(12-18-2013 03:20 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  And I have to pay for your damn kids and your pregnant wife too.

What make believe story are you talking about now, tommy?

(12-18-2013 03:20 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-18-2013 01:56 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(12-18-2013 01:27 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  You guys simply don't understand or don't care about the facts.

There is a sizeable subset of the LGBT community that isn't rich (especially the transgendered community, which faces massive hostility and discrimination - as can be evidenced by the insulting and childish OP). Many of these people do not have access to affordable health insurance. Lets also remember that even Gay males (who are supposedly better off - well the white ones at least) also face massive health insurance discrimination by companies that do not provide equal access to health care for the spouses of Gay Americans. The net result is that the LGBT community has a much lower level of health care access than do straight Americans. Many LGBT persons do not have access to family support as well.

It is far cheaper for our economy for these people to be covered by ACA than for them to be uninsured. Preventative care is cheaper than Emergency care. You'll be paying for it either way.

You know if Gay people could get health insurance through their employers for their families like straight people could, Gay people might not be so supportive of ACA/Obamacare. Something to think about when you're eating your bigoted Chicken sandwich or supporting businesses when they discriminate in employement benefits.

Tom, I've never heard of an insurance company denying coverage to a gay spouse. And I'm kind of puzzled why you think insurance in the gay community would be affordable when it won't be for most of the country. Are you guys special or just hold crappy jobs that pay squat and now you qualify for subsidies? You're talking yourself into a hole there, Tom.

Also, AIDS is a legitimate threat to the gay population and I have no idea how much it costs to treat a person who has it, but risk is risk and the insurance companies will make you pay for that risk - in fact, they're making me pay for your risk.

https://www.aclu.org/lgbt-rights_hiv-aid...ance-plan.

And I have to pay for your damn kids and your pregnant wife too.

Is that an expression of your "bigotry" towards people who can reproduce?

(12-18-2013 01:53 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  I like how the term bigot gets thrown around.

It is appropriate in this case. Go read the OP and come back to me and tell me Eagle Rock Café isn't just insulting the advocates of healthcare, not because they are advocating ACA/Obamacare enrollment, but due to their looks and gender stereotypes.

The term bigot got thrown around here, because it deserved to be.

(12-18-2013 03:21 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(12-18-2013 03:20 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-18-2013 01:56 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(12-18-2013 01:27 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  You guys simply don't understand or don't care about the facts.

There is a sizeable subset of the LGBT community that isn't rich (especially the transgendered community, which faces massive hostility and discrimination - as can be evidenced by the insulting and childish OP). Many of these people do not have access to affordable health insurance. Lets also remember that even Gay males (who are supposedly better off - well the white ones at least) also face massive health insurance discrimination by companies that do not provide equal access to health care for the spouses of Gay Americans. The net result is that the LGBT community has a much lower level of health care access than do straight Americans. Many LGBT persons do not have access to family support as well.

It is far cheaper for our economy for these people to be covered by ACA than for them to be uninsured. Preventative care is cheaper than Emergency care. You'll be paying for it either way.

You know if Gay people could get health insurance through their employers for their families like straight people could, Gay people might not be so supportive of ACA/Obamacare. Something to think about when you're eating your bigoted Chicken sandwich or supporting businesses when they discriminate in employement benefits.

Tom, I've never heard of an insurance company denying coverage to a gay spouse. And I'm kind of puzzled why you think insurance in the gay community would be affordable when it won't be for most of the country. Are you guys special or just hold crappy jobs that pay squat and now you qualify for subsidies? You're talking yourself into a hole there, Tom.

Also, AIDS is a legitimate threat to the gay population and I have no idea how much it costs to treat a person who has it, but risk is risk and the insurance companies will make you pay for that risk - in fact, they're making me pay for your risk.

https://www.aclu.org/lgbt-rights_hiv-aid...ance-plan.

And I have to pay for your damn kids and your pregnant wife too.

Is that an expression of your "bigotry" towards people who can reproduce?

Not at all, I'm just pointing out that I have to pay for expensive medical care for people that aren't part of my family or social group. And I promise you, single employees in group health plans usually end up getting screwed as many plans are set up to subsidize those with kids or those that get pregnant. And those costs are much higher than any charges for HIV/AIDS.

(12-18-2013 03:23 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-18-2013 01:53 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  I like how the term bigot gets thrown around.

It is appropriate in this case. Go read the OP and come back to me and tell me Eagle Rock Café isn't just insulting the advocates of healthcare, not because they are advocating ACA/Obamacare enrollment, but due to their looks and gender stereotypes.

The term bigot got thrown around here, because it deserved to be.

I disagree.

Even if somebody is making fun of those people it doesn't make them a bigot.

You don't seem to understand what the term means or the loaded nature of it today. Well, the thing is you probably do but you're dishonest so you want to paint a person like him inaccurately.

(12-18-2013 03:26 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(12-18-2013 03:23 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-18-2013 01:53 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  I like how the term bigot gets thrown around.

It is appropriate in this case. Go read the OP and come back to me and tell me Eagle Rock Café isn't just insulting the advocates of healthcare, not because they are advocating ACA/Obamacare enrollment, but due to their looks and gender stereotypes.

The term bigot got thrown around here, because it deserved to be.

I disagree.

Even if somebody is making fun of those people it doesn't make them a bigot.

You don't seem to understand what the term means or the loaded nature of it today. Well, the thing is you probably do but you're dishonest so you want to paint a person like him inaccurately.

I actually believe him to be biased against transgendered persons. And I believe that he thinks that those that adhere to cisgender norms are better than transgendered persons. I believe that he operates out of ignorance of transgendered persons and the issues they face. I don't think that he or others really wish to be educated on the issues related to gender norms and would rather simply insult and demean persons because they don't conform to his particular ideas of gender conformity.

In other words, he doesn't know about transgendered persons, isn't interested in learning about them, and would rather just insult and demean them for his own (and your) amusement.

What would you call that? I think bigot was as nice as I could muster.

His point wasn't as much a dig on ACA/Obamacare than it was him trying to degrade ACA/Obamacare because drag queens were supporting it. Meaning that the those people are so bad that they remove credibility from anything they touch.

(12-18-2013 03:33 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-18-2013 03:26 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(12-18-2013 03:23 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-18-2013 01:53 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  I like how the term bigot gets thrown around.

It is appropriate in this case. Go read the OP and come back to me and tell me Eagle Rock Café isn't just insulting the advocates of healthcare, not because they are advocating ACA/Obamacare enrollment, but due to their looks and gender stereotypes.

The term bigot got thrown around here, because it deserved to be.

I disagree.

Even if somebody is making fun of those people it doesn't make them a bigot.

You don't seem to understand what the term means or the loaded nature of it today. Well, the thing is you probably do but you're dishonest so you want to paint a person like him inaccurately.

I actually believe him to be biased against transgendered persons. And I believe that he thinks that those that adhere to cisgender norms are better than transgendered persons. I believe that he operates out of ignorance of transgendered persons and the issues they face. I don't think that he or others really wish to be educated on the issues related to gender norms and would rather simply insult and demean persons because they don't conform to his particular ideas of gender conformity.

In other words, he doesn't know about transgendered persons, isn't interested in learning about them, and would rather just insult and demean them for his own (and your) amusement.

What would you call that? I think bigot was as nice as I could muster.

That's a whole lot of nothing.

(12-18-2013 03:25 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-18-2013 03:21 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(12-18-2013 03:20 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-18-2013 01:56 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  

(12-18-2013 01:27 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  You guys simply don't understand or don't care about the facts.

There is a sizeable subset of the LGBT community that isn't rich (especially the transgendered community, which faces massive hostility and discrimination - as can be evidenced by the insulting and childish OP). Many of these people do not have access to affordable health insurance. Lets also remember that even Gay males (who are supposedly better off - well the white ones at least) also face massive health insurance discrimination by companies that do not provide equal access to health care for the spouses of Gay Americans. The net result is that the LGBT community has a much lower level of health care access than do straight Americans. Many LGBT persons do not have access to family support as well.

It is far cheaper for our economy for these people to be covered by ACA than for them to be uninsured. Preventative care is cheaper than Emergency care. You'll be paying for it either way.

You know if Gay people could get health insurance through their employers for their families like straight people could, Gay people might not be so supportive of ACA/Obamacare. Something to think about when you're eating your bigoted Chicken sandwich or supporting businesses when they discriminate in employement benefits.

Tom, I've never heard of an insurance company denying coverage to a gay spouse. And I'm kind of puzzled why you think insurance in the gay community would be affordable when it won't be for most of the country. Are you guys special or just hold crappy jobs that pay squat and now you qualify for subsidies? You're talking yourself into a hole there, Tom.

Also, AIDS is a legitimate threat to the gay population and I have no idea how much it costs to treat a person who has it, but risk is risk and the insurance companies will make you pay for that risk - in fact, they're making me pay for your risk.

https://www.aclu.org/lgbt-rights_hiv-aid...ance-plan.

And I have to pay for your damn kids and your pregnant wife too.

Is that an expression of your "bigotry" towards people who can reproduce?

Not at all, I'm just pointing out that I have to pay for expensive medical care for people that aren't part of my family or social group. And I promise you, single employees in group health plans usually end up getting screwed as many plans are set up to subsidize those with kids or those that get pregnant. And those costs are much higher than any charges for HIV/AIDS.

Two points:

You benefit from people having kids

I challenge you on the costs of HIV/AIDS.

However, if you want to get rid of taxes for public schools, then own up and say so. I won't criticize.

(12-18-2013 03:38 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(12-18-2013 03:25 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-18-2013 03:21 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(12-18-2013 03:20 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-18-2013 01:56 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  Tom, I've never heard of an insurance company denying coverage to a gay spouse. And I'm kind of puzzled why you think insurance in the gay community would be affordable when it won't be for most of the country. Are you guys special or just hold crappy jobs that pay squat and now you qualify for subsidies? You're talking yourself into a hole there, Tom.

Also, AIDS is a legitimate threat to the gay population and I have no idea how much it costs to treat a person who has it, but risk is risk and the insurance companies will make you pay for that risk - in fact, they're making me pay for your risk.

https://www.aclu.org/lgbt-rights_hiv-aid...ance-plan.

And I have to pay for your damn kids and your pregnant wife too.

Is that an expression of your "bigotry" towards people who can reproduce?

Not at all, I'm just pointing out that I have to pay for expensive medical care for people that aren't part of my family or social group. And I promise you, single employees in group health plans usually end up getting screwed as many plans are set up to subsidize those with kids or those that get pregnant. And those costs are much higher than any charges for HIV/AIDS.

Two points:

You benefit from people having kids

I challenge you on the costs of HIV/AIDS.

However, if you want to get rid of taxes for public schools, then own up and say so. I won't criticize.

And you benefit from people having access to healthcare. So I have to subsidize your kids and you have to subsidize people who have HIV/AIDS.

(12-18-2013 03:42 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  And you benefit from people having access to healthcare.

Care to back that up with facts? That's rare for you, I know. But I keep reminding you that were not all dumb like your friends.

(12-18-2013 03:33 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  I actually believe him to be biased against transgendered persons. And I believe that he thinks that those that adhere to cisgender norms are better than transgendered persons. I believe that he operates out of ignorance of transgendered persons and the issues they face. I don't think that he or others really wish to be educated on the issues related to gender norms and would rather simply insult and demean persons because they don't conform to his particular ideas of gender conformity.

In other words, he doesn't know about transgendered persons, isn't interested in learning about them, and would rather just insult and demean them for his own (and your) amusement.

Tom, it's real easy; someone born with a schlong is a guy, he has guy chromosomes, he has guy facial hair, and he's the guy part of what it takes to make a baby. Anything beyond that is all in one's head.

(12-18-2013 03:42 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-18-2013 03:38 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(12-18-2013 03:25 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-18-2013 03:21 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(12-18-2013 03:20 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  https://www.aclu.org/lgbt-rights_hiv-aid...ance-plan.

And I have to pay for your damn kids and your pregnant wife too.

Is that an expression of your "bigotry" towards people who can reproduce?

Not at all, I'm just pointing out that I have to pay for expensive medical care for people that aren't part of my family or social group. And I promise you, single employees in group health plans usually end up getting screwed as many plans are set up to subsidize those with kids or those that get pregnant. And those costs are much higher than any charges for HIV/AIDS.

Two points:

You benefit from people having kids

I challenge you on the costs of HIV/AIDS.

However, if you want to get rid of taxes for public schools, then own up and say so. I won't criticize.

And you benefit from people having access to healthcare. So I have to subsidize your kids and you have to subsidize people who have HIV/AIDS.

I don't mind them having healthcare insurance - I just think it's a crock that I get to pay for it. But then, I'm not real happy about covering for Welfare either. In both instances, the fact that our government doesn't require these folks to "do anything" for their freebies is may main rub.

The old saying that "There is no free lunch" doesn't hold water for way too many on the government dole, and this is just another extension of the government dole.

Honestly Tom, every time I see someone with neck tattoo's, my thought is "You just relegated yourself to a minimum wage job". You don't think Tranny's are the same - get real. Sometimes life choices equal sh!ttier outcomes.

(12-17-2013 11:55 PM)EagleRockCafe Wrote:  

Is it me or does the one in the middle look like a slightly heavier version of Mooch?



So is this cutie on the right...man, woman?

As a critical deadline for signing up for insurance under President Obama’s health-care law approaches, the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community has emerged as a major target for the White House and outside groups.

A disproportionate number of LGBT Americans are uninsured and qualify for federal premium subsidies to help buy coverage, and the administration is intensifying its efforts to get them enrolled before the end of the year. There are several reasons for this disparity, among them that same-sex partners often don’t qualify as family members for employer-based insurance plans and that individuals sometimes lose coverage when they are fired because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. The White House on Tuesday will release an infographic on the Affordable Care Act’s benefits for the LGBT community. [...]

The group has held workshops in major cities such as Houston, New York and Philadelphia. On Thursday, for example, White House public engagement adviser Gautam Raghavan joined Joanne Grossi, a regional director for the Department of Health and Human Services, for a training session with health-care “navigators” in Philadelphia, as well as a town hall event. Both focused on the LGBT community.

Some of the pitches are decidedly less conventional. Wednesday Night Tea, a drag show in Shreveport, La., has started promoting the health-care law as part of its act. And Out2Enroll is launching a social media campaign this week that will have “naughty” elements as well as holiday cheer, according to Kellan Baker, associate director of the LGBT Research and Communications Project at CAP.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/h..._headlines

I am really offended that you are posting a picture of my high school prom court.

(12-17-2013 11:55 PM)EagleRockCafe Wrote:  

Wednesday Night Tea?

Are these jiz suppositories Tea partiers?

(12-18-2013 05:03 PM)Jerry Falwell Wrote:  

(12-17-2013 11:55 PM)EagleRockCafe Wrote:  

Wednesday Night Tea?

Are these jiz suppositories Tea partiers?

Think they are the opposite of Tea Partiers.

What would that be? Whine and Please crowd?

(12-18-2013 12:50 AM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Good for them. I know you probably just want to laugh at them, but they're helping their community.

You are quite a bigot by the way.

Oh, did the witty bitty wib get upset????

(12-18-2013 04:42 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  

(12-17-2013 11:55 PM)EagleRockCafe Wrote:  

Is it me or does the one in the middle look like a slightly heavier version of Mooch?



So is this cutie on the right...man, woman?

As a critical deadline for signing up for insurance under President Obama’s health-care law approaches, the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community has emerged as a major target for the White House and outside groups.

A disproportionate number of LGBT Americans are uninsured and qualify for federal premium subsidies to help buy coverage, and the administration is intensifying its efforts to get them enrolled before the end of the year. There are several reasons for this disparity, among them that same-sex partners often don’t qualify as family members for employer-based insurance plans and that individuals sometimes lose coverage when they are fired because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. The White House on Tuesday will release an infographic on the Affordable Care Act’s benefits for the LGBT community. [...]

The group has held workshops in major cities such as Houston, New York and Philadelphia. On Thursday, for example, White House public engagement adviser Gautam Raghavan joined Joanne Grossi, a regional director for the Department of Health and Human Services, for a training session with health-care “navigators” in Philadelphia, as well as a town hall event. Both focused on the LGBT community.

Some of the pitches are decidedly less conventional. Wednesday Night Tea, a drag show in Shreveport, La., has started promoting the health-care law as part of its act. And Out2Enroll is launching a social media campaign this week that will have “naughty” elements as well as holiday cheer, according to Kellan Baker, associate director of the LGBT Research and Communications Project at CAP.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/h..._headlines

I am really offended that you are posting a picture of my high school prom court.

Whatever the sex is of the one on the right (the close-up) - that is one ugly human being. I don't know how "it" could attract anyone of either sex. I guess there's someone for everyone...................except Robert - who admits to blow-up dolls.

(12-18-2013 08:35 AM)Jerry Falwell Wrote:  Obamacare doesn't fix AIDS.

Yeah, and nobody can fix stupid. Not even God. Sorry, you are screwed.

(12-18-2013 03:38 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(12-18-2013 03:25 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-18-2013 03:21 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(12-18-2013 03:20 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-18-2013 01:56 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  Tom, I've never heard of an insurance company denying coverage to a gay spouse. And I'm kind of puzzled why you think insurance in the gay community would be affordable when it won't be for most of the country. Are you guys special or just hold crappy jobs that pay squat and now you qualify for subsidies? You're talking yourself into a hole there, Tom.

Also, AIDS is a legitimate threat to the gay population and I have no idea how much it costs to treat a person who has it, but risk is risk and the insurance companies will make you pay for that risk - in fact, they're making me pay for your risk.

https://www.aclu.org/lgbt-rights_hiv-aid...ance-plan.

And I have to pay for your damn kids and your pregnant wife too.

Is that an expression of your "bigotry" towards people who can reproduce?

Not at all, I'm just pointing out that I have to pay for expensive medical care for people that aren't part of my family or social group. And I promise you, single employees in group health plans usually end up getting screwed as many plans are set up to subsidize those with kids or those that get pregnant. And those costs are much higher than any charges for HIV/AIDS.

Two points:

You benefit from people having kids

I challenge you on the costs of HIV/AIDS.

However, if you want to get rid of taxes for public schools, then own up and say so. I won't criticize.

I don't benefit from you having kids. In fact, it is detriment to my life.

(12-18-2013 03:51 PM)Crebman Wrote:  

(12-18-2013 03:42 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-18-2013 03:38 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(12-18-2013 03:25 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(12-18-2013 03:21 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Is that an expression of your "bigotry" towards people who can reproduce?

Not at all, I'm just pointing out that I have to pay for expensive medical care for people that aren't part of my family or social group. And I promise you, single employees in group health plans usually end up getting screwed as many plans are set up to subsidize those with kids or those that get pregnant. And those costs are much higher than any charges for HIV/AIDS.

Two points:

You benefit from people having kids

I challenge you on the costs of HIV/AIDS.

However, if you want to get rid of taxes for public schools, then own up and say so. I won't criticize.

And you benefit from people having access to healthcare. So I have to subsidize your kids and you have to subsidize people who have HIV/AIDS.

I don't mind them having healthcare insurance - I just think it's a crock that I get to pay for it. But then, I'm not real happy about covering for Welfare either. In both instances, the fact that our government doesn't require these folks to "do anything" for their freebies is may main rub.

The old saying that "There is no free lunch" doesn't hold water for way too many on the government dole, and this is just another extension of the government dole.

Honestly Tom, every time I see someone with neck tattoo's, my thought is "You just relegated yourself to a minimum wage job". You don't think Tranny's are the same - get real. Sometimes life choices equal sh!ttier outcomes.

You should try living in the real world.