fred wrote:

Isn't having to go to the clinic for a test every now and then a draw back?

Retard, I wouldn't call it a drawback, but a condition of it.

Even though I use protection, I still go get tested.

Thanks for caring.

Does insurance cover periodic testing?

fred wrote:

Does insurance cover periodic testing?

jc wrote:

mctopeka wrote: 1. So a liberal judge can overturn what the majority of voters in California wanted. it's interesting how "liberal" seems to be used so often to describe legal rulings that are "fair", "just" and provide for "equality".

And people wonder why there is so much hatred and prejudice. It's the "Unfair","Unjust" rulings providing for the "Inequality" that's going on in America. When the needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many, then we get the hatred and prejudice towards the few, by the many.

Hey PanGuy, I think that was a good question. Since I am a fat old guy who gets heartburn often, insurance will pay for the doctor to look down my throat every year. I was wondering if you tell them you are a hairy butt poker if they pay for AIDS tests

There are two places I can go in town for free AIDS tests, fred.

It's not free. Somebody is paying for it.

Who cares?

I wonder if the average tax payer wants to pay for hairy butt pokers to be tested.

mctopeka wrote:

jc wrote: mctopeka wrote: 1. So a liberal judge can overturn what the majority of voters in California wanted. it's interesting how "liberal" seems to be used so often to describe legal rulings that are "fair", "just" and provide for "equality". And people wonder why there is so much hatred and prejudice. It's the "Unfair","Unjust" rulings providing for the "Inequality" that's going on in America. When the needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many, then we get the hatred and prejudice towards the few, by the many.

like i said, people like you use "liberal" to describe things that are all about fairness, justice and equality. your idea of those things is for you and your particular racial/gender/reliious group to have all the rights and everyone else to be subservient to you. we aren't going for that shit any more, mc. those days are way past.

My point jc don't ask the people to vote on a yes or no issue if you can overrule that discision of the people.To me thats an attack on this great nation .I won't debate over the subject on same sex marriage because that debate would go on forever.I know what I believe and why I believe it.

Kermie wrote:

My point jc don't ask the people to vote on a yes or no issue if you can overrule that discision of the people.To me thats an attack on this great nation .I won't debate over the subject on same sex marriage because that debate would go on forever.I know what I believe and why I believe it.

so, you're saying that anything "the people" vote for should be the law of the land and no one can challenge it. is that right. it doesn't matter if its constitutional or not. it doesn't matter how unfair, immoral or unjust it is - as long as "the people" vote for it.
you really need to be careful about that kind of shit, kerm. once we go down that road, you could end up being one of the people getting voted off the planet.

Last edited by jc on Tue May 20, 2008 12:48 pm; edited 1 time in total

Come on don't be retarded. They didn't vote that two queers couldn't poke each other. They voted that the state shouldn't sanction it.

BUT WHO WOULD BE VOTED OFF first??

jc wrote:

we aren't going for that shit any more, mc. those days are way past.

Those days will never be in the past as long as people like you and your liberal cronies keep telling others what you think is right and keep shoving your opinions down everyones throat, and anyone that disagrees with your liberal cronies are wrong and either a neocon, sexist, racist, homophob, GW apologist or anti-what-ever-religion, or all of the above for even having the nerve to disagree. I have news for you there are 100's of millions maybe even billions of people that think the same way I do, and some day someone will speak up for us. So for now we will continue to pander to the minorities and pander to the rich, but someday.

reminds me of a song......someday but just not today now who sings that.,

KENNY CHESNEY

fred wrote:

Come on don't be retarded. They didn't vote that two queers couldn't poke each other. They voted that the state shouldn't sanction it.

that's why fred doesn't get it - he is so ignorant about homosexuals that he thinks the gay life is about nothing but gay sex. and, apparently, he isn't too well informed about marriage either....... he seems to think marriage is about nothing but sex, too.

nothing wrong with any of that doesn't bother me at all whether they are gay bi or that other thing fred is afraid of pan or whatever it is

mctopeka wrote:

jc wrote: we aren't going for that shit any more, mc. those days are way past. Those days will never be in the past as long as people like you and your liberal cronies keep telling others what you think is right and keep shoving your opinions down everyones throat, and anyone that disagrees with your liberal cronies are wrong and either a neocon, sexist, racist, homophob, GW apologist or anti-what-ever-religion, or all of the above for even having the nerve to disagree. I have news for you there are 100's of millions maybe even billions of people that think the same way I do, and some day someone will speak up for us. So for now we will continue to pander to the minorities and pander to the rich, but someday.

i really don't think there are 100's of millions of mean-spirited racists and bigots in this country. i'll bet if you move to one of those countries where there is only one religion, one race and one way you might find yourself in the majority. in fact, i think that sound perfect........bye bye.

you moving?