Mike_Baltimore
92p1,286 comments posted · 3 followers · following 0
8 years ago @ Equality on Trial - Open thread BREAKING N... · 4 replies · -8 points
I don't go to the library, for example, to view the web on a 'free' computer, and I don't go to a computer cafe. And when I go to visit friends, I go to visit those friends, not to use any computer they might have.
You or anyone keep up the posts with YouTube links, and I'll continue to ignore them as long as I have this computer that doesn't have sound.
And sarcasm should be pointed out if delivered in print. It is delivered in print with no indication of sarcasm by people who think EVERYONE thinks as they do. Not everyone does. Therefore, sarcasm in print, unless described as such, should never be attempted.
And what is this directly responding to a post of mine, but commenting about me in the third person?
8 years ago @ Equality on Trial - Open thread BREAKING N... · 7 replies · -11 points
I stated "I don't have sound on my PC". So tell me how, with no sound, I can turn on non-existent sound and watch the video?
8 years ago @ Equality on Trial - Open thread BREAKING N... · 9 replies · -6 points
Case in point: During the 1950s and 1960s, my mother was very against anyone who was GLBT. By the 1990s, even before she knew I was Gay, her attitude had gone through a change, and her opinion was 180 degrees different than previously.
If we are supposed to 'destroy her American family', if destroyed during the 1960s, my very pro-GLBT (half-)sister (born of my mother in 1962) would also have been destroyed.
I may be very left of center, politically, but I don't think Liberals have EVERY answer.
Oh, and I don't have sound on my PC, so any YouTube videos are almost certainly for nought.
Oh, and IF you saw a copy of 'the Gay Agenda', consider yourself a very fortunate GLBT person, possibly unique. In my experience as an out gay (going back more than 40 years), the only persons who have admitted to seeing 'the Gay Agenda' have been the anti-GLBT bigots. If you have seen 'the Gay Agenda', why are you posting pro-GLBT comments here, and not anti-GLBT comments?
8 years ago @ Equality on Trial - Open thread BREAKING N... · 11 replies · +6 points
THAT is something I'd love to see, but with some trolls, 'conversion' is impossible. Jim, I suspect, is one of those 'unconvertible' trolls.
We can always hope, though.
Also, Jim apparently hasn't read and digested the first sentence of Section 1, Article IV, of the US Constitution.
8 years ago @ Equality on Trial - Open thread BREAKING N... · 29 replies · +7 points
SCOTUS will have some fun with this case.
8 years ago @ Equality on Trial - Open thread · 0 replies · +1 points
8 years ago @ Equality on Trial - Open thread with news ... · 0 replies · +6 points
According to the Washington Blade, he has now been endorsed by NOM. http://www.washingtonblade.com/2015/12/09/cruz-en...
8 years ago @ Equality on Trial - Open thread with news ... · 3 replies · +1 points
As one example, when Marge Schott owned the Reds, facial hair, even sideburns, was banned on baseball players on the Reds team, apparently supported as there was no organized resistance to it from the fans or the city council, and the media remained silent on the issue.
Another example were her slurs against African-Americans, Jews, and persons of Japanese ancestry and love of Adolf Hitler. I can just imagine what her feelings were about the GLBT community. I'm sure she is/was a heroine of kimmee davis.
When she died, she was hailed by the residents and media of Cincinnati as 'a great lady'.
8 years ago @ Equality on Trial - Open thread · 1 reply · +1 points
In 2007, he was created a cardinal-priest by Pope Benedict XVI, and
He was born October 24, 1944 (71 years old now), thus eligible to elect future Popes until he is age 80, or until late October 2024. I'm fairly certain there will be a Papal conclave prior to then. I would be very surprised to see a pro-GLBT Pope by then, but at least Cardinal Gracias is available for GLBT advocacy at any time he meets with other members of the Latin Rite Catholic Church.
8 years ago @ Equality on Trial - Open thread · 0 replies · -4 points
There is no doubt, though, that January 4, 2016 is a date AFTER December 25, 2015, and the court didn't say 'the week after December 25, 2015', so even January 4, 2016 is 'in play', especially when considering January 1 is a holiday, thus a 'non-court' day (and making the 'court week' after [Gregorian calendar] December 25, 2015, a 4 day week), January 2 and 3 are the weekend, thus 'non-court' days, with January 4 the first 'court date' of 2016.
(Oh, and the court didn't say 'X-mas 2015', so any X-mas is 'in play'. The implication is that it was X-mas 2015 being referenced, though.)