@stre: I very much support the right of gays to legally marry with the same rights as everyone else. Its why I voted against Prop 2 here in Florida (basically the exact opposite of Prop 8 in California). Thats wasn't what my post was about.

@Jonny_eh: "Thall shalt not kill" is a religious belief which is also a law. But I guess we should do away with that as well?

@Madge Gristle: There are no legal rights from religious marriage because it is simply a ceremony. The rights came from the marriage license given out by the state. The minister may be the one who signs it, but its the state that gives it out which is why you can simply be married in front of a judge.

@mrletternumber: So then you would support revoking the tax exempt status of the NAACP as well then?

equating religious beliefs with hate just makes you the bigot.

Its not a human right because at some point the internet costs and most likely you're not paying the lion share of that cost. Hence you're using someone else's property, not your own.

"But the people who just bought on an iPhone 4 with Verizon will be locked into new 2-year contracts."

@FiddlingWhileJimRomeBurns:

Not actually carriers. The 2 ships merely had runways built over their turrets. The runways were temporary. The USS Langley was America's first aircraft carrier.

@PaddyDugan: Its hardly "unregulated". Didn't deep water horizon pass a government safety inspection earlier in the year?

@johnnyabnormal: Except Johnny I deal in actual facts. You're quote, not actually a quote.

@johnnyabnormal: Just out of curiosity have you noticed you're arguing against you're own argument? Treason is can be espionage when that espionage is carried out by an American. If its a non american, its espionage. Hence why he would be charged with espionage and not treason.

@johnnyabnormal: His being an American or not being on American soil doesn't matter.

@FuturePastNow: Actually the constitutionality of the act would be upheld in Assanges case, quite easily. The previous cases that have cast doubt on the espionage act never involved people's lives nor actual secrets. As the NYTimes reported, as soon as Wikileaks released informants names the Taliban started hunting…

@johnnyabnormal: Well yeah when you completely ignore the facts of what Assange has done you can make up whatever argument you want to.

Isn't it hilarious that Wikileaks supporters constantly make arguments about free speech, but their actions show they hate free speech.

@Michael J Mulligan: Hope so, or you're just one bad party away from getting your network shut down :)

@Weihovah: Because Mastercard, Visa and Paypal are American companies. They see American interests under attack for basically no real reason, they see the people of America viewing those attacks badly (60% view wikileaks as harmful) and don't want to be viewed badly by working with wikileaks.

@bdinger: Seriously, go get some education. The Afghani are not "sitting at desks". They're not american service personnel and are very much at danger. The NYTimes already had a report of the Taliban downloading the list and going hunting.

@bungadunga: It is in clear violation of the espionage act. Anyone who has weighed in on the act has done so about the latest leaks, not the earlier ones that names Afghan informants. That alone gives aid to the enemy which is covered by the act. Giving out critical infrastructure locations accomplishes the same…