(07-30-2012 01:13 PM)Max Power Wrote:  But they're not being nice. They're promoting bigotry under cover of the Bible. Who's doing any appeasing? I've never heard an American Muslim leader speak out against gays, but if he did I'd give him the same treatment.

Max, that's really weak. The 'promoting bigotry under cover of the Bible' has become the standard left talking point and you're not the only one parroting that nonsense.

If you knew ANYTHING about Islam, you'd know that the teachings are anything but ambivalent towards gays. They are crystal clear. Kill them. Of course, you revert to the standard liberal weaseling using words.

I've never heard an American Muslim leader speak out against gays, but if he did I'd give him the same treatment.

You're pathetic. You support bigotry against Christians yet ignore other religions and their belief systems because it is far easier to peddle this tripe without mentioning the inconvenient facts of other religions.

(08-04-2012 05:10 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  

(07-30-2012 01:13 PM)Max Power Wrote:  But they're not being nice. They're promoting bigotry under cover of the Bible. Who's doing any appeasing? I've never heard an American Muslim leader speak out against gays, but if he did I'd give him the same treatment.

Max, that's really weak. The 'promoting bigotry under cover of the Bible' has become the standard left talking point and you're not the only one parroting that nonsense.

If you knew ANYTHING about Islam, you'd know that the teachings are anything but ambivalent towards gays. They are crystal clear. Kill them. Of course, you revert to the standard liberal weaseling using words.

I've never heard an American Muslim leader speak out against gays, but if he did I'd give him the same treatment.

You're pathetic. You support bigotry against Christians yet ignore other religions and their belief systems because it is far easier to peddle this tripe without mentioning the inconvenient facts of other religions.

Bigotry against christians? Are you f*ing serious? 80% of this country claims to be christian, and the other 20% is split between islamic, jewish, hindu, pagan, and atheist. You have the overwhelming majority in this country and YOU claim to be persecuted?

We don't ask that you stop practicing your faith altogether, we just don't want the bible shoved down our throats or to be forced to participate in a dogmatic ritual meant to appease your religious fears (I do not trust in god, regardless of what money I have to give, and this is NOT one nation under god, regardless of what 1950's anti-communism bill was passed to amend the pledge of allegiance)

We don't ask you to get married to a person of the same sex, we don't ask you to like them, and we couldn't care less about what you say. But when you influence government to restrict the rights of ANYONE, that is where we have an issue. Eat all the chick-fil-a you like. I really don't care. But don't expect me to spend money at a place where it will directly go to fund organizations that would seek to limit the rights of another human being.

I don't care if you are black, white, christian, satanist, islamic, hindu, alien, in a coma, mentally retarded, atheist, the president, the pope, the dalai lama, Osama Bin Ladin, or anything. No one has the right to take away the rights of someone else in this country. No one.

By supporting organizations that would seek to create political movements to restrict the rights of gay people, you are essentially, restricting the rights of gay people yourself.

This is no different when interracial marriages were illegal. The excuse back then was "The sanctity of marriage must be preserved"

This is no different when blacks and whites were segregated from one another. The reasoning then was "they are lesser people".

Why does it matter if a gay person get's married? What possible difference does it make to you? Why don't you cry foul when people get divorced? Nullifying a marriage seems like violating the sanctity of marriage as well?

Why do you hide behind your bibles, stating that homosexuality is an abomination when the bible also says that working on sunday, eating figs, wearing clothes of mixed fabrics, and allowing women to speak is an abomination?

Do you hide behind your bibles because you just don't want to plain admit that you find homosexuality icky? Guess what. I find homosexuality icky. That does not give me the right to tell them who they can and cannot love. That does not give me the right to say "You can't see your husband on his deathbed because you are not his spouse". It does not give me the right to tell them how to live.

THAT is why we are angry. This day and age we shouldn't be fighting over this Iron Age bullsh!t. This is utter nonsense that anyone can determine the rights of another person in a country as great as the USA.

(08-04-2012 01:05 PM)mtsufan561 Wrote:  

(08-03-2012 11:23 PM)BlazerFan11 Wrote:  

(08-03-2012 10:40 PM)Max Power Wrote:  

(08-02-2012 02:48 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  People are tired of being told by a very small minority of the population that because they don't agree or more importantly, ACCEPT homosexuality that they are HATERS.

And that small minority of homosexuals is tired of being told they are the same as pedophiles.

I'm ashamed for all these people showing "appreciation" for that bigotry. Again, if McDonald's gave money to the KKK would that impact your purchasing decision? If you have any moral compass it damn well better.

Can you provide links to where Chick-Fil-A donated to groups that murder homosexuals habitually, since this is such an apples-to-apples comparison you're making here? Thanks.

http://equalitymatters.org/factcheck/201207020001

I haven't followed the thread, but "murder homosexuals habitually"? What? Those groups they donated to are very obviously anti-gay and their campaigns have been nothing but hateful against that community. I find it disgusting personally, their bigoted agenda.

Then you have the right to choose not to patronize their business. You do not, however, have the right to tell them where they can and cannot have a business.

(08-04-2012 12:05 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  

Funny how the Northern states never refused to accept the tax revenues generated on the backs of Southern slaves. It was only when the South seceded (thereby jeopardizing the tax revenues collected from the slavery states) that the North found slavery repulsive and unacceptable.

(08-04-2012 05:25 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  Bigotry against christians? Are you f*ing serious? 80% of this country claims to be christian, and the other 20% is split between islamic, jewish, hindu, pagan, and atheist. You have the overwhelming majority in this country and YOU claim to be persecuted?

You're new here, and clearly haven't read many of Marx's posts. If you had, you would know what he was talking about.

Kruschev - You don't read well do you?

Max has told us over and over here on this forum that he has no problem bashing Christians. He's a bigot and seems to be proud of it.

I stopped reading your screed after a few sentences because it was obvious that you didn't catch that I was responding to Max.

I'm not even a good Christian but I have zero tolerance for those that constantly bash them and endorse policies that marginalize them or even try to use the force and coercion of government to punish them.

So now I go back to read your response and it is obvious that you, yourself are a bigot. This 'we just don't want the bible shoved down our throats' is exactly how the rest of us feel when 3% of the population wants to re-write the mores of civilized societies to make them feel better about themselves. They don't just want tolerance (or respect) but ACCEPTANCE from everybody. That ain't gonna happen.

Personally, if two gays want to marry, I don't have a problem with it. But the actions of the militant gay activists are turning people off and possibly alienating fence sitters because you, your groups and your actions are far more hateful and ugly than a person affirming their biblical beliefs can ever be. Continue to be irrational and you'll get nowhere. The more militant and ugly your activists get, the more pushback you can expect. People see who the true haters are.

To rational people,

disagreement does not equal hate

(08-04-2012 05:41 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  Kruschev - You don't read well do you?

Max has told us over and over here on this forum that he has no problem bashing Christians. He's a bigot and seems to be proud of it.

I stopped reading your screed after a few sentences because it was obvious that you didn't catch that I was responding to Max.

I'm not even a good Christian but I have zero tolerance for those that constantly bash them and endorse policies that marginalize them or even try to use the force and coercion of government to punish them.

So now I go back to read your response and it is obvious that you, yourself are a bigot. This 'we just don't want the bible shoved down our throats' is exactly how the rest of us feel when 3% of the population wants to re-write the mores of civilized societies to make them feel better about themselves. They don't just want tolerance (or respect) but ACCEPTANCE from everybody. That ain't gonna happen.

Personally, if two gays want to marry, I don't have a problem with it. But the actions of the militant gay activists are turning people off and possibly alienating fence sitters because you, your groups and your actions are far more hateful and ugly than a person affirming their biblical beliefs can ever be. Continue to be irrational and you'll get nowhere. The more militant and ugly your activists get, the more pushback you can expect. People see who the true haters are.

To rational people,

disagreement does not equal hate

That's it. I quit. There is no arguing with people who refuse to listen. This country is doomed to idiocy if these barbarian ideologies ever grow among the populace. Fortunately, religion and it's hate is a dying breed. All we have to do is wait. It's only a matter of time before reason and logic eventually make it to even the thickest of people.

(08-04-2012 05:32 PM)BlazerFan11 Wrote:  

(08-04-2012 01:05 PM)mtsufan561 Wrote:  

(08-03-2012 11:23 PM)BlazerFan11 Wrote:  

(08-03-2012 10:40 PM)Max Power Wrote:  

(08-02-2012 02:48 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  People are tired of being told by a very small minority of the population that because they don't agree or more importantly, ACCEPT homosexuality that they are HATERS.

And that small minority of homosexuals is tired of being told they are the same as pedophiles.

I'm ashamed for all these people showing "appreciation" for that bigotry. Again, if McDonald's gave money to the KKK would that impact your purchasing decision? If you have any moral compass it damn well better.

Can you provide links to where Chick-Fil-A donated to groups that murder homosexuals habitually, since this is such an apples-to-apples comparison you're making here? Thanks.

http://equalitymatters.org/factcheck/201207020001

I haven't followed the thread, but "murder homosexuals habitually"? What? Those groups they donated to are very obviously anti-gay and their campaigns have been nothing but hateful against that community. I find it disgusting personally, their bigoted agenda.

Then you have the right to choose not to patronize their business. You do not, however, have the right to tell them where they can and cannot have a business.

Umm I posted nothing about that. In fact, through my other posts, I've made it quite obvious that I feel that is true (their right to operate).

You asked to show their anti-gay donations and I did. I don't like it, and I won't eat there. Support them if you want to but I personally won't.

(08-04-2012 05:49 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  That's it. I quit

Bye.

We're still discussing this ****?? Seriously, this is what has everyone riled up now? The silent majority spoke when Chick Fil-A had their best day ever.

Kruciff, true religions don't preach hate. Those that don't believe, or don't agree with religious teachings are the minority in this country. You have every right not to believe, and I respect that. It would seem though, that for all the reason and logic you seem to claim that athiests have, they are woefully ignorant of religions.
Why must some athiests demand that crosses be removed from public places? If these athiests posess a supreme level of reason and logic, why can't they simply laugh off the crosses as silly? Their presence, regardless of where they are, should have no influence on athiests. It is not an endorsement by govt or a show of favortism. Those of us that believe have the right to express our beliefs, just as athiests have the right not to believe. It seems to me that those athiests that want all signs of religions removed and hidden are driven by their insecurity in their choice not to believe.

(08-04-2012 06:26 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  We're still discussing this ****?? Seriously, this is what has everyone riled up now? The silent majority spoke when Chick Fil-A had their best day ever.

Kruciff, true religions don't preach hate. Those that don't believe, or don't agree with religious teachings are the minority in this country. You have every right not to believe, and I respect that. It would seem though, that for all the reason and logic you seem to claim that athiests have, they are woefully ignorant of religions.
Why must some athiests demand that crosses be removed from public places? If these athiests posess a supreme level of reason and logic, why can't they simply laugh off the crosses as silly? Their presence, regardless of where they are, should have no influence on athiests. It is not an endorsement by govt or a show of favortism. Those of us that believe have the right to express our beliefs, just as athiests have the right not to believe. It seems to me that those athiests that want all signs of religions removed and hidden are driven by their insecurity in their choice not to believe.

Private place, on land owned by people who support and maintain what is being done there, sure. Load up the place with crosses. Mow your lawn in cross shaped patterns. Make a hedge maze in the shape of jesus dying on the cross for your sins. I do not care.

But the moment you put a cross on public property, paid by public funds, maintained by public funds, and set forth in a place that is supposed to represent the government I pay my taxes to, THAT is when it becomes a problem. If my taxes go to support any of this, I have a problem with it. If my representatives speak for me, and say something idiotic like the earth is only 6000 years old or evolution is just a theory, I have a problem with it.

I challenge you to find an instance where a secularist fought to have religious symbols of any kind removed from a private property.

(08-04-2012 05:56 PM)Paul M Wrote:  

(08-04-2012 05:49 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  That's it. I quit

Bye.

(08-04-2012 06:39 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  Private place, on land owned by people who support and maintain what is being done there, sure. Load up the place with crosses. Mow your lawn in cross shaped patterns. Make a hedge maze in the shape of jesus dying on the cross for your sins. I do not care.

But the moment you put a cross on public property, paid by public funds, maintained by public funds, and set forth in a place that is supposed to represent the government I pay my taxes to, THAT is when it becomes a problem. If my taxes go to support any of this, I have a problem with it. If my representatives speak for me, and say something idiotic like the earth is only 6000 years old or evolution is just a theory, I have a problem with it.

I challenge you to find an instance where a secularist fought to have religious symbols of any kind removed from a private property.

Crosses on public land are often there in rememberance of individuals, more often than not christian, that died to protect and defend the country that gives you the right to believe or not to believe. If it truely means nothing to you, it shouldn't matter that there may be a little maintenance at the site. We're talking about a cross, similar to any other monument or sign, it doesn't take a lot of maintenance.

My taxes go towards many things that I don't presonally believe in or support. Understand that in a country that identifies itself as 80% christian there are going to be some tax dollars that go to christian projects. Tax dollars go to other religious projects as well. Didn't a mosque receive tax monies of some sort a few years ago?

What elected representative has stated the earth is only 6000 years old? Anybody, representative, christian, muslim, athiest, or otherwise that believes something like that is just ignorant. I know that Duggar family believes something stupid like that, and many christians and athiests alike are batshit crazy enough to do the same.

As for crosses being removed from private property, it has happened. There are also cases where crosses on public (often federal) property and there has been resistance in proposed 'land exchanges' where private property would be traded for the public property.

Challenge answered.

Wait.

We can opt out of things our tax dollars pay for that we disagree with?

Awesome! Where do I sign up?

(08-04-2012 04:38 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  Hahaha how ironic. You post data that was made up for the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster parody. A central premise of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti monster is that the lack of pirates in the world is causing increased global warming, so in order to save the world from sure destruction, we worship the spaghetti entree and him bringing more pirates into the world.

There is no irony involved... You can be wrong about one thing and right about another. This idea showed that correlation does not equal causation, the fact you ignored that fact and brought up the spaghetti monster is pretty telling..

(08-04-2012 06:39 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  I challenge you to find an instance where a secularist fought to have religious symbols of any kind removed from a private property.

http://www.christianpost.com/news/cross-...wer-62925/

Quote:The ACLU of Texas said the developer of the tower, Ralph Lampman of the VTLM Group, ordered the crosses removed after a TAMU-SA faculty member complained about the religious symbol. Criminology professor Sissy Bradford questioned the placement as a First Amendment violation.

Associate Vice President for University Communications Marilu Reyna told The Christian Post that she and university President Maria Hernandez Ferrier will speak with the owners of the property to see why the cross was removed. Reyna says the tower “doesn’t belong to the university. It’s on private property.” The Verano Land Group authorized the VTML group to build the tower on their property.

Game... Set... Match...

But just for good measure

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/official...ent-fight/

Quote:A First Amendment battle is brewing in Livingston, New Jersey, after officials told a local resident to take down a cross he had placed on a tree in his front yard.

(07-25-2012 05:01 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  meh... you don't want to support them, don't. It's called freedom, democrats. The freedom to believe differently and "pay" the consequences. He's not open on Sundays. I'm sure that costs him business. He doesn't support homosexuality, though clearly (by the fact that there are no lawsuits and my local store features a drive through hostess who is CLEARLY in drag) he doesn't violate any law. It costs him business as well I'm certain. So what? I don't go to chic-fil-a because I support the CEOs personal beliefs. I go there for food.

I just find it amazingly stupid that democrats so often want to legislate against peoples beliefs, and then get mad when people want to legislate against theirs. Freedom means putting up with people you disagree with. Deal with it.