Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
she was physically attacked by the crazed loons who ripped the sign from her hands and trampled on it, yeah.
you better inform those comical characters at georgetown u. law school
harmful contact-she wasn't physically contacted so strike that one. Was the cross she had expensive? No? Then there goes the suit for any monetary damages she incurred. I still see no physically assaulted examples in this.
The APA is nothing more than a secular group of people that couldn't figure out who they are, so they spend their time defining everyone else... \
The Gay community is a huge lifelong customer of the Psychology industry, why say they can be cured and give up all those billable hours...
They don't have a clue.
freedom
Repressed, repressed! I suggest all of you out there who are so gol darn angry go out & get you some sex STAT! I'd be pretty damn angry too if my wife or husband denied me sex because "sex is only for procreation".
Ya just have to respect a group of big old tough gays pushing around a 80 year old woman, she was a real threat, maybe next time they will move up to pushing around a handicapped person.
Watch the video......they weren't big or tough but those 'gays' sure were old! It was a geriatric riot and I'm sure everyone was in bed by 9 pm
harmful contact-she wasn't physically contacted so strike that one.
a swing and a miss
the requirement is for imminent apprehensionof harmful or offensive contact. this case certainly fits the criteria.
Quote:
Was the cross she had expensive? No? Then there goes the suit for any monetary damages she incurred.
i seriously doubt there was ever an intention of filing charges on the basis of monetary damages.
still.. don't you feel a little odd defending a bunch of shrieking loons who attacked a 80 year old woman, ripped a cross from her hands, and stomped on it?
if not - why?
Quote:
I still see no physically assaulted examples in this.
then you probably should read a bit closer: "Assault is the intent to place another person in imminent apprehension of harmful or offensive contact."
the requirement is for imminent apprehensionof harmful or offensive contact. this case certainly fits the criteria.
i seriously doubt there was ever an intention of filing charges on the basis of monetary damages.
still.. don't you feel a little odd defending a bunch of shrieking loons who attacked a 80 year old woman, ripped a cross from her hands, and stomped on it?
if not - why?
then you probably should read a bit closer: "Assault is the intent to place another person in imminent apprehension of harmful or offensive contact."
No, I don't feel "odd" defending people who have a right to their anger. You however should feel odd trying to deny people a basic right.
It's just theory, just as scientifiic as an opinion. it's written by the American Psychological Association , very fitting.
Now this is nothing more than typical anti-intelligence Republicanism. Dump-down & than celebrate the "normal real American" from Podunk [rural South - now the base for the GOP - Bible Belt ignorance\ self-hate
First of all, anal sex is totally legal, and countless heterosexual couples have engaged in it. (I'll bet there are folks doing it at this very moment, somewhere in the world.) Furthermore, oral sex and other non-copulatory acts are also traditionally considered sodomy. If that's the case, I, a straight male, am a happy sodomite (and I pity you if you haven't ever been... it could explain your stress level).
Second of all, this has nothing to DO with what goes on in the bedroom. Like I say, that's perfectly legal. This is about marriage. Rights. What happens in the courtroom, not the bedroom.
Third of all, I find it ridiculous that gay men and women have been beaten, killed, tortured, derided, and generally disrespected for centuries (often with impunity) and when a couple of angry people verbally confront someone (which was out of line, but nobody got hurt), people say "Where's your tolerance NOW????"
It's ridiculous that one side can engage in bigotry with impunity while the other side cannot even breath a word that isn't nice and pretty without being crucified for it.
Indeed.
The most VIOLENTLY INTOLERANT people on the planet are LIBERALS and California Liberals are some of the WORST!
But, none of this should be surprising.
The Liberal elites have completely succumbed to the Communist Revolutionary Ideology. They obviously believe that endless violent revolution is the answer to the countries problems.
What planet are you living on? What comic book are you reading?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
