LunarRay
Diamond Member
Originally posted by: przero
so suppose "we" decide to pass a law making homosexuality illegal?
If it stands up to Constitutional review by the USSC then fine. Until then it is not illegal to be homosexual.
Originally posted by: przero
so suppose "we" decide to pass a law making homosexuality illegal?
Originally posted by: przero
My whole point in this conversation is to say this:
Society as a WHOLE should determine laws governing these things. Not you, not me, and for sure not MoonBeam. All of us collectively. State by state. California wants to legalize pedophelia, not my business. I don't vote there. Utah wants polygamy, work out. Here in Louisiana, I will cast my vote as I wish, and will accept the will of the people, whatever they decide.
Now for the record. I would not vote to outlaw gay relationships or sodomy, etc. Not my business. I would vote against gay "marriages", but not civil unions. I would not vote for minortiy status for any sexual preference category. I would vote against polygamy, etc. I have friends and aquaintences that are gay/lesbian, and I don't beat them up about it. We get along just fine. I have yet to drag any gay/lesbian/minority behind my pick-up truck. I do my very best to get along with and HELP eveyone regardless of who or what they are. But I DO NOT like being told I have to do this or that because of who they are! Now if that makes me a BIGOT, then so be it.
Originally posted by: BlitzCraig64
IMO the elementry level of school is for teaching fact and function. The three R's and that is it. Psychology is a bit beyond there reasoning capabilities. A more mature mind is needed to discern what a person believes about homosexuality, but it is not the responsibility of a school to influence them....only to provide fact. I personally will never teach my children that being gay is a lifestyle at all. Arguments have been made that there is no relationship between being gay and sex. I disagree.......I have friends that I love...but I ain't bending over for any of them. Homosexuality is about nothing BUT sex......you don't need to have sex to love someone else. Ok....I hear the argument coming that sex is just a way to express that love. If that is what you choose to believe, that is fine, but I will not perpetuate that thought for my children. What you do with yours......that is your own business.
I have to say something about Moonbeam.......could you be anymore selfrighteous. You are just as much a bigot as anyone else....against those that have any opinion that varies from yours.......get over yourself......damn.......
In what way am I a bigot? You are a bigot because you freely admit that you are irrational. All you do to support your bigoted opinion is to say you disagree. Any loon can disagree. Why do you disagree. Where is your logic. You have a perfect legal right to screw over your kids mind, but you are still a bigot and screwing over their minds. What you call selfrighteous is merely the accurate application of the definition of bigot which you fit perfectly.Originally posted by: BlitzCraig64
IMO the elementry level of school is for teaching fact and function. The three R's and that is it. Psychology is a bit beyond there reasoning capabilities. A more mature mind is needed to discern what a person believes about homosexuality, but it is not the responsibility of a school to influence them....only to provide fact. I personally will never teach my children that being gay is a lifestyle at all. Arguments have been made that there is no relationship between being gay and sex. I disagree.......I have friends that I love...but I ain't bending over for any of them. Homosexuality is about nothing BUT sex......you don't need to have sex to love someone else. Ok....I hear the argument coming that sex is just a way to express that love. If that is what you choose to believe, that is fine, but I will not perpetuate that thought for my children. What you do with yours......that is your own business.
I have to say something about Moonbeam.......could you be anymore selfrighteous. You are just as much a bigot as anyone else....against those that have any opinion that varies from yours.......get over yourself......damn.......
Originally posted by: Orsorum
Originally posted by: Orsorum
Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain
oppression of freedom of independent thought is definitely a left-wing objective;
otherwise the term 'bigot' wouldn't be thrown around so idiotically, as it's 'OK' to censor bigots, isn't it? and it's OK to censor those that want to 'oppress' you, isn't it? and it's wrong to allow people to 'force' their religion down your through, isn't it?
How is this oppression of freedom of independent thought?
I'll ask this again. ^
replace the word polygamists with whore-mongers.Originally posted by: Orsorum
Originally posted by: przero
There is no law to prevent me from refusing to hire any non-minority for simply not liking them. A minority is another matter. Why should gays, polygamist, child molesters, etc. be granted that right via minority status?
Are gay people criminals?
Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain
Originally posted by: Orsorum
Originally posted by: Orsorum
Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain
oppression of freedom of independent thought is definitely a left-wing objective;
otherwise the term 'bigot' wouldn't be thrown around so idiotically, as it's 'OK' to censor bigots, isn't it? and it's OK to censor those that want to 'oppress' you, isn't it? and it's wrong to allow people to 'force' their religion down your through, isn't it?
How is this oppression of freedom of independent thought?
I'll ask this again. ^
Because you can call any view you want 'bigoted', you can say that anyone is a 'hate monger', unless it's actually inciting people to cause destruction it's not your nor my place to tell someone else what freedom of speech they have and what thoughts they may espouse.
The left says that NAMBLA an organization dedicated to helping others learn how to molest boys has a 'freedom of speech'; but is constantly trying to say that trying to keep small children from being sate-sexualized is a thought that must be repressed for 'our own good' and 'evolution;
I'm sure their are intelligent people who think otherwise, but I've been assaulted by enough ardent anti-Christians on this board to know that expressing and sharing your relegious views is something the 'progressives' want censored as much as the right wants censored hard-core pornography.
Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain
replace the word polygamists with whore-mongers.Originally posted by: Orsorum
Originally posted by: przero
There is no law to prevent me from refusing to hire any non-minority for simply not liking them. A minority is another matter. Why should gays, polygamist, child molesters, etc. be granted that right via minority status?
Are gay people criminals?
Originally posted by: Orsorum
Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain
Originally posted by: Orsorum
Originally posted by: Orsorum
Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain
oppression of freedom of independent thought is definitely a left-wing objective;
otherwise the term 'bigot' wouldn't be thrown around so idiotically, as it's 'OK' to censor bigots, isn't it? and it's OK to censor those that want to 'oppress' you, isn't it? and it's wrong to allow people to 'force' their religion down your through, isn't it?
How is this oppression of freedom of independent thought?
I'll ask this again. ^
Because you can call any view you want 'bigoted', you can say that anyone is a 'hate monger', unless it's actually inciting people to cause destruction it's not your nor my place to tell someone else what freedom of speech they have and what thoughts they may espouse.
The left says that NAMBLA an organization dedicated to helping others learn how to molest boys has a 'freedom of speech'; but is constantly trying to say that trying to keep small children from being sate-sexualized is a thought that must be repressed for 'our own good' and 'evolution;
I'm sure their are intelligent people who think otherwise, but I've been assaulted by enough ardent anti-Christians on this board to know that expressing and sharing your relegious views is something the 'progressives' want censored as much as the right wants censored hard-core pornography.
The "left" does not say anything, such generalizing is as useless as it is baseless. Not all conservatives want hardcore pornography censored (and, yes, I am a conservative), just as not all democrats support or liking NAMBLA, and I know many Democrats who are also strong Christians. Get over yourself, get out there and meet some people; these message boards are a horrible place to cement your political beliefs.
Democrats who are also strong Christians.
Originally posted by: Romans828
Originally posted by: Orsorum
Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain
Originally posted by: Orsorum
Originally posted by: Orsorum
Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain
oppression of freedom of independent thought is definitely a left-wing objective;
otherwise the term 'bigot' wouldn't be thrown around so idiotically, as it's 'OK' to censor bigots, isn't it? and it's OK to censor those that want to 'oppress' you, isn't it? and it's wrong to allow people to 'force' their religion down your through, isn't it?
How is this oppression of freedom of independent thought?
I'll ask this again. ^
Because you can call any view you want 'bigoted', you can say that anyone is a 'hate monger', unless it's actually inciting people to cause destruction it's not your nor my place to tell someone else what freedom of speech they have and what thoughts they may espouse.
The left says that NAMBLA an organization dedicated to helping others learn how to molest boys has a 'freedom of speech'; but is constantly trying to say that trying to keep small children from being sate-sexualized is a thought that must be repressed for 'our own good' and 'evolution;
I'm sure their are intelligent people who think otherwise, but I've been assaulted by enough ardent anti-Christians on this board to know that expressing and sharing your relegious views is something the 'progressives' want censored as much as the right wants censored hard-core pornography.
The "left" does not say anything, such generalizing is as useless as it is baseless. Not all conservatives want hardcore pornography censored (and, yes, I am a conservative), just as not all democrats support or liking NAMBLA, and I know many Democrats who are also strong Christians. Get over yourself, get out there and meet some people; these message boards are a horrible place to cement your political beliefs.
Democrats who are also strong Christians.
that does not exist
Quote
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Democrats who are also strong Christians.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
that does not exist
Originally posted by: przero
bigot
: a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices
Guess what moonie - that's you too!
Originally posted by: Orsorum
Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain
Originally posted by: Orsorum
Originally posted by: Orsorum
Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain
oppression of freedom of independent thought is definitely a left-wing objective;
otherwise the term 'bigot' wouldn't be thrown around so idiotically, as it's 'OK' to censor bigots, isn't it? and it's OK to censor those that want to 'oppress' you, isn't it? and it's wrong to allow people to 'force' their religion down your through, isn't it?
How is this oppression of freedom of independent thought?
I'll ask this again. ^
Because you can call any view you want 'bigoted', you can say that anyone is a 'hate monger', unless it's actually inciting people to cause destruction it's not your nor my place to tell someone else what freedom of speech they have and what thoughts they may espouse.
The left says that NAMBLA an organization dedicated to helping others learn how to molest boys has a 'freedom of speech'; but is constantly trying to say that trying to keep small children from being sate-sexualized is a thought that must be repressed for 'our own good' and 'evolution;
I'm sure their are intelligent people who think otherwise, but I've been assaulted by enough ardent anti-Christians on this board to know that expressing and sharing your relegious views is something the 'progressives' want censored as much as the right wants censored hard-core pornography.
The "left" does not say anything, such generalizing is as useless as it is baseless. Not all conservatives want hardcore pornography censored (and, yes, I am a conservative), just as not all democrats support or liking NAMBLA, and I know many Democrats who are also strong Christians. Get over yourself, get out there and meet some people; these message boards are a horrible place to cement your political beliefs.
Originally posted by: Orsorum
Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain
replace the word polygamists with whore-mongers.Originally posted by: Orsorum
Originally posted by: przero
There is no law to prevent me from refusing to hire any non-minority for simply not liking them. A minority is another matter. Why should gays, polygamist, child molesters, etc. be granted that right via minority status?
Are gay people criminals?
... you mean pimps? AFAIK that's already illegal in most states.
Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain
Originally posted by: Orsorum
Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain
replace the word polygamists with whore-mongers.Originally posted by: Orsorum
Originally posted by: przero
There is no law to prevent me from refusing to hire any non-minority for simply not liking them. A minority is another matter. Why should gays, polygamist, child molesters, etc. be granted that right via minority status?
Are gay people criminals?
... you mean pimps? AFAIK that's already illegal in most states.
no i mean those that have sex with woman-after-woman.
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain
Originally posted by: Orsorum
Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain
replace the word polygamists with whore-mongers.Originally posted by: Orsorum
Originally posted by: przero
There is no law to prevent me from refusing to hire any non-minority for simply not liking them. A minority is another matter. Why should gays, polygamist, child molesters, etc. be granted that right via minority status?
Are gay people criminals?
... you mean pimps? AFAIK that's already illegal in most states.
no i mean those that have sex with woman-after-woman.
You mean women are whores because that is the implication. Wow!
Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain
Originally posted by: Orsorum
Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain
replace the word polygamists with whore-mongers.Originally posted by: Orsorum
Originally posted by: przero
There is no law to prevent me from refusing to hire any non-minority for simply not liking them. A minority is another matter. Why should gays, polygamist, child molesters, etc. be granted that right via minority status?
Are gay people criminals?
... you mean pimps? AFAIK that's already illegal in most states.
no i mean those that have sex with woman-after-woman.
You mean women are whores because that is the implication. Wow!
Main Entry: whore·mas·ter
Pronunciation: -"mas-t&r
Function: noun
: a man consorting with whores or given to lechery
i intended the lechery part.
now why are you distracting from the issue?