(03-25-2015 04:18 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 04:04 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 03:22 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  ^^^Long-winded, leftist way of saying, "I could care less about people exercising their religious freedoms."

Segregation Issues =/= Religious Issues Regarding Sodomites.

You'd be wise to have a conversation with a Christian Black man from the South before you go spouting your opinions of how "It's no different..." As much as you leftists might not like it, they are not even remotely equal. Let's face it, these guys/girls/its don't ACTUALLY want the cake the Christians are making, they just want to . If I don't agree with somebody's politics my solution is pretty simple. Don't shop there. The issue is akin to any other religious discrimination laws, which ironically passed in the Civil Rights era. How can you force somebody to perform or participate in wedding ceremonies for homosexuals when this is a clear violation of their religious beliefs?

Indiana.

Where the law is in many places (including in a partial sense in Indiana), it IS the same where sexual orientation is a protected class.

Reference my last post... 19 other states have enacted similar legislation.

(03-25-2015 04:04 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  Furthermore, I'm far from a leftist, as noted that I've voted GOP in every presidential election since I turned 18, which was a long time ago. The crazy thing about this whole issue is that it's the business groups that financially support the Republican Party, such as the US Chamber of Commerce (which the Daily Kos, MSNBC and the Huffington Post would hardly call leftist), absolutely HATE these "religious freedom for businesses" proposals. They're Republican supporters, like myself, that wish that the party would completely drop anything related to social issues altogether (both philosophically and politically), especially anything pertaining to gay rights. This legislation that is supposedly in place to protect the freedom of business is being completely rejected by businesses!!! It's a social wedge issue being couched as a faux business issue that businesses, at best, actually don't care about, and at worst, negatively impact the companies in growth industries (like Salesforce mentioned in the article) that lose young and educated talent because they absolutely abhor these homophobic environments.

Clearly it's an important enough issue that states continue to make these laws.

(03-25-2015 04:04 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  People can try to pass off the gay rights movement as supposedly "not as important" as the Civil Rights movement, but for Millennials, this is absolutely their equivalent. There are not two sides of the gay rights issue for them in the same way that there were not two sides of the civil rights issues for Baby Boomers.

If that's really how Millenials feel... wow. To use what African Americans endured during the Civil Rights movement as an equivalent is frankly insulting to most people's intelligence. You're comparing a group people who were enslaved, hanged, beaten, blasted with fire hoses, etc. to a group of people who were not allowed to get married. If that's not the height of self-importance, I'm not sure what is. That just goes to show how disconnected Millennials are from history and reality.

(03-25-2015 04:04 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  It's as black and white of an issue for Millennials as you can get and, from a pure political opportunist standpoint, it continues to boggle my mind why Republicans would commit political suicide with an entire generation when the party isn't going to be able to stem these changes, anyway. You can find plenty of fiscal conservatives among Millennials, but they won't hear the GOP message as long as the social conservatives exist.

Frankly, I couldn't care less what is or is not an issue for Millennials right now. If the Republicans never win another election because of this so be it but I personally think that any impact is blown completely out of proportion. By the time the Millennials get out of their parents' basements and start paying taxes, they'll hopefully have figured out simple economics the hard way.

So only those who's civil rights have been violated as bad as African Americans can say their cause is also a civil rights issue? that's a really, really poor way of looking at things.

Coretta Scott King over the years on gay rights...

On April 1, 1998 at the Palmer House Hilton in Chicago, Mrs. King called on the civil rights community to join in the struggle against homophobia and anti-gay bias. "Homophobia is like racism and anti-Semitism and other forms of bigotry in that it seeks to dehumanize a large group of people, to deny their humanity, their dignity and personhood", she stated.[133] "This sets the stage for further repression and violence that spread all too easily to victimize the next minority group."

In a speech in November 2003 at the opening session of the 13th annual Creating Change Conference, organized by the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, Coretta Scott King made her now famous appeal linking the Civil Rights Movement to LGBT rights: "I still hear people say that I should not be talking about the rights of lesbian and gay people. ... But I hasten to remind them that Martin Luther King Jr. said, 'Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.' I appeal to everyone who believes in Martin Luther King Jr.'s dream, to make room at the table of brotherhood and sisterhood for lesbian and gay people."

Coretta Scott King's support of LGBT rights was strongly criticized by some black pastors. She called her critics "misinformed" and said that Martin Luther King's message to the world was one of equality and inclusion.

In 2003, she invited the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force to take part in observances of the 40th anniversary of the March on Washington and Martin Luther King's I Have a Dream speech. It was the first time that an LGBT rights group had been invited to a major event of the African-American community.

On March 23, 2004, she told an audience at The Richard Stockton College of New Jersey in Pomona, New Jersey, that same-sex marriage is a civil rights issue. She denounced a proposed amendment advanced by President George W. Bush to the United States Constitution that would ban equal marriage rights for same-sex couples. In her speech King also criticized a group of black pastors in her home state of Georgia for backing a bill to amend that state's constitution to block gay and lesbian couples from marrying. Scott King is quoted as saying "Gay and lesbian people have families, and their families should have legal protection, whether by marriage or civil union. A constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriages is a form of gay bashing and it would do nothing at all to protect traditional marriage."

(03-25-2015 04:45 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 04:25 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 04:04 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 03:22 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  ^^^Long-winded, leftist way of saying, "I could care less about people exercising their religious freedoms."

Segregation Issues =/= Religious Issues Regarding Sodomites.

You'd be wise to have a conversation with a Christian Black man from the South before you go spouting your opinions of how "It's no different..." As much as you leftists might not like it, they are not even remotely equal. Let's face it, these guys/girls/its don't ACTUALLY want the cake the Christians are making, they just want to . If I don't agree with somebody's politics my solution is pretty simple. Don't shop there. The issue is akin to any other religious discrimination laws, which ironically passed in the Civil Rights era. How can you force somebody to perform or participate in wedding ceremonies for homosexuals when this is a clear violation of their religious beliefs?

Indiana.

Where the law is in many places (including in a partial sense in Indiana), it IS the same where sexual orientation is a protected class.

Furthermore, I'm far from a leftist, as noted that I've voted GOP in every presidential election since I turned 18, which was a long time ago. The crazy thing about this whole issue is that it's the business groups that financially support the Republican Party, such as the US Chamber of Commerce (which the Daily Kos, MSNBC and the Huffington Post would hardly call leftist), absolutely HATE these "religious freedom for businesses" proposals. They're Republican supporters, like myself, that wish that the party would completely drop anything related to social issues altogether (both philosophically and politically), especially anything pertaining to gay rights. This legislation that is supposedly in place to protect the freedom of business is being completely rejected by businesses!!! It's a social wedge issue being couched as a faux business issue that businesses, at best, actually don't care about, and at worst, negatively impact the companies in growth industries (like Salesforce mentioned in the article) that lose young and educated talent because they absolutely abhor these homophobic environments.

People can try to pass off the gay rights movement as supposedly "not as important" as the Civil Rights movement, but for Millennials, this is absolutely their equivalent. There are not two sides of the gay rights issue for them in the same way that there were not two sides of the civil rights issues for Baby Boomers. It's as black and white of an issue for Millennials as you can get and, from a pure political opportunist standpoint, it continues to boggle my mind why Republicans would commit political suicide with an entire generation when the party isn't going to be able to stem these changes, anyway. You can find plenty of fiscal conservatives among Millennials, but they won't hear the GOP message as long as the social conservatives exist.

As someone who has never voted for a Republican candidate in my lifetime (I will be 58 in July), I love this display of political suicide by the Republicans.

Keep up the good work, guys...

Glad somebody stands up for marriage as God intended. If the Supreme Court overturns state statues on what marriage is, look for more than just same sex marriages happening. Polygamy will be allowed and who's to say you can't marriage your horse or dog. Once the SC says you can't say what marriage is then it is a free for all.

There is a leap of a billion miles.

(03-25-2015 04:45 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 04:25 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 04:04 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 03:22 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  ^^^Long-winded, leftist way of saying, "I could care less about people exercising their religious freedoms."

Segregation Issues =/= Religious Issues Regarding Sodomites.

You'd be wise to have a conversation with a Christian Black man from the South before you go spouting your opinions of how "It's no different..." As much as you leftists might not like it, they are not even remotely equal. Let's face it, these guys/girls/its don't ACTUALLY want the cake the Christians are making, they just want to . If I don't agree with somebody's politics my solution is pretty simple. Don't shop there. The issue is akin to any other religious discrimination laws, which ironically passed in the Civil Rights era. How can you force somebody to perform or participate in wedding ceremonies for homosexuals when this is a clear violation of their religious beliefs?

Indiana.

Where the law is in many places (including in a partial sense in Indiana), it IS the same where sexual orientation is a protected class.

Furthermore, I'm far from a leftist, as noted that I've voted GOP in every presidential election since I turned 18, which was a long time ago. The crazy thing about this whole issue is that it's the business groups that financially support the Republican Party, such as the US Chamber of Commerce (which the Daily Kos, MSNBC and the Huffington Post would hardly call leftist), absolutely HATE these "religious freedom for businesses" proposals. They're Republican supporters, like myself, that wish that the party would completely drop anything related to social issues altogether (both philosophically and politically), especially anything pertaining to gay rights. This legislation that is supposedly in place to protect the freedom of business is being completely rejected by businesses!!! It's a social wedge issue being couched as a faux business issue that businesses, at best, actually don't care about, and at worst, negatively impact the companies in growth industries (like Salesforce mentioned in the article) that lose young and educated talent because they absolutely abhor these homophobic environments.

People can try to pass off the gay rights movement as supposedly "not as important" as the Civil Rights movement, but for Millennials, this is absolutely their equivalent. There are not two sides of the gay rights issue for them in the same way that there were not two sides of the civil rights issues for Baby Boomers. It's as black and white of an issue for Millennials as you can get and, from a pure political opportunist standpoint, it continues to boggle my mind why Republicans would commit political suicide with an entire generation when the party isn't going to be able to stem these changes, anyway. You can find plenty of fiscal conservatives among Millennials, but they won't hear the GOP message as long as the social conservatives exist.

As someone who has never voted for a Republican candidate in my lifetime (I will be 58 in July), I love this display of political suicide by the Republicans.

Keep up the good work, guys...

Glad somebody stands up for marriage as God intended. If the Supreme Court overturns state statues on what marriage is, look for more than just same sex marriages happening. Polygamy will be allowed and who's to say you can't marriage your horse or dog. Once the SC says you can't say what marriage is then it is a free for all.

So how many goats did you sell your daughter off for? That's what God intended.

(03-25-2015 04:54 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 04:48 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 04:42 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 04:29 PM)john01992 Wrote:  The support for LGBT rights within this demographic is here to stay.

...thanks to leftists' strangle-hold over US public education.

Yeah, it must be some kinda secret liberal indoctrination process that has hijacked public education. Not the four century long trend of society becoming increasingly more tolerant.

John, If I own and live in a 4 unit apartment building do you think I should be allowed to not rent someone because they are gay, or a jew, a muslim, or a protected class?

You can reject a potential tenant for a variety of reasons. But those reasons can't be on the basis of ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, race, gender, etc.

(03-25-2015 05:01 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 04:45 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 04:25 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 04:04 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 03:22 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  ^^^Long-winded, leftist way of saying, "I could care less about people exercising their religious freedoms."

Segregation Issues =/= Religious Issues Regarding Sodomites.

You'd be wise to have a conversation with a Christian Black man from the South before you go spouting your opinions of how "It's no different..." As much as you leftists might not like it, they are not even remotely equal. Let's face it, these guys/girls/its don't ACTUALLY want the cake the Christians are making, they just want to . If I don't agree with somebody's politics my solution is pretty simple. Don't shop there. The issue is akin to any other religious discrimination laws, which ironically passed in the Civil Rights era. How can you force somebody to perform or participate in wedding ceremonies for homosexuals when this is a clear violation of their religious beliefs?

Indiana.

Where the law is in many places (including in a partial sense in Indiana), it IS the same where sexual orientation is a protected class.

Furthermore, I'm far from a leftist, as noted that I've voted GOP in every presidential election since I turned 18, which was a long time ago. The crazy thing about this whole issue is that it's the business groups that financially support the Republican Party, such as the US Chamber of Commerce (which the Daily Kos, MSNBC and the Huffington Post would hardly call leftist), absolutely HATE these "religious freedom for businesses" proposals. They're Republican supporters, like myself, that wish that the party would completely drop anything related to social issues altogether (both philosophically and politically), especially anything pertaining to gay rights. This legislation that is supposedly in place to protect the freedom of business is being completely rejected by businesses!!! It's a social wedge issue being couched as a faux business issue that businesses, at best, actually don't care about, and at worst, negatively impact the companies in growth industries (like Salesforce mentioned in the article) that lose young and educated talent because they absolutely abhor these homophobic environments.

People can try to pass off the gay rights movement as supposedly "not as important" as the Civil Rights movement, but for Millennials, this is absolutely their equivalent. There are not two sides of the gay rights issue for them in the same way that there were not two sides of the civil rights issues for Baby Boomers. It's as black and white of an issue for Millennials as you can get and, from a pure political opportunist standpoint, it continues to boggle my mind why Republicans would commit political suicide with an entire generation when the party isn't going to be able to stem these changes, anyway. You can find plenty of fiscal conservatives among Millennials, but they won't hear the GOP message as long as the social conservatives exist.

As someone who has never voted for a Republican candidate in my lifetime (I will be 58 in July), I love this display of political suicide by the Republicans.

Keep up the good work, guys...

Glad somebody stands up for marriage as God intended. If the Supreme Court overturns state statues on what marriage is, look for more than just same sex marriages happening. Polygamy will be allowed and who's to say you can't marriage your horse or dog. Once the SC says you can't say what marriage is then it is a free for all.

So how many goats did you sell your daughter off for? That's what God intended.

No, that is what some illiterate sheep herders may have told/re-told/mis-retold over campfires for centuries, then someone wrote it down, it was then translated or mis-translated into a bunch of other languages by a bunch of guys over several millennia and now it is available online as well as in book form in many languages, including modern English.

(03-25-2015 04:48 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 04:42 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 04:29 PM)john01992 Wrote:  The support for LGBT rights within this demographic is here to stay.

...thanks to leftists' strangle-hold over US public education.

Yeah, it must be some kinda secret liberal indoctrination process that has hijacked public education. Not the four century long trend of society becoming increasingly more tolerant.

Quote:"Let me control the textbooks and I will control the state." -- Adolph Hitler

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/13.../page/full

Quote:The country’s two largest teachers' unions -- the National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers -- spent a combined $330 million in the past five years on outside causes, political campaigns, lobbying and issue education, the Wall Street Journal reports.

According to annual reports filed with the Labor Department, some of the spending identified as “political and lobbying” activities went to election consultants, voter mobilization and advertising. Millions went to PACs that donate almost exclusively to Democratic candidates and committees, while organizations promoting causes like women’s rights and African-American, Hispanic and Asian-American civil rights also received money.

(03-24-2015 03:47 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  OK NCAA - you made a big deal about boycotting South Carolina over the Confederate Flag, now the site of both your premier sporting event and your headquarters is getting ready to pass a bill allowing outright discrimination against LGBT's.

Put your money where your mouth is - move the FINAL FOUR out of Indianapolis, and move your headquarters.

http://www.indystar.com/story/news/polit.../70336706/

At some point, the NCAA can't be the flag bearer for any and all non-college athletics related causes. As noble as they might be.

(03-25-2015 05:18 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(03-24-2015 03:47 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  OK NCAA - you made a big deal about boycotting South Carolina over the Confederate Flag, now the site of both your premier sporting event and your headquarters is getting ready to pass a bill allowing outright discrimination against LGBT's.

Put your money where your mouth is - move the FINAL FOUR out of Indianapolis, and move your headquarters.

http://www.indystar.com/story/news/polit.../70336706/

At some point, the NCAA can't be the flag bearer for any and all non-college athletics related causes. As noble as they might be.

I tend to agree, actually. Just really wanted to point out the NCAA's hypocrisy on things.

This one SHOULD mean they move the final four, move their offices, etc. But we will only get the vanilla "we are studying the issue"

(03-25-2015 05:13 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 04:48 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 04:42 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 04:29 PM)john01992 Wrote:  The support for LGBT rights within this demographic is here to stay.

...thanks to leftists' strangle-hold over US public education.

Yeah, it must be some kinda secret liberal indoctrination process that has hijacked public education. Not the four century long trend of society becoming increasingly more tolerant.

Quote:"Let me control the textbooks and I will control the state." -- Adolph Hitler

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/13.../page/full

Quote:The country’s two largest teachers' unions -- the National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers -- spent a combined $330 million in the past five years on outside causes, political campaigns, lobbying and issue education, the Wall Street Journal reports.

According to annual reports filed with the Labor Department, some of the spending identified as “political and lobbying” activities went to election consultants, voter mobilization and advertising. Millions went to PACs that donate almost exclusively to Democratic candidates and committees, while organizations promoting causes like women’s rights and African-American, Hispanic and Asian-American civil rights also received money.

And do you know why they have to do that? Because the GOP seems content with weakening education as much as possible by either pulling funding that should be going to students or cutting pensions/teacher salaries.

Not to mention it's usually the GOP not the Dems who actually try to alter the course curriculum with their "reversing the liberal bias" and/or "adding patriotism" BS.

Don't believe me? Learn for yourself:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answ...ort-finds/

and because Texas is the single largest buyer of Textbooks, the publishers conform to THEIR standards and it ends up affecting pretty much every State.

You need to be at the highest level of stupidity to claim that the political base that is fighting to improve quality of education by improving funding is somehow the "anti education" party. But yeah, thanks for quoting Hitler to help tank your own argument.

(03-25-2015 05:00 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 04:45 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 04:25 PM)TerryD Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 04:04 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 03:22 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  ^^^Long-winded, leftist way of saying, "I could care less about people exercising their religious freedoms."

Segregation Issues =/= Religious Issues Regarding Sodomites.

You'd be wise to have a conversation with a Christian Black man from the South before you go spouting your opinions of how "It's no different..." As much as you leftists might not like it, they are not even remotely equal. Let's face it, these guys/girls/its don't ACTUALLY want the cake the Christians are making, they just want to . If I don't agree with somebody's politics my solution is pretty simple. Don't shop there. The issue is akin to any other religious discrimination laws, which ironically passed in the Civil Rights era. How can you force somebody to perform or participate in wedding ceremonies for homosexuals when this is a clear violation of their religious beliefs?

Indiana.

Where the law is in many places (including in a partial sense in Indiana), it IS the same where sexual orientation is a protected class.

Furthermore, I'm far from a leftist, as noted that I've voted GOP in every presidential election since I turned 18, which was a long time ago. The crazy thing about this whole issue is that it's the business groups that financially support the Republican Party, such as the US Chamber of Commerce (which the Daily Kos, MSNBC and the Huffington Post would hardly call leftist), absolutely HATE these "religious freedom for businesses" proposals. They're Republican supporters, like myself, that wish that the party would completely drop anything related to social issues altogether (both philosophically and politically), especially anything pertaining to gay rights. This legislation that is supposedly in place to protect the freedom of business is being completely rejected by businesses!!! It's a social wedge issue being couched as a faux business issue that businesses, at best, actually don't care about, and at worst, negatively impact the companies in growth industries (like Salesforce mentioned in the article) that lose young and educated talent because they absolutely abhor these homophobic environments.

People can try to pass off the gay rights movement as supposedly "not as important" as the Civil Rights movement, but for Millennials, this is absolutely their equivalent. There are not two sides of the gay rights issue for them in the same way that there were not two sides of the civil rights issues for Baby Boomers. It's as black and white of an issue for Millennials as you can get and, from a pure political opportunist standpoint, it continues to boggle my mind why Republicans would commit political suicide with an entire generation when the party isn't going to be able to stem these changes, anyway. You can find plenty of fiscal conservatives among Millennials, but they won't hear the GOP message as long as the social conservatives exist.

As someone who has never voted for a Republican candidate in my lifetime (I will be 58 in July), I love this display of political suicide by the Republicans.

Keep up the good work, guys...

Glad somebody stands up for marriage as God intended. If the Supreme Court overturns state statues on what marriage is, look for more than just same sex marriages happening. Polygamy will be allowed and who's to say you can't marriage your horse or dog. Once the SC says you can't say what marriage is then it is a free for all.

There is a leap of a billion miles.

Not really. If marriage only between a man and woman is 'discriminatory' then it still becomes discriminatory if marriage is only between 2 people (regardless of sex). That is going to be the basis of the courts where the state cannot make a law on what marriage is. And in fact there are a couple of polygamy cases now also being work along side the same-sex marriage cases with the same defense as the same-sex couple cases.

(03-25-2015 04:06 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 03:59 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 03:45 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 02:22 PM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  This is the same B.S. argument that people use to try to say that a Catholic hospital should be forced to offer abortions. Or to really drive the point home, should a black bartender be forced to serve a KKK function? Of course not. Just because you're a service provider doesn't mean you're the general public's slave.

It's morally wrong to force people to take an action that violates their own conscience.

The abortion example isn't quite as analogous (albeit much more complicated).

However, the black bartender issue is very much clear: the KKK isn't a protected class (unlike race, gender, sexual orientation, etc.), so of course the bartender doesn't have to serve them. That's the difference: sexual orientation is becoming a protected class in this country (whether people personally agree with it or not), so it has to be treated completely differently than other groups.

If you have a private business, you are free to not serve customers for any reason BESIDES discriminating against a protected class. If you don't want to serve people that aren't wearing shoes or shirts, that's legal. If you don't want to serve people wearing Ohio State T-shirts because you're a Cincinnati fan, that's legal. If you don't want to serve KKK members, that's legal. If you don't want to serve someone because he's black, though, then that's NOT legal. You CANNOT refuse to serve someone by discriminating against a protected class even if you are trying to justify it by one of your other rights (i.e. free speech, freedom of religion, etc.). In that conflict, the rights of the protected class trumps any of your rights that you're using to justify discriminating against them.

Yet, 19 other states have passed similar legislation to protect religious business owners. You can talk all of your jive but these laws keep getting passed. Clearly states aren't seeing these issues as equals.

And how many states had Jim Crow laws? These laws are the last gasp of anti-gay bigotry. Your CHOICE of religion should not, and in the end, will not triumph over my born sexual orientation.

Why are the "traditional" marriage folks protesting outside divorce courts? Jesus spoke against divorce?
How come Red Lobster's don't get firebombed? Leviticus speaks against that.

Here is a well-thought answer to the seafood question. http://www.gotquestions.org/God-hates-shrimp.html

As a Millennial, I am pretty embarrassed by most (not all) of my fellow peers stances. Their view of tolerance is force their beliefs down everyone throats while appearing as tolerant angels. Their "open" minds believe everything and commit to nothing in fear of "offending" someone. I am ashamed to part of my generation. Our moral relativism is going sink this nation. We don't have the moral fortitude to combat an evil like ISIS. They want "free" internet, they want "free" college, without realizing nothing earthly is free.

The cultural wars about pretty much over. The conservative side has lost.

That side also has lost four of the last six Presidential elections and has lost the popular vote in five of the last six Presidential elections.

More importantly for the future, they may have lost and will continue to lose the demographic battle. Those trends do not bode well for the future for that side of these issues.

(03-25-2015 05:25 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 05:13 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 04:48 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 04:42 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 04:29 PM)john01992 Wrote:  The support for LGBT rights within this demographic is here to stay.

...thanks to leftists' strangle-hold over US public education.

Yeah, it must be some kinda secret liberal indoctrination process that has hijacked public education. Not the four century long trend of society becoming increasingly more tolerant.

Quote:"Let me control the textbooks and I will control the state." -- Adolph Hitler

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/13.../page/full

Quote:The country’s two largest teachers' unions -- the National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers -- spent a combined $330 million in the past five years on outside causes, political campaigns, lobbying and issue education, the Wall Street Journal reports.

According to annual reports filed with the Labor Department, some of the spending identified as “political and lobbying” activities went to election consultants, voter mobilization and advertising. Millions went to PACs that donate almost exclusively to Democratic candidates and committees, while organizations promoting causes like women’s rights and African-American, Hispanic and Asian-American civil rights also received money.

And do you know why they have to do that? Because the GOP seems content with weakening education as much as possible by either pulling funding that should be going to students or cutting pensions/teacher salaries.

Not to mention it's usually the GOP not the Dems who actually try to alter the course curriculum with their "reversing the liberal bias" and/or "adding patriotism" BS.

Don't believe me? Learn for yourself:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answ...ort-finds/

and because Texas is the single largest buyer of Textbooks, the publishers conform to THEIR standards and it ends up affecting pretty much every State.

You need to be at the highest level of stupidity to claim that the political base that is fighting to improve quality of education by improving funding is somehow the "anti education" party. But yeah, thanks for quoting Hitler to help tank your own argument.

Please tell me more about public education spending.

(03-25-2015 05:32 PM)TerryD Wrote:  The cultural wars about pretty much over. The conservative side has lost.

That side also has lost four of the last six Presidential elections and has lost the popular vote in five of the last six Presidential elections.

More importantly for the future, they may have lost and will continue to lose the demographic battle. Those trends do not bode well for the future for that side of these issues.

Funny thing is, I actually expect to continue to lose most of those battles. It will only get worse and worse for social conservatives - just prophecy being fulfilled.

(03-25-2015 05:34 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 05:25 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 05:13 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 04:48 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 04:42 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  ...thanks to leftists' strangle-hold over US public education.

Yeah, it must be some kinda secret liberal indoctrination process that has hijacked public education. Not the four century long trend of society becoming increasingly more tolerant.

Quote:"Let me control the textbooks and I will control the state." -- Adolph Hitler

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/13.../page/full

Quote:The country’s two largest teachers' unions -- the National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers -- spent a combined $330 million in the past five years on outside causes, political campaigns, lobbying and issue education, the Wall Street Journal reports.

According to annual reports filed with the Labor Department, some of the spending identified as “political and lobbying” activities went to election consultants, voter mobilization and advertising. Millions went to PACs that donate almost exclusively to Democratic candidates and committees, while organizations promoting causes like women’s rights and African-American, Hispanic and Asian-American civil rights also received money.

And do you know why they have to do that? Because the GOP seems content with weakening education as much as possible by either pulling funding that should be going to students or cutting pensions/teacher salaries.

Not to mention it's usually the GOP not the Dems who actually try to alter the course curriculum with their "reversing the liberal bias" and/or "adding patriotism" BS.

Don't believe me? Learn for yourself:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answ...ort-finds/

and because Texas is the single largest buyer of Textbooks, the publishers conform to THEIR standards and it ends up affecting pretty much every State.

You need to be at the highest level of stupidity to claim that the political base that is fighting to improve quality of education by improving funding is somehow the "anti education" party. But yeah, thanks for quoting Hitler to help tank your own argument.

Please tell me more about public education spending.

That "source" is an ultra right wing blog that is shady at best.

I know it's msnbc but come on, you really can't deny basic political science at this point.

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker wants a $300 million funding cut for higher education, and Gov. Bobby Jindal has proposed the same level of cuts in Louisiana. Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey wants at least a $75 million cut to higher ed, and Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback is aiming to cut $45 million from K-12 schools and higher education combined.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/gop-governors...shortfalls

(03-25-2015 05:06 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 04:54 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 04:48 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 04:42 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 04:29 PM)john01992 Wrote:  The support for LGBT rights within this demographic is here to stay.

...thanks to leftists' strangle-hold over US public education.

Yeah, it must be some kinda secret liberal indoctrination process that has hijacked public education. Not the four century long trend of society becoming increasingly more tolerant.

John, If I own and live in a 4 unit apartment building do you think I should be allowed to not rent someone because they are gay, or a jew, a muslim, or a protected class?

You can reject a potential tenant for a variety of reasons. But those reasons can't be on the basis of ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, race, gender, etc.

Not what I asked? Should I be allowed? Last time I checked it was legal to do such. You a Muslim, in Dearborn, how hates Jews should legally be allowed to say nah I am renting to a jew?

(03-25-2015 05:50 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 05:06 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 04:54 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 04:48 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 04:42 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  ...thanks to leftists' strangle-hold over US public education.

Yeah, it must be some kinda secret liberal indoctrination process that has hijacked public education. Not the four century long trend of society becoming increasingly more tolerant.

John, If I own and live in a 4 unit apartment building do you think I should be allowed to not rent someone because they are gay, or a jew, a muslim, or a protected class?

You can reject a potential tenant for a variety of reasons. But those reasons can't be on the basis of ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, race, gender, etc.

Not what I asked? Should I be allowed? Last time I checked it was legal to do such. You a Muslim, in Dearborn, how hates Jews should legally be allowed to say nah I am renting to a jew?

go away dude.

You asked "do you think I should be allowed to..." so don't give me this s*** "not what I asked...last I checked it's legal" BS. You forfeited that talking point when you asked for my personal opinion. Stop being a prick right now.

(03-25-2015 05:49 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 05:34 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  Please tell me more about public education spending.

That "source" is an ultra right wing blog that is shady at best.

Reading comprehension is obviously not a strong point. I suppose these sources are "ultra right wing" as well? Feel free to fact check if you want to refute the data.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default...tables.asp
https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/2009menu_tables.asp
http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/sub...013456.pdf

(03-25-2015 05:49 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 05:34 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 05:25 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 05:13 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 04:48 PM)john01992 Wrote:  Yeah, it must be some kinda secret liberal indoctrination process that has hijacked public education. Not the four century long trend of society becoming increasingly more tolerant.

Quote:"Let me control the textbooks and I will control the state." -- Adolph Hitler

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/13.../page/full

Quote:The country’s two largest teachers' unions -- the National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers -- spent a combined $330 million in the past five years on outside causes, political campaigns, lobbying and issue education, the Wall Street Journal reports.

According to annual reports filed with the Labor Department, some of the spending identified as “political and lobbying” activities went to election consultants, voter mobilization and advertising. Millions went to PACs that donate almost exclusively to Democratic candidates and committees, while organizations promoting causes like women’s rights and African-American, Hispanic and Asian-American civil rights also received money.

And do you know why they have to do that? Because the GOP seems content with weakening education as much as possible by either pulling funding that should be going to students or cutting pensions/teacher salaries.

Not to mention it's usually the GOP not the Dems who actually try to alter the course curriculum with their "reversing the liberal bias" and/or "adding patriotism" BS.

Don't believe me? Learn for yourself:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answ...ort-finds/

and because Texas is the single largest buyer of Textbooks, the publishers conform to THEIR standards and it ends up affecting pretty much every State.

You need to be at the highest level of stupidity to claim that the political base that is fighting to improve quality of education by improving funding is somehow the "anti education" party. But yeah, thanks for quoting Hitler to help tank your own argument.

Please tell me more about public education spending.

That "source" is an ultra right wing blog that is shady at best.

I know it's msnbc but come on, you really can't deny basic political science at this point.

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker wants a $300 million funding cut for higher education, and Gov. Bobby Jindal has proposed the same level of cuts in Louisiana. Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey wants at least a $75 million cut to higher ed, and Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback is aiming to cut $45 million from K-12 schools and higher education combined.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/gop-governors...shortfalls

You can spend all the money you want, but education won't improve until you have less powerful teacher unions. More money doesn't always equal better results.

I thank God that I was homeschooled, sent to a Catholic high school and avoided the cesspool of public education.

(03-25-2015 05:59 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 05:49 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 05:34 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 05:25 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 05:13 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/13.../page/full

And do you know why they have to do that? Because the GOP seems content with weakening education as much as possible by either pulling funding that should be going to students or cutting pensions/teacher salaries.

Not to mention it's usually the GOP not the Dems who actually try to alter the course curriculum with their "reversing the liberal bias" and/or "adding patriotism" BS.

Don't believe me? Learn for yourself:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answ...ort-finds/

and because Texas is the single largest buyer of Textbooks, the publishers conform to THEIR standards and it ends up affecting pretty much every State.

You need to be at the highest level of stupidity to claim that the political base that is fighting to improve quality of education by improving funding is somehow the "anti education" party. But yeah, thanks for quoting Hitler to help tank your own argument.

Please tell me more about public education spending.

That "source" is an ultra right wing blog that is shady at best.

So you're calling these sources "ultra right wing" as well? Feel free to fact check if you want to refute the data.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default...tables.asp
http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/sub...013456.pdf

No I'm calling the blog that made that graph ultra right wing. It's very easy to misrepresent data on a graph. Especially when said graph uses 2010 as it's takeaway point...using data up to 2009.