One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
The F*****t Gay Lobby's Hypocrisy
Page <prev 2 of 2
Mar 6, 2014 15:26:36   #
Hungry Freaks
 
Maybe the government should grant civil unions to all and any who ask with all the civil protections we now associate with government-sanctioned marriage and churches should grant marriages according to their own beliefs.




Iggy Rat wrote:
I've always been of the opinion that "Marriage" is a religious institution. "Civil Unions" should carry all the same legal rights and responsibilities without the religious connotations. If gays want to "Marry" they should read the Bible, or any of the world's other religious texts and find that God is NOT cool with homosexuality. Separation of church and state. Uncle Sam won't marry you. He will provide you with a Civil Union. Same thing. No religion involved. Church won't let you in. Sodomy specifically mentioned in the Bible. Sorry. Not my rule. Not my place to wonder. I'm just trying to obey.
I've always been of the opinion that "Marriag... (show quote)

Reply
Mar 6, 2014 15:41:26   #
meekep
 
The Dutchman wrote:
What will the f*****t gay lobby say now?

Governor of New Mexico, Susana Martinez, has been told by her gay hairdresser that he will no longer be working on her coif. It seems that her hairdresser, Mr. Antonio Darden, does not appreciate the Governor’s stance on homosexuality and gay marriage. Because of this he will no longer cut her hair.

Darden told a local news station that he cut the governor’s hair three times, but won’t do it again as long as she continues to oppose gay marriage.

“The governor’s aides called not too long ago, wanting another appointment to come in,” he told KOB-TV. “Because of her stances and her views on this, I told her aides no. They called the next day, asking if I’d changed my mind about taking the governor in and I said no.”

“It’s just e******y, dignity for everyone,” he said. “Everybody should be allowed the right to be together.”

Gov Martinez: That’s interesting. I think Mr. Darden is well within his rights to refuse service to anyone he chooses – but given the recent spate of lawsuits against Christian business owners for not serving at gay weddings – it seems like the outcry from the liberal community should be immediate. They’ve been the ones saying that Christians’ refusal to perform at gay weddings amounted to a new kind of “Jim Crow” – so wouldn’t this be similar?

The fact is that the gay lobby and the liberal community have overplayed their hand. They have been refusing service (and worse) to conservatives FOR YEARS. Whether the issue has been homosexuality, immigration, a******n, etc. they have always found reasons to marginalize and attack us. Now that Christians have turned the tables and refused to perform at gay weddings, the gay lobby has gotten litigious.

For years (especially in 80’s movies about the beach) we were told “No Shoes, No Shirt, No Service” and we all assumed that businesspeople had the right to refuse service to anyone they didn’t want to serve. In years past we also understood the free market better and knew that for the free market to operate fairly and justly, both parties had to CHOOSE to be part of the t***saction.

Forcing business owners to serve everyone no matter what is just as f*****t and despotic as the government saying that some people CAN’T be served.

Apparently, liberals are now openly embracing f*****m.
What will the f*****t gay lobby say now? br br G... (show quote)


http://dictionary.search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=A0SO8zWN3BhTnGUAFANXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTB0dnUzbXFuBHNlYwNzYwRjb2xvA2dxMQR2dGlkA1ZJUDM4NV8x?p=f*****m&.sep=

I could attend to your argument better if your language was more precise: regardless of the fact that I don't agree with you.

Reply
Mar 6, 2014 15:54:16   #
LAPhil Loc: Los Angeles, CA
 
meekep wrote:
http://dictionary.search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=A0SO8zWN3BhTnGUAFANXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTB0dnUzbXFuBHNlYwNzYwRjb2xvA2dxMQR2dGlkA1ZJUDM4NV8x?p=f*****m&.sep=

I could attend to your argument better if your language was more precise: regardless of the fact that I don't agree with you.

His language is precise enough to understand his meaning.
Note #3 in the definition of f*****m in your link:

"Oppressive, dictatorial control"

I think that definition can be applied loosely to the attitudes of various groups and does not necessarily have to apply to a system of government.

Reply
 
 
Mar 6, 2014 17:48:33   #
meekep
 
LAPhil wrote:
His language is precise enough to understand his meaning.
Note #3 in the definition of f*****m in your link:

"Oppressive, dictatorial control"

I think that definition can be applied loosely to the attitudes of various groups and does not necessarily have to apply to a system of government.


Our governor not getting a haircut: oppressive...wow! Sounds pretty f*****tic to me...this vs say and Arizona law that says anyone can discriminate against anyone for (basically) any reason with a government stamp of approval...
I'm not quite getting your point.

Reply
Mar 6, 2014 18:03:46   #
LAPhil Loc: Los Angeles, CA
 
meekep wrote:
Our governor not getting a haircut: oppressive...wow! Sounds pretty f*****tic to me...this vs say and Arizona law that says anyone can discriminate against anyone for (basically) any reason with a government stamp of approval...
I'm not quite getting your point.

My point is that anyone can be f*****t-like by attempting to oppress another individual or group by various means, including but not limited to bullying, discrimination, ostr****m, slandering, and physical intimidation. As we've seen from the example of the governor, it's not always a one-way street. You can make light of the refusal to style the governor's hair, because it's not your ox being gored, but what would have been f*****tic would be if the governor had FORCED the stylist to do her hair, just as it was f*****tic in my opinion to attempt to force the Oregon bakery to bake a cake for a gay wedding when the owners clearly felt it would have been a violation of their religious convictions.

Reply
Mar 6, 2014 20:03:37   #
marjorie
 
Mr LaPhil

There is no judgment by my scriptural word of God. That's what God says. No forgiveness for being a sinner whether its unbelief, your a sodomite, liar, etc. He will judge you and His judgment will be final. Being dogmatic and prejudiced is your judgment of me you too shall reap the consequence

Reply
Mar 6, 2014 20:07:11   #
rumitoid
 
The Dutchman wrote:
What will the f*****t gay lobby say now?

Governor of New Mexico, Susana Martinez, has been told by her gay hairdresser that he will no longer be working on her coif. It seems that her hairdresser, Mr. Antonio Darden, does not appreciate the Governor’s stance on homosexuality and gay marriage. Because of this he will no longer cut her hair.

Darden told a local news station that he cut the governor’s hair three times, but won’t do it again as long as she continues to oppose gay marriage.

“The governor’s aides called not too long ago, wanting another appointment to come in,” he told KOB-TV. “Because of her stances and her views on this, I told her aides no. They called the next day, asking if I’d changed my mind about taking the governor in and I said no.”

“It’s just e******y, dignity for everyone,” he said. “Everybody should be allowed the right to be together.”

Gov Martinez: That’s interesting. I think Mr. Darden is well within his rights to refuse service to anyone he chooses – but given the recent spate of lawsuits against Christian business owners for not serving at gay weddings – it seems like the outcry from the liberal community should be immediate. They’ve been the ones saying that Christians’ refusal to perform at gay weddings amounted to a new kind of “Jim Crow” – so wouldn’t this be similar?

The fact is that the gay lobby and the liberal community have overplayed their hand. They have been refusing service (and worse) to conservatives FOR YEARS. Whether the issue has been homosexuality, immigration, a******n, etc. they have always found reasons to marginalize and attack us. Now that Christians have turned the tables and refused to perform at gay weddings, the gay lobby has gotten litigious.

For years (especially in 80’s movies about the beach) we were told “No Shoes, No Shirt, No Service” and we all assumed that businesspeople had the right to refuse service to anyone they didn’t want to serve. In years past we also understood the free market better and knew that for the free market to operate fairly and justly, both parties had to CHOOSE to be part of the t***saction.

Forcing business owners to serve everyone no matter what is just as f*****t and despotic as the government saying that some people CAN’T be served.

Apparently, liberals are now openly embracing f*****m.
What will the f*****t gay lobby say now? br br G... (show quote)


More conspiracy theories. But what else can be expected? Civil Rights in the 60s was a C*******t led offensive. Right?

Reply
 
 
Mar 6, 2014 20:10:36   #
LAPhil Loc: Los Angeles, CA
 
marjorie wrote:
Mr LaPhil

There is no judgment by my scriptural word of God. That's what God says. No forgiveness for being a sinner whether its unbelief, your a sodomite, liar, etc. He will judge you and His judgment will be final. Being dogmatic and prejudiced is your judgment of me you too shall reap the consequence

Oh, I guess I should be shaking in my boots right now then.

Reply
Mar 6, 2014 20:16:01   #
marjorie
 
Well if you wear boots and your not a BORN AGAIN BELIEVER. You bet you should be shaking

Mr LaPhil

Reply
Mar 6, 2014 20:17:03   #
Hungry Freaks
 
I think that one's already been done.

rumitoid wrote:
More conspiracy theories. But what else can be expected? Civil Rights in the 60s was a C*******t led offensive.

Reply
Mar 6, 2014 20:20:01   #
LAPhil Loc: Los Angeles, CA
 
marjorie wrote:
Well if you wear boots and your not a BORN AGAIN BELIEVER. You bet you should be shaking

Mr LaPhil

Maybe I am a born again believer. That doesn't mean I shouldn't reject the word of a self-righteous zealot like yourself.

Reply
 
 
Mar 6, 2014 20:43:32   #
marjorie
 
What is self righteous zealot. I'm a BORN AGAIN BELIEVER IN CHRIST JESUS. I put out the WORD of GOD to all as I am told by my Savior. So wear your boots buddy!!!

Mr LaPhil

Reply
Mar 6, 2014 20:51:46   #
LAPhil Loc: Los Angeles, CA
 
marjorie wrote:
What is self righteous zealot. I'm a BORN AGAIN BELIEVER IN CHRIST JESUS. I put out the WORD of GOD to all as I am told by my Savior. So wear your boots buddy!!!

Mr LaPhil

Well knock yourself out because I totally couldn't less what you believe. There's no arguing with people like you who think they're putting out the word of God as if they exclusively speak for Him. I view arguments about religion as a complete waste of time, so with that I'll say good night to you and your delusions of grandiosity.

Reply
Mar 6, 2014 21:18:17   #
Hungry Freaks
 
I believe God said "judgement is mine." So beware of anyone claiming to know who god is going to judge or how God is going to judge them.

And that's only for those who believe in the God of the Bible. I think there was few hundred million people who don't believe in the God of the Bible. How their supreme being, if they have one, is going to judge them is an entirely different story. I don't by that the God I believe in is going to throw everyone with a different set of beliefs into a burning pit. But that's just my opinion.

As a few scientists to Einstein at a convention on theoretical physics : "Stop telling us what God is saying!"

LAPhil wrote:
Well knock yourself out because I totally couldn't less what you believe. There's no arguing with people like you who think they're putting out the word of God as if they exclusively speak for Him. I view arguments about religion as a complete waste of time, so with that I'll say good night to you and your delusions of grandiosity.

Reply
Mar 7, 2014 08:08:46   #
bmac32 Loc: West Florida
 
And maybe the government should stay completely out of the church.


Hungry Freaks wrote:
Maybe the government should grant civil unions to all and any who ask with all the civil protections we now associate with government-sanctioned marriage and churches should grant marriages according to their own beliefs.

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 2
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.