regarding this. The group opposing homosexual marriage in California won. What's with the protests,the losers don't like result too bad. I voted for Mccain he lost so I have to live with Obama as my president for the next four years,so be it. I will not be protesting that Obama shoudn't be President because he won only because of the racism of blacks who 95% voted for a black over a white. Same goes for the homosexual marriage crowd, work toward the next vote don't try to invalidate the election results. If you keep this up I might have to slap you.

You might have to what?

Watch it, jerk. Threats of violence are a violation of the contract you signed when you signed up to post on this board. Any more of this and I will have to report you to Slate management, and get your right to post revoked.

Is your post a joke? I just love the gay nazi scene in california. As always, when reason dies, violence rears its ugly head. At least this Jurisprudence article isn't gay, as it resorts to mental masturbation instead (safer I suppose). People who actually cogitate aren't willing to institutionalize this form of perversion until they get some real evidence that gays are a real minority rather than a self-declared one.

And if a majority of voters want the institution slavery, that would make it OK? Or to segregate schools? Or voted for a presidential candidate who wanted to establish a fascist state and exterminate a minority population?

Sadly, these are not hypothetical examples. People who actually cogitate would recognize that as well as the lesson learned from them: just because most people want it, doesn't make it a good idea, and it certainly doesn't make it right.

And what the hell does "real" vs. "self-declared" minority mean?

Truthbomb,

In recent months, arguments on this board repeatedly decayed into insult exchanges and threats of violence. Apparently some people find it pleasant to threaten complete strangers; go figure. In this case, a top poster seems to have thought it would be swell to START a string by threatening people.

While I'm not crazy about idiots posting trash like "gay nazi scene," (or "islamofascism," for that matter) I figure you're americans too, and I'll have to put up with you as a cost of freedom. But threats of violence cross a line, and in this instance it's a line you have contractually agreed not to cross. So blather away about "perversion" and whether the people whose rights you deny are real or not. Your right to advertise your mental masturbation is enshrined in the Bill of Rights. But threatening assault is not.

Mmmmkay?

First Amendment.

Dear Oxboggle,

Did you ever ask yourself why the second amendment was placed into the Constutition? I guess some thinks it has something to do with hunting, but guess what, it has nothing to do with hunting.

It has to do with the right of the people to have arms to protect themselves against an unjust government. You do this thru acts of violance, it is how our country became free, and has remained free thru the years.

It is not a threat of violance to say to somebody, if you refuse to accept the laws of this land, then I will resort to violance to inforce them. This is the only time violance is acceptable, is in the defense of freedom.

The cost of freedom is not the written word it is the willingness to fight and die for it, and you need to think about this, and think about it hard, as some day soon this may be a question for you.

If you want to look at a case where we have taken away freedoms look at Dred Scott, this is clasic case where the court took away our freedoms, and were force to commit acts of violance to get them back.

So yes, if people are not going to follow the law, then we have not only a right but duty to force them to comply, and if this causes a slapping that is a small price to pay for such a great nation.

God Bless You

Mark_RSM is a troll

Don't feed the troll