 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 »
|
|
64Block_3BcwsiN0jeEkxrQT3opldp
|
|
|
|
|
64Block_3BcwsiN0jeEkxrQT3opldp
|
|
|
|
|
Argentina (W) 69 v 77 Brazil (W)
|
|
|
|
|
64Block_3BcwsiN0jeEkxrQT3opldp
|
|
|
|
|
The people who live closest to Iran, and know them best hate this deal (Israel, Saudi Arabia, Turkey). This article seems to be saying that scientists 1000 miles away feel pretty good about this? This doesn't really make any sense to me. How do the scientists in a bunker in the antarctic feel? Shouldn't they be the deciding vote?
|
|
|
|
ISIS is not merely a "regional" problem, as some have attempted to claim. They are coming here, soon enough, in my opinion. That is, if they are not thoroughly and absolutely defeated--just as the Nazis were in WWII--and not merely "degraded."
I do not, therefore, believe that America should wait for another country to "take out ISIS." We should act.
Now.
The fact is we are. Over 1000 sucessful airstrikes. |
|
|
|
Donald Trump slammed comedienne and former talk show host Rosie O’Donnell in the first 10 minutes of the GOP presidential debate on Thursday. Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly asked Trump to respond to the comments he’s made about women on Twitter and on his former NBC reality show “The Apprentice.” "When it comes to women, you’ve called them fat pigs, dogs and slobs," Kelly said. “Only Rosie O’Donnell,” Trump interrupted to cheers. “For the record, it was well beyond Rosie O’Donnell,” Kelly retorted before finishing her question. "Does that sound like the temperament of a man we should elect for president?" she asked. Trump has famously feuded with O’Donnell for years. Shortly after his put-down, O'Donnell tweeted, “try explaining that 2 ur kids.” http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/250503-trump-slam-rosie-odonnell-during-debateJust watch this video. Trump is great. Finally there is a person who bashes political correctness. I'm so tired of it in the media and it seems like I'm not the only one who shares this opinion. Now I'm starting to doubt that Trump has any chance to win but he is still one of the few persons who tells the truth. I'd like to see him being the president but sadly he is way too straightforward to win. So you guys and Trumpeter want to use the "N" word all you want , call women the "c" word, throw the F bomb wherever you are, call the physically disabled "crips" , the mentally disabled "retards" to their face and around their family...and make fun of them, call for segregation.,, hang blacks in effigy and libel and slander anyone you care to.... .. ......That DOES reflect on just what righties stand for....thanks for admitting it... |
|
|
|
"The Times of Israel reports that researchers at Tel Aviv University found that rats with broken bones healed much quicker when given the non-psychotic marijuana component, cannabidiol or CBD."
well that is just stupid then isn't it, if this is true, why should you be fired for taking your medicine
proof the war on drugs ruins more lives then the drugs themselves
I think this issue is something that most of us on the liberal and conservative side can rally around. Whether you like weed or not, the fact that it can land you in jail is just stupid. Employers can decide their own policy. I'm glad my company doesn't have a drug test policy and I still make more than the national average. |
|
|
|
Good luck with that. (Save your money, though).
Religious belief is not an excuse for breaking the law.
The SCOTUS has ruled on this in the past, it probably won't do so again.
Render unto Caesar.
Just hand over your Jewish friends to the authorities. It's the law. |
|
|
|
|
Are we sure that's actually an exhibit or just another dead black guy in Chicago?
|
|
|
|
|
Social norms that are deemed acceptable, not "what I think is wrong with america".
What do you dislike in the life here in the USA but were not ready to express your opinion.
I know that many social norms are not acceptable but who is ready to tell us which?
|
|
|
|
hey mates ..my friend has requested me to start this thread for him so I did..he want to sell his member account for 0.027btc.
no ban or active loans..
high quality posts
no possitve or negetive trust
signed message will be provided
pm with your price or replay here with your offer
How much activity points? What is your asking price? ops..sorry I forget that.. POST=127 ACTIVITY=70 asked price is 0.027btc I would like to pay 0.015 btc. Thanks |
|
|
|
|
I will pay 0.05 btc for both member accounts.
|
|
|
|
|
Sounds clear but recent events show how bad witness accounts can be at times.
|
|
|
|
Jeb Bush Primary Winner = Surfer Voting Libertarian Again
Yep. If Jeb wins the primary, I won't be voting Republican. |
|
|
|
I've been seeing both sides of the debate when it comes to polygamy. The anti-gay marriage crowd asked a fair question - if the definition of marriage can change from one man/woman to man/man or woman/woman, on what grounds can polygamy be denied given it is involving consenting adults.
The pro gay-marriage crowd (playing damage control a bit) would dismiss the question or simply state polgamy is not in big demand. But either response was deflecting from the question.
Last night, after about four IPAs, I actually figured it out.
When marriage is denied to gays, it is denying a person something than another person has a legal right to.
But in making polygamy illegal, it is discriminating against everyone - including gays, straights, men and women. Therefore, in a skewed way, there is no one excluded from the anti-polygamy law because it is forbidden to all.
Okay, it sounds good. But what about the old argument that marriage was not forbidden to gays before the SCOTUS ruled. They could still marry. Marriage to another same sex couple was forbidden to all, everyone regardless of orientation. No one could marry someone of their own gender, no matter what or throw in any caveat. One could say under the old system, all it did was treat men as men and women as women, with marriage allowed to only one man and one woman. Personally, I have said this until I am blue in the face. Get government out of marriage. Only those who want to get married and are of consenting age, let them marry whom ever they want and how many they want. Let the people actually involved decide, not government. |
|
|
|
|
