(08-12-2011 12:47 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(08-12-2011 12:20 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(08-12-2011 08:16 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  Something tells me that SS is not going to out Bert and Earnie. This is simply making a mountain out of a mole hill. I will say though that I agree with Reb. on this. If the gay community wants acceptance,it would behoove itself to simply not go down this road and try and shove this nonsense down the public's throat.

Personally I would not appreciate having to answer a question from my 4 year old in regard to ANY sexually related topic. Hell...I did not appreciate having to explain what oral sex was to my 10 year old daughter after the Clinton debacle. I believe that a certain maturity is needed to understand these subjects and as a parent..I should make that determination as to when that occurs. I do not need help in raising my child.

Actually, if the Gay community keeps quiet and hidden, nothing changes. The Gay community wins when they force Americans to see that they exist.

Wins what? And why do we have to see them when they keep demanding privacy for what they do in their own bedrooms?

Geesh, can you cut w/ the doublespeak.

Quote:that their relationships are just as valid as others. And that they deserve as much respect as you expect from them.

Wow, less than one paragraph and you're off on cliche tangents.

Quote:Unless you want to throw your TV away and home skool

Really? You insult homeschooling now? Despite it's demonstrated superiority ? Despite your pleas for tolerance and "respect" it only takes you to the second paragraph before you start insulting people who don't think like you.

Quote:your children, they are going to see Gay families. Either on TV or at their school. Hopefully, your children will behave appropriately.

And you get to define "appropriately"? Your hypocrisy is convenient.

And we're talking 1-2% of the population, wh/ is not distributed homogenously, so there's a good chance that many children will not see gay families. (And yes, I think it's hilarious that those who think they are so intellectually superior can't do basic math).

Quote:If you are upset with people with agendas pushing them onto children without parental consent, I certainly hope you'll be consistent and support the ACLU and Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, as they argue for an end to fundamentalist indocrination in our schools and from our government.

So you don't want kids to learn the principles on which the country was founded, and which offer historically demonstrable success in terms of health and prosperity?

The founders worked on Christmas. Dominionism is idiotic and not supported by historical record.

The US was founded as a non-religious government. That means that the US government cannot favor any religion over another or any religion over athiesm.

I didn't realize that fundamentalists were higher earners than secular liberals.

So the fundamentalist solution to the issue of Gay male promiscuity is to make Gay monogamy ILLEGAL. You'll have to explain that one to me.

So the fundamentalist solution to the HIV/AIDS crisis is to provide zero HIV education to Gay men, to fire people who are open enough in the community to be identified as a target market for education, and to cut off funding for life saving drugs in order to line the pockets of Republican politicians.

How about this...the Gay community will shut up when they have the exact same rights for their relationships as straight infertile couples and when fundamentalists keep their faith inside their churches out of public view.

(08-12-2011 12:59 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  And CMU alumni/fans I should think.

And Walmart Wolverines... don't forget about them.

(08-12-2011 12:59 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(08-12-2011 12:52 PM)Motown Bronco Wrote:  

(08-12-2011 12:24 PM)ImMoreAwesomeThanYou Wrote:  Aw...thats sweet. You think sexual deviants should have rights and deserve respect. Gays don't go to heaven to who cares what they do while they're here.

People are born with a certain orientation.

You could get that from the Bible.

Quote: And if they seek a relationship with a consenting adult with the same orientation, it's their right.

That's a much deeper question. Who gives us rights? What are those rights?

The whole notion of individual rights is almost exclusively Judeo-Christian. You can build from that if you want, but it gets more challenging to find the basis if you do so.

Quote:I'm sure there are Bible passages that can be quoted to refute my viewpoint; but in my view, disrespecting and treating gays as second-class vermin is the opposite what Christianity is (or should) be about. I save my ugly bitterness for actual criminals, London rioters, flash mob attackers, etc.

And CMU alumni/fans I should think.

Actually, the first concepts of individual rights came from the pagan Greeks.

Someone's getting angry...call your boyfriend and tell him about how you're being picked on by people who make sense.

(08-12-2011 12:20 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(08-12-2011 08:16 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  Something tells me that SS is not going to out Bert and Earnie. This is simply making a mountain out of a mole hill. I will say though that I agree with Reb. on this. If the gay community wants acceptance,it would behoove itself to simply not go down this road and try and shove this nonsense down the public's throat.

Personally I would not appreciate having to answer a question from my 4 year old in regard to ANY sexually related topic. Hell...I did not appreciate having to explain what oral sex was to my 10 year old daughter after the Clinton debacle. I believe that a certain maturity is needed to understand these subjects and as a parent..I should make that determination as to when that occurs. I do not need help in raising my child.

Actually, if the Gay community keeps quiet and hidden, nothing changes. The Gay community wins when they force Americans to see that they exist. And that their relationships are just as valid as others. And that they deserve as much respect as you expect from them.

Unless you want to throw your TV away and home skool your children, they are going to see Gay families. Either on TV or at their school. Hopefully, your children will behave appropriately.

If you are upset with people with agendas pushing them onto children without parental consent, I certainly hope you'll be consistent and support the ACLU and Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, as they argue for an end to fundamentalist indocrination in our schools and from our government. And that you supported the return of Elian Gonzales to Cuba.

Just for clarity. I support the right of people to freely associate with each other in any fashion they wish as long as theft, fraud, violence or breach of contract is not involved. That is the principle I live by in regard to ALL topics of liberty and have expounded ad nauseum that principle on this forum.

I think I explained my reasoning for not wanting sexual topics of ANY sort being cast at my 4 year old child and I will stand by that. I do not think that is an unreasonable request to make as a parent. There is certainly a time and place for these discussions and I had them with my daughter when I felt she was mature enough to understand the subject. I would simply appreciate that "I" get to be the one that breaches these topics. It is about respecting others wishes in regard to raising their children.

I respect the gay community's right to live free. I would hope that respect is reciprocated.

(08-12-2011 01:00 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  The founders worked on Christmas.

So?

Quote: Dominionism is idiotic and not supported by historical record.

?

Quote:The US was founded as a non-religious government. That means that the US government cannot favor any religion over another or any religion over athiesm.

That's your definition of "non-religious". The founders' own words don't suggest that same interpretation.

Quote:I didn't realize that fundamentalists were higher earners than secular liberals.

Red herring

Quote:So the fundamentalist solution to the issue of Gay male promiscuity is to make Gay monogamy ILLEGAL. You'll have to explain that one to me.

No I won't. That's your straw man argument, so you figure it out.

Quote:So the fundamentalist solution to the HIV/AIDS crisis is to provide zero HIV education to Gay men, to fire people who are open enough in the community to be identified as a target market for education, and to cut off funding for life saving drugs in order to line the pockets of Republican politicians.

That's several straw man arguments. To the point of absurdity. Very typical since you don't have a real point to make, other than you want to do things your way and everybody else owes you for it.

Quote:How about this...the Gay community will shut up when they have the exact same rights for their relationships as straight infertile couples and when fundamentalists keep their faith inside their churches out of public view.

Why?

(08-12-2011 01:01 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Actually, the first concepts of individual rights came from the pagan Greeks.

Who were preceded by the Israelites...(But only by hundreds of years, so I can see why you could get mixed up.)

(08-12-2011 01:01 PM)Motown Bronco Wrote:  

(08-12-2011 12:59 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  And CMU alumni/fans I should think.

And Walmart Wolverines... don't forget about them.

Good call.

(08-12-2011 12:55 PM)ImMoreAwesomeThanYou Wrote:  I only point out the hypocrisy of your point. Dr. Torch actually spelled it out for you. I don't have a problem with homosexuals. I just don't think they should be afforded the right to marry and given the same rights as a couple. They can't shout tolerance then be intolerant of those that feel differently...ie christians. People like you are only tolerant of those that believe the same way you do. If you don't like your country then leave. Its one nation under God or GET OUT!..move to France.

Not moving. You can't push them around anymore. Get your church out of the public square first, then we can talk about Gays getting out of the public square.

When Gays can fire people for being evangelical(currently against the law in all 50 states), then you can talk about the fairness of laws that allow evangelicals to fire people (while taking tax dollars) for being openly Gay.

The One Nation under God language was inserted in the Pledge of Allegiance...in the 1950's as part of the McCathyist nightmare. It used to read... One Nation, Indivisible...

Furthermore, if you are looking to live under a religious government might I suggest that you move to France, where the church actually does have special standing.

And yes, if you don't support equal pay for equal work (that includes benefits) and equal rights then you do have a problem with Gay people. There are really only two reasons why someone would oppose equality. They are:

1) Animosity or hatred towards Gays
2) A desire to make your religious laws the laws for everyone, including those that don't share your religion.

Me likey Torch

(08-12-2011 01:10 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(08-12-2011 12:55 PM)ImMoreAwesomeThanYou Wrote:  I only point out the hypocrisy of your point. Dr. Torch actually spelled it out for you. I don't have a problem with homosexuals. I just don't think they should be afforded the right to marry and given the same rights as a couple. They can't shout tolerance then be intolerant of those that feel differently...ie christians. People like you are only tolerant of those that believe the same way you do. If you don't like your country then leave. Its one nation under God or GET OUT!..move to France.

Not moving. You can't push them around anymore. Get your church out of the public square first, then we can talk about Gays getting out of the public square.

When Gays can fire people for being evangelical(currently against the law in all 50 states), then you can talk about the fairness of laws that allow evangelicals to fire people (while taking tax dollars) for being openly Gay.

The One Nation under God language was inserted in the Pledge of Allegiance...in the 1950's as part of the McCathyist nightmare. It used to read... One Nation, Indivisible...

Furthermore, if you are looking to live under a religious government might I suggest that you move to France, where the church actually does have special standing.

And yes, if you don't support equal pay for equal work (that includes benefits) and equal rights then you do have a problem with Gay people. There are really only two reasons why someone would oppose equality. They are:

1) Animosity or hatred towards Gays
2) A desire to make your religious laws the laws for everyone, including those that don't share your religion.

Guilty and Guilty...now what?

Its funny you say push "them" around like your not gay...

(08-12-2011 01:05 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(08-12-2011 12:20 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(08-12-2011 08:16 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  Something tells me that SS is not going to out Bert and Earnie. This is simply making a mountain out of a mole hill. I will say though that I agree with Reb. on this. If the gay community wants acceptance,it would behoove itself to simply not go down this road and try and shove this nonsense down the public's throat.

Personally I would not appreciate having to answer a question from my 4 year old in regard to ANY sexually related topic. Hell...I did not appreciate having to explain what oral sex was to my 10 year old daughter after the Clinton debacle. I believe that a certain maturity is needed to understand these subjects and as a parent..I should make that determination as to when that occurs. I do not need help in raising my child.

Actually, if the Gay community keeps quiet and hidden, nothing changes. The Gay community wins when they force Americans to see that they exist. And that their relationships are just as valid as others. And that they deserve as much respect as you expect from them.

Unless you want to throw your TV away and home skool your children, they are going to see Gay families. Either on TV or at their school. Hopefully, your children will behave appropriately.

If you are upset with people with agendas pushing them onto children without parental consent, I certainly hope you'll be consistent and support the ACLU and Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, as they argue for an end to fundamentalist indocrination in our schools and from our government. And that you supported the return of Elian Gonzales to Cuba.

Just for clarity. I support the right of people to freely associate with each other in any fashion they wish as long as theft, fraud, violence or breach of contract is not involved. That is the principle I live by in regard to ALL topics of liberty and have expounded ad nauseum that principle on this forum.

I think I explained my reasoning for not wanting sexual topics of ANY sort being cast at my 4 year old child and I will stand by that. I do not think that is an unreasonable request to make as a parent. There is certainly a time and place for these discussions and I had them with my daughter when I felt she was mature enough to understand the subject. I would simply appreciate that "I" get to be the one that breaches these topics. It is about respecting others wishes in regard to raising their children.

I respect the gay community's right to live free. I would hope that respect is reciprocated.

Free? Is someone free if their existance is shoved in a closet like some filthy rag? Is someone free if they can be discriminated against in public policy? or in the private sector. Is someone free if they cannot act in public exactly like straight people do? Or if they are not represented in government programming?

Look, Gay people don't believe that they are free to be anything other than second class citizens.

What are Gay people free to do in the open? Not have a picture of their husband on their desk like the straight people do? Not to answer a question honestly (like..'are you single'...'what did you do last weekend').

(08-12-2011 01:12 PM)ImMoreAwesomeThanYou Wrote:  

(08-12-2011 01:10 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(08-12-2011 12:55 PM)ImMoreAwesomeThanYou Wrote:  I only point out the hypocrisy of your point. Dr. Torch actually spelled it out for you. I don't have a problem with homosexuals. I just don't think they should be afforded the right to marry and given the same rights as a couple. They can't shout tolerance then be intolerant of those that feel differently...ie christians. People like you are only tolerant of those that believe the same way you do. If you don't like your country then leave. Its one nation under God or GET OUT!..move to France.

Not moving. You can't push them around anymore. Get your church out of the public square first, then we can talk about Gays getting out of the public square.

When Gays can fire people for being evangelical(currently against the law in all 50 states), then you can talk about the fairness of laws that allow evangelicals to fire people (while taking tax dollars) for being openly Gay.

The One Nation under God language was inserted in the Pledge of Allegiance...in the 1950's as part of the McCathyist nightmare. It used to read... One Nation, Indivisible...

Furthermore, if you are looking to live under a religious government might I suggest that you move to France, where the church actually does have special standing.

And yes, if you don't support equal pay for equal work (that includes benefits) and equal rights then you do have a problem with Gay people. There are really only two reasons why someone would oppose equality. They are:

1) Animosity or hatred towards Gays
2) A desire to make your religious laws the laws for everyone, including those that don't share your religion.

Guilty and Guilty...now what?

So you are a bigot who endorses sharia government. Just taking notes.

(08-12-2011 01:00 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  The US was founded as a non-religious government. That means that the US government cannot favor any religion over another or any religion over athiesm.

Which is why there were prayers before the first session of congress...yup ok..

(08-12-2011 01:17 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(08-12-2011 01:05 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(08-12-2011 12:20 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(08-12-2011 08:16 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  Something tells me that SS is not going to out Bert and Earnie. This is simply making a mountain out of a mole hill. I will say though that I agree with Reb. on this. If the gay community wants acceptance,it would behoove itself to simply not go down this road and try and shove this nonsense down the public's throat.

Personally I would not appreciate having to answer a question from my 4 year old in regard to ANY sexually related topic. Hell...I did not appreciate having to explain what oral sex was to my 10 year old daughter after the Clinton debacle. I believe that a certain maturity is needed to understand these subjects and as a parent..I should make that determination as to when that occurs. I do not need help in raising my child.

Actually, if the Gay community keeps quiet and hidden, nothing changes. The Gay community wins when they force Americans to see that they exist. And that their relationships are just as valid as others. And that they deserve as much respect as you expect from them.

Unless you want to throw your TV away and home skool your children, they are going to see Gay families. Either on TV or at their school. Hopefully, your children will behave appropriately.

If you are upset with people with agendas pushing them onto children without parental consent, I certainly hope you'll be consistent and support the ACLU and Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, as they argue for an end to fundamentalist indocrination in our schools and from our government. And that you supported the return of Elian Gonzales to Cuba.

Just for clarity. I support the right of people to freely associate with each other in any fashion they wish as long as theft, fraud, violence or breach of contract is not involved. That is the principle I live by in regard to ALL topics of liberty and have expounded ad nauseum that principle on this forum.

I think I explained my reasoning for not wanting sexual topics of ANY sort being cast at my 4 year old child and I will stand by that. I do not think that is an unreasonable request to make as a parent. There is certainly a time and place for these discussions and I had them with my daughter when I felt she was mature enough to understand the subject. I would simply appreciate that "I" get to be the one that breaches these topics. It is about respecting others wishes in regard to raising their children.

I respect the gay community's right to live free. I would hope that respect is reciprocated.

Free? Is someone free if their existance is shoved in a closet like some filthy rag? Is someone free if they can be discriminated against in public policy? or in the private sector. Is someone free if they cannot act in public exactly like straight people do? Or if they are not represented in government programming?

Look, Gay people don't believe that they are free to be anything other than second class citizens.

What are Gay people free to do in the open? Not have a picture of their husband on their desk like the straight people do? Not to answer a question honestly (like..'are you single'...'what did you do last weekend').

I understand your frustration....However...Your fight is not with me. All of those things you list I support under the non aggression principle of liberty. All I ask is that you are good neighbor.

Wether by religion or biology being homosexual is wrong and the argument that you're born that way is CRAZY. Its a choice. If you choose to be gay then you choose to act against nature and religion.

(08-12-2011 01:17 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Look, Gay people don't believe that they are free to be anything other than second class citizens.

Take it from AA, feelings aren't facts.

Quote:What are Gay people free to do in the open? Not have a picture of their husband on their desk like the straight people do? Not to answer a question honestly (like..'are you single'...'what did you do last weekend').

You really can't stop chasing red herrings. That ought to tip you off that your points don't hold up under logic.

(08-12-2011 01:31 PM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(08-12-2011 01:17 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Look, Gay people don't believe that they are free to be anything other than second class citizens.

Take it from AA, feelings aren't facts.

Quote:What are Gay people free to do in the open? Not have a picture of their husband on their desk like the straight people do? Not to answer a question honestly (like..'are you single'...'what did you do last weekend').

You really can't stop chasing red herrings. That ought to tip you off that your points don't hold up under logic.

like kids have pictures of their husbands on their desk in pre school... Phew thank goodness we have Sesame street to make things easy on those young married tots...

(08-12-2011 12:44 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(08-12-2011 12:21 PM)Rebel Wrote:  If they want the government out of their bedrooms, keep their bedrooms out of the public fuken eye because they're sounding like GDamn hypocrites.

And get the government out of straight people's bedrooms too. No marriage benefits. For anyone. Go ahead and strip public policy rights from straight people. Treat everyone as if they are single for taxation, inheritance, immigration, due process, adoption, pension, health care benefits, and VA benefits.

If government is going to give special benefit to divorced, infertile, straight couples...then those same exact benefits need to be available to Gay couples. Otherwise its discrimination.

They want Government in their marriages because of the 1500+ public policy benefits that come from marriage. You don't get it.

You want gay puppets, get your own fuken puppets. As for kids, I don't want my 3-5 year olds learning ANYTHING about sex.