Tom Toles by Tom Toles

Tom Toles

Comments (27) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. Anthony 2816

    Anthony 2816 said, over 3 years ago

    You mean when both Rush Limbaugh and Bill O’Reilly gave up the fight against gays?

  2. artworksmetal

    artworksmetal GoComics PRO Member said, over 3 years ago

    I never thought thought I would agree with anything Rush might say.

  3. Christopher Shea

    Christopher Shea said, over 3 years ago

    The Full Faith and Credit clause of the Constitution requires that each state honor contracts made in the others. If you’re married in Iowa, you don’t stop being married when you go to Alabama. And that should apply to gay marriages too.

  4. richardelguru

    richardelguru GoComics PRO Member said, over 3 years ago

    onguard: so childless hetero-couples shouldn’t get married? Women past menopause shouldn’t?

  5. Jase99

    Jase99 GoComics PRO Member said, over 3 years ago

    Spoken like a bigoted pseudo-Christian.

  6. Anthony 2816

    Anthony 2816 said, over 3 years ago

    Read it again. I didn’t say it was. I merely suggested your “milestone” might be when both Rush Limbaugh and Bill O’Reilly gave up the fight against gays.

  7. Anthony 2816

    Anthony 2816 said, over 3 years ago

    Tigger, don’t you get tired of going to each gay marriage thread, posting the exact same thing, and then running away with your tail between your legs when people point out why your wish won’t work?

  8. Anthony 2816

    Anthony 2816 said, over 3 years ago

    There’s only one real reason to be against gay marriage: Because you don’t like gay people, and wish to make them unhappy.

  9. Uncle Joe

    Uncle Joe GoComics PRO Member said, over 3 years ago

    @Christopher Shea

    “The Full Faith and Credit clause of the Constitution requires that each state honor contracts made in the others. If you’re married in Iowa, you don’t stop being married when you go to Alabama. And that should apply to gay marriages too.”

    I think the Supreme Court is well aware of this, but wants to issue as narrow a ruling right now. It will take several years before a case over this issue makes it to the SCOTUS, by which time same sex marriage will be even less controversial.

  10. Uncle Joe

    Uncle Joe GoComics PRO Member said, over 3 years ago

    “Reading comprehension and Dem Libs it appears, are incomparable…..No wonder they are always trying to change the meaning of words.”

    The meaning of words change. Get over it.

  11. Simon_Jester

    Simon_Jester said, over 3 years ago

    LOL!, ROFL! and OMG!

    Don’tcha LUV it when tea-baggers accuse us libs of being dumb while saying things like THAT? I swear,this is right up there with that, "Get a Clue, Morans’ sign.

    Hey Mr Reading Skills… the word you were looking for for was, ‘In com-PAT-ible’, not ‘incom-PAR-able’.

  12. Stipple

    Stipple said, over 3 years ago

    @Simon_Jester

    I believe onguard got it right, the comprehension skills of the Dem libs are not comparable to his.
    .
    Heck, they are not even close, much less comparable.
    That is obvious just by reading the posts, past and present.

  13. Anthony 2816

    Anthony 2816 said, over 3 years ago

    “You’re so positive the Justices will rule the way you want them to rule”

    I never said any such thing.

    “this is a State to State issue which it is according to our Constitution”

    Then I’ll ask you yet again…maybe you’ll answer this time…how do you reconcile what you just said with the Full Faith and Credit Clause. Since you seem unfamiliar with it, here it is: Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.

  14. Anthony 2816

    Anthony 2816 said, over 3 years ago

    “Yet you’re against our right to bear arms.”

    I never said any such thing.

  15. Anthony 2816

    Anthony 2816 said, over 3 years ago

    “Should States that do not have conceal/carry laws take a case to the SCOTUS forcing all 50 States to have conceal/carry laws, or should it be up to each individual State to decide if they want their private citizens to carry a concealed handgun?”

    I see concealing or not concealing a weapon as very much less of a burden than being married or not. If traveling the country with a handgun, I can easily display it in one state and conceal it in another

    But, as I’ve pointed out to you (without response) in other threads, how is a married couple supposed to get unmarried when passing through one state, then married again to pass through another, then unmarried again in the next state…? Your gun analogy makes no more sense than you claiming all roads must have the same speed limits.

    Maybe this time you’ll address these points, instead of just going to a new thread and reposting your tired old drivel as if you’ve never been challenged on it?

  16. Load the rest of the comments (12).