there are already tons of gay people in the military, many of them have lost their lives serving this country. these religious nuts are out of their minds... sprigg needs to move on..
It's absolutely ridiculous that this is being discussed in the U.S. Seriously, don't we have better things to deal with other than if LGBT people can serve or not serve in the military?
the united kingdom of great britian and northern ireland allow lgbt serivce members to serve openly and since that has happend i have not head any reports of mutinty or break down in disclipne in the armed forced of the united kingdom of great britan
lol@ the bigots thinking that if the gay people say that theyre gay then they will have the purpose and reason to sexually assault some1 in the army and other straight members would feel uncomfortable with the presence of a gay member. what kind of logic is that? oh thats right its not logical at all
People seem to forget that DADT was started because a gay man was beaten to death in a porter potty by two violent thug soldiers. Not because people don't want to know about it. It was to protect soldiers, but times have changed in the past 20 years.
The Peter Spriggs of the world make the world colder. He is an authoritarian; absolute leader; sees all, knows all; the self-anointed; resign your will to his, for he knows what is best for all. He points the way. If you go your own way, YOU will falter! God, probably believes, rapped in his ear too. Go forth, my bigot, and spread my message of hate; separation; division. Lay waste the malleable minds of the Republican Party. Follow the Limbaugh Doctrine.
If you're in the proximity of a gay person and that gay makes a pass at you, all you have to say is, I'm not gay. That ends it. I believe those who are adamantly opposed to gays, have unresolved issues. I'm not gay, but I've been approached by gays and I just say, NO. They haven't raped me or beat me up. I don't fear them, I use to when I was a teenager and taught to fear and hate them. I've matured since then and I suggest you, the guardians of, "all that is right in your sight", do to.
Peter Sprigg is simply a theocratic homophobe but we need to keep turning the rocks over and revealing these people for what they are. I am glad that Chris Matthews had him on.
Haha Chris Matthews, he just laughs at the end there, you can tell how disgusted and bemused he is at the lunacy of this guy, Peter Sprigg. What a nutjob. He seriously needs to just go back to the rock from which he crawled.
Peter Sprigg.....your ignorance is appalling. Your one sided opinions, misinformation and quoting of selective statistics demonstrates your prejudices. What makes this even more appalling is that you do this under the guise of Christianity and 'family values' and fail to realise that gay service people are also loved by their families. I am comforted by the knowledge that people such as yourself are a declining minority. The enemy is ignorance. Thanks for displaying that so well.
ususally people who are vehemently & outrageously opposed to Gay people are usually closeted Gay persons themselves..Larry Craig,Mark Foley,Ted Haggard,Bishop Long and countless others have taken this woefully outdated stance only to be found on their knees in front of a naked man..
I agree, it is just common sense, open homosexuals serving will logically increase the sexual tension in the military. Look at it this way, homosexuals are sexually attracted to males. Heterosexuals are sexually attracted to females. If women served with men in showers, slept in same rooms, there would be sexual tension, likewise for homosexuals and other men.
If Israel & UK can make homosexual intergration work why cant USA - regular soldier are just not that insecure - I think you will find it a non issue once this stupid law is binned
PS: I always found it kind of funny how many of those who complain about gays not being monogamous, or whatever, fight from every angle (including marriage) to exacerbate that ... and those that don't want gays to be together wouldn't want ... say ... a gay man marrying their daughter.
For some, gays (for which it IS natural), partnering with the same gender is best for them and everyone else (from almost any way you can look at it). Not only that, but it is in theirs and everyone else's best interest to support stability in all couples, especially families (many gay couples have kids that deserve protections as well).
PS: I always found it kind of funny how many of those who complain about gays not being monogamous, or whatever, fight from every angle (incl
I dont opose gays or lesbians, but the thought came thru my mind, if many people defened homosexuality so strongly, because of freedom of choice, even though that is repugnant, and deviates from the normal behavior, why dont we legalize prostitution and defend it too? that is also a choice, and the arguemetns gainst it are similar.
@Ddstairclimber Your argument doesn't make any sense, but still prostitution should be legalised. The only difference is that it would have to be regulated like in the Netherlands. A legitimate opposition to legalising prostitution is that because money changes hands people may be coerced into it - which completely ignores the face that it still happens anyway. Nothing like homosexual activity. If it's consensual and no one is harmed then it's none of anyone's business.
@FreeInquisition yes, my argument makes sense, perhaps the only difference is hte exchange of money, but even then one can still choose to decline the money and not do it, or have teh choice to do it. but there as social stigma against both of them, each in its own way, but that is the reason why Americans criminalize prostitution beacause of it being a social stigma and disrigard, freedom of choice.
Yes, being able to choose is a repugnant idea. *facepalm* And why, exactly, should it be illegal to sell something that you can freely give away? As FreeInquisition said, your argument makes no sense. Something tells me that you would be opposed to homosexuals being able to marry also.
@sakar181 you are missinterpreting and/or missunderstanding, I am PRO freedom of choice, that is why I support prostitution drugs, and dont opose people being gay. What I am saying is many people find homosexuality disgusting.( keep in mind I never said it should be outlawed!) I think none of the above should not be ilegal, because it is a personal choice, so is prostitution, there are some similarities. people find things disgusting, but It is not fair to legislate on that.
We all know what guys like Fred Phelps and Peter Sprigg are like - they are probably each other's fuck buddies behind the scenes. They can both go to hell in my opinion - it's attitudes like that this which make me disdainful of America.
If the Gay can handle it, they should never joint the military period. And go impose that their lifestyle and choice, affect others in the military. Keep their stupit lifestyle in the closet and keep it to themselves period. What they do in their own bed is their busy, but don't go around tell people to accept it...It is wrong and sin is sin, which God hates and do not condone....
I don't agree with incest but if it's between consenting adults then I don't really think anyone should have a say so in the matter. People are only victims when it's a case of rape or pedophilia. Animals cannot consent to sex with humans therefore bestiality is a form of animal abuse.
People who hate gays just come across as weird old remnants of a bygone era. They're like the crazy people giving sermons on the street. It's better to just shake your head and walk on by.
@paxson001 Hey dumb ass most of the people in the country are "antigay", stupid fuck, gay marriage fails in every place its voted on. Idiots. Btws I suppose pedos are ok too, arent they?
Why do they need to serve openly? They are there to do a job and their sexuality is last thing that should be on anyones mind. Does this mean that when a gay person is employed they should say so in an interview or when they're presented to co-workers? Serving/working openly as a gay person is just stupid. Keep your personal life for your own personal time, not at work or in the forces.
lemonjellies: "Serving openly" doesn't mean gay soldiers broadcast their sexuality at every introduction. It just simply means they won't get dismissed if they mention their significant other when they talk about their weekend, or if they get their sex life reported to their commander by someone with a grudge. Just like the straight soldiers.
Fine then, so when straight people go off to war for years at a time they should not have their wives/girlfriends and children wishing them well because gays sure can't. Also speaking of work, should straight people not have photos of their partners on their desk since many gays feel like they can't without repercussions, especially in conservative areas.
i agree with you to an extent. they should lift the policy; however, no one in the military should state their sexual orientation. both gays and straights.
watch more videos like this at daceband(.)com it's a video site like Youtube but better because not only can you share videos but you can also share photos, blogs, chat, sell your music and even make money by inviting your friends to the site.
How about all these Christian freaks walk down to their nearest VA Hospital and tell the gay soldier who left his legs on an IED in Iraq that he shouldn't serve because he's gay? I don't have much patience for the arm chair warriors who pontifiicate for keeping DADT with words like "unit cohesion," without ever having served in a unit. And if you're concerned about national security, what country is in a more perilous region of the world than Israel. And they allow gays to serve.
Oh yeah, you don't hate them but you hate their sin. That's like saying you hated black people for being black but claiming that you're not a racist.
@tzushih Im not into religion i just think gays are criminals many gay's do drug's have unprotected sex and spread hiv . I think gays are a threat to our society and children we dont need that foolish behavior in this great nation
Yeah, I have a right to physically express my sincere loving feelings of pre-teen boys! As long as it is consensual of course. - So much for "freedom."
This is military regulations, policies and standard we're talking about not civilian life. If gays want freedom then they should still civilian, and stop trying to put their nonsense onto the military! Once you sign the papers and become a US soldier your freedom =/ to a civilian. To a gay guy which is a better? obviously the civilian life..
Not really, its just that when you join the military, you act as a group, not as an individual. Hence don't ask, don't tell just basically means I don't give a crap about your sexuality as long as you do your job. If you feel that you have to express your sexuality, then you're in the wrong place.
97% support gay to openly serve the military? Thats' fucking outrageous!! Where did that get that number from? It;'s fucking absurd!! If that was true then 48 of states would allow gay marriage. A poll recently created stated that 55% of rep don't support gay rights: Marriage, serving openly gay in the military, and gay openly teaching at school. It's a statistic that came out of his loose asshole obviously!!
79% might be a high number but how about people ask the members in the military. It seems to be all about politics and no one is asking any military personnel how they would feel about this. Your 79% of what im sure was mainly civilians proves nothing of how the military would feel.
The same arguments were made over racial integration of the military, and lo and behold, it was no big deal.
If you're in the military, you've served with gays and lesbians already anyway, especially since 1994. It's no big deal now, and it'll be no big deal two years from now. Nothing much will change, except my tax money won't be wasted on dismissing good people from the armed forces.
Spyhunter107: No, it's not at all a flawed analogy. In both cases, conservatives wailed and moaned that change would disrupt the forces and mean an end to military life as we know it. In reality, our soldiers (of all ethnicities) behaved professionally, and before long people had even forgotten why it was supposed to be such a big deal.
I agree, I feel this decision to be one sided and it the only way Obama would accomplish the repeal.. If you asked a military family, I'd 70% wouldn't be happy if the policy was repeal! My sister and my cousin wouldn't be happy if the policy was repeal, and they're married to military soldier. I'm about to enlist in the military and I wouldn't feel happy one bit if I had to shower or sleep in the barrack w/ an openly gay mens. Politics shouldn't interfere with military regulations and standards
Exactly. Politics SHOULDN'T INTERFERE with military regulations and standards. Honestly, if you're gay, so what? You don't have to openly tell when you're in the amry. What good will that do? Will it change anything? If not, then there's no point. I do believe in gay rights but there's more important things for the president to do.
Spyhunter107: A May 2009 Gallup poll found that 69% of adults nationwide favor allowing openly gay men and women to serve in the military, up from 63% in 2004.
A 2008 CNN poll pegged the number as high as 81%.
Obama is merely doing what three-quarters of the country would like him to do. And not a moment too soon.
I am currently in the military and woman and men are not in any way allowed to reside in the same barracks room. I am not against gays but when gays serve openly in the military figuring out just what to do with basic housing and barracks will be a disaster. The reason is to alleviate sexual tension, so someone please explain to me how you feel this is going to be ok with gays living with other males? It wont, and you cant put multiple gays in the same room for the same reason.
Absolutely, it'd be a disaster trying to figure out alternate ways for gays and lesbian be separated from straights because I'd still be a chaos! Gay males in one barrack would be a sausage heaven for them, it'd be out of control and sexual assaults would occurred.. The DS would pick on them, they'd feel joining the military will be the biggest regret of their lives.. Right now, they're protected as long they stay quiet and it should be that way!! More funds would be wasted by expanding!!
It's bullshit!! The policy shouldn't get overturn especially when there's more people oppose to this decision than gay which is 1% of the population! Msnbc supports gay, look at their logo, it's obvious!! We're fighting two wars currently and the united states is worrying about gays serving the military? FFS whats this country becoming? I don't want to be in the same shower or sleep in the same room as gays..
they can use torture to get information, since its nessesary, but gay's cant fight for their country! i just love republicans.. God one's said "Everyone is equal" i suggest they read on up it considering their all christains. and no im not gay btw
A question. Do military men and women allow to sleep in a same room in their barracks? If the answer is yes, there shouldn't be any objection to gay & lesbian in military. If the answer is no, the issue should be considered again, or one should ridiculus rules such as gay should sleep in women's barrack and lesbian should sleep in men's barrack.
A species that produces more than 2 offspring per coupling that survive into parenthood needs to have homosexual members, or the species will doom itself to overpopulation.
It certainly sounds natural to me. That or a regulation fro God to ensure we don't multiply ten-fold.
I don't get it. If somebody wants to live in a Theocratic totalitarian democracy where the government is constantly imposing their views on you, then why don't they just move to Iran?
@GGLebo23 lmao.... wow, that guy was an idiot. youre absolutely right. people are soo concerned with their own freedom that they try to take away everyone elses. hey, gay people watching, us streight people are not all idiots. i vote on your behalf!
There is a correlation of increased artificial hormones in industrial food products over the last century that is directly related to the growing population of 'homosexuals'. There has always been gay people, and its because there are hormonal differences between gay and straight that make an individual appeal to one sex. Now there is much more of a hormone imbalance and a culture that made an identity from it. Once hormones are brought to balance that person loses homosexual preference.
I just love the way Matthews attacks the guy for not knowing what NO ONE KNOWS. Does anyone actually think Chris is objective? There is never really a serous discussion of the issue with him anymore.
I hope you are just dumb and it´ll be hard top that this year , but so far you are in line with Achmadinejad, i tend to think you are just crazy insane. And that is peer rewied, written in stone and as much more true as you cannot prove it otherwise , not even if you lived another 123 years from now on.
Good god the arguments this guy is making are truly insane. He's saying that if gay people were allowed to be gay openly, they would rampantly abuse, molest and rape other people.
That's freakin' ridiculous.
And btw, I'm convinced that homophobic people have an inner shame, are insecure, and perhaps gay themselves.
I'm so comfortable with my heterosexuality, that I am entirely understanding and sympathetic towards gay people. Homophobes are totally insecure, and it is sad.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
You are so fully of it. People who oppose homosexuality do it for several principled reasons. The fact that they are not willing to be stream rolled by the gay movement does not mean they are "insecure".
Homosexuals are the ones with three to four times the rate of suicide, substance abuse, and physical abuse as compared to heterosexuals. It is they who have a problem dealing with their "inner shame" and mistakenly believe that forcing themselves on the public will fix it.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
There is no such a things as sexual orientation. It is a myth. It is all based on subjective feelings. There is no genetic or physiological difference between homosexuals and heterosexuals. Just as there is none between heterosexuals and child molesters. These are chosen deviant sexual behaviors.
I am not being intellectually dishonest. There is no independent, objective evidence for sexual orientation. Even it's proponents cannot tell you where it comes from.
and ancient vases illustrate where it commes from and it clearly happens only in democracies like in old greece, but not in totalitarian countries like iran , sowiet union or in fascist countries.
you can also clearly state that it came up with the catholic priests and their agenda only 20 years ago for shizzle.
My arguments have their basis is reality. We are designed biologically to reproduce as heterosexuals, male and female. This is indisputable objective fact. Sexual attraction is subjective and cannot be verified. However sexual behavior can be. One chooses to engage in a sexual behavior, whether it be heterosexual or homosexual. Only one is based on the design of our bodies.
The only linkage was in regard to your false premise that "mammals do it so it must be natural" nonsense.
The hypothesis that we are BORN with a sexual orientation other than heterosexual is totally and completely unproven. There is no genetic or physiological difference to account for homosexuality. Attraction is subjective and is negotiable. When here about men or women who have functioned perfectly fine for decades as heterosexuals "suddenly" discovering they are gay, you cannot possible believe they were faking it all that time.
The objective fact is that we are heterosexual by biology.
Biological factors which may be related to the development of a heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual orientation include genes, prenatal hormones, & brain structure. You may post here screaming it's a hypothesis, or that the Sun doesn't really exist, or unicorns are real, but it's not true.
Ignorant bigots like you who create irrational lies to support hate-full views will all be dead soon. You can't cheat time or death
For the rest of the world, time can't pass fast enough.
Do you think gay people CARE about what's 'natural'!? Do scientists care what's 'natural' when they make life saving drugs!? Is it 'natural' for us to drive around in giant hunks of metal called CARS!?
Gay people only care about what feels right to them and it is supposed to be the American way to accept that.
@CommonSenseJoe Homosexuality in the natural history of humans may have served to created a labor and resource pool. Humans children have longest period of dependancy on adults. Extra resources aid brain developement and the extra energy from the resource pool can be spent on technological and cultural development. Extra energy can be used for group scouting, looking out for predators and finding new food sources. Having a certain ratio of homosexual offspring aids group survival.
Propogation of a species is not about the sole survival of individuals, but of groups of individuals. Its about the propogation of genes. Look at an ant colony. The workers are not fertile. In the case of humans and other animals, it might be the case that having a certain ratio of individuals that do not reproduce may be a benefit to the group doing better. Instead of having all individuals having offspring, it may be be...
@DireDowns We are not ants or animals. If you want to have sex with someone of your own gender, have at it. The problem becomes when you want to take a perversion and make it "normal" behavior. It is unnatural, immoral, and harmful. There is absolutely no reason to promote it with ANY benefits such as marriage.
You cannot "promote" what some people naturally are. Sure you can promote understanding instead of fear and misrepresentation. But it is impossible to promote an emotional and physical attraction the same way that a company can promote a product. Since by your own reasoning that humans are seperate from nature, how can it be said that something is natural or unnatural? By what standard do you use? Do you use the standard of what is more common vs what is less common?
How that work out for Peter.....LOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
dards4444 2 weeks ago
MICHAEL MULLIN SOUNDS LIKE A KING SIZE FLAMER .. HAHA
DaRyteJuan 1 month ago
WE ARE CUMMING FOR YOU GAY-MATTHEWS, YOU GAY MOTHERFUCKER.
DaRyteJuan 1 month ago
there are already tons of gay people in the military, many of them have lost their lives serving this country. these religious nuts are out of their minds... sprigg needs to move on..
brigantty 7 months ago
It's absolutely ridiculous that this is being discussed in the U.S. Seriously, don't we have better things to deal with other than if LGBT people can serve or not serve in the military?
Zephur19 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
You are what you hate.
FreeFromWar 8 months ago
the united kingdom of great britian and northern ireland allow lgbt serivce members to serve openly and since that has happend i have not head any reports of mutinty or break down in disclipne in the armed forced of the united kingdom of great britan
kingnick104 9 months ago 2
lol@ the bigots thinking that if the gay people say that theyre gay then they will have the purpose and reason to sexually assault some1 in the army and other straight members would feel uncomfortable with the presence of a gay member. what kind of logic is that? oh thats right its not logical at all
vicked914 9 months ago 2
This guy is a male Anita Bryant.
toddles9 9 months ago 3
People seem to forget that DADT was started because a gay man was beaten to death in a porter potty by two violent thug soldiers. Not because people don't want to know about it. It was to protect soldiers, but times have changed in the past 20 years.
unhallowed45 10 months ago
This guy is getting his ass handed to him. What a bigot.
Love those other guys. Live long and prosper!
Mimi2591 11 months ago 3
How can you outlaw gays??? It's a matter of hormones and you can change the hormones after third trimester pregnacy.
skarosTHEgreek 11 months ago
The Peter Spriggs of the world make the world colder. He is an authoritarian; absolute leader; sees all, knows all; the self-anointed; resign your will to his, for he knows what is best for all. He points the way. If you go your own way, YOU will falter! God, probably believes, rapped in his ear too. Go forth, my bigot, and spread my message of hate; separation; division. Lay waste the malleable minds of the Republican Party. Follow the Limbaugh Doctrine.
octaviaaugustus1950 1 year ago
If you're in the proximity of a gay person and that gay makes a pass at you, all you have to say is, I'm not gay. That ends it. I believe those who are adamantly opposed to gays, have unresolved issues. I'm not gay, but I've been approached by gays and I just say, NO. They haven't raped me or beat me up. I don't fear them, I use to when I was a teenager and taught to fear and hate them. I've matured since then and I suggest you, the guardians of, "all that is right in your sight", do to.
octaviaaugustus1950 1 year ago
@octaviaaugustus1950
nicely put.
superstubes 1 year ago
SPRIGG = A COMPLETE BIGOT.
maybe a closet case.
superstubes 1 year ago 3
Who cares if gays serve in the army? Most people aren't affected by it, so get it over it.
IshName 1 year ago
Peter Sprigg is simply a theocratic homophobe but we need to keep turning the rocks over and revealing these people for what they are. I am glad that Chris Matthews had him on.
peter70chgo 1 year ago
Haha Chris Matthews, he just laughs at the end there, you can tell how disgusted and bemused he is at the lunacy of this guy, Peter Sprigg. What a nutjob. He seriously needs to just go back to the rock from which he crawled.
meghanpierson1 1 year ago
He should have just said "EAT DA POO POO"
MamaMario13 1 year ago
Welcome to Qatar
Nahasapasa 1 year ago
I'll quote a comment I read on another video: "Thank God people like this are a dying breed."
bananas1and2 1 year ago
Peter Sprigg.....your ignorance is appalling. Your one sided opinions, misinformation and quoting of selective statistics demonstrates your prejudices. What makes this even more appalling is that you do this under the guise of Christianity and 'family values' and fail to realise that gay service people are also loved by their families. I am comforted by the knowledge that people such as yourself are a declining minority. The enemy is ignorance. Thanks for displaying that so well.
gayambassador 1 year ago
ususally people who are vehemently & outrageously opposed to Gay people are usually closeted Gay persons themselves..Larry Craig,Mark Foley,Ted Haggard,Bishop Long and countless others have taken this woefully outdated stance only to be found on their knees in front of a naked man..
gretschsounds 1 year ago
I agree, it is just common sense, open homosexuals serving will logically increase the sexual tension in the military. Look at it this way, homosexuals are sexually attracted to males. Heterosexuals are sexually attracted to females. If women served with men in showers, slept in same rooms, there would be sexual tension, likewise for homosexuals and other men.
gustavoadolfo44 1 year ago
@gustavoadolfo44 your logic is poor.
Gays have been serving openly in every other major western army for years.
We've never had a problem
anyankafan 1 year ago
@gustavoadolfo44 what about homosexual women? are they attracted to men?
ccheng21 1 year ago
It's sad that we are still having this debate years after other countries have moved passed it.
chansetwo 1 year ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
If you have the right to die for your country , you also have the right to be a hero no matter what is your sexual orientation.
RonaldBarone 1 year ago
Man Chris Mathews is a homo.
dukeljk 1 year ago
If Israel & UK can make homosexual intergration work why cant USA - regular soldier are just not that insecure - I think you will find it a non issue once this stupid law is binned
trevortrevortsr2 1 year ago
this level of hatred is just downright despicable.
arshsingh1984 1 year ago
wait wait wait... and I quote.
"If we had a policy where people were considered bigoted if they were apposed to same sex conduct then... "
here's where it gets good...
"... then there would be much greater danger of misconduct on the part of homosexuals."
You really can't write this shit.
VibrancySF 1 year ago
PS: I always found it kind of funny how many of those who complain about gays not being monogamous, or whatever, fight from every angle (including marriage) to exacerbate that ... and those that don't want gays to be together wouldn't want ... say ... a gay man marrying their daughter.
bEEarCUB 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe
For some, gays (for which it IS natural), partnering with the same gender is best for them and everyone else (from almost any way you can look at it). Not only that, but it is in theirs and everyone else's best interest to support stability in all couples, especially families (many gay couples have kids that deserve protections as well).
PS: I always found it kind of funny how many of those who complain about gays not being monogamous, or whatever, fight from every angle (incl
bEEarCUB 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@palatiality You are a butt fucker.
theapollomoonlanding 1 year ago
Family Research Council = Bigoted cretins.
FreeInquisition 1 year ago
@FreeInquisition Chris Matthews can't be human.
theapollomoonlanding 1 year ago
I dont opose gays or lesbians, but the thought came thru my mind, if many people defened homosexuality so strongly, because of freedom of choice, even though that is repugnant, and deviates from the normal behavior, why dont we legalize prostitution and defend it too? that is also a choice, and the arguemetns gainst it are similar.
Ddstairclimber 1 year ago
@Ddstairclimber Your argument doesn't make any sense, but still prostitution should be legalised. The only difference is that it would have to be regulated like in the Netherlands. A legitimate opposition to legalising prostitution is that because money changes hands people may be coerced into it - which completely ignores the face that it still happens anyway. Nothing like homosexual activity. If it's consensual and no one is harmed then it's none of anyone's business.
FreeInquisition 1 year ago
@FreeInquisition yes, my argument makes sense, perhaps the only difference is hte exchange of money, but even then one can still choose to decline the money and not do it, or have teh choice to do it. but there as social stigma against both of them, each in its own way, but that is the reason why Americans criminalize prostitution beacause of it being a social stigma and disrigard, freedom of choice.
Ddstairclimber 1 year ago
@Ddstairclimber
Yes, being able to choose is a repugnant idea. *facepalm* And why, exactly, should it be illegal to sell something that you can freely give away? As FreeInquisition said, your argument makes no sense. Something tells me that you would be opposed to homosexuals being able to marry also.
sakar181 1 year ago
@sakar181 you are missinterpreting and/or missunderstanding, I am PRO freedom of choice, that is why I support prostitution drugs, and dont opose people being gay. What I am saying is many people find homosexuality disgusting.( keep in mind I never said it should be outlawed!) I think none of the above should not be ilegal, because it is a personal choice, so is prostitution, there are some similarities. people find things disgusting, but It is not fair to legislate on that.
Ddstairclimber 1 year ago
@Ddstairclimber
Ahh, Im sorry. I stand corrected. :)
sakar181 1 year ago
We all know what guys like Fred Phelps and Peter Sprigg are like - they are probably each other's fuck buddies behind the scenes. They can both go to hell in my opinion - it's attitudes like that this which make me disdainful of America.
fatpizzaman 1 year ago 3
Matthews was a little annoying here, journalism isn't always about playing hardball, sometimes you just have to let him speak...
SirPwn4lot 1 year ago
ban homosexual behaviour?
Why bomb Iran then? The US would be, if a ban on homosexual behavior was passed, pretty close to tehran..
braydenbeautiful 1 year ago
If the Gay can handle it, they should never joint the military period. And go impose that their lifestyle and choice, affect others in the military. Keep their stupit lifestyle in the closet and keep it to themselves period. What they do in their own bed is their busy, but don't go around tell people to accept it...It is wrong and sin is sin, which God hates and do not condone....
sungmee45 1 year ago
Allowing Gays to serve openly would not only place a huge target on their fronts but on their backs as well !
hobo59 1 year ago
keep out?
88conservative 1 year ago
Why fight for a country that would tell you you are not "compatible."
casehater 2 years ago
peter you need to speak up
you need to stop having a dick in your mouth when you are talking on air
Eldrad235 2 years ago
wow peter sprigg can go to hell. grow up, you homophobic asshole
decoru15 2 years ago
@decoru15 AMen to that!
fatpizzaman 1 year ago
that old guy's a fag?
mathewjohn5174 2 years ago
chris mathews is shocked at this fools positions and so am I.
Kyanlikethepepper 2 years ago
Sharpshooter? He means Sniper.
soulofshiver 2 years ago
I don't agree with incest but if it's between consenting adults then I don't really think anyone should have a say so in the matter. People are only victims when it's a case of rape or pedophilia. Animals cannot consent to sex with humans therefore bestiality is a form of animal abuse.
equalityboy81 2 years ago
I think we should outlaw Peter Spriggs.
mistaspot1 2 years ago
Did Peter Spriggs serve in the military? anyone know this answer?
xzrhsb 2 years ago
People who hate gays just come across as weird old remnants of a bygone era. They're like the crazy people giving sermons on the street. It's better to just shake your head and walk on by.
paxson001 2 years ago 23
@paxson001 I love this statement. LMAO
deathxofxspring 2 years ago
@paxson001 Bit hard when those 'weird old remnants' consist 90% of the legislature :/
SirPwn4lot 1 year ago
@paxson001 Man you are a clueless homo.
dukeljk 1 year ago
@paxson001 Hey dumb ass most of the people in the country are "antigay", stupid fuck, gay marriage fails in every place its voted on. Idiots. Btws I suppose pedos are ok too, arent they?
TheDukeljk 5 months ago
@TheDukeljk
Why would pedos be okay? They rape kids. Homosexuals have consenting sex between two adults. Are you seriously that fucking stupid?
roeas29 2 months ago
@TheDukeljk Well, I personally believe that people with a low IQ score, like yourself, should be locked up so the rest of society can move forward.
ZatDudeOnline 1 month ago
this is gay.
amy24sm 2 years ago
lol
shackelfrdace69 2 years ago
Why do they need to serve openly? They are there to do a job and their sexuality is last thing that should be on anyones mind. Does this mean that when a gay person is employed they should say so in an interview or when they're presented to co-workers? Serving/working openly as a gay person is just stupid. Keep your personal life for your own personal time, not at work or in the forces.
lemonjellies 2 years ago
@lemonjellies
That's great. The fact is, if someone discovers that someone is gay, they get discharged. Why not just shrug it off?
thisisjustjeff 2 years ago
lemonjellies: "Serving openly" doesn't mean gay soldiers broadcast their sexuality at every introduction. It just simply means they won't get dismissed if they mention their significant other when they talk about their weekend, or if they get their sex life reported to their commander by someone with a grudge. Just like the straight soldiers.
tzushih 2 years ago 15
@tzushih Yeah it does, if they wanted to be equal they wouldn't even bring it up. Fucking lame.
dukeljk 1 year ago
Fine then, so when straight people go off to war for years at a time they should not have their wives/girlfriends and children wishing them well because gays sure can't. Also speaking of work, should straight people not have photos of their partners on their desk since many gays feel like they can't without repercussions, especially in conservative areas.
marlonkchat 2 years ago
i agree with you to an extent. they should lift the policy; however, no one in the military should state their sexual orientation. both gays and straights.
shackelfrdace69 2 years ago
fake and gay
chakra424 2 years ago
If don't ask, don't tell isn't good enough then they should be banned.
The last thing we need is gay's openly prancing around in our Military.
soundsliketruck 2 years ago
ban the gays from the system
indiemen 2 years ago
this guy is a closet homo.
JeffyTree 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
watch more videos like this at daceband(.)com it's a video site like Youtube but better because not only can you share videos but you can also share photos, blogs, chat, sell your music and even make money by inviting your friends to the site.
xcash7 2 years ago
I can't even believe this douche.
SurlyMiss 2 years ago
A simple solution; barrack for men, barrack for women, barrack for gay, barrack for lesbian and barrack for bisexual. Simple...?
agolapeeroo 2 years ago
Sure, but where are these barracks you speak of?
You won't find an extra barracks sitting around on any Marine base on the west coast or Okinawa.
LiberalHuntingSeason 2 years ago
Yet your name has shit in it? lol
Do you think anal is gross because of the shit? Anal is normal and natural. Would you agree?
LiberalHuntingSeason 2 years ago
How about all these Christian freaks walk down to their nearest VA Hospital and tell the gay soldier who left his legs on an IED in Iraq that he shouldn't serve because he's gay? I don't have much patience for the arm chair warriors who pontifiicate for keeping DADT with words like "unit cohesion," without ever having served in a unit. And if you're concerned about national security, what country is in a more perilous region of the world than Israel. And they allow gays to serve.
jpoling33 2 years ago 2
Sure, tell me who the gay soldier is that lost his legs to an IED.
Sorry, POGs don't get blown up.
LiberalHuntingSeason 2 years ago
i think there are some full grown men here that do not want to mention they feel sexually insecure when they look at other men sometimes
aimpointclick 2 years ago
we dont care if you're gay. just dont tell us cuz we dont care.
joenike55 2 years ago
nice video
SexCyberGuideCom 2 years ago
America is no better than the backward Islamic nations in terms of hating gays. Pitiful.
ziderazzi 2 years ago
Where is the hate?
LiberalHuntingSeason 2 years ago
in the toilet along with you and your entire inbred family
aimpointclick 2 years ago
Comment removed
ziderazzi 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Oh yeah, you don't hate them but you hate their sin. That's like saying you hated black people for being black but claiming that you're not a racist.
ziderazzi 2 years ago
I thank God everyday I'm not in America
dennomite 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
hell nah move all the gays to another country we dont need them faggots ruining this culture
yoshi207 2 years ago
yoshi207: How about we move all the religious fundamentalists to another country instead?
Maybe Saudi Arabia, they'd like it there where religion is law.
tzushih 2 years ago
@tzushih Im not into religion i just think gays are criminals many gay's do drug's have unprotected sex and spread hiv . I think gays are a threat to our society and children we dont need that foolish behavior in this great nation
yoshi207 2 years ago
America talks about "rights" and "equality" and so on and on and on...
but it is just words.
TheJapanChannelDcom 2 years ago
Yeah, I have a right to physically express my sincere loving feelings of pre-teen boys! As long as it is consensual of course. - So much for "freedom."
a5dr3 2 years ago
@a5dr3
Gay does not equal pedophile.
Ignorance is another obvious problem.
TheJapanChannelDcom 2 years ago
This is military regulations, policies and standard we're talking about not civilian life. If gays want freedom then they should still civilian, and stop trying to put their nonsense onto the military! Once you sign the papers and become a US soldier your freedom =/ to a civilian. To a gay guy which is a better? obviously the civilian life..
Spyhunter107 2 years ago
@Spyhunter107
So no equality in America.. unless you are white and straight.
I am white and straight and don't live in America.. so I really dont care :-)
Bye bye.
TheJapanChannelDcom 2 years ago
baka!
Spyhunter107 2 years ago
@TheJapanChannelDcom
Not really, its just that when you join the military, you act as a group, not as an individual. Hence don't ask, don't tell just basically means I don't give a crap about your sexuality as long as you do your job. If you feel that you have to express your sexuality, then you're in the wrong place.
MrBautista303 2 years ago
Let's force a liberal social experiment on the MILITARY full alpha-male, skinheads, White Nationalists, rednecks, and Bible thumpers.
Oh and better yet, let's not ask us who we want in the military. Just force it on us.
Things are going to get real fucking ugly.
LiberalHuntingSeason 2 years ago
Stretching that little brain to its fullest extent, LHS?
And coming up with a clueless, idiot idea.
How surprising.
integral 2 years ago
Glad you stopped by with a cookie-cutter liberal answer.
Would have been better if you debated what I said.
LiberalHuntingSeason 2 years ago
97% support gay to openly serve the military? Thats' fucking outrageous!! Where did that get that number from? It;'s fucking absurd!! If that was true then 48 of states would allow gay marriage. A poll recently created stated that 55% of rep don't support gay rights: Marriage, serving openly gay in the military, and gay openly teaching at school. It's a statistic that came out of his loose asshole obviously!!
Spyhunter107 2 years ago
sorry 79% which is still a very high number!
Spyhunter107 2 years ago
79% might be a high number but how about people ask the members in the military. It seems to be all about politics and no one is asking any military personnel how they would feel about this. Your 79% of what im sure was mainly civilians proves nothing of how the military would feel.
mattleeney 2 years ago
202 there was a pool. 58% said No. 12% of them said they would leave the military immediately.
I already had a few tell me this today. Like I said to someone else, I''l take those 3 guys over 100 fags any day of the week.
But who cares how we feel. Only the liberals feelings matter, in most cases, will never step foot into the military.
We already hate liberals, this isn't going to help matters.
LiberalHuntingSeason 2 years ago
Mmhmm.
The same arguments were made over racial integration of the military, and lo and behold, it was no big deal.
If you're in the military, you've served with gays and lesbians already anyway, especially since 1994. It's no big deal now, and it'll be no big deal two years from now. Nothing much will change, except my tax money won't be wasted on dismissing good people from the armed forces.
tzushih 2 years ago
You're comparing racial integration to sexual orientation which is a flaw analogy to compared.
Spyhunter107 2 years ago
Spyhunter107: No, it's not at all a flawed analogy. In both cases, conservatives wailed and moaned that change would disrupt the forces and mean an end to military life as we know it. In reality, our soldiers (of all ethnicities) behaved professionally, and before long people had even forgotten why it was supposed to be such a big deal.
tzushih 2 years ago
2002 poll.
I really need to start proofreading lol
LiberalHuntingSeason 2 years ago
I agree, I feel this decision to be one sided and it the only way Obama would accomplish the repeal.. If you asked a military family, I'd 70% wouldn't be happy if the policy was repeal! My sister and my cousin wouldn't be happy if the policy was repeal, and they're married to military soldier. I'm about to enlist in the military and I wouldn't feel happy one bit if I had to shower or sleep in the barrack w/ an openly gay mens. Politics shouldn't interfere with military regulations and standards
Spyhunter107 2 years ago
I put 70% because I'm trying to be fair with gays but in reality it'd be around 90%!
Spyhunter107 2 years ago
@Spyhunter107
Exactly. Politics SHOULDN'T INTERFERE with military regulations and standards. Honestly, if you're gay, so what? You don't have to openly tell when you're in the amry. What good will that do? Will it change anything? If not, then there's no point. I do believe in gay rights but there's more important things for the president to do.
MrBautista303 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Spyhunter107: A May 2009 Gallup poll found that 69% of adults nationwide favor allowing openly gay men and women to serve in the military, up from 63% in 2004.
A 2008 CNN poll pegged the number as high as 81%.
Obama is merely doing what three-quarters of the country would like him to do. And not a moment too soon.
tzushih 2 years ago
Where's the military poll?
LiberalHuntingSeason 2 years ago
@LiberalHuntingSeason No ones asked that question!
Fair question by all means!
But don't discount the leaders of the bill!
melyacy 2 years ago
I am currently in the military and woman and men are not in any way allowed to reside in the same barracks room. I am not against gays but when gays serve openly in the military figuring out just what to do with basic housing and barracks will be a disaster. The reason is to alleviate sexual tension, so someone please explain to me how you feel this is going to be ok with gays living with other males? It wont, and you cant put multiple gays in the same room for the same reason.
mattleeney 2 years ago
Someone just told me in another thread to "deal with it" and we need to "change or ways".
Oh, we're going to "deal with it all right".
But to answer the barracks question, I bet they give fags BAH. That's fair right? So much for no special treatment.
Beat their ass.
FAP them out.
Whatever it takes.
This is our world. Not some liberal playground for social experiments.
LiberalHuntingSeason 2 years ago
If they begin to give homosexuals BAH a lot of military personnel will claim homosexuality just so they can get BAH themselves.
mattleeney 2 years ago
Yep. We were joking about that today.
LiberalHuntingSeason 2 years ago
Absolutely, it'd be a disaster trying to figure out alternate ways for gays and lesbian be separated from straights because I'd still be a chaos! Gay males in one barrack would be a sausage heaven for them, it'd be out of control and sexual assaults would occurred.. The DS would pick on them, they'd feel joining the military will be the biggest regret of their lives.. Right now, they're protected as long they stay quiet and it should be that way!! More funds would be wasted by expanding!!
Spyhunter107 2 years ago
hmm, is that why homosexuals are not allowed to live in dorms ? and not allowed to use the same swimming facilities as non gays ? oh ok...
45axelh 2 years ago
It's bullshit!! The policy shouldn't get overturn especially when there's more people oppose to this decision than gay which is 1% of the population! Msnbc supports gay, look at their logo, it's obvious!! We're fighting two wars currently and the united states is worrying about gays serving the military? FFS whats this country becoming? I don't want to be in the same shower or sleep in the same room as gays..
Spyhunter107 2 years ago
they can use torture to get information, since its nessesary, but gay's cant fight for their country! i just love republicans.. God one's said "Everyone is equal" i suggest they read on up it considering their all christains. and no im not gay btw
spyhunter41 2 years ago
This is what's important right now? Gays in the military? Who gives a shit.
We've got a collapsing economic system and creeping socialism and we're concerned with gays? This is nothing but a distraction.
tarossi400 2 years ago
I love it, Chris! Burn these FRC scumbags!
MEpianist 2 years ago
A question. Do military men and women allow to sleep in a same room in their barracks? If the answer is yes, there shouldn't be any objection to gay & lesbian in military. If the answer is no, the issue should be considered again, or one should ridiculus rules such as gay should sleep in women's barrack and lesbian should sleep in men's barrack.
agolapeeroo 2 years ago
Chris Matthews cuts to the chase. He's just awesome.
cclovesyoutoob 2 years ago 2
A species that produces more than 2 offspring per coupling that survive into parenthood needs to have homosexual members, or the species will doom itself to overpopulation.
It certainly sounds natural to me. That or a regulation fro God to ensure we don't multiply ten-fold.
MachShot1337 2 years ago 6
I don't get it. If somebody wants to live in a Theocratic totalitarian democracy where the government is constantly imposing their views on you, then why don't they just move to Iran?
GGLebo23 2 years ago 2
@GGLebo23 Because Islam is only 90% identical to Christianity. They need 100%.
MachShot1337 2 years ago
@GGLebo23 lmao.... wow, that guy was an idiot. youre absolutely right. people are soo concerned with their own freedom that they try to take away everyone elses. hey, gay people watching, us streight people are not all idiots. i vote on your behalf!
jenanjuice2003 2 years ago 2
There is a correlation of increased artificial hormones in industrial food products over the last century that is directly related to the growing population of 'homosexuals'. There has always been gay people, and its because there are hormonal differences between gay and straight that make an individual appeal to one sex. Now there is much more of a hormone imbalance and a culture that made an identity from it. Once hormones are brought to balance that person loses homosexual preference.
easydropd 2 years ago
There has also been an increase in pizza consumption over the last century. Coincidence? I don't think so!
MMS747 2 years ago
when you don`t watch the vid but listen, the gayest
in this trio is none of the libs kind ;)
gay is ok!
Realizalize 2 years ago
I just love the way Matthews attacks the guy for not knowing what NO ONE KNOWS. Does anyone actually think Chris is objective? There is never really a serous discussion of the issue with him anymore.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
I hope you are just dumb and it´ll be hard top that this year , but so far you are in line with Achmadinejad, i tend to think you are just crazy insane. And that is peer rewied, written in stone and as much more true as you cannot prove it otherwise , not even if you lived another 123 years from now on.
Realizalize 2 years ago
Good god the arguments this guy is making are truly insane. He's saying that if gay people were allowed to be gay openly, they would rampantly abuse, molest and rape other people.
That's freakin' ridiculous.
And btw, I'm convinced that homophobic people have an inner shame, are insecure, and perhaps gay themselves.
I'm so comfortable with my heterosexuality, that I am entirely understanding and sympathetic towards gay people. Homophobes are totally insecure, and it is sad.
Staticnz 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
That argument is retarded. Just because someone thinks homosexuality is disgusting doesn't mean they are secretly gay or insecure.
People sound so stupid when they say that.
I beleive that all gays should be shipped off to "Gay Island" and I know I'm not gay. I know because when I jerk off I think of girls!
ElectricPineapple79 2 years ago
I think that all bigots that want to live in a theocracy should be shipped off to Iran.
KingMKLA 2 years ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
You are so fully of it. People who oppose homosexuality do it for several principled reasons. The fact that they are not willing to be stream rolled by the gay movement does not mean they are "insecure".
Homosexuals are the ones with three to four times the rate of suicide, substance abuse, and physical abuse as compared to heterosexuals. It is they who have a problem dealing with their "inner shame" and mistakenly believe that forcing themselves on the public will fix it.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
"People who oppose homosexuality do it for several principled reasons."
Such as?
Bolgernow 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
It is a self-destructive behavior. It is both immoral and unnatural. It violates the design of our bodies and leads to greater physical illness.
There is absolute no benefit to society to promote it or encourage it.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
That's your opinion. However, other people's sexual orientation has nothing to do with you
What you're calling "principled reasons", rational people call blatant bigotry against a community of people
Funny, existing having equal rights is not "promoting" anything. It's demanding basic rights every American has
Separate but equal is not equal. It's discrimination. Your ignorance to see that tells me much about you
Bolgernow 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
There is no such a things as sexual orientation. It is a myth. It is all based on subjective feelings. There is no genetic or physiological difference between homosexuals and heterosexuals. Just as there is none between heterosexuals and child molesters. These are chosen deviant sexual behaviors.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
@CommonSenseJoe
You are ether the simplest minded/ intellectually dishonest person I've seen in a long while, or you are simply a troll.
creamsykle 2 years ago
I am not being intellectually dishonest. There is no independent, objective evidence for sexual orientation. Even it's proponents cannot tell you where it comes from.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
it is just so that ancient philosophy has it
and ancient vases illustrate where it commes from and it clearly happens only in democracies like in old greece, but not in totalitarian countries like iran , sowiet union or in fascist countries.
you can also clearly state that it came up with the catholic priests and their agenda only 20 years ago for shizzle.
Realizalize 2 years ago
You're a myth. You're also an uneducated, irrational, lying bigot...
The younger generation looks at people like you with utter confusion...
They see you as a pathetic, ignorant, sad, insane, lying, hate-filled person. They pity you, yet know how dangerous you are...
You might want to get that looked at. Be well
Bolgernow 2 years ago
Insults are hardly persuasive.
I don't care what the "young generation" thinks. I deal in facts and reality.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
Your entire existence is an insult to functioning brain cells, & anyone holding an IQ in double digits...
Your arguments hold no factual evidence. Your views hold no merit. They're steeped in bigotry & lies. Nothing more
You label things "myth" that are fact, make insane links to child molesters, & clearly don' accept reality.
You sound mentally unstable & clearly suffer from Homophobia. Please seek help...
Bolgernow 2 years ago
My arguments have their basis is reality. We are designed biologically to reproduce as heterosexuals, male and female. This is indisputable objective fact. Sexual attraction is subjective and cannot be verified. However sexual behavior can be. One chooses to engage in a sexual behavior, whether it be heterosexual or homosexual. Only one is based on the design of our bodies.
The only linkage was in regard to your false premise that "mammals do it so it must be natural" nonsense.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
Your argument is faulty...
It ignores sexual orientation as "myth", doesn't accept same sex genetic attraction, & rejects homosexuality as sexual orientation
Moronic!
Sexual attraction as it relates to gender is no more subjective than eye color, nose length, or height.
While people are attracted to different people for different reasons, the gender they're attracted to is not negotiable.
You incorrectly think it is. Understand this term: Homophobia. It describes your views & attitude.
Bolgernow 2 years ago
The hypothesis that we are BORN with a sexual orientation other than heterosexual is totally and completely unproven. There is no genetic or physiological difference to account for homosexuality. Attraction is subjective and is negotiable. When here about men or women who have functioned perfectly fine for decades as heterosexuals "suddenly" discovering they are gay, you cannot possible believe they were faking it all that time.
The objective fact is that we are heterosexual by biology.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
Biological factors which may be related to the development of a heterosexual, homosexual, or bisexual orientation include genes, prenatal hormones, & brain structure. You may post here screaming it's a hypothesis, or that the Sun doesn't really exist, or unicorns are real, but it's not true.
Ignorant bigots like you who create irrational lies to support hate-full views will all be dead soon. You can't cheat time or death
For the rest of the world, time can't pass fast enough.
Bolgernow 2 years ago
Basically your argument boils down to this -
Men and women have sex, and this is natural.
Everything else isn't...because...I say so...
That's about it.
Do you think gay people CARE about what's 'natural'!? Do scientists care what's 'natural' when they make life saving drugs!? Is it 'natural' for us to drive around in giant hunks of metal called CARS!?
Gay people only care about what feels right to them and it is supposed to be the American way to accept that.
Staticnz 2 years ago 3
Same logic use by those who have sex with children. It feels right to them.
We reproduce in only one way, heterosexually.
CommonSenseJoe 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@CommonSenseJoe Homosexuality in the natural history of humans may have served to created a labor and resource pool. Humans children have longest period of dependancy on adults. Extra resources aid brain developement and the extra energy from the resource pool can be spent on technological and cultural development. Extra energy can be used for group scouting, looking out for predators and finding new food sources. Having a certain ratio of homosexual offspring aids group survival.
DireDowns 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe "What benefit is there to homosexuality?"
Propogation of a species is not about the sole survival of individuals, but of groups of individuals. Its about the propogation of genes. Look at an ant colony. The workers are not fertile. In the case of humans and other animals, it might be the case that having a certain ratio of individuals that do not reproduce may be a benefit to the group doing better. Instead of having all individuals having offspring, it may be be...
DireDowns 1 year ago
@DireDowns We are not ants or animals. If you want to have sex with someone of your own gender, have at it. The problem becomes when you want to take a perversion and make it "normal" behavior. It is unnatural, immoral, and harmful. There is absolutely no reason to promote it with ANY benefits such as marriage.
CommonSenseJoe 1 year ago
@CommonSenseJoe
You cannot "promote" what some people naturally are. Sure you can promote understanding instead of fear and misrepresentation. But it is impossible to promote an emotional and physical attraction the same way that a company can promote a product. Since by your own reasoning that humans are seperate from nature, how can it be said that something is natural or unnatural? By what standard do you use? Do you use the standard of what is more common vs what is less common?
DireDowns 1 year ago