The Second Amendment Freedom Rally, A Rally For All Freedoms

Before noon at Dover’s Modern Maturity Center, in the hall where the Second Amendment Freedom Rally met, it was filled to capacity and overflowing. People from all of Delaware and surrounding states, packed the place well before the meeting actually started at 1pm. The 9-12 Delaware patriot Organization set up at the door for sign-up with many items for sale, including a T-shirt with a hand-gun on a flag emblazoned with the slogan written in Greek that says “Come and Take it.” 1200 people were expected but the main hall was filled by 12:15pm and the overflow hall started to fill. I stopped counting at 1400 in attendance.

Legislators present included, Rep .John Atkins, Rep. Ruth Briggs King, Rep. Harvey Kenton, Rep. Bobby Outen, Rep. Danny Short, Rep. Jack Peterman, Rep Jeff Spiegelman, Rep. Dave Wilson, Rep Steve Smyk, Rep. Ramon and Sen. Dave Lawson.

Delaware GOP Chairman John Sigler, a past President of the National Rifle Association acted as Master of ceremonies. The Keynote Speaker was David A. Keene, NRA President and Former Chairman of the American Conservative Union. Sigler kicked off the Rally by citing the Second Amendment and the code in Delaware’s Constitution that is similar to the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

“It’s good to be in Delaware and know its part of America and not part of Joe Biden’s fantasy world. We have a special interest in the constitution of the US. We have a special interest in the Second Amendment. We have a special interest in the values that were handed down to us. We stand up and say NO you will not take the rights that were handed down to us. There are things Obama will have to overcome if he wants to take our rights from us. Those things include, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights,” are just some of the things NRA President David A. Keene said. Referring to the President’s outrage over the NRA’s statement concerning the president’s children being protected, Keene expressed concern about why the president wouldn’t want all of America’s children to be protected.

“They’re going to ban any magazines (in New York) that hold more than seven rounds. The real insidious portion of the bill is, you will be required to register to buy ammunition and they will be required to keep records for five years. There were 5000 people in Albany protesting this legislation,” said Tom King NRA BoD & President of New York State Rifle and Pistol Association.

“This is what the cultural war is all about, that the children can grow up safe. Women, I urge you to get involved. You need to be a member of the NRA. It is not just a man’s organization. It’s what stands between the leftists and the Second Amendment. It is not just about the right to defend yourself, it’s about guaranteeing the same rights to the next generation,” Said Maria Heil, NRA BoD & Second Amendment Sisters.
“Who needs a magazine with 30 rounds? Who’s the one to say they can’t have them,” said Rick Jensen, WDEL Radio Talk Show Host. “

“We need to turn this crowd of 1400 people into many millions. When we don’t vote, we let these people (liberals) slide into office. You have a hammer, you have a vote. You want the liberty you have to vote. Get a hold of your legislator and tell them, when they don’t do what they said they would, throw them out,” said Sen. Dave Lawson, “We don’t have any choice, they brought the fight, we will defend the Constitution. I’ve never been threatened by a legally owned gun. What’s going on now is that legislators that don’t get it, are threatening me and you.”
Representative John Atkins stressed the importance of the people to have respect for the Second Amendment in both parties. He also stressed the rights of people in public housing to protect themselves, as well as people that live in $3 million mansions at the beach.
America’s Second Amendment guarantees its citizens the right to bear arms and guarantees that it will not be infringed on.

92 thoughts on “The Second Amendment Freedom Rally, A Rally For All Freedoms

  1. 49Geezer writes in #49: “The issue isn’t medical necessity — it’s the right of women to decide whether they want to carry pregnancies to term, or your overriding right to claim they must.”

    Not exclusively, the argument is frequently made by pro-murder advocates that abortion is necessary to protect the life of the mother and opponents of murder would allow the mother to die to save the unborn child, when that is completely false.

    And on that score any moral person must answer no, a person does not have the discretionary right to murder another person.

    The right of a woman to decide cannot trump the right of another person to LIVE.

    Can you murder your boss to get his job?

    Can you murder your wife to avoid going through a messy divorce?

    Of course not.

    Mere convenience is not a sufficient reason to commit murder.

  2. Geezer writes in #49: “Most emotionally normal parents would gladly give their life to protect their children.” And yet abortion and infanticide have existed since pre-history, if our earliest history is any guide.”

    Not by much. It has always been considered the most reprehensible act — the ultimate sign of moral decay and depravity (either one).

    In fact, infanticide was and is associated with a false religion worshipping the devil, by different names, such as Molech.

    The cult of abortion is a religious cult inspired by and worshipping a demon. Only the moral sickness of a demon could make anyone contemplate the murder of a helpless child.

    The religious devotion of murder advocates to the sacrifice of helpless children can only be explained by demonic influence.

    The nation has murdered 54 million children since 1973.

  3. “The nation has murdered 54 million children since 1973.”

    Excuse me, since I hold membership in this nation, your statement is absolutely false. If you assert otherwise, you are also equally responsible for every ill in this nation. What happened to personal responsibility? The nation did nothing of the sort. Each individual has the reponsibility for their own decisions. The nation, in the form of government, simply gave women the legal right to make a choice. However, it is their choice. Not mine. Not yours. You make not like their choices but it is theirs to make.

    And by the way, the definition of “murder” is the unlawful killing of one human being by another. There are several ways to approach that definition and some would argue that a fetus is not a human being. But that’s not even relevant, because the operative discriminator is the word “unlawful.” Abortion is not unlawful, therefore, it cannot be defined as “murder” period.

  4. The nation endorsed these murders.

    And you can consider murder in two sense: (1) under the laws of the land (2) under morality and common sense.

    The murder of 6 million Jews + 5 million others in the holocaust was * L E G A L * under the laws of the Nazi Third Reich.

    So are you saying Dave that 11 million civilians (not war deaths) was NOT murder?

  5. Murder is killing that is wrongful. So killing in self defense is not murder. Capital punishment is not murder, because the convict murdered someone else. War is not murder (although there can be murder such as intentionally killing civilians).

    When a goverment like the Nazi Third Reich or the US Supreme Court endorses murder of the innocents, that government cannot coney legitimacy on murder but becomes moral in its own right.

    One day will the US Government be put on trial like the Nuremberg Trials for the murder of 54 million innocent human beings

  6. Oops, I skipped two words: “becomes a moral evil in its own right.”

  7. “Not by much. It has always been considered the most reprehensible act — the ultimate sign of moral decay and depravity (either one). In fact, infanticide was and is associated with a false religion worshipping the devil, by different names, such as Molech.”

    You realize, of course, that a “false” religion is nothing more than one you disagree with. Many of them feel the same way about yours. Since both claim to worship the One True God, one might be right and the other wrong — or both may be wrong.

    That said, you are absurdly wrong about it “only” happening in societies like Carthage. In every society in every age, people in times of famine have killed their children. In the middle ages the church gave them another option, and tens of thousands abandoned their children to the church.

    You continually mistake your particular societal mores as “universal.” They aren’t. Claiming they are just makes you look like the parochial jackass you so obviously are.

  8. “One day will the US Government be put on trial like the Nuremberg Trials for the murder of 54 million innocent human beings”

    No, it won’t, because the vast majority of abortions involve fetuses with no legal standing.

    But thank you for making clear your radical absolutism.

  9. Dave
    “Excuse me, since I hold membership in this nation, your statement is absolutely false.”

    Since I consider abortion to be “serial infanticide,” I would consider Jon’s statement to be somewhat accurate, and your defense of abortion as a collaboration of aiding and abetting of what, by all moral standards should be the felony murder.
    However, the Supreme Count has decided by the case of Roe v. Wade, they would condone the unbelievably unconscionable practice of abortion, in fact, the United States is guilty of what Jon says they are.
    I certainly don’t think the US will be put on trial for these crimes but it does make good copy.

  10. “I consider abortion to be serial infanticide … by all moral standards [abortion] should be the felony murder.”

    And I consider the abortion of a being with no nervous system to be no crime at all. At this point in history, the Supreme Court hews to my position, not yours.

    How peculiar that the party of “small government” wants to impose its moral views on all through government mandate, because it has not been able to convert others to its views by moral suasion.

  11. One can change the definition of any word when you perspective is morality. The fact of the matter “murder” as defined by the society in which you live has only one definition and that definition must be coupled with the adjective “unlawful” Our society has declared that abortion is legal, just as it has determined that capital punishment is legal, which some or morally character consider it be reprehensible, and would call it murder. We don’t live in a society according to your own personal moral code.

    Second, if anyone read my comment as “defense of abortion” please reread. I do not defend abortion. I am against abortion. I defend the rule of law and abortion is the law.

  12. Geezer writes in #57: “You realize, of course, that a “false” religion is nothing more than one you disagree with. ”

    Incorrect. The correct religion is true in reference to objective truth, which is verifiable by the objective reality of God.

    Like most Christians, I became a Christian upon having a personal encounter with a real, actual, living God — not because I wanted to or liked the idea.

    “My” religion is mine because it is true, not because I prefer it or like it or feel good about it.

    Some aspects of Christianity run strongly contrary to the wishes of people. We don’t become Christians because we want Christianity to be true but because it is true, whether you like it or not.

    A false religion is one that either worships a false god — meaning one that is objectively, scientifically, in reality not actually God — or one which falsely portrays God as someone He is not — as defined by Him.

  13. However, where religions have involved the sacrifice of babies, if you simply step back and look at the overall characteristics of that religion and the god it worships, youc an see the striking similarity between Satan and the god that is at the center of those religions that involve infanticide.

    Israelites who went astray and worshipped Molech burned their infant children in the fire, because Molech was a god of fire.

    Discussion of this practice in the Bible shows it to be a shocking abomination almost incomprehensible to those of the time period.

  14. Geezer
    “How peculiar that the party of “small government” wants to impose its moral views on all through government mandate, because it has not been able to convert others to its views by moral suasion.”

    How curious that you would change the subject to advance your big government, tax-and-spend agenda. I haven’t gone over to your blogsite DL, to advance my morality, but instead you have come to my site to advance your morality on me. Liberal tactics are to accuse their political opponents of that which they are guilty of.
    I am not attempting to convert you to my morality, because you are a lost cause and only God can save you.

  15. So then you agree, legislating morality through a federal mandate is intrusive government?

    Because for all the keep government out of my home(a principle I largely agree with) rhetoric we hear, there sure seems to be an awful lot of intrusive policy aimed at mandating everybody follows your belief system.

    For example, I don’t support abortion, but I do not consider the morning after pill an abortion. Nor do I consider it an abortion until certain thresholds of the pregnancy have been reached. In my opinion if the pregnancy has not reached a point where it is sentient and capable of feeling pain I do not consider that abortion.

    It’s a matter of perspective. No Moseley claiming his opinion in an inherent truth.

  16. “The correct religion is true in reference to objective truth, which is verifiable by the objective reality of God.”

    There is no objective reality of God. Your fantasies are your own; don’t blame them on an imaginary being.

  17. “How curious that you would change the subject to advance your big government, tax-and-spend agenda.”

    In what way does my pointing out your hypocrisy advance such an agenda? By the way, please show me a government that does not tax or spend before you toss around that empty bit of conservative “thinking.”

    “I haven’t gone over to your blogsite DL”

    I have no connection to that blog site other than to comment on it, just as I do at this one.

    “instead you have come to my site to advance your morality on me”

    Quite the contrary. I have made no mention of forcing abortions on women who don’t want them.

    “Liberal tactics are to accuse their political opponents of that which they are guilty of.”

    Conservative tactics are to accuse their political opponents of that which they are guilty of. There, fixed it for you, and with an equal amount of evidence as you provided.

    “I am not attempting to convert you to my morality, because you are a lost cause and only God can save you.”

    A lot of commenters on this blog have seen you in action, and by their accounts your morality is severely lacking. Look in the mirror once in a while if you’re looking for somebody to pray for.

  18. Geezer
    “There is no objective reality of God. Your fantasies are your own; don’t blame them on an imaginary being.”

    Ah Geezer, “the fool saith in his heart, there is no God.”
    I do feel pity for you.

  19. Oh, there’s a God. It’s just nothing like you folks think It is, and has nothing to do with objective reality — that is, a reality that can be revealed and shown to believers and skeptics alike.

    Don’t worry, though. I pity you, too.

  20. Geezer
    You would be very surprised just exactly how real and omnipresent God really is. The thing is, God doesn’t pity you and considers you a work in progress, the same as every human on earth.

  21. Falcor writes in #65: “Nor do I consider it an abortion until certain thresholds of the pregnancy have been reached. In my opinion if the pregnancy has not reached a point where it is sentient and capable of feeling pain I do not consider that abortion.”

    By the time a woman knows she is pregnant, based on the usual method of noticing a missed period and then investigating, those thresholds have been crossed already. Maybe not if she is being monitored instantaneously such as for assistance with reproduction like in vitro fertilization and insemination. But in the natural case, by the time a woman starts to think about whether she might have an abortion, the fetus is already capable of feeling pain and is just then becoming sentient.

    However, why does anybody care what you consider?

    The medical profession calls it an abortion at any stage after implantation in the uterus.

    What you consider or want to call it — that is relevant HOW, exactly?

    The correct medical term is an abortion, at any time after the embryo is implanted in the uterine wall.

    But we live in the age of FEELINGS: So thing are whatever you FEEL. We are ruled by feelings not facts.

    Falcor also writes “For example, I don’t support abortion, but I do not consider the morning after pill an abortion. ”

    But it is a medical fact that a morning after pill causes an embryo that is already growing into a human being to be dislodged from the womb and expelled.

    SO you can consider that clouds are made of whipped cream and the sun loves you and the water in the ocean is talking to you. But the facts are the facts.

  22. Geezer writes in #69: “Oh, there’s a God. It’s just nothing like you folks think It is,”

    See this is where people don’t understand what they are commenting on.

    What I thought about God CHANGED when I personally encountered Him, one on one, tangibly.

    What I think of God is what God told me and showed me personally, about Himself, one on one.

    What I previously thought CHANGED when I experienced the actual, living, objective God.

    Skeptics imagine that believers (not doubters who wander into a church every now and then but true believers, meaning they TRULY BELIEVE) got their beliefs from somewhere else.

    In probably all cases what a person believes or thinks about God CHANGES when he or she encounters God.

    But there’s a problem: You will never experience or encounter God, until you WANT to. No, truly want to. In other words, you are ready to accept the CONSEQUENCES of God being real — and probably being different than you thought… and requiring things of you.

    As long as you really don’t want to know, and God knows what is in your heart, God will wait.

    God knows you don’t really want to know, you don’t really want to experience Him.

    But when others who have actually met God talk about God, it is important to be clear about what we mean. What we mean about God is NOT based on anyone’s theory or philosopy and more than that often requies ABANDONING what we previously believed upon encountering God through Jesus Christ.

  23. Falcor writes in #65: “Because for all the keep government out of my home(a principle I largely agree with) rhetoric we hear, there sure seems to be an awful lot of intrusive policy aimed at mandating everybody follows your belief system.

    Name an example. Preferably as many as you are referring to.

    Note: Abortion is not such an example, because it involves the protection of human life.

    You cannot kill your wife, whether it is on a public street or whether it is in your living room. Protecting human life doesn’t change based on where it is: “I want to kill my wife to avoid sharing my money with her in a divorce.” “NO YOU CAN’T. IT’S ILLEGAL.” “But I will do it in the bedroom.” “OH, THAT’S DIFFERENT. YOU CAN DO WHATEVER YOU WANT IN YOUR BEDROOM.” No, that’s silly.

  24. “Name an example. Preferably as many as you are referring to.”

    DOMA and DADT are by far the most glaring IMO. The entire education system in the bible belt which teaches fairytales as scientific fact. ABORTION (we’re just going to have to agree to disagree on this one). The Partiot Act. No Child Left Behind Act. etc.

    “By the time a woman knows she is pregnant, based on the usual method of noticing a missed period and then investigating, those thresholds have been crossed already.”

    This would be incorrect by any reasonable standard, obviously you don’t hesitate to ignore reason in your statements. Sadly the rest of us can’t join Kyle, Kenny, Stan and Cartman in Imaginationland.

  25. Falcor
    You concentrate on the micro-details of abortion, only to minimize the importance of the whole issue. Abortion is abortion, regardless of the stage of pregnancy. You would quibble over insignificant details simply to obfuscate and vitiate the issue. We simply will not accept your argument.

  26. Falcor wites in #74: “Name an example. Preferably as many as you are referring to.” DOMA and DADT are by far the most glaring IMO.”

    DADT = Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, which dropped the longstanding rules against homosexuals serving in the military.

    Remember that the military on base and in the field mostly involves men in close contact, in group showers, group toilets, etc.

    So how is it forcing beliefs on someone to say you are perfectly allowed to be in the military as a homosexual and nobody is going to say or do aything about it — just don’t push it in people’s faces?

    If you don’t like “Dont Ask Don’t Tell” then — BY DEFINITION — YOU WANT TO FORCE YOUR (HOMOSEXUAL) BELIEFS ON PEOPLE… right?

  27. DOMA = Defense of Marriage Act.

    In recognition of States that are allowing homosexual marriage, the Congress passed DOMA to PREVENT ONE STATE FROM FORCING ITS BELIEFS ON ALL THE OTHER STATES.

    So if you are against DOMA, you want to force your (homosexual) beliefs on everyone else. Right?

    Here’s how it works: If two homosexuals get allegedly married in Vermont and then moves to Alabama, they will claim that Alabama MUST recognize their Vermont marriage.

    So the homosexuals have now FORCED their beliefs on other people.

    That by the way is the heart and soul of liberalsim: forcing their liberal morality on others and society in general. Forcing their morality on others is the essence of liberalism in today’s parlance.

    So DOMA says that Alabama does not have to recognize a Vermont marriage if it doesn’t want to.

    DOMA allows Vermont to legalize homosexual “marriage” if it wants to.

    But DOMA protects other states from having Vermont FORCE Alabama to accept homoesxual marriage if Albama doesn’t want to.

    NOW, PLEASE EXPLAIN WHAT YOUR PROBLEM IS WITH THAT?

    I know your problem: You didn’t understand anything about DOMA because you only listen to liberal hack “journalists” (propagandists) and you don’t really know whwat DOMA is, what DOMA does, or why DOMA was passed.

  28. Falcor also writes: “The Partiot Act.”

    How the blazes does the USA Patriot Act force any beliefs on anyone? Now you are just having a flashback.

    Falcor also writes: “No Child Left Behind Act. etc.”

    How is that forcing any beliefs on anyone The No Child Left Behind Act merely demands higher standards and greater achievement — for the benefit of the children.

    The only controversy about “No Child Left Behind” is whether you care more about teachers than you do about the children.

  29. By the way, as I recall “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” is an administrative policy establshed by Bill Clinton.

    How is that Republicans doing anything?

    Was DADT ever formalized in a law? I never heard of that.

    So if you are against DADT, you want homosexuals to “tell.” So how do we envision this happening?

    A soldier shows up, assigned to a new unit, and announces to the barracks where men are goin gout on maneuvers to camp in the woods together that he is homoexual.

    Now how is that NOT the homosexual forcing his beliefs on other people?

  30. “A soldier shows up, assigned to a new unit, and announces to the barracks where men are goin gout on maneuvers to camp in the woods together that he is homoexual. Now how is that NOT the homosexual forcing his beliefs on other people?”

    A soldier shows up…and announces…that he is Christian. Now how is that NOT the Christian forcing his beliefs on other people?

    Given of course that Christianity is a belief and not a result of how someone was born. Oh wait..Christianity is a belief. Now I’m really confused. Is someone (Jon)asserting that homosexuality is a belief? Or that someone’s announcement of their convictions is forcing it upon others?

    Little bit of sticky wicket there Jon? Here let me help (once again). If announcing your “beliefs” is forcing your beliefs on other people, then you have a problem, since you have stated that Jesus commanded you to do exactly that. On the other hand, if homosexuality is not a belief, then there can be no forcing by the mere act of announcing.

    Now you can get out of this one by amending your statement that homosexuality is a belief. Now, on the other other hand, announcing that someone is Mexican, or Italian, or a cowboy, or a scratch golfer is not forcing their Mexicanness, or Italianness, or golferness upon anyone. It is simply saying “This is who I am.”

    Personally, I can do without any of those announcements, including the Christianity announcement. So mull that over a bit and see if you can find a way to say what you want that doesn’t demonstrate intellectual hypocrisy.

  31. “We simply will not accept your argument.”

    You don’t have to. But some people — people who have the wombs that will have to carry the children — disagree with your contention that, because “life begins at conception,” so should legal rights of a fetus, and that its rights should take precedence over those of its mother. It is possible to find abortion regrettable and seek to reduce it without therefore concluding that it should be illegal. You don’t see such distinctions. Others do.

  32. Dave
    You make so many analogies that are not apro po to this discussion, that it is laughable. Where to start is a problem. Are you serious. I thought you were pragmatic. This last post proves that you are an outright progressive liberal not an independent as you have once claimed. LOL What a joke you are.
    I really don’t mean to demean you but you simply don’t make a valid argument.

  33. Oh Geez
    You are so wrong it hurts to answer your comment. First of all women that are intelligent know when they are ovulating, and to have unprotected sex and become pregnant is just plain stupidity. Geezer, you want me to believe that women are stupid and uninformed, well that’s not happening there big boy.
    Your want to excuse common sense and go for political correctness, and that’s not happening either. I’m not going to believe that women that make bad choices are stupid.
    I’ve made a few bad choices in my life and never has the government covered my butt.

  34. @Don,

    What eluded you was that Jon was arguing that accouncing who or what one is has the effect of forcing that “belief” (his word) on others. That’s the crux of his argument.

    My response was that if that Jon’s premises are true that “A” (public announcement is forcing) and “B” homosexuality is a belief., then it must be true for all such announcements, whether political persuasion, religion, or any other “belief.”

    I’m sorry you missed that. And once again, because see me defending logic, reason, and common sense, you construe that as defending homosexuality in the military or something equally ridiculous.

    What you do not seem to ever get is that I despise intellectual dishonesty in all forms from all sources. If you want to argue philosophy and principle, do it using reason. False analogy and false equivalence, especially are epidemic on this site. You can no more understand or recognize my politics and principles than they are able to over on DL because I do not stand on principles. I stand on solutions to problems that are mostly self evident. It’s not about waving the flag. It’s about creating, sustaining, and improving an America for all Americans.

  35. Dave writes in #80: “A soldier shows up…and announces…that he is Christian. Now how is that NOT the Christian forcing his beliefs on other people?”

    No, because living in close quarters, showring in group showers, and crouching side by side in fox holes FORCES male soldiers to confront the SEXUALITY of the gay soldier in a very personal way. The soldiers cannot avoid altering their behavior and their emotions in response.

    Sexuality is different.

    There is nothing about being a Christian that makes soldiers have to conform or change their behavior.

    The bottom line is that if you oppose “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” — a Bill Clinton creation — than you want to rub people’s noses in your homosexuality.

    The homosexual lobby wants to force its agenda and beliefs on everyone else.

    We don’t need to hear about anyone’s private sexuality. Some friends want to talk about such things. But you don’t force it on people who don’t want to know.

    T O O
    M U C H
    I N F O R M A T I O N

    DADT is the answer.

  36. Geezer writes in #81: “But some people — people who have the wombs that will have to carry the children — disagree with your contention that, because “life begins at conception,” so should legal rights of a fetus,”

    And some men kill their wives or women kill their husbands because they disagree that the person they hate should have legal rights.

    There is and has to be OBJECTIVE truth.

    Geeer, suppose you could get a promotion by killing your boss and taking his job?

    Is that wrong? But you have a MOTIVE for doing it… so that makes it okay, right? No, having a MOTIVE is often used as indication of guilt for murder.

    What if you in your own personal opinion feel that your desire for a promotion outweighs your miserable nasty worthless boss’ life?

    Can you make that subjective determination yourself? Or is there an objective standard that applies regardless of your own private, personal, subjective feeling on the subject?

  37. “crouching side by side in fox holes ”

    Jon,
    Please read the thread on women in combat. There are no more foxholes!

    “FORCES male soldiers to confront the SEXUALITY of the gay soldier in a very personal way. ”

    How so? I see gay people every day. I’ve shaken hands with them? Do you think normal people are afraid they are going to get aroused around a gay soldier? Just what is it that forces them to confront sexuality? Are you suggesting there is something going on in foxholes and in the showers? You’ve never even been in the military and probably have never been in a military barracks/dorm. What the heck do you think goes on in there?

    And how does your announcment of your religion not force everyone to confront that as well? In fact, I will tell you it does force people to confront it and it makes them uncomfortable when some dude walks in and announces they are Christian. It happened in my unit. I mean why would anyone do such a thing? It made most everyone uncomfortable that the person felt the need to share that information. Your religion and your sexuality are yours. Keep it in your pants and in your prayers and we’ll all be fine.

  38. Dave writes in #87: “There are no more foxholes!”

    Depends on the war. Ask a sniper or recon team.

    Dave writes: ““FORCES male soldiers to confront the SEXUALITY of the gay soldier in a very personal way. ”
    How so? I see gay people every day. I’ve shaken hands with them?”

    And, Mr. Facts and Logic, isn’t that your CHOICE?

    The topic is how liberals, especially gays, want to force their beliefs on others.

    If you CHOOSE to shake hands with someone, how is that forcing anything on you?

    Remember when you used to pretend to be driven by facts and logic instead of admitting that you are simply a left-wing propagandist?

    The topic is whether Republicans are forcing their beliefs on people, and Falcor offered BILL CLINTON’S policy of DADT as an example of REPUBLICANS forcing their beliefs on people.

    By definition, DADT is the exact opposite of anyone forcing their beliefs on anyone. It says “Just keep it to yourself and in private and don’t push it in anyone’s face.”

    So DADT established by Bill Clinton is clearly not an example of Republicans forcing their beliefs on anyone.

    The push to repeal DADT is an attempt to force liberal and homosexual beliefs on people.

    Some may choose to accept or agree with those beliefs.

    But opponents of DADT want to force people to agree with them.

  39. You don’t have to “agree” with anything. You just have to keep your bigotry to yourself.

  40. “There is and has to be OBJECTIVE truth.”

    The objective truth is that, as it is not an independent being, a fetus of less than 13 weeks’ development has no legal standing as a “person.” That’s the objective truth of the law of the land, and you refuse to accept it.

    So with all due respect, shove your “OBJECTIVE truth” up your fallopian tube.

  41. I wish I could post like you. Your position The Second Amendment Freedom Rally,
    A Rally For All Freedoms | DelawarePolitics.net has pushed me
    to get off my butt and get some word out to the
    world. You have boosted my confidence just by writing so
    well.

Comments are closed.