|
|
| Re: Gay protest in LA (380579) | |
 |
|
| Home > OTChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 6 of 7 |
||
|
| (383146) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Nov 10 09:42:50 2008, in response to Re: Gay protest in LA, posted by ntrainride on Mon Nov 10 07:45:22 2008. by replying to him, you only reinforce his mistaken notion that he is correct. you should not reply to any of his posts. |
|
|
| (383148) | |
Re: Salaam Allah is a bigot who needs to learn value of work |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Nov 10 09:46:35 2008, in response to Re: Salaam Allah is a bigot who needs to learn value of work, posted by shiznit1987 on Mon Nov 10 08:57:22 2008. nah, you shouldn't respond to his post. it just reinforces his mistaken notion that he's correct. |
|
|
| (383149) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Nov 10 09:48:12 2008, in response to Re: Gay protest in LA, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Nov 10 09:36:47 2008. by replying to his post, you've only reinforced his mistaken notion that he's correct. |
|
|
| (383150) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Mon Nov 10 10:09:42 2008, in response to Re: Gay protest in LA, posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Nov 10 09:42:50 2008. by replying to him, you only reinforce his mistaken notion that he is correct.However, in this case ntrainride was proposing that murder was the best solution for gays who have the bad taste to engage in sexual activity in a wooded area of a park. |
|
|
| (383151) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Mon Nov 10 10:11:16 2008, in response to Re: Gay protest in LA, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Nov 10 09:35:58 2008. However, I don't feel they should bring a kid into that through adoption.So do you feel that no single person should be allowed to adopt, or only no gay person? |
|
|
| (383155) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Mon Nov 10 10:18:19 2008, in response to Re: Gay protest in LA, posted by AlM on Mon Nov 10 10:09:42 2008. Yes, but there needs to be consistency. |
|
|
| (383159) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Nov 10 10:37:39 2008, in response to Re: Gay protest in LA, posted by AlM on Mon Nov 10 10:11:16 2008. It's a tough decision. As I said, it's hard enough growing up without thrusting this sort of a thing on a kid. I really am not hardcore in my beliefs on gay adoption either way, but my first reaction, especially in Easy's photo, is "it's tough on the kid". Just think in school, it takes a lot less than something like that for the kid to be teased in school, and that is quite hard on kids, for much less of a situation. |
|
|
| (383163) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Mon Nov 10 11:02:07 2008, in response to Re: Gay protest in LA, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Nov 10 10:37:39 2008. Just think in school, it takes a lot less than something like that for the kid to be teased in school, and that is quite hard on kids, for much less of a situation.The teasing in school may be less than you think. About 3 years ago my niece (then a senior in high school in Rockland County) mentioned something about a guy in her school and then said as an aside that he was gay. There was a time not too long ago that no high school boy would let it be generally known that he was gay. Now I understand that Rockland County isn't Arkansas, but it isn't the Upper West Side either. |
|
|
| (383164) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Nov 10 11:40:57 2008, in response to Re: Gay protest in LA, posted by AlM on Mon Nov 10 11:02:07 2008. Perhaps, but again, kids tease for anything. I am not really talking about the "kid" being gay, but imagine when the other kids find out he has "two daddies". |
|
|
| (383171) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Mon Nov 10 12:14:01 2008, in response to Re: Gay protest in LA, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Mon Nov 10 11:40:57 2008. If they do, they do. The onus is on the teasers, not the adoptee.Kids get teased and bullied for all sorts of reasons beyond their control. It's not their fault. The answer to a bully is to correct the bully. |
|
|
| (383173) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Mon Nov 10 12:15:16 2008, in response to Re: Gay protest in LA, posted by ntrainride on Mon Nov 10 07:45:22 2008. "You are SO very lucky that your only only contact with me is via this hobby forum"Other way around. You don't know much about me. |
|
|
| (383174) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA |
|
|
Posted by ntrainride on Mon Nov 10 12:16:57 2008, in response to Re: Gay protest in LA, posted by AlM on Mon Nov 10 10:09:42 2008. Hold on. I didn't say murder them. I said to get them out of the bushes, beat their assess good, and throw them out of the park. Head first would be cool. Okay, I recommended firing buckshot into the woods, or burning the woods down. Call it what you will.I was speculating what I would do if I were a parent with young children living next to a park which was known as a place where deviants were engaging in public sexual activities in the bushes. And I'll repeat: If I were in that situation I would speak to other similar parents and suggest the actions I have described as a counter to the deviants' activities. Because the next step in "allowing" such things to go on in public with "adults" is going to be involvement of children...and that's something that deserves the buckshot response, with no regrets. This is all based on the supposition that the cops can't or won't intervene with the deviants' behaviors. Which apparently isn't happening in this park. |
|
|
| (383176) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Mon Nov 10 12:43:33 2008, in response to Re: Gay protest in LA, posted by ntrainride on Mon Nov 10 12:16:57 2008. "Okay, I recommended firing buckshot into the woods"A load of buckshot is highly lethal. That's why security teams like shotguns. Get hit with a shotgun blast, don't get up again. "I was speculating what I would do if I were a parent with young children " You're far too evil and stupid to raise children. Of course, that never stopped anybody from making children. They just don't get raised - they fend for themselves with stupid parents. |
|
|
| (383515) | |
Re: Salaam Allah is a bigot who needs to learn value of work |
|
|
Posted by Robert King on Tue Nov 11 18:58:47 2008, in response to Re: Salaam Allah is a bigot who needs to learn value of work, posted by RonInBayside on Sun Nov 9 17:47:36 2008. I really think the title "Salaam Allah is a bigot wo needs to learn value of work" is a pretty fair summary. After years of reading his writing here and on Subchat about racial discrimination, I would have expected to see something, anything more tolerant from him instead of the crap he's been posting lately. Frankly, after what he has written after crying 'discrimination' so much over the years took me by surprise. I was not expecting to see such a glaring double standard, but then again this is also the guy who goes out railfan photographing all day paid for at public expense while the rest of us have to get up every morning and go out and work for a living.-Robert King |
|
|
| (383538) | |
Re: Salaam Allah is a bigot who needs to learn value of work |
|
|
Posted by Jeff Rosen on Tue Nov 11 21:10:33 2008, in response to Re: Salaam Allah is a bigot who needs to learn value of work, posted by salaamallah@hotmail.com on Sun Nov 9 18:06:28 2008. Salaam, we've had many a differences over the last decade on both Subchat & Subtalk, especially on police issues, but anyone who can get the ire of Ron, one of the biggest asses on this board, is a friend of mine for life, and one day I should buy you a drink. |
|
|
| (383576) | |
Re: Salaam Allah is a bigot who needs to learn value of work |
|
|
Posted by salaamallah@hotmail.com on Tue Nov 11 23:39:36 2008, in response to Re: Salaam Allah is a bigot who needs to learn value of work, posted by Robert King on Tue Nov 11 18:58:47 2008. prove i'' railfan photographing all day paid for at public expense'' What the fuck is that supposed to mean ? PROVE THAT LIE !! ''while the rest of us have to get up every morning and go out and work for a living'' what the fuck is that supposedto mean ?? PROVE THAT LIE !!! ------------------------------ the '' railfan photographing all day paid for at public expense'' what the fuck is that supposed to mean Robert King ?? ??????? aand the rest of your post is only your opinion wrong of cource !! |
|
|
| (383587) | |
Re: Salaam Allah is a bigot who needs to learn value of work |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Wed Nov 12 00:16:57 2008, in response to Re: Salaam Allah is a bigot who needs to learn value of work, posted by Jeff Rosen on Tue Nov 11 21:10:33 2008. The two of youb can lap from the same doggie dish and eat Kibbles N Bits...that should be fun. |
|
|
| (383591) | |
Re: Salaam Allah is a bigot who needs to learn value of work |
|
|
Posted by salaamallah@hotmail.com on Wed Nov 12 00:30:08 2008, in response to Re: Salaam Allah is a bigot who needs to learn value of work, posted by Jeff Rosen on Tue Nov 11 21:10:33 2008. Jeff Rosen i dont drink alchol beverages , i hang out at starbucksetc.. and i am not looking for trouble with anyone here a nice cup of coffee at starbucks would do fine ... i guess he is mad because i voted yes on californias prop 8 here and i guess he can have his opinion of me i hve my reasons why i voted the way i did in this last election it may not win a lot of friends and maybe make some persons mad cant please everybody... oh well |
|
|
| (383593) | |
Re: Salaam Allah is a bigot who needs to learn value of work |
|
|
Posted by salaamallah@hotmail.com on Wed Nov 12 00:30:34 2008, in response to Re: Salaam Allah is a bigot who needs to learn value of work, posted by Jeff Rosen on Tue Nov 11 21:10:33 2008. Jeff Rosen i dont drink alchol beverages , i hang out at starbucksetc.. and i am not looking for trouble with anyone here a nice cup of coffee at starbucks would do fine ... i guess he is mad because i voted yes on californias prop 8 here and i guess he can have his opinion of me i have my reasons why i voted the way i did in this last election it may not win a lot of friends and maybe make some persons mad cant please everybody... oh well |
|
|
| (383605) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA |
|
|
Posted by ntrainride on Wed Nov 12 01:06:43 2008, in response to Re: Gay protest in LA, posted by R PansePCC on Sat Nov 8 19:30:31 2008. I don't believe it. Men who engage in sexual relations with other men are doing it by choice. It's always a choice. Anything that goes against a species inclination to reproduce is ...ahh, fuck all that. strait up...i'll always think that it's abnormal for men to have sex with men. to me, it's men who are too timid, lazy or stupid to make time with women. i never want to see man holding hands or kissing other men in the street. and nothing's gonna change my mind on that. afa marriage...rediculous. it's like kids playing dressup. Naw, sorry, there's nothing good gained by somehow "officially" recognizing what "everybody feels" is, well, a perversion. |
|
|
| (383607) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA |
|
|
Posted by salaamallah@hotmail.com on Wed Nov 12 01:12:15 2008, in response to Re: Gay protest in LA, posted by ntrainride on Wed Nov 12 01:06:43 2008. that is wahy i voted yes on prop 8 here in californiayou said it right i agree with you |
|
|
| (383619) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Wed Nov 12 01:53:49 2008, in response to Re: Gay protest in LA, posted by salaamallah@hotmail.com on Sun Nov 9 17:41:42 2008. Hey..I feel you.You do what you have to do... |
|
|
| (383810) | |
Re: Salaam Allah is a bigot who needs to learn value of work |
|
|
Posted by WMATAGMOAGH on Wed Nov 12 19:20:54 2008, in response to Re: Salaam Allah is a bigot who needs to learn value of work, posted by Robert King on Tue Nov 11 18:58:47 2008. IAWTP |
|
|
| (383818) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Wed Nov 12 20:15:32 2008, in response to Re: Gay protest in LA, posted by salaamallah@hotmail.com on Sun Nov 9 17:45:01 2008. Why should a slim majority be allowed to dictate the personal lives of a minority group? Would you like it if 51% of the population of California found your behavior threatening and voted to ban railroad photography? Prop 8 clearly violates CA's "Equal Protection Under the Law" provision in the constitution. Thus the California Supreme Courts need to take up this issue and overturn Prop 8 before it does irreparable harm to California's economy. |
|
|
| (383820) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Wed Nov 12 20:28:31 2008, in response to Re: Gay protest in LA, posted by WillD on Wed Nov 12 20:15:32 2008. And cuts off Salaam's welfare check. |
|
|
| (383827) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Wed Nov 12 21:10:40 2008, in response to Re: Gay protest in LA, posted by RonInBayside on Wed Nov 12 20:28:31 2008. There's no need to resort to such taunting. Yes, his stance is completely hypocritical in light of his years of screaming about discrimination. However, California's court system has a long history of overturning unconstitutional propositions, and I have faith they'll do the right thing in this case as well, especially given the number of people taking to the streets to protest the proposition. Call it legislating from the bench if you want, but it is the judiciary protecting a minority from the actions of a majority which may not have their best interests at heart. This was undoubtly the greatest stroke of genius on the part of the constutional framers, and no doubt part of what has allowed our nation to persist all these years. |
|
|
| (383859) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA |
|
|
Posted by ntrainride on Wed Nov 12 23:12:17 2008, in response to Re: Gay protest in LA, posted by WillD on Wed Nov 12 21:10:40 2008. I personally think most so-call "gay" men are full of it. And they know they're full of it but the same character flaw that let's them justify their behavior to themselves is the reason we're seeing such protests. Basically, they're immature. Yeah, that's harsh. But that's how it seems to me. Society can't "approve" of EVERYTHING. Some things are just wrong to most people. |
|
|
| (383862) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA |
|
|
Posted by WillD on Wed Nov 12 23:48:38 2008, in response to Re: Gay protest in LA, posted by ntrainride on Wed Nov 12 23:12:17 2008. Ignoring the choice vs genetic disposition argument for a moment, if two people find happiness in each other on a level that they say is every bit as strong as that felt by a married couple then who are we to deny them that practice? We condone plenty of immature behavior, so why do we draw the line at allowing people to be happy together? Of course I disagree with your premise that it is a choice, that they're faking, immature, or whatever, but I do not think that changes the argument in the slightest. |
|
|
| (383864) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA |
|
|
Posted by salaamallah@hotmail.com on Wed Nov 12 23:54:08 2008, in response to Re: Gay protest in LA, posted by RonInBayside on Wed Nov 12 20:28:31 2008. i do not recieve any welfare checkprove that i do liar |
|
|
| (383865) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA |
|
|
Posted by salaamallah@hotmail.com on Wed Nov 12 23:56:50 2008, in response to Re: Gay protest in LA, posted by WillD on Wed Nov 12 20:15:32 2008. i do not believe gay groups are a ''minority group''no and not like black latinos asians etc.... our voting yes was not for the reasons many thought others did not want this taught in the schools and forced on chuches , mosques etc... |
|
|
| (383867) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA Gay-rights movement at odds |
|
|
Posted by salaamallah@hotmail.com on Thu Nov 13 00:27:05 2008, in response to Gay protest in LA, posted by Easy on Thu Nov 6 02:07:30 2008. ay-rights movement at odds- Pasadena Star-News 11/11/2008 SAN FRANCISCO - California's gay-rights movement has been beset by infighting and finger-pointing since the defeat of gay marriage at the ballot box, with some activists questioning the campaign's mild tactics, including the decision not to show same-sex couples in ads. The movement's leaders "were very timid. They were too soft," said Robin Tyler, a lesbian comic who created a series of celebrity public service announcements with the slogan "Stop the Hate, No on 8" that were rejected because they were deemed too negative. "We were lightweights on our side." Proposition 8, a measure to stop gay marriage in California, passed with 52 percent of the vote last week in a painful defeat for gay rights activists. The ban overrode a California Supreme Court ruling last spring that allowed 18,000 same-sex couples to tie the knot over the past four months. Some gays are complaining that their leaders failed to organize a visible and vigorous defense of same-sex marriage. In particular, they say the movement failed to counter a series of hard-hitting ads warning that the ban on gay marriage was needed to prevent children from learning about gay relationships in school. Leaders of the campaign in favor of gay marriage say they made a strategic decision not to highlight gay newlyweds or same-sex couples with children in their ads for fear of alienating undecided heterosexual voters. The movement's first commercial, aired in late September, starred a couple with an adult lesbian daughter. Later ads included a fictional woman with a lesbian niece, California's public schools chief, and Sen. Dianne Feinstein saying, "No matter how you feel about marriage, vote against discrimination." Geoff Kors, executive director of the gay rights group Equality California, defended the choice of advertisements. "Lesbian and gay people were everywhere in this campaign - as spokespeople, on YouTube, our Web site. For the television advertising, the best messengers were the messengers that were used," he said. But Michael Petrelis, a veteran AIDS activist in San Francisco, said the absence of gay couples in the media campaign was a fatal error. "We were seen more as a liability," Petrelis said. "When you have that kind of attitude, it's no wonder there was little community buy-in." The criticisms extend to beyond how the campaign was run to how people are responding to the ban's passage. In the past few days, demonstrators have hit the streets in California, sometimes clashing with police and snarling traffic. They have rallied outside Mormon temples to protest the church's major role in banning gay marriage. Plans have been made for a demonstration outside a Mormon church in New York City on Wednesday, and outside city halls in every state on Saturday. |
|
|
| (383868) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA |
|
|
Posted by ntrainride on Thu Nov 13 00:31:09 2008, in response to Re: Gay protest in LA, posted by WillD on Wed Nov 12 23:48:38 2008. Oh...because they're deluding themselves. Biologically, it can never be the same. Big, big difference. The love between man and woman is unique. Whatever its ultimate destination, that love is rooted to the primary law of nature: reproduce your species. It's part of the formula, it's the most basic program, it's the way of the world. Two men being together for sexual pleasure is like, an aberration.Dress it up all you want. But to allow such a union is to make a sham of the concept of marriage in general. You wanna do weird stuff with another guy, fine, do it in your apartment on your own time. But don't ask everybody to accept your concept of "normal". |
|
|
| (383884) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Thu Nov 13 02:22:24 2008, in response to Re: Gay protest in LA, posted by WillD on Wed Nov 12 21:10:40 2008. Fair enough. |
|
|
| (383886) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Thu Nov 13 02:25:35 2008, in response to Re: Gay protest in LA, posted by ntrainride on Thu Nov 13 00:31:09 2008. So you:- don't know anything about biology -don't know anything about deviancy (psychologists and psychiatrists have long abandoned the notion that homosexuality is an illness) -don't know what most people believe or don't believe What do you do for a living? I hope it isn't anything too complicated. You could hurt yourself. |
|
|
| (383901) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Thu Nov 13 04:11:02 2008, in response to Re: Gay protest in LA, posted by ntrainride on Thu Nov 13 00:31:09 2008. Such ignorance!or Care to explain the biology behind your opinion? your pal, Fred |
|
|
| (383907) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Thu Nov 13 04:34:17 2008, in response to Re: Gay protest in LA, posted by salaamallah@hotmail.com on Sat Nov 8 11:30:00 2008. I boycott you for your hypocrisy. |
|
|
| (383931) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA |
|
|
Posted by salaamallah@hotmail.com on Thu Nov 13 05:47:31 2008, in response to Re: Gay protest in LA, posted by WillD on Wed Nov 12 21:10:40 2008. will D it is not anything at all except i and most of the good voterswho voted yes on 8 can not approve of something we believe is not moral and right calling that marrage ! this is not hypocritical in any way whatsoever this vote overturnined the california supreme court and made it law |
|
|
| (383932) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA |
|
|
Posted by salaamallah@hotmail.com on Thu Nov 13 05:52:25 2008, in response to Re: Gay protest in LA, posted by Fred G on Thu Nov 13 04:34:17 2008. a hypocrite i am notyou are entitledtoyour wrong opinion of me |
|
|
| (383935) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Nov 13 06:09:33 2008, in response to Re: Gay protest in LA, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Nov 10 02:52:59 2008. The USA is better than other civilizations for the most part. |
|
|
| (383937) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Nov 13 06:16:27 2008, in response to Re: Gay protest in LA, posted by LuchAAA on Sun Nov 9 17:56:19 2008. Butt buddies. |
|
|
| (383938) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Nov 13 06:22:40 2008, in response to Re: Gay protest in LA, posted by WillD on Wed Nov 12 20:15:32 2008. Prop 8 is a Constitutional amendment though.They really need a higher threshold for amendments. Props that are laws can still be 50%+1, but I think that amendments should be 2/3rd or something. A Constitutional amendment is not something that should be taken lightly. |
|
|
| (383939) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Nov 13 06:24:14 2008, in response to Re: Gay protest in LA, posted by WillD on Wed Nov 12 23:48:38 2008. What if three people felt the same way about each other? |
|
|
| (383941) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA |
|
|
Posted by BMTLines on Thu Nov 13 06:37:59 2008, in response to Re: Gay protest in LA, posted by RonInBayside on Sun Nov 9 18:22:31 2008. gay coupler?
|
|
|
| (383946) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA |
|
|
Posted by BMTLines on Thu Nov 13 06:55:34 2008, in response to Re: Gay protest in LA, posted by AlM on Sun Nov 9 19:27:14 2008. In some states those in "Civil Unions" are allowed to file joint state tax returns but they must file separate Federal tax returns because the IRS does not recognize civil unions as a legal "marriage". Until the federal government accepts either civil union or gay marriage this tax situation will continue.Take Massachusetts as an example: Massachusetts construes the term civil marriage "to mean the voluntary union of two persons as spouses." Thus the term "marriage" includes same-sex marriage, and the term "spouse" includes partners in a same-sex marriage. The Supreme Judicial Court stayed the entry of judgment in Goodridge for 180 days; thus same-sex marriage is recognized in Massachusetts on May 16, 2004. Massachusetts will recognize valid same-sex marriages for tax periods that end on or after May 16, 2004, and will not recognize same-sex marriages for tax periods that end before May 16, 2004. The federal Defense of Marriage Act The terms "marriage" and "spouse" differ in meaning between Massachusetts and federal law. Federal law states that: In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the word "marriage" means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word "spouse" refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife. Unless the "Federal Defense of Marriage Act" is repealed then the IRS will not recognize either a civil union or marriage between two individuals of the same sex. |
|
|
| (383947) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA |
|
|
Posted by BMTLines on Thu Nov 13 06:57:15 2008, in response to Re: Gay protest in LA, posted by Spider-Pig on Thu Nov 13 06:24:14 2008. I favor legalizing polygamy!!!Threesomes are way cool! |
|
|
| (383949) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA |
|
|
Posted by ntrainride on Thu Nov 13 07:51:02 2008, in response to Re: Gay protest in LA, posted by Fred G on Thu Nov 13 04:11:02 2008. No. |
|
|
| (383953) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Thu Nov 13 09:36:11 2008, in response to Re: Gay protest in LA, posted by Fred G on Thu Nov 13 04:11:02 2008. Those who make any such claims that biology mandates heterosexual marriage should google "bonobo sex" |
|
|
| (383954) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Thu Nov 13 09:38:33 2008, in response to Re: Gay protest in LA, posted by salaamallah@hotmail.com on Thu Nov 13 05:47:31 2008. It is hypocritical and you are immoral.I highly doubt you would be happy if an initiative passed making all black people slaves. |
|
|
| (383959) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Nov 13 10:14:32 2008, in response to Re: Gay protest in LA, posted by R30A on Thu Nov 13 09:38:33 2008. Let's not get crazy here now. There's quite a difference between saying "I don't believe gays should be able to 'marry'", and "All Black people should be slaves.".Personally, I could give a rats ass who people want to have sex with, how they want to do it, or why they do it the way they do. And I have no problem with some sort of civil union, however, the term "marriage" I think is best left for religious institutions, and they can make their own decisions on that. |
|
|
| (383960) | |
Re: Gay protest in LA |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Nov 13 10:17:28 2008, in response to Re: Gay protest in LA, posted by Newkirk Plaza David on Fri Nov 7 12:06:18 2008. It's not "compromised" if the STATE allows gays to marry. Those religious institutions can dictate how they handle "marriage". It's not up to the government to decide "what is marriage" nor is it up to those religious organizations. I have no problem with the governemnt allowing some sort of "civil union" between two people if they are gay. However, I do believe the term "marriage" is best left to the religious institutions (who also have no right to dictate what the state does). |
|
|
|
Page 6 of 7 |
||