At 8/3/12 11:26 PM, Korriken wrote:
you calling me a neo nazi? ... nah.
nah, I'm just pointing out that he was being a total hypocrite. of course, seeing such is impossible for you when you agree with what he's saying. It's the problem with some folks. Course, you're spouting your own hatred, calling my a neo nazi when you have no proof that I am a neo nazi at all. If anything that's slander.
Nice. Why actually respond when you can intentionally twist and play the false victim again. Sounds very GOP to me.
uh huh. right.... well, no, that's wrong. I didn't say I was being attacked. I'm saying he's spewing hate for Chick Fil A supporters
Feoric may be doing so, frankly, I haven't cared to read much into what he wrote, but the smug attitude has existed the entire debate, long before anybody made any comment about the Chick FilA supporters.
Nah, I like Texas just fine, where speaking your mind is legal and politicians don't try to force people out of business for their personal beliefs.
You don't get it. You MUST leave in order to be able to live in the Theocracy you so crave. Let's match it up to what you want more closely. Not only can you not have your theocracy, you will be taxed higher, lose hospital rights, lose many proibate rights and more for openly declaring your following of Christianity. Either pay more for your beliefs, emotions, lifestyle, and soul or go to Iran.
Starting to make sense now?
No, but they're telling me to go against my beliefs... I find it slightly ironic that the Catholic religion has fallen so far as to allow gays into the priesthood. *shrug* It's almost enough to make one lose faith.
What the hell do others' marriages have to do with your beliefs? What does their personal relationship have to do with your beliefs?
no, but there have been discrimination lawsuits against churches and such for refusing to marry gay couples.
And the churches will win every time. So, the possibility of lawsuits is enough to deny them marriage?
no, I'm just being labeled a hateful ignorant bigot because I don't throw my beliefs aside.
No. You're only labelled that because you are forcing your restrictive beliefs upon those who clearly don't believe what you do. Would you like it if you were forced to pray toward Mecca 5 times a day? Or if the women you know were not allowed to show any skin at all? What you ask of Gays is no different than that.
How?! How does gay marriage, a ceremony that exists 100% separate from you rlife altogether have any effect your values? Really?
Do as you will, just don't do it in front of me... which is why I don't live in California and never will.
Again, would you have it where you were not allowed to declare as Christian without losing privileges? keep your Biblethumping and crosswaving elsewhere, and not in front of me. Because I believe that, (under your logic) I now have the right to glo into your home and restrict your actions. No intestate rights for you. I mean, your personal Christian declaration has 100% to do with my values.
Which depends on which country you're in. thanks for making my point.
The age of consent isn't a moral decision though. It's a safety decision based upon when we believe a person is ready to make certain decisions and understand their consequences. Society has determined that a person below that age is too prone to being taken advantage of to make the decision on their own. The only reason it's an arbitrary number is because a case by case evaluation would bog the system down. Your decision about homosexuality has no such safety based reason. At best, it's morally based. The government is NOT in the business of picking and choosing morals to foist upon everyone.
When was the last time cops showed up in riot gear to a gay parade with the intention of shutting it down forcefully? Hell in this day and age a group of Illegal Immigrants can parade down the road and not get arrested and deported.
So just because things aren't "as bad" means they should shut up and take it? What kind of thinking is that?