DiaryLand members area

Really, it's just that Daver looks awful (not sick or like he's miserable awful, just bad) and since I'm still not able to forgive him, it makes me happy.

from sole-review :

Hello, I'm the owner of Sole Review. I am trying to create a review site with the possibility of anybody getting a good grade if they pick the right reviewer. Therefore, I'm trying to get as many reviewers as possible with all different ages, backgrounds, insights, and grading styles. I'm writing you about this to see if you'd be interested. I don't expect this to take up too much of your time, for the reason that if there are lots of reviewers, then each reviewer should only have to do a review once every two weeks or less. If you're interested, read the rules and scoring of the site and get back to me, Pink. Thanks for your time.

from zinger53 :

Well, I must say, hearing about this entry got me onto diaryland, which I haven't been to in a very long time. Of course I'm not gonna stop talking to you, I have several republican friends....I guess I just never expected it from you. Moose pretty much summed up my argument in that, it's not about whether you think homosexuality is right or wrong, it's about separation of church and state, something that we supposedly have in this "great" country of ours. It's about freedom of expression (who you love) and aledgedly freedom to live your life how you want so long as you are not hurting others. Constitutional amendment 36 brought religion into our constitution, something the founders of this country said they wanted to keep out of it. Of course I have a problem with the measure on another level because it affects friends, family members and family members of many friends, but I also have a problem because it combines religion where it doesn't belong, in our government, and therefore forces others to follow religious views....now that's not fair!

from napsaregood :

No problem. I avoid confrontations as much as possible.

from moose262 :

4 years ago, i probably would have voted the same way you did... i am still a fairly moderate liberal conservative... lol. but anyway, measure 36 really rubbed me the wrong way.. it has nothing to do with how i feel on the subject, it doesnt matter if i was for or against homosexuality (for teh record, i do agree with it wholeheartedly).... the hting that burns me up is that certain people are expectign a privelege that they have decided other people cannot have. the issue here is nto a sacremental marriage, it has nothign to do with a holy union between a man and a woman made in a church and blessed by god... it is about government sanctioned secualr marriage.. tehre is a difference. if you are marrie dby teh state, but are nto blessed by a priest, or minister or whatever, you are nto married in the eyes of god.. but you are still married, the word has worked its way into secularity, you might as well say taht two atheists cant get married, because tehy dotn belive in god, tehrefor its nto a valid marriage, and its nto goign to be blessed. i am just burne dup because i think that peopel are mistakign secular marriage with holy matrimony, one of the seven sacrements. by callign it marriage, we are only usign a word that designates a union between two peopel, because it is teh most common word for it. just because you believe soemoen will get no grace from soemthign does not mean that they shoudlnt be abel to try,a nd beleive their own way. im nto mad so much at teh peopel who voted yes, as much as teh peopel who blatantly touted this like it wa ssoemn important hoyl issue that really needed to be taken care of... you can be married by a priest and not have a civil marriage, and vice versa. they do nto mean teh same thing.