privilege available to one set of people, but not to another set simply because that civil legal privilege arose from a religious ceremony. (at least, within our cultural heritage; among others, it had little to do with religion) If those who object to gay marriage on religious grounds would be consistent, then let them also reject the civil privileges of marriage not contained in the Bible. Until such a time as we could clearly distinguish the two in legal terms, the civil legal privileges of marriage should be extended to everybody." I can live with giving homosexuals/gays/lesbians/transgenders(don't want to exclude anyone) the civil privileges, but we should stride to get the government out of the business! Does this help you guys to see where I cam coming from? I am sorry if I come across as over blunt, or strong, but I am tired of the government taking more and more power. We need to cut them back, and get our freedom back. I also don't mean to write novels in this thread, but I am trying to explain my view.

Yummy!

That is why I asked if he had an exemption. I know you are law enforcement, maybe you can get away with it, but what about your daughter?

If you pay attention to my statements I have said the government should not give any special benefits to "married" people whether straight, bisexual, lesbian, transgender, gay, etc! Get the state out of the business of telling you who can marry, put us all on the same playing field! My argument doesn't fall apart here because I am arguing that the state has no business telling us who can marry one another as long as they are legal consenting adults. Do completely away with the state power to dictate marriage, and issue marriage license's. Does this not fix the problem? Essentially make it a contract between the two people who wish to "marry". I don't know how I am being misunderstood here. I am not invoking religion as in the bible says homosexuality is "wrong". I am invoking it in the origin of marriage is religion. Make what the state currently says is marriage a social/civil contract between to people which no permit should be required for.

This should probably be a whole new thread. Really the purpose is simply to restrict a mandated state religion! It was never meant to keep the ten commandments off the town squares. I am guessing you believe in the incorporation of the Federal Constitution to the states then? Which by the way I don't by the way. The Federal Constitution is meant to protect us from the Federal Government, the states have their own charters or constitutions. Now if we are going to say the First amendment is incorporated to the states, is the 2nd also? If that is the case then no state could make any laws restricting the 2nd amendment. They also could not infringe, and a license to carry my firearm is an infringement in my opinion. I am simply going by the 10th amendment.

Exactly! The government has taken more power away from the people than they deserve!

Marriage like it or not is originally a RELIGIOUS idea! PERIOD! If you don't believe so prove to me otherwise historically. Just because the government decided to take control over "marriage" does not make it their idea. Now the version of "marriage" which I will be discussing from here on out, which unless you are a religious person is really just a social contract, but for the sake of argument I will use the your term marriage. Do you know in this state a gay person can loose there job, be denied housing, be denied service at a restaurant for appearing gay? Can I be denied service because I am a 2nd amendment supporter? Yes Can I be denied service because I have black hair? Yes Can I be denied service because I have blue eyes? Yes Can I be denied service because I am a heterosexual? Yes Business's have a right to deny service. There are also private property rights. Should you loose your job because your gay? NO Can I loose my job because I am straight? Yes Should you get special treatment because you are Gay?NO Can I be denied housing because I am straight? Yes Can you be denied housing because you are gay? Yes Now will they say we are denied because we are gay or straight? NO Do I think you should be denied because you are gay?NO Is it anymore okay for you to call me a breeder, than it is for me to call you a "F" word? NO (I tried to be nice there) I could come up with a ton more scenarios, but hopefully my point is made. EQUALITY IS EQUAL, not EQUAL plus a little. Everyone should have the same laws/rules applied to them no matter race, creed, color, sexual orientation, etc! There shouldn't be special laws to protect a certain class! It is time to end the "special treatment" or "protected classes" of people! All laws should apply to everyone equally! Should a heterosexual who assaults a homosexual receive a more severe sentence strictly based on sexual orientation than a homosexual who assaults a heterosexual? NO Should a white who assaults a Latino receive a longer sentence than a Latino who assaults a white strictly based on the color of their skin? NO What I am saying is we are all people, and we are all different. Nobody should be more protected under the law than any other person! Hence equal protection under the law! The significant other of 20+ years can be blocked from the death bed of their partner. Is that ok to you? No which is why the state should get out of the marriage business. By the way this happens to heterosexuals who live together, but are not married also1 If all persons whether heterosexual or homosexual were required to go through the same process we would all be treated equal. Everyone who is of legal age should be allowed to "marry" whomever they want without some stupid license from the state! How can you argue with that? Whether you are heterosexual, homosexual, or transgender the state should not tell you who you can marry! Basically you would go to a lawyer and draw up a contract, or do it yourself and have witness or a notary, however you want to do it no matter what your sexuality is! IS that normal for you? Getting Married has jack shit to do with your cult, or any other cult. You do not have to believe in an invisible man in the sky to get married. The fact of the matter is the Act of getting Married has a hell of a lot to do with legal issues of the state. GET THE STATE OUT OF IT!!!! Everyone under the system I advocate would have a civil contract essentially, because marriage is a RELIGIOUS CONCEPT! But as far as the government is concerned everyone would be treated EQUAL no matter what sexual orientation they CHOOSE! Wills, next of kin, insurance, etc. I am a heterosexual married man and I have both a living will and living will. Once again if you get the state out of the business of choosing who can marry and make everyone go through the same process you don't have to worry. Where am I being mistaken??? Insurance most policies have a "significant other" clause. Once again make everyone equal and get the state out of deciding who is "married" NO TAX BREAKS OF BEING MARRIED OR HAVING KIDS! The government should have NOTHING to do with Marriage!!!' By the way if my wife and I were divorced we would actually pay less in taxes, go figure. So sometimes it is a marriage penalty! And on the subject of "Schools Normalizing it" have you been keeping count of all the young teens we have lost in recent years because parents teach that it is OK to demonize and persecute someone they THINK is gay. What if that was your child? If parents can't teach their children not to act like bigots, then yes the school needs to step in. If you want to teach acceptance of other people no matter their race, religion, color, hair color, eye color, sexual orientation, etc, etc FINE. But do not teach my future child that it is normal for one man to stick his man hood where another empties his bowl! Science is on the heterosexual side. The whole purpose of sex is to REPRODUCE, while most of us use it as recreation also. Two men or two woman can not reproduce! It is simply a life style choice. Now if you want to try the statement "we are born this way", then would it be okay for people to opt to abort homosexual babies, assuming that a gene could be found? Would you have a problem with that? Its my RIGHT, right? If you choose to stick your man hood where another man empties his bowels, and contract aids DO NOT EXPECT me to pay for your healthcare. On the same aspect do not expect me to pay for your healthcare if are lesbian or heterosexual and contract herpiegonasilpaids(herpes, gonorrhea, syphilis, aids, etc.)(my made up word). Your freedom to be free includes my freedom to be free from you. If you participate in risky behavior you should be responsible no matter your sexual orientation. Yes this means if you pop out a kid you should pay for your kid, not the state or federal government.

What capactiy magazine is that? Do you have an exemption?

If you are referring to me you missed my poiny which is the government has no business in marriage. While I think homosexuality is unnatural, you wont see me asking for laws TCP outlaw it. I am entitled to believe its unnatural, and I'm not forcing my beliefs on you. I don't understand why homosexuals want to force me to accept homosexuality as normal. FYI I will never feel its normal even if the government allows them to marry. While on the topic the public schools have no business in trying to normalize homosexuality either or normalizing being straight for that matter! If homosexuals want the "right" to marry why not get on the libertarian band wagon? No the want a new law "normalizaling" it. Fight to get the government out of it all together. Liberty in my opinion is minimal government laws and interference. Why is it the governments place to say brothers and sisters, brothers, sisters, cousins, etc can't "marry"? Why does the government need to tell me how many spouses I can have? ****FYI I am not advocating incest, or polygamy only making a point. ****

You put it more eloquently than I did, but yrs that's my point. A true atheist would not call it a marriage. The state shouldn't issue licenses at all or dictate who can marry. The government should not givespecial benefits to "married" people then a simple contract is the equivalent to "marriage"

You are absolutely wrong. Marriage is a religious concept not a secular. Secular has taken over marriage, but it was originally a religious concept.

Please show me the seperation of church and state" can I find it in the bill of rights or the constitution?

Firstly the orgins of marriage are purely religious! Marriage predates the united states, and the constitution! The states and federal government have NO business regulating marriage. Secondly I am against legalization of gay marriage because its in natural in a scientific way. That being said that is my personal view! If you take the power back away from government, then they can't decide who can marry. Meaning if two men want to marry and a minister will marry them, I can't stop it. The fact you have to cone terms with is marriage is a religious function!

Hey now, I don't claim him as my commander on chief! I agree bush was a scumbag, and yet I think he is leaps and bounds above the annoited one! I was against the war in iraq, Afghanistan, and Iran from the start. I was never a bush fan boy. At least Bush didn't bow to foreign leaders! Bush didn't pass an unconstitutional health care mandate. He did violate the constitution by going around Congress and bailing out auto makers. How about Obama's unconstitutional war in Libya? For all the complaints about Bush's golf and vacations why aren't the same people outraged about Obama doing the same or worse? Shall I continue?

do you faint after he ejaculates in your mouth? Any stains on your white dress? Maybe you could start a line of purses and handbags, like Lewinsky!

I would recommend a 22lr!

Not exactly, someone pays for them!

+1 Although I think there are 1,00 better places to cut.

[QUtOTE=jporter12;787230]I just happen to know a pretty good ASE certified Master Tech (+L1 Advanced Engine Performance, +X1 Undercar Specialist) and could possibly get you a deal. I have one. I have no idea all his certs, but I believe he is a ASE master mechanic. He is a family friend, and is the only mechanic in his shop.