# Chic-Fil-A is making history, and showing the power of the American people/voter.



## beagle9

Today Chic-Fil-A made history, and so does the power of facebook by staging a support Chic-Fil-A day, where thousands upon thousands turned out in support for the chicken sandwich franchise, thus sending a strong message to those who think that the American voters will just lay silent anymore, when infact they (the boycotters) have another thought coming for sure on that note, because the sleeping giant has once again been awoken.

Today in many states where Chic-Fil-A is located, people came out by the thousands in support of the resteraunt chain, causing traffic jams and flooding in ajoining parking lots and more. It was all due mainly in support of the chain and it's personal right to make a statement, and this when asked about it's values and morals as an American business that is run on those values and morals. It then caused an uprising or uproar amongst a minority of Americans when answered, for whom thought that they could afterwards take on the chain by calling for a boycott of it, but the Americans who support the chain weren't having any of it, so they came out in support of the chain today big time, in one of the biggest (counter boycott) moves the nation has seen in a long time. I have a friend who called me and said his wife waited in line for two hours today, but it was worth the wait no matter he said that she said. My wife just came from up town around 8:00 o'clock PM evening time, and she said that the lines were still long and the chain flooded with supporters still at 8:00 o'clock. It was strong in support of all day long and into the night. I wonder how the Media will cover it ? Lets see who they (the media) really belongs to as well in the situation.

I bet this is what will happen to Obama this election, so he had better get ready for the storm, even though it won't help him none otherwise to get ready and counter the Americans on the same views and ideals in which they have had for Chic-Fil-A, and this especially so if the same turn out happens with this election, that also happened with Chic-Fil-A today. WOW!


----------



## Ravi

I guess it's cool that people applaud intolerance....


----------



## beagle9

No it's cool that the people are standing up for their right to stand up again, instead of laying down and taking it like they have for so long now in America, and I think this is just the tip of the iceburg that is coming so hang on for the ride everybody.


----------



## Ravi

So, standing up for equal rights is laying down?

I don't get your reasoning.

The chicken chain (that I avoid because of the inhumane practices toward chickens) obviously hates gay people. Fine, they are entitled to be intolerant.

What I don't understand is the idiots that cheer them on.


----------



## beagle9

Ravi said:


> I guess it's cool that people applaud intolerance....


Tolerance as in being tolerant of, is a loaded word for sure, and it has taken on meanings over the years in which has eroded our society, values and morals over these many years now looking back, so it all depends on what sort of tolerance is asked of the American people anymore, as to whether or not they will go along with a specific tolerance in which is being asked of them, and especially when it comes to the compromising of their morals and values in which has exposed their children, familiy and communities to some horrid things over the years now. To keep ones head in the sand is fruitless anymore, so it's time for a rude awakening finally to come again in America, in which has been asleep for far to long now.


----------



## Ravi

Sad for you that you live in fear of teh gay.


----------



## tjvh

Ravi said:


> I guess it's cool that people applaud intolerance....



Funny how the First Amendment works so well when you agree with it, but when you don't, not so much.


----------



## beagle9

Ravi said:


> So, standing up for equal rights is laying down?
> 
> I don't get your reasoning.
> 
> The chicken chain (that I avoid because of the inhumane practices toward chickens) obviously hates gay people. Fine, they are entitled to be intolerant.
> 
> What I don't understand is the idiots that cheer them on.


Equal rights as in some supposed rights that a few THINK that some should have in this nation, and this over the good majority who are opposed to certain things in which people are calling rights on their own (i.e. not recognized by the citizens at large or the states governments), or are you reffering to the equal rights in which we know are honorable and justifiable, and for which we all do support without a doubt, and for which is known about by all in this nation to date whom are in agreeance with (those rights) ? Many things have been highjacked by groups, and then shoved down the throats of the citizens in which has weakned this nation over time, and has taught the government about the citizens vulnerabilities when let these things just go on without resistance of. It is ashame what has happened over time, and the way I see it by what happend today, it was a standing up again finally about those things inwhich have been shoved down the peoples throats, and I hope that it continues in the right directions.


----------



## Ravi

tjvh said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I guess it's cool that people applaud intolerance....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Funny how the First Amendment works so well when you agree with it, but when you don't, not so much.
Click to expand...


Where did I say they couldn't do it? Oh, right....

I guess you are one of those intolerant idiots. Good for you.


----------



## beagle9

tjvh said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I guess it's cool that people applaud intolerance....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Funny how the First Amendment works so well when you agree with it, but when you don't, not so much.
Click to expand...

Exactly...


----------



## Ravi

beagle9 said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> So, standing up for equal rights is laying down?
> 
> I don't get your reasoning.
> 
> The chicken chain (that I avoid because of the inhumane practices toward chickens) obviously hates gay people. Fine, they are entitled to be intolerant.
> 
> What I don't understand is the idiots that cheer them on.
> 
> 
> 
> Equal rights as in some supposed rights that a few THINK that some should have in this nation, and this over the good majority who are opposed to certain things in which people are calling rights on their own (i.e. not recognized by the citizens at large or the states governments), or are you reffering to the equal rights in which we know are honorable and justifiable, and for which we all do support without a doubt, and for which is known about by all in this nation to date whom are agreeance with ? Many things have been highjacked by groups, and then shoved down the throats of the citizens in which has weakned this nation over time, and has taught the government about the citizens vulnerabilitiues when let these things just go on without resistance of. It is ashame what has happened over time, and the way I see it by what happend today, it was a standing up again finally about those things inwhich have been shoved down the peoples throats, and I hope that it continues in the right directions.
Click to expand...


You say a lot while saying nothing.


----------



## William Joyce

Ravi said:


> So, standing up for equal rights is laying down?
> 
> I don't get your reasoning.



The left basically rules our nation by fear and intimidation -- a small, intolerant, hateful group of fuckwads who bully the rest of us with lawsuits, Hollywood poison, PC propaganda, the news media, bought politicians.  We're constantly bashed and we just take it:  Christians, traditionalists, straights, normal families, normal kids, non-drug users, workers, etc.  "You suck, you're racist, you're intolerant, backward, inbred, flyover country, blah blah."

So, Ravi, biting into that juicy chicken and those wonderful waffle fries just tastes all the more delicious knowing it hurts you so.

Gotta tell ya, IT FEELS SO FUCKING GOOD to get back at the liberal asshole elites by supporting CFA.


----------



## beagle9

Ravi said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> So, standing up for equal rights is laying down?
> 
> I don't get your reasoning.
> 
> The chicken chain (that I avoid because of the inhumane practices toward chickens) obviously hates gay people. Fine, they are entitled to be intolerant.
> 
> What I don't understand is the idiots that cheer them on.
> 
> 
> 
> Equal rights as in some supposed rights that a few THINK that some should have in this nation, and this over the good majority who are opposed to certain things in which people are calling rights on their own (i.e. not recognized by the citizens at large or the states governments), or are you reffering to the equal rights in which we know are honorable and justifiable, and for which we all do support without a doubt, and for which is known about by all in this nation to date whom are agreeance with ? Many things have been highjacked by groups, and then shoved down the throats of the citizens in which has weakned this nation over time, and has taught the government about the citizens vulnerabilitiues when let these things just go on without resistance of. It is ashame what has happened over time, and the way I see it by what happend today, it was a standing up again finally about those things inwhich have been shoved down the peoples throats, and I hope that it continues in the right directions.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You say a lot while saying nothing.
Click to expand...

A liberal has a hard time with these sort sorts of things, so I understand the block you are having.. It's cool!


----------



## Ravi

William Joyce said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> So, standing up for equal rights is laying down?
> 
> I don't get your reasoning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The left basically rules our nation by fear and intimidation -- a small, intolerant, hateful group of fuckwads who bully the rest of us with lawsuits, Hollywood poison, PC propaganda, the news media, bought politicians.  We're constantly bashed and we just take it:  Christians, traditionalists, straights, normal families, normal kids, non-drug users, workers, etc.  "You suck, you're racist, you're intolerant, backward, inbred, flyover country, blah blah."
> 
> So, Ravi, biting into that juicy chicken and those wonderful waffle fries just tastes all the more delicious knowing it hurts you so.
> 
> Gotta tell ya, IT FEELS SO FUCKING GOOD to get back at the liberal asshole elites by supporting CFA.
Click to expand...

I'm only surprised you didn't work the evil Negroes into your post.


----------



## beagle9

Ravi said:


> William Joyce said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> So, standing up for equal rights is laying down?
> 
> I don't get your reasoning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The left basically rules our nation by fear and intimidation -- a small, intolerant, hateful group of fuckwads who bully the rest of us with lawsuits, Hollywood poison, PC propaganda, the news media, bought politicians.  We're constantly bashed and we just take it:  Christians, traditionalists, straights, normal families, normal kids, non-drug users, workers, etc.  "You suck, you're racist, you're intolerant, backward, inbred, flyover country, blah blah."
> 
> So, Ravi, biting into that juicy chicken and those wonderful waffle fries just tastes all the more delicious knowing it hurts you so.
> 
> Gotta tell ya, IT FEELS SO FUCKING GOOD to get back at the liberal asshole elites by supporting CFA.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm only surprised you didn't work the evil Negroes into your post.
Click to expand...

You just did, what because he didn't fast enough, so will it work this game of yours ? NOPE !

Are we getting desperate for creating strawmen now ?  Yep I think you are ! So you are resorting to the tired old race card now  ? yep I think you are.. sigh..


----------



## MeBelle

Ravi said:


> So, standing up for equal rights is laying down?
> 
> I don't get your reasoning.
> 
> The chicken chain (that I avoid because of the inhumane practices toward chickens) obviously hates gay people. Fine, they are entitled to be intolerant.
> 
> What I don't understand is the idiots that cheer them on.



Proof of intolerance by Chic Fil A?


----------



## The Gadfly

Ravi said:


> I guess it's cool that people applaud intolerance....



No, Ravi, the people did NOT applaud intolerance today; instead, they stood up, slapped intolerance in the face, knocked it to the ground, and stomped on it! This time, it was the Left and its minions who were the intolerant ones, in seeking to deny another American the right to state his personal religious views; in seeking to punish a business which has a clear and unambiguous record of NOT discriminating in its actions as a company, simply because its CEO exercised his right of free speech; a right which the Left in its unmitigated arrogance believes belongs exclusively to those it favors, and should be denied to anyone whose views the Left opposes. The overwhelming and thoroughly nauseating hypocrisy of the PC Left in America has finally been exposed for the would-be tyranny it represents, and today, the American people have given it a well-deserved boot in the arse which is LONG overdue. 

NO, you on the Left will NOT tell the rest of us what to say, you will NOT tell the rest of us what to believe, and you will NOT tell the rest of us what to think! Today was a Victory for REAL tolerance, a Victory for the Constitution, and a crushing defeat for those who have used Political Correctness and a cult of victimology to intimidate all opposition into silence, lest they be *falsely* labeled "racist" "homophobic", and "intolerant"! Today the American people by the hundreds of thousands spoke, and their words are clear: "ENOUGH! We will not be intimidated, we will NOT be silent any longer, and WE WILL BE HEARD!" Don't like it? Tough! Deal with it!


----------



## MarcATL

William Joyce said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> So, standing up for equal rights is laying down?
> 
> I don't get your reasoning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The left basically rules our nation by fear and intimidation -- a small, intolerant, hateful group of fuckwads who bully the rest of us with lawsuits, Hollywood poison, PC propaganda, the news media, bought politicians.  We're constantly bashed and we just take it:  Christians, traditionalists, straights, normal families, normal kids, non-drug users, workers, etc.  "You suck, you're racist, you're intolerant, backward, inbred, flyover country, blah blah."
> 
> So, Ravi, biting into that juicy chicken and those wonderful waffle fries just tastes all the more delicious knowing it hurts you so.
> 
> Gotta tell ya, IT FEELS SO FUCKING GOOD to get back at the liberal asshole elites by supporting CFA.
Click to expand...

Exhibit A:

The subject clearly suffers from persecution complex.

A persecution complex is a term given to an array of psychologically complex behaviours, that specifically deals with the perception of being persecuted, for various possible reasons, imagined or real.

People or groups who hold to marginal (non-mainstream) beliefs or theories often display some features of this malady, as a way of explaining why their views are not more widespread. It is also commonly displayed by people or groups whose beliefs actually are comparatively widespread, such as fundamentalist Christians.

Because the subject perceives to be under persecution, the subject now finds great comfort and satisfaction with yet another perception...a lash out and back against a perceived foe by eating tasty chicken in one of the subject's favorite southern establishments.


----------



## TheGreatGatsby

Ravi said:


> I guess it's cool that people applaud intolerance....



Do you applaud the Boston mayor who is intolerant of Chic-Fil-A?


----------



## gallantwarrior

Ravi said:


> So, standing up for equal rights is laying down?
> 
> I don't get your reasoning.
> 
> The chicken chain (that I avoid because of the inhumane practices toward chickens) obviously hates gay people. Fine, they are entitled to be intolerant.
> 
> What I don't understand is the idiots that cheer them on.



The man said he supported traditional marriage.  It's pretty intolerant not to recognize that as a valid opinion and leave it at that.


----------



## Luissa

tjvh said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I guess it's cool that people applaud intolerance....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Funny how the First Amendment works so well when you agree with it, but when you don't, not so much.
Click to expand...


What are you even referring to?


----------



## Luissa

beagle9 said:


> tjvh said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I guess it's cool that people applaud intolerance....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Funny how the First Amendment works so well when you agree with it, but when you don't, not so much.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Exactly...
Click to expand...


Exactly what? Where did Ravi state she wanted their first amendment rights taken away?


----------



## gallantwarrior

Luissa said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tjvh said:
> 
> 
> 
> Funny how the First Amendment works so well when you agree with it, but when you don't, not so much.
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Exactly what? Where did Ravi state she wanted their first amendment rights taken away?
Click to expand...


Where did the CEO of Chic-fil-A say he hates gays?


----------



## The Gadfly

MarcATL said:


> William Joyce said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> So, standing up for equal rights is laying down?
> 
> I don't get your reasoning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The left basically rules our nation by fear and intimidation -- a small, intolerant, hateful group of fuckwads who bully the rest of us with lawsuits, Hollywood poison, PC propaganda, the news media, bought politicians.  We're constantly bashed and we just take it:  Christians, traditionalists, straights, normal families, normal kids, non-drug users, workers, etc.  "You suck, you're racist, you're intolerant, backward, inbred, flyover country, blah blah."
> 
> So, Ravi, biting into that juicy chicken and those wonderful waffle fries just tastes all the more delicious knowing it hurts you so.
> 
> Gotta tell ya, IT FEELS SO FUCKING GOOD to get back at the liberal asshole elites by supporting CFA.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Exhibit A:
> 
> The subject clearly suffers from persecution complex.
> 
> A persecution complex is a term given to an array of psychologically complex behaviours, that specifically deals with the perception of being persecuted, for various possible reasons, imagined or real.
> 
> People or groups who hold to marginal (non-mainstream) beliefs or theories often display some features of this malady, as a way of explaining why their views are not more widespread. It is also commonly displayed by people or groups whose beliefs actually are comparatively widespread, such as fundamentalist Christians.
> 
> Because the subject perceives to be under persecution, the subject now finds great comfort and satisfaction with yet another perception...a lash out and back against a perceived foe by eating tasty chicken in one of the subject's favorite southern establishments.
Click to expand...


Thank you, Marc, for this classic illustration of denial and projection, as practiced by the American liberal establishment. Once again, I find that an example of the behavior so prevalent among your faction of choice is far more revealing than any attempt at explication ever could be.

Just as an aside, while I rarely agree with the individual you are addressing, in this instance he happens to be correct in describing the selectively intolerant  behavior so long associated with the Left in America (and elsewhere). I suppose even a blind squirrel can find the occasional nut. This one has, and if his observation cuts a bit near the bone, well, your side had it coming to them.


----------



## The Gadfly

Luissa said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tjvh said:
> 
> 
> 
> Funny how the First Amendment works so well when you agree with it, but when you don't, not so much.
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Exactly what? Where did Ravi state she wanted their first amendment rights taken away?
Click to expand...


She quite clearly sides with those who would abridge Mr. Cathey's First Amendment rights by intimidation, Lulu, and that is quite the same thing. I might point out that simply voicing support for traditional marriage is quite some distance from advocating (much less practicing) "intolerance" of homosexuals, a point lost among those liberals who attempted to create a tempest in a teapot, and got thoroughly rebuked for their effort (even by some of their own, I note). It is more than a little hypocritical to demand "tolerance" when one refuses to extend it to even the mere expression of a contrary point of view.


----------



## Ravi

The Gadfly said:


> Luissa said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly what? Where did Ravi state she wanted their first amendment rights taken away?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> She quite clearly sides with those who would abridge Mr. Cathey's First Amendment rights by intimidation, Lulu, and that is quite the same thing. I might point out that simply voicing support for traditional marriage is quite some distance from advocating (much less practicing) "intolerance" of homosexuals, a point lost among those liberals who attempted to create a tempest in a teapot, and got thoroughly rebuked for their effort (even by some of their own, I note). It is more than a little hypocritical to demand "tolerance" when one refuses to extend it to even the mere expression of a contrary point of view.
Click to expand...

Ah, it's okay for him to have an opinion but it isn't okay for me to have an opinion.

Priceless.


----------



## Katzndogz

Since Chick Fil A has never done anything intolerant and does not discriminate, the only thing the left has is that the CEO says he supports traditional marriage.   It is that OPINION that the left intends to stamp out wherever they find it.   Anyone who supports traditional marriage can expect to receive the same treatment.

Having been there myself, I know there is nothing gay activists will not do.


----------



## Luissa

gallantwarrior said:


> Luissa said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly what? Where did Ravi state she wanted their first amendment rights taken away?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Where did the CEO of Chic-fil-A say he hates gays?
Click to expand...


Where did I say he did?


----------



## Luissa

The Gadfly said:


> Luissa said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly what? Where did Ravi state she wanted their first amendment rights taken away?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> She quite clearly sides with those who would abridge Mr. Cathey's First Amendment rights by intimidation, Lulu, and that is quite the same thing. I might point out that simply voicing support for traditional marriage is quite some distance from advocating (much less practicing) "intolerance" of homosexuals, a point lost among those liberals who attempted to create a tempest in a teapot, and got thoroughly rebuked for their effort (even by some of their own, I note). It is more than a little hypocritical to demand "tolerance" when one refuses to extend it to even the mere expression of a contrary point of view.
Click to expand...


No it doesn't. 
I think the guy is wrong but he has a right to be wrong. That is the part you guys don't get. 
This guy has the right to to express his views, and we have the right to think he is an asshole. See how that works? 

You just assumed you thought Ravi was demanding tolerance. And you assumed she wanted his rights taken away. One should never ASSume anything.


----------



## Luissa

Katzndogz said:


> Since Chick Fil A has never done anything intolerant and does not discriminate, the only thing the left has is that the CEO says he supports traditional marriage.   It is that OPINION that the left intends to stamp out wherever they find it.   Anyone who supports traditional marriage can expect to receive the same treatment.
> 
> Having been there myself, I know there is nothing gay activists will not do.



And there is nothing homophobes won't do. 
But what ya gonna do?


----------



## Article 15

I'm seriously in the wrong business.

I need to find a way to somehow become a victim of the liberals so I can rake in all sorts of conservative sympathy cash.


----------



## peach174

Ravi said:


> So, standing up for equal rights is laying down?
> 
> I don't get your reasoning.
> 
> The chicken chain (that I avoid because of the inhumane practices toward chickens) obviously hates gay people. Fine, they are entitled to be intolerant.
> 
> What I don't understand is the idiots that cheer them on.



If they really hated gay people, they would refuse to hire them or serve them.
They don't.
The owner has the right to his religious views. He has the right to close his stores on Sundays.
Governors and Mayors don't have a right in this country to shut out or punish a business because you disagree with his or her first amendment right.


----------



## The Gadfly

Ravi said:


> The Gadfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Luissa said:
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly what? Where did Ravi state she wanted their first amendment rights taken away?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She quite clearly sides with those who would abridge Mr. Cathey's First Amendment rights by intimidation, Lulu, and that is quite the same thing. I might point out that simply voicing support for traditional marriage is quite some distance from advocating (much less practicing) "intolerance" of homosexuals, a point lost among those liberals who attempted to create a tempest in a teapot, and got thoroughly rebuked for their effort (even by some of their own, I note). It is more than a little hypocritical to demand "tolerance" when one refuses to extend it to even the mere expression of a contrary point of view.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ah, it's okay for him to have an opinion but it isn't okay for me to have an opinion.
> 
> Priceless.
Click to expand...


Au contraire; it is perfectly OK for you to have an OPINION, and state it. What is NOT OK, is for you to mislabel the opinion of another for the purpose of suppressing it. The reasoning behind your opinion is entirely spurious, and I and others here have every right to point out how and why it is spurious. There is a difference, quite a large one, between a business ACTING to discriminate against a group, and an executive expressing a PERSONAL RELIGIOUS VIEW which said group does not like. In plain and simple terms, refusing to conform one's personal convictions to the every desire of ANY minority is hardly the same thing as hating that minority. That's a false equivalence; you know it, I know it, everyone else knows it; in sum, it is a lie. Now, you have every right to tell that lie; even believe it if you choose; but everyone else has an equal right to call you on it.


----------



## The Gadfly

Article 15 said:


> I'm seriously in the wrong business.
> 
> I need to find a way to somehow become a victim of the liberals so I can rake in all sorts of conservative sympathy cash.



You were told the kool-aid was poisonous, but you drank it anyway. I doubt your fellow libs put a gun (they don't seem to like those) to your head, so you drank it of your own free will, didn't you? Sorry, no victim status for you; YOU DID IT TO YOURSELF!


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM

Ravi said:


> I guess it's cool that people applaud intolerance....



I'm not sure why you are so intolerant towards Muslims and Christians who believe what their holy books teach them that marriage is supposed to be between a man and a women.

Sure I disagree with them but I don't call them names and disparage them over having their own opinions based of their religious values as you do.   That is borderline bigotry you display ravi.


----------



## Ravi

The Gadfly said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Gadfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> She quite clearly sides with those who would abridge Mr. Cathey's First Amendment rights by intimidation, Lulu, and that is quite the same thing. I might point out that simply voicing support for traditional marriage is quite some distance from advocating (much less practicing) "intolerance" of homosexuals, a point lost among those liberals who attempted to create a tempest in a teapot, and got thoroughly rebuked for their effort (even by some of their own, I note). It is more than a little hypocritical to demand "tolerance" when one refuses to extend it to even the mere expression of a contrary point of view.
> 
> 
> 
> Ah, it's okay for him to have an opinion but it isn't okay for me to have an opinion.
> 
> Priceless.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Au contraire; it is perfectly OK for you to have an OPINION, and state it. What is NOT OK, is for you to mislabel the opinion of another for the purpose of suppressing it. The reasoning behind your opinion is entirely spurious, and I and others here have every right to point out how and why it is spurious. There is a difference, quite a large one, between a business ACTING to discriminate against a group, and an executive expressing a PERSONAL RELIGIOUS VIEW which said group does not like. In plain and simple terms, refusing to conform one's personal convictions to the every desire of ANY minority is hardly the same thing as hating that minority. That's a false equivalence; you know it, I know it, everyone else knows it; in sum, it is a lie. Now, you have every right to tell that lie; even believe it if you choose; but everyone else has an equal right to call you on it.
Click to expand...


The guy is intolerant and an anti-American bigot. That's his right. He doesn't have the right to be shielded from derision.


----------



## The Gadfly

Ravi said:


> The Gadfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ah, it's okay for him to have an opinion but it isn't okay for me to have an opinion.
> 
> Priceless.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Au contraire; it is perfectly OK for you to have an OPINION, and state it. What is NOT OK, is for you to mislabel the opinion of another for the purpose of suppressing it. The reasoning behind your opinion is entirely spurious, and I and others here have every right to point out how and why it is spurious. There is a difference, quite a large one, between a business ACTING to discriminate against a group, and an executive expressing a PERSONAL RELIGIOUS VIEW which said group does not like. In plain and simple terms, refusing to conform one's personal convictions to the every desire of ANY minority is hardly the same thing as hating that minority. That's a false equivalence; you know it, I know it, everyone else knows it; in sum, it is a lie. Now, you have every right to tell that lie; even believe it if you choose; but everyone else has an equal right to call you on it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The guy is intolerant and an anti-American bigot. That's his right. He doesn't have the right to be shielded from derision.
Click to expand...


He hasn't been; but he most certainly DOES have the right to be shielded from attempted intimidation and reprisal against his business by pandering liberal politicians! That's what started this, and I think you've seen how Americans by the hundreds of thousands have rallied to his side. Your side picked this fight, and lost. Deal with it. I suspect there's plenty more where that came from. Let's see where this "Kiss-In" goes tomorrow; somehow, I don't think that's going to work so well either. This ain't about gay, Ravi dear, it's about PC, liberal intolerance, and liberal bullying, and I think most of us out here in flyover country have had more than enough of all three.


----------



## MarcATL

Article 15 said:


> I'm seriously in the wrong business.
> 
> I need to find a way to somehow become a victim of the liberals so I can rake in all sorts of conservative sympathy cash.


RW business THRIVE on victimhood.


----------



## Luddly Neddite

Chick-Fil-A Has 'Record-Setting Day' While Embroiled In Anti-Gay Controversy

This latest load of teepot crap pretty much sums up what they're doing to our country. This chain couldn't get any attention until they joined the Hate Club. There's a whole lotta hate going on and they just cashed in because if there's one thing the right will fight against, its Equal Rights For All Americans.


----------



## Luddly Neddite

Gadfly 





> She quite clearly sides with those who would abridge Mr. Cathey's First Amendment rights by intimidation...



This is not a First Amendment issue. 

jeeeeez.


----------



## emilynghiem

Ravi said:


> you get what you give, Ravi.
> 
> it's okay for you to call the opposing side "intolerant"
> but not okay to acknowledge when you are being intolerant.
> 
> it's okay for you to label people by group as "unamerican"
> in order to discredit and justify rejecting that group
> but not okay for other people to "discriminate against whole groups of people"


----------



## The Gadfly

luddly.neddite said:


> Chick-Fil-A Has 'Record-Setting Day' While Embroiled In Anti-Gay Controversy
> 
> This latest load of teepot crap pretty much sums up what they're doing to our country. This chain couldn't get any attention until they joined the Hate Club. There's a whole lotta hate going on and they just cashed in because if there's one thing the right will fight against, its Equal Rights For All Americans.



What hate? The man gave a personal religious opinion to a reporter for a Christian magazine. The problem is, you Leftists label any opinion you disagree with, or that any of your designated victim groups disagree with, as "hate speech". This is not new; the blueprint for the American Left's brand of selective tolerance was spelled out years ago by one of its pioneering philosophers , one Herbert Marcuse, in his essay, "A Critique of Pure Tolerance". I know, because I spent a college assignment many years ago tearing the spurious logic and pure self-serving hypocrisy of that wretched document to shreds. For anyone who wants to know how the hell you of the Left justify the sort of "tolerance" (what a farce!) you advocate, that essay of Marcuse's should be required reading, as it offers a fascinating insight into the Left's mindset, and its penchant for lies, distortion, and all forms of deceit in pursuit of its dreams of turning America into a communist dictatorship. Marcuse details the Left's way of "tolerating" only that expression which is "progressive", i.e. consistent with the Left's own ideology, while shouting down or otherwise attempting to utterly silence anything to the contrary. Your pious bleating in this instance is a perfect case in point. Unfortunately for you, the American sheeple are beginning to understand what we conservatives have said for years about the Left's mendacity, and have responded to your latest assault on the rights of the rest of us with proper outrage. I am only amazed it took this long. Spin it however you like, but you and your Leftist pals got yourselves screwed, blued and tattooed on this one, and I think, it couldn't happen to a more deserving bunch! I'm going to go now, and get another Chick-fil-A sandwich to enjoy, as I revel in your misery!

P.S. Serves you right, you partisan hack!


----------



## The Gadfly

luddly.neddite said:


> Gadfly
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She quite clearly sides with those who would abridge Mr. Cathey's First Amendment rights by intimidation...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is not a First Amendment issue.
> 
> jeeeeez.
Click to expand...


That is PRECISELY what it is! The company has NO record of discrimination against gays, yet a number of pandering liberal politicians threatened to keep his company out of their states/cities solely because Mr. Cathey affirmed his belief in traditional marriage in an interview. If THAT is not and attempted assault on the First Amendment, I cannot fathom what would be! Obviously, there are an overwhelming number of Americans who agree with my assessment on that, rather than yours!

P.S. I know that boot America just put up your arse hurts, but do try to stop whining; it's very unbecoming, and tedious besides.

P.PS. I really must go now; I'm getting hungry, and the line at my nearby Chick-fil-A is still quite long, I hear. Don't fret; I'll be back with more barbs later, because I'm just getting warmed up.


----------



## emilynghiem

Ravi said:


> So, standing up for equal rights is laying down?
> 
> I don't get your reasoning.



Ravi I see you are framing it as either/or where standing up for one side
means the other side is being asked to stand down.

If you frame it as both sides having equal right to stand up for their views,
they can both do so freely, and nobody has to back down or lie down for the other.

Isn't that more constitutional or american? To include and respect
all views equally, where you don't have to impose one way in conflict or competition?



Ravi said:


> The chicken chain (that I avoid because of the inhumane practices toward chickens) obviously hates gay people. Fine, they are entitled to be intolerant.
> 
> What I don't understand is the idiots that cheer them on.



Ravi why are you equating not believing in the state sanctioning gay marriage
with "hating gay people" "being intolerant" or "idiots" cheering them on?

I also don't believe in imposing laws either for or against gay marriage
unless the legislation is written and passed by consent of the people affected.

So I equally defend views on both sides, and that certainly doesn't make me an idiot.
I think that shows I'm a fairminded person defending constitutional inclusion and
protection of all views, regardless if they agree or disagree with my own views or biases.

I equally cheer on the businessman here, for expressing his position without apology,
as I applauded Dick Cheney for countering Bush by stating his support of gay marriage!

Does this make me a two faced idiot, then, for cheering on both these men on both sides?

Just because I support prochoice, and don't support laws making abortion illegal, does not mean I "hate" babies or am "intolerant" of prolife beliefs in banning abortion. I actually agree abortion should be prevented and support prolife outreach as part of the solution. 

Similarly just because I don't support laws making gay marriage legal (or illegal) against
public consent, does not mean I hate gay people or am intolerant of those who disagree.

Ravi, in several msgs you seem quick to labeling people in negative ways as "hating" "intolerant" "bigots" "unamerican"

Do you do this with all people? or just those you disagree with?

Weren't you criticizing someone else for doing that?
Are you equally as self-critical when it comes to yourself and people you agree with?


----------



## MarcATL

The Gadfly said:


> luddly.neddite said:
> 
> 
> 
> Gadfly
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She quite clearly sides with those who would abridge Mr. Cathey's First Amendment rights by intimidation...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is not a First Amendment issue.
> 
> jeeeeez.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is PRECISELY what it is! The company has NO record of discrimination against gays, *yet a number of pandering liberal politicians threatened to keep his company out of their states/cities* solely because Mr. Cathey affirmed his belief in traditional marriage in an interview. If THAT is not and attempted assault on the First Amendment, I cannot fathom what would be! Obviously, there are an overwhelming number of Americans who agree with my assessment on that, rather than yours!
> 
> P.S. I know that boot America just put up your arse hurts, but do try to stop whining; it's very unbecoming, and tedious besides.
> 
> P.PS. I really must go now; I'm getting hungry, and the line at my nearby Chick-fil-A is still quite long, I hear. Don't fret; I'll be back with more barbs later, because I'm just getting warmed up.
Click to expand...

Really?

List them please.

Thanks.


----------



## emilynghiem

luddly.neddite said:


> Gadfly
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She quite clearly sides with those who would abridge Mr. Cathey's First Amendment rights by intimidation...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is not a First Amendment issue.
> 
> jeeeeez.
Click to expand...


1. regarding free speech

both the Chick Fil A spokesman and the customers and the Mayors
have equal right to express their views freely
(only if they become so disruptive as to cause breach of security or peace, where they infringe on the right of others peaceably to assemble and conduct business securely would such right to free speech or protests violate the same laws these people are exercising)

as long as the patrons or protesters do not HARASS or commit other civil or legal violation
they all have equal freedom to express themselves, their support or dissent.

2. regarding religion neither prohibited nor imposed by the state

neither the people for or the people against gay marriage
should threaten to abuse state authority to impose their views on those of different beliefs

in this case, there is not equal recognition
of both the views for and against gay marriage to be equally protected
from biases in law by the state

3. NOTE: this is TECHNICALLY only a First Amendment issue where govt is involved
if you interpret the law to mean only govt is held to the Bill of Rights/Constitution

by the Spirit of the laws, where the Golden Rule of Reciprocity applies to all human beings
under natural laws of society and governance that affect all our relations with each other,
not jsut govt,
then all parties would be expected to follow the same rules
if they want to invoke them consistently.

so if you want free speech, you should respect the same of others
if you want your views to be included and not be harassed or namecalled for them,
then you should respect the same of others
etc.

that is not literally how the First Amendment is interpreted literally to apply to govt only

but in practice, that is how people exercise and respond to others under natural laws
and principles that the First Amendment contains and reflects.


----------



## emilynghiem

The Gadfly said:


> luddly.neddite said:
> 
> 
> 
> Gadfly
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She quite clearly sides with those who would abridge Mr. Cathey's First Amendment rights by intimidation...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is not a First Amendment issue.
> 
> jeeeeez.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That is PRECISELY what it is! The company has NO record of discrimination against gays, yet a number of pandering liberal politicians threatened to keep his company out of their states/cities solely because Mr. Cathey affirmed his belief in traditional marriage in an interview. If THAT is not and attempted assault on the First Amendment, I cannot fathom what would be! Obviously, there are an overwhelming number of Americans who agree with my assessment on that, rather than yours!
> 
> P.S. I know that boot America just put up your arse hurts, but do try to stop whining; it's very unbecoming, and tedious besides.
> 
> P.PS. I really must go now; I'm getting hungry, and the line at my nearby Chick-fil-A is still quite long, I hear. Don't fret; I'll be back with more barbs later, because I'm just getting warmed up.
Click to expand...


Dear Gadfly: Again the Golden rule applies where you get what you give.
Only insofar as the company has "threatened" to discriminate against gays such as by
funding campaigns for or against certain legislation or views,
then it is natural people may respond by "threatening" the same by equivalent sanctions.

You can verbalize such protests all you want.

What matters is if you actually take steps to discriminate against someone by personal views or religious/political views.

In the case of gay marriage, both sides should have equal protection NOT to be imposed upon by the other viewpoint, and certainly not to be discriminated against or harassed.

I find it interesting at the same time this is going on,
a Mosque in Tennessee is trying to defend its rights to construct and congregate
while opponents are blocking and fighting those efforts by
equating Islam with Jihadist shariah law they claim is in conflict with the constitution
and not protected by it.

Whatever learning curve our country is on right now, we need to get to the point of these
lessons and exercises, resolve the conflicts and move to a better place with all this!!!


----------



## ConzHateUSA

anybody post the links to the employees losing free speech rights for working there?

that they monitor your behavior as in church attendance etc?

chick fil a needs to get the HELL out of my country, i am just about out of patience with you rabid racist haters...just about

keep it up, assholes...keep it up


----------



## beagle9

Luissa said:


> tjvh said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I guess it's cool that people applaud intolerance....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Funny how the First Amendment works so well when you agree with it, but when you don't, not so much.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What are you even referring to?
Click to expand...

He was referring to ravi with his statement, but I guess you feel that you should take up the conversation for ravi now?


----------



## copsnrobbers

He's rolling in the doe while the liberals are sucking wind and each other off.

LMAO!


----------



## beagle9

ConzHateUSA said:


> anybody post the links to the employees losing free speech rights for working there?
> 
> that they monitor your behavior as in church attendance etc?
> 
> chick fil a needs to get the HELL out of my country, i am just about out of patience with you rabid racist haters...just about
> 
> keep it up, assholes...keep it up



Another Holmes maybe ? Keep it up with your threats here, and the FBI will be knocking at your door real soon, you betcha.. In fact you may have already said enough now as it is, because there is a huge debate now going on right now, and this whether you know it or not, about when was it the right time to stop a person like Holmes, and a lot of finger pointing is going on now in regards to that. The debate going on now, is who should have caught him before he done what he had done, especially considering the evidence that he had put out there prior to ?

If don't want to end up like Holmes, then I would suggest that you stop with the general threats you keep making here.. Just saying!  Now back on topic please..


----------



## beagle9

Ravi said:


> The Gadfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ah, it's okay for him to have an opinion but it isn't okay for me to have an opinion.
> 
> Priceless.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Au contraire; it is perfectly OK for you to have an OPINION, and state it. What is NOT OK, is for you to mislabel the opinion of another for the purpose of suppressing it. The reasoning behind your opinion is entirely spurious, and I and others here have every right to point out how and why it is spurious. There is a difference, quite a large one, between a business ACTING to discriminate against a group, and an executive expressing a PERSONAL RELIGIOUS VIEW which said group does not like. In plain and simple terms, refusing to conform one's personal convictions to the every desire of ANY minority is hardly the same thing as hating that minority. That's a false equivalence; you know it, I know it, everyone else knows it; in sum, it is a lie. Now, you have every right to tell that lie; even believe it if you choose; but everyone else has an equal right to call you on it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The guy is intolerant and an anti-American bigot. That's his right. He doesn't have the right to be shielded from derision.
Click to expand...

How tolerant should America be ravi ? I mean we have laws ya know, and the very existance of those laws means that we have limits to our tolerances in America. This is what the left don't understand, where as just because they think something is good and that we should tolerate it, doesn't mean that we think that it is good, and therefore should tolerate it because they demand us to.

If anything the left are just as intolerant as they claim that the right is etc.

This is when the good majority should always be on standby, and on the ready to settle these issues by a majority vote there of, but the feds who have forever sided with those who claim eternal victimized status in America, and are given special victimized protections by the feds, use the status to abuse the rights of others in order to gain power over them.

People are awakening to this fact finally, and this was just one more good example of that awakening.


----------



## beagle9

Ravi said:


> The Gadfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Luissa said:
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly what? Where did Ravi state she wanted their first amendment rights taken away?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She quite clearly sides with those who would abridge Mr. Cathey's First Amendment rights by intimidation, Lulu, and that is quite the same thing. I might point out that simply voicing support for traditional marriage is quite some distance from advocating (much less practicing) "intolerance" of homosexuals, a point lost among those liberals who attempted to create a tempest in a teapot, and got thoroughly rebuked for their effort (even by some of their own, I note). It is more than a little hypocritical to demand "tolerance" when one refuses to extend it to even the mere expression of a contrary point of view.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ah, it's okay for him to have an opinion but it isn't okay for me to have an opinion.
> 
> Priceless.
Click to expand...

Who is stopping you from having an opinion Ravi ?


----------



## gallantwarrior

emilynghiem said:


> luddly.neddite said:
> 
> 
> 
> Gadfly
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She quite clearly sides with those who would abridge Mr. Cathey's First Amendment rights by intimidation...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is not a First Amendment issue.
> 
> jeeeeez.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 1. regarding free speech
> 
> both the Chick Fil A spokesman and the customers and the Mayors
> have equal right to express their views freely
> (only if they become so disruptive as to cause breach of security or peace, where they infringe on the right of others peaceably to assemble and conduct business securely would such right to free speech or protests violate the same laws these people are exercising)
> 
> as long as the patrons or protesters do not HARASS or commit other civil or legal violation
> they all have equal freedom to express themselves, their support or dissent.
> 
> 2. regarding religion neither prohibited nor imposed by the state
> 
> neither the people for or the people against gay marriage
> should threaten to abuse state authority to impose their views on those of different beliefs
> 
> in this case, there is not equal recognition
> of both the views for and against gay marriage to be equally protected
> from biases in law by the state
> 
> 3. NOTE: this is TECHNICALLY only a First Amendment issue where govt is involved
> if you interpret the law to mean only govt is held to the Bill of Rights/Constitution
> 
> by the Spirit of the laws, where the Golden Rule of Reciprocity applies to all human beings
> under natural laws of society and governance that affect all our relations with each other,
> not jsut govt,
> then all parties would be expected to follow the same rules
> if they want to invoke them consistently.
> 
> so if you want free speech, you should respect the same of others
> if you want your views to be included and not be harassed or namecalled for them,
> then you should respect the same of others
> etc.
> 
> that is not literally how the First Amendment is interpreted literally to apply to govt only
> 
> but in practice, that is how people exercise and respond to others under natural laws
> and principles that the First Amendment contains and reflects.
Click to expand...


In support of everyone's First Amendment rights:  The CEO of Chic-fil-A has a right to say he supports traditional marriage (still curious how that equates to hating gays); the mayors have the right to say that they don't believe his statement reflects the ideals of the inhabitants of their cities (they DO NOT have the right to block or forbid further establishment of businesses); the people have the right to support, or not support, the business in question (they either contribute by purchasing the fare on offer, or they do not).  NO ONE has the right to bully, physically, financially, or psychologically intimidate, or otherwise threaten people who have opinions that differ from theirs.


----------



## gallantwarrior

ConzHateUSA said:


> anybody post the links to the employees losing free speech rights for working there?
> 
> that they monitor your behavior as in church attendance etc?
> 
> chick fil a needs to get the HELL out of my country, i am just about out of patience with you rabid racist haters...just about
> 
> keep it up, assholes...keep it up



No.  Do you have access to links that substantiate the claims you make?


----------



## The Gadfly

ConzHateUSA said:


> anybody post the links to the employees losing free speech rights for working there?
> 
> that they monitor your behavior as in church attendance etc?
> 
> chick fil a needs to get the HELL out of my country, i am just about out of patience with you rabid racist haters...just about
> 
> keep it up, assholes...keep it up



Really? Or you'll do what, precisely? Go out in the garden and eat worms? Have a temper tantrum? Hold your breath? Implode? (I can only wish!). You better believe I'm going to keep it up, hell, I'm just getting started, and in the immortal words of Ronald Wilson Reagan, "You ain't seen NOTHING yet!" Prickly little caterpillar, when you get your bristles ruffled, aren't you? Well, let me assure you that I am thoroughly enjoying the discomfort this situation is causing you and your fellow travelers, and watching the lot of you make your mostly futile and pathetic efforts to extricate yourselves from the beating your side just took in a fight it explicitly picked, with malice aforethought, amuses me no end. On the whole, you've been reduced to little more than hysterical name-calling, a fact I note with some relish. In fact, I am such a good mood, that I'm not being nearly as mean as I can be. However, I am getting more irascible in my old age than I used to be, and it would not take much more of your drivel to change that mood.


----------



## blastoff

gallantwarrior said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> So, standing up for equal rights is laying down?
> 
> I don't get your reasoning.
> 
> The chicken chain (that I avoid because of the inhumane practices toward chickens) obviously hates gay people. Fine, they are entitled to be intolerant.
> 
> What I don't understand is the idiots that cheer them on.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The man said he supported traditional marriage.  It's pretty intolerant not to recognize that as a valid opinion and leave it at that.
Click to expand...


Amen!  And the same opinion shared by millions and millions of other Americans.


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM

MarcATL said:


> Article 15 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm seriously in the wrong business.
> 
> I need to find a way to somehow become a victim of the liberals so I can rake in all sorts of conservative sympathy cash.
> 
> 
> 
> RW business THRIVE on victimhood.
Click to expand...


Oh my how the world turns


----------



## blastoff

ConzHateUSA said:


> anybody post the links to the employees losing free speech rights for working there?
> 
> that they monitor your behavior as in church attendance etc?
> 
> chick fil a needs to get the HELL out of my country, i am just about out of patience with you rabid racist haters...just about
> 
> keep it up, assholes...keep it up



Oh, gee, yet another cyber tough guy.  So many of them around they've been marked down to only a nickel a dozen these days.


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM

blastoff said:


> ConzHateUSA said:
> 
> 
> 
> anybody post the links to the employees losing free speech rights for working there?
> 
> that they monitor your behavior as in church attendance etc?
> 
> chick fil a needs to get the HELL out of my country, i am just about out of patience with you rabid racist haters...just about
> 
> keep it up, assholes...keep it up
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh, gee, yet another cyber tough guy.  So many of them around they've been marked down to only a nickel a dozen these days.
Click to expand...


Hence them not being taken seriously too often (unless i'm looking for some fun back and forth that has nothing to do with learning anything)


----------



## nitroz

They are making history, allright. 

It's a first for America's politics to be centered on fried chicken, hate, and religious hypocrisy.


----------



## OODA_Loop

nitroz said:


> They are making history, allright.
> 
> It's a first for America's politics to be centered on fried chicken, hate, and religious hypocrisy.



Or they simply respect Federal law enacted by Clinton which codified that marriage is between one man and a woman.


----------



## nitroz

OODA_Loop said:


> nitroz said:
> 
> 
> 
> They are making history, allright.
> 
> It's a first for America's politics to be centered on fried chicken, hate, and religious hypocrisy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Or they simply respect Federal law enacted by Clinton which codified that marriage is between one man and a woman.
Click to expand...


A law/Ban that has been ruled unconstitutional by the supreme court.
Gay Marriage Ban DOMA Ruled Unconstitutional In Connecticut Case
Prop 8 backers ask Supreme Court to review gay marriage ban - U.S. News
California Proposition 8 same-sex-marriage ban ruled unconstitutional - The Washington Post
Federal court strikes down key part of federal law banning same-sex marriage - CNN
Judge rules against Defense of Marriage Act | Strange Bedfellows &#8212; Politics News - seattlepi.com
Judge: Texas Ban On Gay Marriage Unconstitutional | NBC 5 Dallas-Fort Worth



A law that only has religious backing, Imposing their beliefs on others.
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2euDIMg20w]US pastor&#39;s anti-gay sermon goes viral - YouTube[/ame]
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pRgZ8hfhr1s]Extreme Religious Right Hate Exposed: Target Obama - YouTube[/ame]
Religious Right Targets Maine & Marriage Equality with Money, Anti-Gay Swat Teams and Reprise of Prop-8


Some pathetic excuse of a "law".


----------



## OODA_Loop

nitroz said:


> A law/Ban that has been ruled unconstitutional by the supreme court.



Not SCOTUS. Sorry.


----------



## Rozman

Ravi said:


> I guess it's cool that people applaud intolerance....



Well when it comes to gays they have no tolerance for
people and their religious beliefs.Everyone has to be careful
of the gays feelings and there it ends.


----------



## Ravi

Rozman said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I guess it's cool that people applaud intolerance....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well when it comes to gays they have no tolerance for
> people and their religious beliefs.Everyone has to be careful
> of the gays feelings and there it ends.
Click to expand...

Good point. Those damn Negroes never had any tolerance for the fucked up beliefs of the slave owners either.


----------



## beagle9

All that the supporters of chic-fil-a did the other day, was go out and eat some chicken in order to show support towards an opinion that was given, and supported the right for Chic-Fil-A to give that opinion when it was given, but wow have you seen all the ciminal acts the non-supporters have resorted to, and this in hopes to counter the support of an opinion, and especially the religious stance that is found in that opinion, in which chic-fil-a has taken on the issue of marriage, where it believes that marriage should be defined and kept as being between one man and one woman? 

If this don't let this nation know just how far that the media and government has gone in bullying this nation into submission over time, and especially so as it has been directed at the core of the strength of this nation found within it's families over time, then we are in big trouble.  To bully us all into going along with something that is not right for many of us, and for whom will never support these things that government and the media have tried so hard to fool everybody on, and have been at it for so long now, has been something else to witness in this nation over time.  They have done this out of pure pressure as it has been applied by them, where as they have made false claims and have made up false numbers to support their claims, and then if that don't work, then it has been by way of strong armed tactics or criminal actions applied next in evidence there of. If we all can't see all this now, then it won't ever be known by the nations people, who are living here as the good majority in America. 

The support that was given the other day for Chic-Fil-A, was a great example of putting a cause or opinion out there honestly, and then letting the good people in a majority decide as it should be in this nation as to whether or not they will support the cause or not support the cause. Now who shall deny these people their rights to support or not support a cause in this nation, just as it had supported a cause and an opinion the other day ?


----------



## beagle9

Ravi said:


> Rozman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I guess it's cool that people applaud intolerance....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well when it comes to gays they have no tolerance for
> people and their religious beliefs.Everyone has to be careful
> of the gays feelings and there it ends.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Good point. Those damn Negroes never had any tolerance for the fucked up beliefs of the slave owners either.
Click to expand...

And it was defintely their right not to tolerate being treated like farm animals or property in which they once belonged to these owners back then as purchased property, so what was your point being made again Ravi ?

People have many ways of abusing others in this nation, and when many don't want to be abused in this nation, and therefore they refuse to tolerate abuse of any kind within their circles, then that is their right. If they get many to join them in their refusal to be abused or to tolerate abuse in what they feel is not to be tolerated, then that is just icing on the cake for them, because then they can have their cake and also eat it in peace to.


----------



## Katzndogz

After the CFA appreciation day, and the Kiss In, it is right and appropriate for the democratic party to put in a gay marriage plank in their party platform, and make endless promises to pass gay marriage legislation at the first opportunity.


----------



## FJO

Ravi said:


> I guess it's cool that people applaud intolerance....



The only intolerance was expressed by the mayors of Boston, Chicago and San Francisco.
And the only people who applauded were liberals and gays.

It was really cool!


----------



## FJO

Ravi said:


> So, standing up for equal rights is laying down?
> 
> I don't get your reasoning.
> 
> The chicken chain (that I avoid because of the inhumane practices toward chickens) obviously hates gay people. Fine, they are entitled to be intolerant.
> 
> What I don't understand is the idiots that cheer them on.



Eating chicken is inhumane practice toward chickens, according to you.  So, you must agree that eating potatoes and carrots is inhuman practice towards potatoes and carrots. If you don`t care to live at the expense of another living entity, hurry up and develop photosynthesis.

Those who oppose Chick-fil-A obviously hate straight people. Fine, they are entitled to be intolerant.

And please note that while I disagree with you I did not sink to your level and call you an idiot.


----------



## FJO

ConzHateUSA said:


> anybody post the links to the employees losing free speech rights for working there?
> 
> that they monitor your behavior as in church attendance etc?
> 
> chick fil a needs to get the HELL out of my country, i am just about out of patience with you rabid racist haters...just about
> 
> keep it up, assholes...keep it up



Example of liberal-progressive-Democrat love and tolerance.


----------



## Ravi

FJO said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> So, standing up for equal rights is laying down?
> 
> I don't get your reasoning.
> 
> The chicken chain (that I avoid because of the inhumane practices toward chickens) obviously hates gay people. Fine, they are entitled to be intolerant.
> 
> What I don't understand is the idiots that cheer them on.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Eating chicken is inhumane practice toward chickens, according to you.  So, you must agree that eating potatoes and carrots is inhuman practice towards potatoes and carrots. If you don`t care to live at the expense of another living entity, hurry up and develop photosynthesis.
> 
> Those who oppose Chick-fil-A obviously hate straight people. Fine, they are entitled to be intolerant.
> 
> And please note that while I disagree with you I did not sink to your level and call you an idiot.
Click to expand...


No, but you sure did make a lot of stupid assumptions.

Go to a chicken farm and see how inhumanely the chickens are treated, dummy.


----------



## peach174

Where was the outrage toward President Obama or Vice Pres Biden, when they stood for marriage as a man and woman.
Obama just changed his stance just a few months back.


----------



## FJO

Ravi said:


> FJO said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> So, standing up for equal rights is laying down?
> 
> I don't get your reasoning.
> 
> The chicken chain (that I avoid because of the inhumane practices toward chickens) obviously hates gay people. Fine, they are entitled to be intolerant.
> 
> What I don't understand is the idiots that cheer them on.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Eating chicken is inhumane practice toward chickens, according to you.  So, you must agree that eating potatoes and carrots is inhuman practice towards potatoes and carrots. If you don`t care to live at the expense of another living entity, hurry up and develop photosynthesis.
> 
> Those who oppose Chick-fil-A obviously hate straight people. Fine, they are entitled to be intolerant.
> 
> And please note that while I disagree with you I did not sink to your level and call you an idiot.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, but you sure did make a lot of stupid assumptions.
> 
> Go to a chicken farm and see how inhumanely the chickens are treated, dummy.
Click to expand...


I don`t care to go to a chicken farm, because I simply don`t care about the previous state of my dinner, if it happens to be chicken. Those chicken are given food and water until they reach the age destiny determined for them: Be food for humans.

And please note, I still never called you a dummy or your opinions stupid. If you go to a public library you will find books about CIVIL discourse. Give me your ZIP code and I will direct you to the nearest one to you.


----------



## Ravi

FJO said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> FJO said:
> 
> 
> 
> Eating chicken is inhumane practice toward chickens, according to you.  So, you must agree that eating potatoes and carrots is inhuman practice towards potatoes and carrots. If you don`t care to live at the expense of another living entity, hurry up and develop photosynthesis.
> 
> Those who oppose Chick-fil-A obviously hate straight people. Fine, they are entitled to be intolerant.
> 
> And please note that while I disagree with you I did not sink to your level and call you an idiot.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, but you sure did make a lot of stupid assumptions.
> 
> Go to a chicken farm and see how inhumanely the chickens are treated, dummy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don`t care to go to a chicken farm, because I simply don`t care about the previous state of my dinner, if it happens to be chicken. Those chicken are given food and water until they reach the age destiny determined for them: Be food for humans.
> 
> And please note, I still never called you a dummy or your opinions stupid. If you go to a public library you will find books about CIVIL discourse. Give me your ZIP code and I will direct you to the nearest one to you.
Click to expand...

So you do know how they are abused and you just want to pretend you don't.

As you wish.


----------



## FJO

peach174 said:


> Where was the outrage toward President Obama or Vice Pres Biden, when they stood for marriage as a man and woman.
> Obama just changed his stance just a few months back.



President Obama `evolved` after the thoughtless gaffe by the most ridiculous Vice President in history, over which he was more than likely raked over the coals by the President.


----------



## signelect

Ravi said:


> So, standing up for equal rights is laying down?
> 
> I don't get your reasoning.
> 
> The chicken chain (that I avoid because of the inhumane practices toward chickens) obviously hates gay people. Fine, they are entitled to be intolerant.
> 
> What I don't understand is the idiots that cheer them on.



Hate was never mentioned.  They oppose gay marriage as do a majority of the citizens of the US.  I have never been ask my sexual preference at a resturant or any other place where I spend my money.  If gays don't like it eat somewhere else.  We have less that 10% of the population telling the rest of us that we don't understand.  Understand what?


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones

beagle9 said:


> Today Chic-Fil-A made history, and so does the power of facebook by staging a support Chic-Fil-A day, where thousands upon thousands turned out in support for the chicken sandwich franchise, thus sending a strong message to those who think that the American voters will just lay silent anymore, when infact they (the boycotters) have another thought coming for sure on that note, because the sleeping giant has once again been awoken.
> 
> Today in many states where Chic-Fil-A is located, people came out by the thousands in support of the resteraunt chain, causing traffic jams and flooding in ajoining parking lots and more. It was all due mainly in support of the chain and it's personal right to make a statement, and this when asked about it's values and morals as an American business that is run on those values and morals. It then caused an uprising or uproar amongst a minority of Americans when answered, for whom thought that they could afterwards take on the chain by calling for a boycott of it, but the Americans who support the chain weren't having any of it, so they came out in support of the chain today big time, in one of the biggest (counter boycott) moves the nation has seen in a long time. I have a friend who called me and said his wife waited in line for two hours today, but it was worth the wait no matter he said that she said. My wife just came from up town around 8:00 o'clock PM evening time, and she said that the lines were still long and the chain flooded with supporters still at 8:00 o'clock. It was strong in support of all day long and into the night. I wonder how the Media will cover it ? Lets see who they (the media) really belongs to as well in the situation.
> 
> I bet this is what will happen to Obama this election, so he had better get ready for the storm, even though it won't help him none otherwise to get ready and counter the Americans on the same views and ideals in which they have had for Chic-Fil-A, and this especially so if the same turn out happens with this election, that also happened with Chic-Fil-A today. WOW!



Chic-Fil-A is making history only by embarrassing itself by being on the wrong side of the Constitution, as are those who support the companys efforts to deny citizens equal protection of the law. 

Indeed, the 14th Amendment stands as a bulwark against the ignorance and hate of fearful citizens.


----------



## midcan5

Long live intolerance and disrespect for others, may the intolerant hold hands in their un-American disrespect for people who only want equal rights under the law. Rights that many of these same Americans fought for, now denied. Long live hatred of the other. Take a bow America or stay seated you've sunk low under religious bigotry.


----------



## OODA_Loop

midcan5 said:


> Long live intolerance and disrespect for others, may the intolerant hold hands in their un-American disrespect for people who only want equal rights under the law. Rights that many of these same Americans fought for, now denied. Long live hatred of the other. Take a bow America or stay seated you've sunk low under religious bigotry.



its Federal law ?


----------



## beagle9

FJO said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I guess it's cool that people applaud intolerance....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The only intolerance was expressed by the mayors of Boston, Chicago and San Francisco.
> And the only people who applauded were liberals and gays.
> 
> It was really cool!
Click to expand...

Exactly right, because they only want it one way in America (no two ways about it), and that is the path that they have been on, and the agenda that they are following no matter how many Americans it abuses or leaves voiceless and out of the equasion in America, and this upon wanting what they want no matter what, especially how they have been going against the majority in America for whom want no part of what they want or what they have been advocating over time, and therefore would be much happier if they (good average everyday hardworking family oriented, Jesus loving Americans) were just left alone instead. The left can't leave the good majority who want their part in America to be family oriented and decent and moral for their children to be raised up in alone, they just can't do it.


----------



## beagle9

midcan5 said:


> Long live intolerance and disrespect for others, may the intolerant hold hands in their un-American disrespect for people who only want equal rights under the law. Rights that many of these same Americans fought for, now denied. Long live hatred of the other. Take a bow America or stay seated you've sunk low under religious bigotry.



Only want equal rights eh ? Ummm if we look back now, I think it is known by now, that their are those who want far more than equal rights in America, and if it takes squashing the rights of others to get beyond the equal rights falshood that has been created, then they will do it without hesitation.

The highjacking of many great causes, that started out very nobel causes in America, is what America is facing now on a huge scale. It is a new day and a new struggle for Americans who now see through alot of the bull crap it has been forcefully spoonfed for way to long now. The Chic-Fil-A turn out was a rebuking of this by Americans, and the left who are agenda filled, and therefore will try and squash this statement with all of it's controlled biased media associations, and it's aquirred government might, so just you wait and see America, because they are not done yet.


----------



## beagle9

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Chic-Fil-A is making history only by embarrassing itself by being on the wrong side of the Constitution, as are those who support the companys efforts to deny citizens equal protection of the law.
> 
> Indeed, the 14th Amendment stands as a bulwark against the ignorance and hate of fearful citizens.



Try telling this to the millions who came out in support of what Chic-Fil-A said, and I bet they knew that they were in their rights to do what they did in support of, just as Chic-Fil-A knew that it was in it's rights as well the day in which they had spoken what they said also. You know what I love the most about this, is that Chic-Fil-A isn't tied to the government so much so, that the left could have immediately used the governments crushing power on them, just as they have done upon the Boy Scouts, and with Prayer in the Public Schools, Nativity scenes taken down in the public square, Crosses/Crucifixes removed from government sponsored graveyards, courthouses and etc., the annual Whitehouse "Christmas Tree" lighting and tree itself right now under attack as we speak, and the list just keeps getting biger and bigger everyday.

Just because you on the left want to say that they were in the wrong, doesn't mean that they were, but if you can get by with convincing people that they were in the wrong (even though they weren't), and this by saying so out of thin air in order to somehow get by with this accusing of the chain and it's supporters of being in the wrong, then you will go there everytime won't cha ? I mean you have to, because you feel that their is to much at stake on your side not to. 

Sadly you on the left do this in hopes that you will win, and this in hopes that the American people will just capitualte, because they are as ignorant as you wish for them to be, but in this your game is then revealed so very easily. In fact it is a game that the people have now stood up against by eating at Chic-Fil-A on that historic day of the awakening.


----------



## Samson

midcan5 said:


> Long live intolerance and disrespect for others, may the intolerant hold hands in their un-American disrespect for people who only want equal rights under the law. Rights that many of these same Americans fought for, now denied. Long live hatred of the other. Take a bow America or stay seated you've sunk low under religious bigotry.



Many Americans fought for same-sex marriage?



Really.

You oughta go into your local VFW and poll the membership.


----------



## Ravi

beagle9 said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> 
> Chic-Fil-A is making history only by embarrassing itself by being on the wrong side of the Constitution, as are those who support the companys efforts to deny citizens equal protection of the law.
> 
> Indeed, the 14th Amendment stands as a bulwark against the ignorance and hate of fearful citizens.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Try telling this to the millions who came out in support of what Chic-Fil-A said, and I bet they knew that they were in their rights to do what they did in support of, just as Chic-Fil-A knew that it was in it's rights as well the day in which they had spoken what they said also. You know what I love the most about this, is that Chic-Fil-A isn't tied to the government so much so, that the left could have immediately used the governments crushing power on them, just as they have done upon the Boy Scouts, and with Prayer in the Public Schools, Nativity scenes taken down in the public square, Crosses/Crucifixes removed from government sponsored graveyards, courthouses and etc., the annual Whitehouse "Christmas Tree" lighting and tree itself right now under attack as we speak, and the list just keeps getting biger and bigger everyday.
> 
> Just because you on the left want to say that they were in the wrong, doesn't mean that they were, but if you can get by with convincing people that they were in the wrong (even though they weren't), and this by saying so out of thin air in order to somehow get by with this accusing of the chain and it's supporters of being in the wrong, then you will go there everytime won't cha ? I mean you have to, because you feel that their is to much at stake on your side not to.
> 
> Sadly you on the left do this in hopes that you will win, and this in hopes that the American people will just capitualte, because they are as ignorant as you wish for them to be, but in this your game is then revealed so very easily. In fact it is a game that the people have now stood up against by eating at Chic-Fil-A on that historic day of the awakening.
Click to expand...


Yes, they were within their rights to come out and support bigotry in a big way. Historically, even!


----------



## beagle9

Ravi said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> 
> Chic-Fil-A is making history only by embarrassing itself by being on the wrong side of the Constitution, as are those who support the companys efforts to deny citizens equal protection of the law.
> 
> Indeed, the 14th Amendment stands as a bulwark against the ignorance and hate of fearful citizens.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Try telling this to the millions who came out in support of what Chic-Fil-A said, and I bet they knew that they were in their rights to do what they did in support of, just as Chic-Fil-A knew that it was in it's rights as well the day in which they had spoken what they said also. You know what I love the most about this, is that Chic-Fil-A isn't tied to the government so much so, that the left could have immediately used the governments crushing power on them, just as they have done upon the Boy Scouts, and with Prayer in the Public Schools, Nativity scenes taken down in the public square, Crosses/Crucifixes removed from government sponsored graveyards, courthouses and etc., the annual Whitehouse "Christmas Tree" lighting and tree itself right now under attack as we speak, and the list just keeps getting biger and bigger everyday.
> 
> Just because you on the left want to say that they were in the wrong, doesn't mean that they were, but if you can get by with convincing people that they were in the wrong (even though they weren't), and this by saying so out of thin air in order to somehow get by with this accusing of the chain and it's supporters of being in the wrong, then you will go there everytime won't cha ? I mean you have to, because you feel that their is to much at stake on your side not to.
> 
> Sadly you on the left do this in hopes that you will win, and this in hopes that the American people will just capitualte, because they are as ignorant as you wish for them to be, but in this your game is then revealed so very easily. In fact it is a game that the people have now stood up against by eating at Chic-Fil-A on that historic day of the awakening.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Yes, they were within their rights to come out and support bigotry in a big way. Historically, even!
Click to expand...

Is it not being a bigot also, to be intolerant of your Christian brothers and sisters in America Ravi ?

It apears that everyone needs to go to their corners and figure it all back out, because everyone is wrong when you use the word bigot against another, because this word cuts like a sword having two edges always.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones

OODA_Loop said:


> midcan5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Long live intolerance and disrespect for others, may the intolerant hold hands in their un-American disrespect for people who only want equal rights under the law. Rights that many of these same Americans fought for, now denied. Long live hatred of the other. Take a bow America or stay seated you've sunk low under religious bigotry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> its Federal law ?
Click to expand...


Constitutional case law, to deny same-sex couples equal access to marriage is a violation of the 14th Amendments Equal Protection Clause. See: _Perry v. Brown._


----------



## The Gadfly

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> midcan5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Long live intolerance and disrespect for others, may the intolerant hold hands in their un-American disrespect for people who only want equal rights under the law. Rights that many of these same Americans fought for, now denied. Long live hatred of the other. Take a bow America or stay seated you've sunk low under religious bigotry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> its Federal law ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Constitutional case law, to deny same-sex couples equal access to marriage is a violation of the 14th Amendments Equal Protection Clause. See: _Perry v. Brown._
Click to expand...


Nice attempt at deflection. First of all, the real rights in question here, the ones the liberal democrat mayors of Washington D.C. Boston, Chicago, and San Francisco very publicly (and in their official capacity, no less)threatened to violate, are the ones granted by the First Amendment, NOT the Fourteenth. Specifically, as you damn well know,* even the CEO of a business has the right to state his personal religious convictions without reprisal or threat of reprisal from elected officials misusing governmental power in violation of the Constitution, *(and possibly even local and state zoning laws). Second, a corporation is a legal person, and also has the constitutional right to lobby government, or contribute to organizations that lobby government, EVEN IN SUPPORT OF A POSITION RULED BY A FEDERAL COURT TO BE UNCONSTITUTIONAL, without reprisal or threat of reprisal by public officials who disagree with the lobbying organization's position(s). Incidentally, Please cite the SCOTUS ruling that "denying gays the right to marry is unconstitutional". 

It is in no way "unlawful", nor is it "unconstitutional", for any person or corporation to advocate a point of view contrary to that of gays, the democrat party, liberals, or anyone else, as I am certain you are perfectly well aware. Chick-fil-A and Mr. Cathy have violated no law, nor have they violated the constitution. There is no thing as "Thoughtcrime" here in America, no matter how much the Left wishes there to be, and there is no violation of law in protected speech or advocacy that violates liberal orthodoxy or the democrat party line, no matter how much democrats want there to be. I do believe, however, that* it IS both unlawful and unconstitutional for a public official to threaten to deny a person or corporation the right to do business in his/her jurisdiction based on that person or corporation's exercise of constitutionally protected speech and religious freedom*. Sorry, counselor, but the American people (and court precedents!) have spoken very clearly, and YOU ARE OVERRULED. NOW SIT DOWN!


----------



## The Gadfly

midcan5 said:


> Long live intolerance and disrespect for others, may the intolerant hold hands in their un-American disrespect for people who only want equal rights under the law. *Rights that many of these same Americans fought for, now denied*. Long live hatred of the other. Take a bow America or stay seated you've sunk low under religious bigotry.



You mean the right of freedom of speech, and freedom of religion, especially if exercised by Christians? That's what the liberal mayors of Boston, Washington D.C., Chicago, and San Francisco used the power of their elected office to attempt to trample on; that's what the left wants to stamp out, in the name of Political Correctness and the Stalinist ideology that goes with it; and that's what the American people rose up in their righteous indignation to defend. Your side picked this fight for partisan advantage, tried to abuse the power of government to muzzle a business owner simply for saying something the Left did not like, and the American people overwhelmingly put a boot in the Left's collective arse for it! Don't like that? Cry me a river!


----------



## Indofred

beagle9 said:


> sending a strong message to those who think that the American voters will just lay silent anymore, :



I don't think gay people want them to lay silent.
They probably want then to moan quite a lot and shout things like, "Harder", "more", "I'm cumming" and "give it to me, big boy".


----------



## OohPooPahDoo

beagle9 said:


> Today Chic-Fil-A made history, and so does the power of facebook by staging a support Chic-Fil-A day, where thousands upon thousands turned out in support for the chicken sandwich franchise, thus sending a strong message to those who think that the American voters will just lay silent anymore, when infact they (the boycotters) have another thought coming for sure on that note, because the sleeping giant has once again been awoken.
> 
> Today in many states where Chic-Fil-A is located, people came out by the thousands in support of the resteraunt chain, causing traffic jams and flooding in ajoining parking lots and more. It was all due mainly in support of the chain and it's personal right to make a statement, and this when asked about it's values and morals as an American business that is run on those values and morals. It then caused an uprising or uproar amongst a minority of Americans when answered, for whom thought that they could afterwards take on the chain by calling for a boycott of it, but the Americans who support the chain weren't having any of it, so they came out in support of the chain today big time, in one of the biggest (counter boycott) moves the nation has seen in a long time. I have a friend who called me and said his wife waited in line for two hours today, but it was worth the wait no matter he said that she said. My wife just came from up town around 8:00 o'clock PM evening time, and she said that the lines were still long and the chain flooded with supporters still at 8:00 o'clock. It was strong in support of all day long and into the night. I wonder how the Media will cover it ? Lets see who they (the media) really belongs to as well in the situation.
> 
> I bet this is what will happen to Obama this election, so he had better get ready for the storm, even though it won't help him none otherwise to get ready and counter the Americans on the same views and ideals in which they have had for Chic-Fil-A, and this especially so if the same turn out happens with this election, that also happened with Chic-Fil-A today. WOW!



Awesome. a bunch of fast food eating Chrisians came out to voice their hatred of gay marriage by stuffing a bunch of corporatized greasy fried chikcen down their pie holes. Thanks for the information.


----------



## OODA_Loop

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Constitutional case law, to deny same-sex couples equal access to marriage is a violation of the 14th Amendments Equal Protection Clause. See: _Perry v. Brown._



State level.

Federal law says its a man and woman and other states dont have to acknowledge the marriage should other states allow it.


----------



## midcan5

Samson said:


> midcan5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Long live intolerance and disrespect for others, may the intolerant hold hands in their un-American disrespect for people who only want equal rights under the law. Rights that many of these same Americans fought for, now denied. Long live hatred of the other. Take a bow America or stay seated you've sunk low under religious bigotry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Many Americans fought for same-sex marriage?
> 
> 
> 
> Really.
> 
> You oughta go into your local VFW and poll the membership.
Click to expand...


So equal rights are not a goal, or is reading comprehension not one of your strong suits? As a vet and knowing many, we all served, no one told any of us that the rights and freedoms we fought for were religious based. Grow up sometime.


----------



## mal

Ravi said:


> Rozman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I guess it's cool that people applaud intolerance....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well when it comes to gays they have no tolerance for
> people and their religious beliefs.Everyone has to be careful
> of the gays feelings and there it ends.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Good point. Those damn Negroes never had any tolerance for the fucked up beliefs of the slave owners either.
Click to expand...


Black pastors group launches anti-Obama campaign around gay marriage &#8211; CNN Belief Blog - CNN.com Blogs

^Those Blacks agree with the head of Chick-fil-A...

Gonna Attack them Ravir?...



peace...


----------



## beagle9

mal said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Rozman said:
> 
> 
> 
> Well when it comes to gays they have no tolerance for
> people and their religious beliefs.Everyone has to be careful
> of the gays feelings and there it ends.
> 
> 
> 
> Good point. Those damn Negroes never had any tolerance for the fucked up beliefs of the slave owners either.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Black pastors group launches anti-Obama campaign around gay marriage &#8211; CNN Belief Blog - CNN.com Blogs
> 
> ^Those Blacks agree with the head of Chick-fil-A...
> 
> Gonna Attack them Ravir?...
> 
> 
> 
> peace...
Click to expand...

Those black pastors are all uncle tom's according to the black code ya know, so she will leave them for now, because by the code in which they go by, it already knows how to deal with those kinds on down the road. These pastors are dangerously destroying black unity is what is thought of them, even though fighting for something in which they strongly believe in, and the ones who are gainst them also do, but it still don't matter because the numbers is the name of the game these days, not morals and decency anymore. 

This has been a problem for the blacks in many ways, where as they can't seperate along moral lines or any kind of lines within their group persae, and this acording to those who will never allow that to happen if at all possible (hold the lines no matter what you see), because they fear that if the numbers don't remain strong enough in the lines, then they will be pushed back into slavery or something like it, so otherwise they have to bring everyone that is black regardless of character or morals on board the departing train to the battle fronts with them, so as to apear or become a unified black people (strong in numbers), and this no matter what in order to remain strong along the lines. 

If they don't, then they feel that they will be crused and pushed back 100's of years if they allow this break to happen (a split along thel lines) or any other lines that to evolve on the battle field, and this according to some who are in strong leadership positions now, and that adocates the strength in numbers over any other issue that to arise amongst them now or in the near future.

It was seen against Herman Cain when running for President, and it will be seen yet again real soon against these Pastors.


----------



## beagle9

OohPooPahDoo said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Today Chic-Fil-A made history, and so does the power of facebook by staging a support Chic-Fil-A day, where thousands upon thousands turned out in support for the chicken sandwich franchise, thus sending a strong message to those who think that the American voters will just lay silent anymore, when infact they (the boycotters) have another thought coming for sure on that note, because the sleeping giant has once again been awoken.
> 
> Today in many states where Chic-Fil-A is located, people came out by the thousands in support of the resteraunt chain, causing traffic jams and flooding in ajoining parking lots and more. It was all due mainly in support of the chain and it's personal right to make a statement, and this when asked about it's values and morals as an American business that is run on those values and morals. It then caused an uprising or uproar amongst a minority of Americans when answered, for whom thought that they could afterwards take on the chain by calling for a boycott of it, but the Americans who support the chain weren't having any of it, so they came out in support of the chain today big time, in one of the biggest (counter boycott) moves the nation has seen in a long time. I have a friend who called me and said his wife waited in line for two hours today, but it was worth the wait no matter he said that she said. My wife just came from up town around 8:00 o'clock PM evening time, and she said that the lines were still long and the chain flooded with supporters still at 8:00 o'clock. It was strong in support of all day long and into the night. I wonder how the Media will cover it ? Lets see who they (the media) really belongs to as well in the situation.
> 
> I bet this is what will happen to Obama this election, so he had better get ready for the storm, even though it won't help him none otherwise to get ready and counter the Americans on the same views and ideals in which they have had for Chic-Fil-A, and this especially so if the same turn out happens with this election, that also happened with Chic-Fil-A today. WOW!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Awesome. a bunch of fast food eating Chrisians came out to voice their hatred of gay marriage by stuffing a bunch of corporatized greasy fried chikcen down their pie holes. Thanks for the information.
Click to expand...

The way your pic looks up there, I'd swear you laid your eyes on one of them big fat greasy piecs of good ole frid chicken, you know the piece that one of them thar supporters was eating, so where were you on the outside looking in ?...LOL


----------



## Katzndogz

Contrary to what liberals say, black people do not see gay rights as the same sort of civil rights denied to them.  They never did.   Saying that gays suffer the same kind of discrimination as that endured by blacks is an idea that came almost exclusively from white liberals.


----------



## beagle9

Katzndogz said:


> Contrary to what liberals say, black people do not see gay rights as the same sort of civil rights denied to them.  They never did.   Saying that gays suffer the same kind of discrimination as that endured by blacks is an idea that came almost exclusively from white liberals.


Yes and this has been the trouble with the way that the feds have handled the whole situation involving Civil Rights and such over time, where as they left the door wide open for almost anyone with a cause, to then figure that they could attach themselves also with the Civil Rights Movement, and to then claim civil rights violations against their cause under the act as well. It has been a major fail of the federal government, when they allowed this door to be left wide open to these kinds of highjackings, in which have since taken shape over time within the act itself, and for which has been broadened to having a total inclusion over time of various causes that strengthen the numbers, and therefore ultimately the entire act itself, and this by alowance of these inclusions over time.


----------



## Ravi

beagle9 said:


> mal said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good point. Those damn Negroes never had any tolerance for the fucked up beliefs of the slave owners either.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Black pastors group launches anti-Obama campaign around gay marriage  CNN Belief Blog - CNN.com Blogs
> 
> ^Those Blacks agree with the head of Chick-fil-A...
> 
> Gonna Attack them Ravir?...
> 
> 
> 
> peace...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Those black pastors are all uncle tom's according to the black code ya know, so she will leave them for now, because by the code in which they go by, it already knows how to deal with those kinds on down the road. These pastors are dangerously destroying black unity is what is thought of them, even though fighting for something in which they strongly believe in, and the ones who are gainst them also do, but it still don't matter because the numbers is the name of the game these days, not morals and decency anymore.
> 
> This has been a problem for the blacks in many ways, where as they can't seperate along moral lines or any kind of lines within their group persae, and this acording to those who will never allow that to happen if at all possible (hold the lines no matter what you see), because they fear that if the numbers don't remain strong enough in the lines, then they will be pushed back into slavery or something like it, so otherwise they have to bring everyone that is black regardless of character or morals on board the departing train to the battle fronts with them, so as to apear or become a unified black people (strong in numbers), and this no matter what in order to remain strong along the lines.
> 
> If they don't, then they feel that they will be crused and pushed back 100's of years if they allow this break to happen (a split along thel lines) or any other lines that to evolve on the battle field, and this according to some who are in strong leadership positions now, and that adocates the strength in numbers over any other issue that to arise amongst them now or in the near future.
> 
> It was seen against Herman Cain when running for President, and it will be seen yet again real soon against these Pastors.
Click to expand...

The black pastors are just as bigoted as Cathy. With even less reason.


----------



## beagle9

Ravi said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mal said:
> 
> 
> 
> Black pastors group launches anti-Obama campaign around gay marriage &#8211; CNN Belief Blog - CNN.com Blogs
> 
> ^Those Blacks agree with the head of Chick-fil-A...
> 
> Gonna Attack them Ravir?...
> 
> 
> 
> peace...
> 
> 
> 
> Those black pastors are all uncle tom's according to the black code ya know, so she will leave them for now, because by the code in which they go by, it already knows how to deal with those kinds on down the road. These pastors are dangerously destroying black unity is what is thought of them, even though fighting for something in which they strongly believe in, and the ones who are gainst them also do, but it still don't matter because the numbers is the name of the game these days, not morals and decency anymore.
> 
> This has been a problem for the blacks in many ways, where as they can't seperate along moral lines or any kind of lines within their group persae, and this acording to those who will never allow that to happen if at all possible (hold the lines no matter what you see), because they fear that if the numbers don't remain strong enough in the lines, then they will be pushed back into slavery or something like it, so otherwise they have to bring everyone that is black regardless of character or morals on board the departing train to the battle fronts with them, so as to apear or become a unified black people (strong in numbers), and this no matter what in order to remain strong along the lines.
> 
> If they don't, then they feel that they will be crused and pushed back 100's of years if they allow this break to happen (a split along thel lines) or any other lines that to evolve on the battle field, and this according to some who are in strong leadership positions now, and that adocates the strength in numbers over any other issue that to arise amongst them now or in the near future.
> 
> It was seen against Herman Cain when running for President, and it will be seen yet again real soon against these Pastors.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The black pastors are just as bigoted as Cathy. With even less reason.
Click to expand...

I knew you'd dis-own them quickly Ravi (never understanding their long standing position on the matter), now how did I know this ya reckon?


----------



## Ravi

beagle9 said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Those black pastors are all uncle tom's according to the black code ya know, so she will leave them for now, because by the code in which they go by, it already knows how to deal with those kinds on down the road. These pastors are dangerously destroying black unity is what is thought of them, even though fighting for something in which they strongly believe in, and the ones who are gainst them also do, but it still don't matter because the numbers is the name of the game these days, not morals and decency anymore.
> 
> This has been a problem for the blacks in many ways, where as they can't seperate along moral lines or any kind of lines within their group persae, and this acording to those who will never allow that to happen if at all possible (hold the lines no matter what you see), because they fear that if the numbers don't remain strong enough in the lines, then they will be pushed back into slavery or something like it, so otherwise they have to bring everyone that is black regardless of character or morals on board the departing train to the battle fronts with them, so as to apear or become a unified black people (strong in numbers), and this no matter what in order to remain strong along the lines.
> 
> If they don't, then they feel that they will be crused and pushed back 100's of years if they allow this break to happen (a split along thel lines) or any other lines that to evolve on the battle field, and this according to some who are in strong leadership positions now, and that adocates the strength in numbers over any other issue that to arise amongst them now or in the near future.
> 
> It was seen against Herman Cain when running for President, and it will be seen yet again real soon against these Pastors.
> 
> 
> 
> The black pastors are just as bigoted as Cathy. With even less reason.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I knew you'd dis-own then quickly Ravi (never understanding their long standing position on the matter), now how did I know this ya reckon?
Click to expand...

I've said it all along.

Not my fault that you are stupid and jump to conclusions.

Bigotry is bigotry.


----------



## beagle9

Ravi said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> The black pastors are just as bigoted as Cathy. With even less reason.
> 
> 
> 
> I knew you'd dis-own then quickly Ravi (never understanding their long standing position on the matter), now how did I know this ya reckon?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I've said it all along.
> 
> Not my fault that you are stupid and jump to conclusions.
> 
> Bigotry is bigotry.
Click to expand...

You sure like to throw that word around alot, but do you really understand the differences found in it all ? Do you really know what a real bigot is ravi ? I don't think so, and this is why you are so loose lipped with the word, and thus always applying it to everything or anyone that you disagree with. How convienant the word is for you, that you use it in these ways like you do huh ?


----------



## Ravi

You said I wouldn't comment on the black pastors' bigotry. And when I did you claimed that you predicted that I would throw them under the bus.

You are a dishonest person.


----------



## beagle9

Ravi said:


> You said I wouldn't comment on the black pastors' bigotry. And when I did you claimed that you predicted that I would throw them under the bus.
> 
> You are a dishonest person.


Say WHAT ? I said you wouldn't comment on their bigotry, uhhh nope you must be talking about another, because I only commented once you called them bigots, and then threw them under the bus.


----------



## JohnA

Indofred said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> sending a strong message to those who think that the American voters will just lay silent anymore, :
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think gay people want them to lay silent.
> They probably want then to moan quite a lot and shout things like, "Harder", "more", "I'm cumming" and "give it to me, big boy
Click to expand...


----------



## JohnA

OODA_Loop said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> 
> Constitutional case law, to deny same-sex couples equal access to marriage is a violation of the 14th Amendment&#8217;s Equal Protection Clause. See: _Perry v. Brown._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> State level.
> 
> Federal law says its a man and woman and other states dont have to acknowledge the marriage should other states allow it.
Click to expand...



 who signed that? why your good   democratic old boy  slick willy .

Defense of Marriage Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


. Section 3 of DOMA codifies the *non-recognition *of same-sex marriage for all federal purposes, including insurance benefits for government employees, Social Security survivors' benefits, and the filing of joint tax returns.


----------



## ima

Chick-Filled-Ass chicken is an embarrassment to the US.


----------



## jillian

Ravi said:


> I guess it's cool that people applaud intolerance....



i wonder how he'd feel if an atheist owner of a chain of stores said he didn't want money from christians.

never mind.. we already know.

can you say dixie chicks?


----------



## ima

jillian said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I guess it's cool that people applaud intolerance....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i wonder how he'd feel if an atheist owner of a chain of stores said he didn't want money from christians.
> 
> never mind.. we already know.
> 
> can you say dixie chicks?
Click to expand...


Atheists aren't dumb enough to say that.

Dixie Chicks are doing fine, not to worry.


----------



## PLYMCO_PILGRIM

nitroz said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nitroz said:
> 
> 
> 
> They are making history, allright.
> 
> It's a first for America's politics to be centered on fried chicken, hate, and religious hypocrisy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Or they simply respect Federal law enacted by Clinton which codified that marriage is between one man and a woman.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> A law/Ban that has been ruled unconstitutional by the supreme court.
> Gay Marriage Ban DOMA Ruled Unconstitutional In Connecticut Case
> Prop 8 backers ask Supreme Court to review gay marriage ban - U.S. News
> California Proposition 8 same-sex-marriage ban ruled unconstitutional - The Washington Post
> Federal court strikes down key part of federal law banning same-sex marriage - CNN
> Judge rules against Defense of Marriage Act | Strange Bedfellows  Politics News - seattlepi.com
> Judge: Texas Ban On Gay Marriage Unconstitutional | NBC 5 Dallas-Fort Worth
> 
> 
> 
> A law that only has religious backing, Imposing their beliefs on others.
> [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2euDIMg20w]US pastor's anti-gay sermon goes viral - YouTube[/ame]
> [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pRgZ8hfhr1s]Extreme Religious Right Hate Exposed: Target Obama - YouTube[/ame]
> Religious Right Targets Maine & Marriage Equality with Money, Anti-Gay Swat Teams and Reprise of Prop-8
> 
> 
> Some pathetic excuse of a "law".
Click to expand...


While I support gay marriage you have an error, the supreme court has not done as you claim.   Those are not SCOTUS cases.  

Also, many people on our side of the issue showed hypocricy and bigotry with their anti-muslim/anti-christian/anti-religious comments and attitudes.    Showing a lack of tolerance towards muslims/christians who believe that marriage is between one man and one woman is as bad as showing a lack of tolerance towards people who do not believe this way.


----------



## ConzHateUSA

jillian said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I guess it's cool that people applaud intolerance....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i wonder how he'd feel if an atheist owner of a chain of stores said he didn't want money from christians.
> 
> never mind.. we already know.
> 
> can you say dixie chicks?
Click to expand...


my fave hypocrisy was that tool oreilly saying it was unfair to boycott, is that the same oreilly who wanted to boycott pepsi for hiring Ludacris?


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> Chick-Filled-Ass chicken is an embarrassment to the US.


According to your rep power here, you are an embarrasment to yourself...


----------



## ConzHateUSA

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Chick-Filled-Ass chicken is an embarrassment to the US.
> 
> 
> 
> According to your rep power here, you are an embarrasment to yourself...
Click to expand...


Rep power, really?

An american corp goes out of their way to donate to entities that dehumanize Gay people, and you are worried about some silly little button on this message board?

Your post might well be the epitome post as to why America will fail and crumble...as it is doing now.


----------



## beagle9

ConzHateUSA said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I guess it's cool that people applaud intolerance....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i wonder how he'd feel if an atheist owner of a chain of stores said he didn't want money from christians.
> 
> never mind.. we already know.
> 
> can you say dixie chicks?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> my fave hypocrisy was that tool oreilly saying it was unfair to boycott, is that the same oreilly who wanted to boycott pepsi for hiring Ludacris?
Click to expand...

Give us a link to Orielly actually wanting Pepsi "boycotted" over Ludicris please...Thanks


----------



## ConzHateUSA

beagle9 said:


> ConzHateUSA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jillian said:
> 
> 
> 
> i wonder how he'd feel if an atheist owner of a chain of stores said he didn't want money from christians.
> 
> never mind.. we already know.
> 
> can you say dixie chicks?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> my fave hypocrisy was that tool oreilly saying it was unfair to boycott, is that the same oreilly who wanted to boycott pepsi for hiring Ludacris?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Give us a link to Orielly actually wanting Pepsi "boycotted" over Ludicris please...Thanks
Click to expand...


there are endless links, usually i wont even acknowledge the existence of a rightwing lying hypocrite racist, but here ya go

Boycott Watch - Bill O'Reilly Launches Pepsi Boycott After Pepsi Decides To Use Rapper Ludacris In Adds.

do you really want to change history yet again?

why do you hate Black people?  why do you hate Gay people? why do you hate Asian People?


----------



## Luddly Neddite

Chick fil a is NOT making history. What a silly thing to say. There have been plenty  of others who have stated their hatred and fear in a very public way. 

Ever hear of the Westboro idiots?

This is just one more example of right wing sharia law = the desire or attempt to make law based on religion.


----------



## beagle9

ConzHateUSA said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Chick-Filled-Ass chicken is an embarrassment to the US.
> 
> 
> 
> According to your rep power here, you are an embarrasment to yourself...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Rep power, really?
> 
> An american corp goes out of their way to donate to entities that dehumanize Gay people, and you are worried about some silly little button on this message board?
> 
> Your post might well be the epitome post as to why America will fail and crumble...as it is doing now.
Click to expand...

We know why America is failing, and it is because of having to many years of this nation asking the good citizens (or) by the feds forcing the good citizens in many cases, to be "tolerant" of specific things (not all things), that have certainly caused this nation to fail over time as a result of. The genie is out of the bottle all the way now, and it will take years to get that genie back into that bottle, and I don't see that ever happening really, or at least not until the Good Lord comes back to claim his people for whom have been ensnared/trapped by the hands of the evil one over time, and this within this world in which we all do struggle to live our daily lives in, and this as best that we can as individuals supporting American people, American family values, American cultures, American religions and most that is good in America, in which we all do support freely and willingly. The forcing us to accept many things has led to the demise of this nation over time, but the culprits surely can't see it, even though many who are or have been the victims over time surely can see it, especially by what has gone on and what is still going on in this nation that affects them directly and/or sometimes indirectly, and this comes alot of times all to their surprise.


----------



## ConzHateUSA

Priceless, we are failing because we are TOO Tolerant, wow!

this is an example of why the planet laughs at you guys


----------



## beagle9

ConzHateUSA said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ConzHateUSA said:
> 
> 
> 
> my fave hypocrisy was that tool oreilly saying it was unfair to boycott, is that the same oreilly who wanted to boycott pepsi for hiring Ludacris?
> 
> 
> 
> Give us a link to Orielly actually wanting Pepsi "boycotted" over Ludicris please...Thanks
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> there are endless links, usually i wont even acknowledge the existence of a rightwing lying hypocrite racist, but here ya go
> 
> Boycott Watch - Bill O'Reilly Launches Pepsi Boycott After Pepsi Decides To Use Rapper Ludacris In Adds.
> 
> do you really want to change history yet again?
> 
> why do you hate Black people?  why do you hate Gay people? why do you hate Asian People?
Click to expand...

Because you need me to hate that is why, and this in order to finish your agenda or work your agenda in the ways that you want to against America. This you do for power purposes and not equality purposes. Hec if you didn't have what you called me in your game, then you would be soooo sad, because then you couldn't do your thing in which you love to do in America. 

Hate to disapoint you CONMAN, but I am no hater or racist or any of the things you try and label me as, but you have to do this in order to work your angle on this stuff, in which is a very dishonest angle at best.

Try again, as you have just now been schooled CONMAN.


----------



## beagle9

ConzHateUSA said:


> Priceless, we are failing because we are TOO Tolerant, wow!
> 
> this is an example of why the planet laughs at you guys


What so amazing about this, do you think we should tolerate Jerry Sandusky running loose around our children ? I bet he wanted us to be tolerant of him and his actions, just go ask Penn State who is now cleaning up that mess in which he made. There are good things to tolerate and there are bad things we should never tolerate, but the devil has away these days of breaking us right on down, and thus having people believe that we tolerate almost anything anymore, and that game is either ending or is being found out more and more finally.


----------



## ConzHateUSA

smh


----------



## beagle9

luddly.neddite said:


> Chick fil a is NOT making history. What a silly thing to say. There have been plenty  of others who have stated their hatred and fear in a very public way.
> 
> Ever hear of the Westboro idiots?
> 
> This is just one more example of right wing sharia law = the desire or attempt to make law based on religion.


Who are the newest kids on the block that are here now, and for whom are just now learning the history of this nation and it's American ways, religions and cultures in which we have known, and that have been living in peace for so long now within certain periods that brought about peace for many in America ? Who are the newbies that are now trying to change all of the old ways by forcing their views and ideals above and/or over, and this in order to seek power over, instead of assimilating in like it always should have been and still should be in America ?


----------



## ConzHateUSA

luddly.neddite said:


> Chick fil a is NOT making history. What a silly thing to say. There have been plenty  of others who have stated their hatred and fear in a very public way.
> 
> Ever hear of the Westboro idiots?
> 
> This is just one more example of right wing sharia law = the desire or attempt to make law based on religion.



I fear for my friends and family who are Gay, with the rightwing terrorists coming on strong, killing Sikh's, and others...

When these bigot conz get a hair up their ass to kill someone, they do...that worries me


----------



## Luddly Neddite

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Chick-Filled-Ass chicken is an embarrassment to the US.
> 
> 
> 
> According to your rep power here, you are an embarrasment to yourself...
Click to expand...


Uh, this isn't the junior high choosing up sides for kickball.

Grow up.


----------



## Luddly Neddite

ConzHateUSA said:


> luddly.neddite said:
> 
> 
> 
> Chick fil a is NOT making history. What a silly thing to say. There have been plenty  of others who have stated their hatred and fear in a very public way.
> 
> Ever hear of the Westboro idiots?
> 
> This is just one more example of right wing sharia law = the desire or attempt to make law based on religion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I fear for my friends and family who are Gay, with the rightwing terrorists coming on strong, killing Sikh's, and others...
> 
> When these bigot conz get a hair up their ass to kill someone, they do...that worries me
Click to expand...


KKK types think that Sikhs are Muslims. That's REALLY stupid when you consider that a MUSLIM runs fux. 

That and the gun nuts wanting to be able to carry everywhere -- Churches, schools, restaurants, convenience stores -- soon, there will be NO place where we're safe from these NRA tools.

There is no end to the stupidity of the r. If fux says it, it must be true.


----------



## beagle9

ConzHateUSA said:


> luddly.neddite said:
> 
> 
> 
> Chick fil a is NOT making history. What a silly thing to say. There have been plenty  of others who have stated their hatred and fear in a very public way.
> 
> Ever hear of the Westboro idiots?
> 
> This is just one more example of right wing sharia law = the desire or attempt to make law based on religion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I fear for my friends and family who are Gay, with the rightwing terrorists coming on strong, killing Sikh's, and others...
> 
> When these bigot conz get a hair up their ass to kill someone, they do...that worries me
Click to expand...

Yes violence is never the answer, I'll always agree with that for sure, but there are alot of mentally unstable people (lonewolves) looking for a cause to attach themselves to these days, and when they are successful at joining a cause or a group with a cause or a movement with a cause, then it enpowers them (exactly what they want). 

Now if not detected as a looney quickly, then a loon perp can cause serious harm to any cause out there, and this if and when the mental perp does join a cause or a movement of some sort that is always out there, and yet without being detected as a mental perp when doing so. There are many ways to tell, but people need to return to being very cautious about their members or even friends of the members who think they are close enough in ties to be a member without certifying as a member. 

The way that the perps get close or get into the mainstream, is sort of like the way that people or groups attach themselves to the Civil Rights Cause. It gives strength to their ideology and lifestyles in which they define in their life as good and productive also, and they do this by riding the Civil Rights Act in order to get special protections under the Civil Rights Act or law, even if it wasn't created for them or their groups at all, yet they still attach themselves to it for the strength that it gives them in their cause, especially if successful at doing so when they do this. Nothing wrong with people attaching themselves to causes or groups and  such in America, just as long as it is non-violent, good and productive when they do this in society, but when people do this for other reasons that are violent and very bad, then Houston we have a serious problem in America when this is found to be the case. 

Now this is not to say that all who do this are somehow mental, but it just goes to show upon how in America, that there are people who go in search of a cause or club to join all the time, and then there are always the sucess rates to go by for this sort of thing yet all depending, in which ends up way upwards into the 99.9% range for many when doing so in a non-violent and productive way. It is just up to Americans to either legitimize a cause and it's membership or not to legitimize a cause and it's membership, and this by recognition of or not. 

People who operate a cause, group or club in America, should always be mindful of the perpetrators who want to infiltrate and thus destroy them from the inside out once they get in or try and represent them from the outside (making others think they are members when they are not), and this by committing acts within a groups name, club or association,  in which is associated with a cause or a club etc. and then committing acts that are very bad or even deadly at times when this happens in the name of these causes, groups or associations name.

Might be time to check the membership roles in America, and this by the leaders of these groups, clubs or causes in America, and therefore they should remove from them quickly upon their roles, all the violent speaking radicals or perpetrators who want to commit violence in their names.


----------



## beagle9

luddly.neddite said:


> ConzHateUSA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> luddly.neddite said:
> 
> 
> 
> Chick fil a is NOT making history. What a silly thing to say. There have been plenty  of others who have stated their hatred and fear in a very public way.
> 
> Ever hear of the Westboro idiots?
> 
> This is just one more example of right wing sharia law = the desire or attempt to make law based on religion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I fear for my friends and family who are Gay, with the rightwing terrorists coming on strong, killing Sikh's, and others...
> 
> When these bigot conz get a hair up their ass to kill someone, they do...that worries me
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> KKK types think that Sikhs are Muslims. That's REALLY stupid when you consider that a MUSLIM runs fux.
> 
> That and the gun nuts wanting to be able to carry everywhere -- Churches, schools, restaurants, convenience stores -- soon, there will be NO place where we're safe from these NRA tools.
> 
> There is no end to the stupidity of the r. If fux says it, it must be true.
Click to expand...

Blaming the NRA as the enemy is just pure stupid, where as all that you have to do, is watch a little reality TV now & again, especailly all the prison lock up shows on MSNBC, and you will see easily from these shows who the real perps are. 

One thing about the camera/movie projector, it don't lie.

It is all just a war or words right now that is going on, but what will it become next if the nation keeps operating by way of these words that are being spoken in these ways anymore I do wonder ?


----------



## beagle9

luddly.neddite said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Chick-Filled-Ass chicken is an embarrassment to the US.
> 
> 
> 
> According to your rep power here, you are an embarrasment to yourself...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Uh, this isn't the junior high choosing up sides for kickball.
> 
> Grow up.
Click to expand...

Oh so my comment was childlike in your opinion, but his cursing and lame accusation was stellar and a Harvard performance according to you on his part ?

Your just to rediculous to take seriously ya know that ?


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> luddly.neddite said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> According to your rep power here, you are an embarrasment to yourself...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uh, this isn't the junior high choosing up sides for kickball.
> 
> Grow up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh so my comment was childlike in your opinion, but his cursing and lame accusation was stellar and a Harvard performance according to you on his part ?
> 
> Your just to rediculous to take seriously ya know that ?
Click to expand...


Chick-Filled-Ass chicken is bad for you to start with, and now it's homophobic and proud of it.


----------



## ConzHateUSA

beagle9 said:


> luddly.neddite said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> According to your rep power here, you are an embarrasment to yourself...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uh, this isn't the junior high choosing up sides for kickball.
> 
> Grow up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh so my comment was childlike in your opinion, but his cursing and lame accusation was stellar and a Harvard performance according to you on his part ?
> 
> Your just to rediculous to take seriously ya know that ?
Click to expand...


planet earth laughs at all rightwingers

dont you know that yet?


----------



## gallantwarrior

ConzHateUSA said:


> luddly.neddite said:
> 
> 
> 
> Chick fil a is NOT making history. What a silly thing to say. There have been plenty  of others who have stated their hatred and fear in a very public way.
> 
> Ever hear of the Westboro idiots?
> 
> This is just one more example of right wing sharia law = the desire or attempt to make law based on religion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I fear for my friends and family who are Gay, with the rightwing terrorists coming on strong, killing Sikh's, and others...
> 
> When these bigot conz get a hair up their ass to kill someone, they do...that worries me
Click to expand...


Do you have a link to any story where rightwing terrorists have been killing Sikh's, gays, or anyone else?  I'd appreciate the information.


----------



## ConzHateUSA

gallantwarrior said:


> ConzHateUSA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> luddly.neddite said:
> 
> 
> 
> Chick fil a is NOT making history. What a silly thing to say. There have been plenty  of others who have stated their hatred and fear in a very public way.
> 
> Ever hear of the Westboro idiots?
> 
> This is just one more example of right wing sharia law = the desire or attempt to make law based on religion.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I fear for my friends and family who are Gay, with the rightwing terrorists coming on strong, killing Sikh's, and others...
> 
> When these bigot conz get a hair up their ass to kill someone, they do...that worries me
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you have a link to any story where rightwing terrorists have been killing Sikh's, gays, or anyone else?  I'd appreciate the information.
Click to expand...


Please dont shoot me...I have a family, i am surrounded by coworkers, etc.

(i dont call em employees, kinda demeaning)


----------



## gallantwarrior

ConzHateUSA said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ConzHateUSA said:
> 
> 
> 
> I fear for my friends and family who are Gay, with the rightwing terrorists coming on strong, killing Sikh's, and others...
> 
> When these bigot conz get a hair up their ass to kill someone, they do...that worries me
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have a link to any story where rightwing terrorists have been killing Sikh's, gays, or anyone else?  I'd appreciate the information.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Please dont shoot me...I have a family, i am surrounded by coworkers, etc.
> 
> (i dont call em employees, kinda demeaning)
Click to expand...


...Still waiting for that link, thanks.


----------



## ConzHateUSA

gallantwarrior said:


> ConzHateUSA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have a link to any story where rightwing terrorists have been killing Sikh's, gays, or anyone else?  I'd appreciate the information.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please dont shoot me...I have a family, i am surrounded by coworkers, etc.
> 
> (i dont call em employees, kinda demeaning)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ...Still waiting for that link, thanks.
Click to expand...


What will you do with Blacks and Gays when you take over completely, will you kill all of them or will you just take away their right to vote?


----------



## beagle9

ConzHateUSA said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ConzHateUSA said:
> 
> 
> 
> Please dont shoot me...I have a family, i am surrounded by coworkers, etc.
> 
> (i dont call em employees, kinda demeaning)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...Still waiting for that link, thanks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What will you do with Blacks and Gays when you take over completely, will you kill all of them or will you just take away their right to vote?
Click to expand...

The same could also be asked of you, otherwise the question could be posed or turned around easily to say that "whites" instead of the gays and blacks, are also easily found to be the non-aggressors in any given situation as well, and therefore blacks or gays could be found as being now the ones who seek to kill the whites and/or ultimately take away their rights and ability to unify and/or vote once gain power over them.  Do you think the question doesn't, couldn't or wouldn't apply to you also? It very well could..

How about read it that way just one time, because it all depends on what or how anyone or any group is thinking at any given time on these sorts of things, in which ultimately determins the seriousness of the problem upon review, or within it all just depending on and you know it.


----------



## beagle9

ConzHateUSA said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ConzHateUSA said:
> 
> 
> 
> Please dont shoot me...I have a family, i am surrounded by coworkers, etc.
> 
> (i dont call em employees, kinda demeaning)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...Still waiting for that link, thanks.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What will you do with Blacks and Gays when you take over completely, will you kill all of them or will you just take away their right to vote?
Click to expand...

Why does it have to be black and gays together in your words spoken, as being the victims always in America? Is their some kind of unity amongst these groups in which they draw from each other on any issue like this one is, and so it is felt that if the blacks get into deep water, well the gays are going to be right there with them bailing water also ?


----------



## ConzHateUSA

you are confused, so much so you are even confusing me a little

Baggers hate Gays, Blacks, Latinos, etc...Muslims, Jews, Asians, etc.

got that?


----------



## beagle9

ConzHateUSA said:


> you are confused, so much so you are even confusing me a little
> 
> Baggers hate Gays, Blacks, Latinos, etc...Muslims, Jews, Asians, etc.
> 
> got that?


What is a bagger ? Do you think that gays, blacks, latino's and others are without the ability to hate each other at any given time in life, and this be it as a group verses group or individuals verses individuals so on and so forth ? Whites don't have the patten on hatred in the world, but people like you want the world to believe that they do, but why ? What is your goal finally, to over come the whites someday, and this by the way that you accuse and therefore hate so badly the whites as a race like you do ? You don't fool anyone ya know, as it is learned by your words spoken, along with your baseless, blanketing accusations as you like to throw around like a dirty towel in the room. Got that Conman ?


----------



## ConzHateUSA

beagle9 said:


> ConzHateUSA said:
> 
> 
> 
> you are confused, so much so you are even confusing me a little
> 
> Baggers hate Gays, Blacks, Latinos, etc...Muslims, Jews, Asians, etc.
> 
> got that?
> 
> 
> 
> What is a bagger ? Do you think that gays, blacks, latino's and others are without the ability to hate each other at any given time in life, and this be it as a group verses group or individuals verses individuals so on and so forth ? Whites don't have the patten on hatred in the world, but people like you want the world to believe that they do, but why ? What is your goal finally, to over come the whites someday, and this by the way that you accuse and therefore hate so badly the whites as a race like you do ? You don't fool anyone ya know, as it is learned by your words spoken, along with your baseless, blanketing accusations as you like to throw around like a dirty towel in the room. Got that Conman ?
Click to expand...


I will take a stab at this for you, you might actually learn something

A. minorities cant be racists, not my rules, just the facts, but they can be and some are bigots

B. yes, some minority groups show bigotry toward other minority groups, been known to happen

C. white tea party racists, i.e. baggers, are the most dangerous as they have the power of the govt behind them


----------



## beagle9

ConzHateUSA said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ConzHateUSA said:
> 
> 
> 
> you are confused, so much so you are even confusing me a little
> 
> Baggers hate Gays, Blacks, Latinos, etc...Muslims, Jews, Asians, etc.
> 
> got that?
> 
> 
> 
> What is a bagger ? Do you think that gays, blacks, latino's and others are without the ability to hate each other at any given time in life, and this be it as a group verses group or individuals verses individuals so on and so forth ? Whites don't have the patten on hatred in the world, but people like you want the world to believe that they do, but why ? What is your goal finally, to over come the whites someday, and this by the way that you accuse and therefore hate so badly the whites as a race like you do ? You don't fool anyone ya know, as it is learned by your words spoken, along with your baseless, blanketing accusations as you like to throw around like a dirty towel in the room. Got that Conman ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I will take a stab at this for you, you might actually learn something
> 
> A. minorities cant be racists, not my rules, just the facts, but they can be and some are bigots
> 
> B. yes, some minority groups show bigotry toward other minority groups, been known to happen
> 
> C. white tea party racists, i.e. baggers, are the most dangerous as they have the power of the govt behind them
Click to expand...

No one has had the power of the federal government behind them (for many years now) more so than the black race has, so don't even compare the baggers with the protetcted status of the black race under the federal government, because it is in no way the same I don't think.

Things might be changing, as they always do, but if the blacks are careful and not mess things up all due to the black racist who are growing in numbers amongst them now, then they will be protected and worked with right on and right on without any problems from the whites in this nation going foward, just as it should be when people are being helped and are trying to unify as Americans in the nation for all to eventually enjoy in peace together. 

White people in general want the blacks to get better in America, and they will be there to help them until they are well and good in America, just as Americans should be doing when helping one another as Americans, but if the black racist activist who hate whites sorely, begin to dominate the situation, then the whites will back off and stop helping the blacks in many ways, and this would happen because of possibly a large number of blacks embracing the black racist radicals who are in and amongst the group, and are trying always to seperate the nation instead of bringing it together as it should be.

Yes there are those among the white race who also do the same, but both amongst these two groups should be isolated upon recognition by each group, in so that the good will prevail over the bad always sooner or later (hopefully sooner). White people aren't fools, so it best not to play them as fools by throwing them all into the same basket, and vice-versa I'm guessing does apply just the same as well with the blacks.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> luddly.neddite said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> According to your rep power here, you are an embarrasment to yourself...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uh, this isn't the junior high choosing up sides for kickball.
> 
> Grow up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Oh so my comment was childlike in your opinion, but his cursing and lame accusation was stellar and a Harvard performance according to you on his part ?
> 
> Your just to rediculous to take seriously ya know that ?
Click to expand...


Like, cmon, people are lining up to buy hate chicken? And these pictures are shown all over the world? We look like a nation of haters who don't believe in personal freedom, and where you can hate others openly. SHEESH!!!


----------



## The Gadfly

ConzHateUSA said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ConzHateUSA said:
> 
> 
> 
> I fear for my friends and family who are Gay, with the rightwing terrorists coming on strong, killing Sikh's, and others...
> 
> When these bigot conz get a hair up their ass to kill someone, they do...that worries me
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have a link to any story where rightwing terrorists have been killing Sikh's, gays, or anyone else?  I'd appreciate the information.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Please dont shoot me...I have a family, i am surrounded by coworkers, etc.
> 
> (i dont call em employees, kinda demeaning)
Click to expand...


Listen,  Drama Queen, if conservatives were the kind of people you claim we are, you'd have been thrown behind the wire or shot long ago. I see more tendencies to statism and totalitarianism on the Left these days, than I have ever seen on the right; (Stalinism and fascism are hardly mutually exclusive, you know). You're just beside yourself with rage, because your own side tried to muzzle speech you didn't like, picked a fight over it, got exposed, and got a thorough rebuke from the majority of Americans. No one in America is going to drag you off to the gulag; but *your* side is not going to do that to *us*, either.


----------



## The Gadfly

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> luddly.neddite said:
> 
> 
> 
> Uh, this isn't the junior high choosing up sides for kickball.
> 
> Grow up.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh so my comment was childlike in your opinion, but his cursing and lame accusation was stellar and a Harvard performance according to you on his part ?
> 
> Your just to rediculous to take seriously ya know that ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Like, cmon, people are lining up to buy hate chicken? And these pictures are shown all over the world? We look like a nation of haters who don't believe in personal freedom, and where you can hate others openly. SHEESH!!!
Click to expand...


No, we look like a nation that allows freedom of speech, expression and religion. Some liberal politicians decided to interfere with Mr. Cathy's right to state his OPINION (which is all he did; nowhere in his remarks do I see any "hate", directly expressed or even implied.) Disagreement with the political agenda of any group, gay or straight, liberal or conservative, is NOT hate. Even if it were, this is not socialist Europe, and even REAL expression of hate is tolerated here (otherwise, some of you on the Left would be in jail). We even let Nazis goose step and "Seig heil!" to their heart's content, and let Communists sing the "Internationale"; hell, you can even burn the flag! You can say whatever you like, only when you act on it to harm others does government intervene. It's called "tolerance"-you should try it sometime!


----------



## beagle9

The Gadfly said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh so my comment was childlike in your opinion, but his cursing and lame accusation was stellar and a Harvard performance according to you on his part ?
> 
> Your just to rediculous to take seriously ya know that ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Like, cmon, people are lining up to buy hate chicken? And these pictures are shown all over the world? We look like a nation of haters who don't believe in personal freedom, and where you can hate others openly. SHEESH!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, we look like a nation that allows freedom of speech, expression and religion. Some liberal politicians decided to interfere with Mr. Cathy's right to state his OPINION (which is all he did; nowhere in his remarks do I see any "hate", directly expressed or even implied.) Disagreement with the political agenda of any group, gay or straight, liberal or conservative, is NOT hate. Even if it were, this is not socialist Europe, and even REAL expression of hate is tolerated here (otherwise, some of you on the Left would be in jail). We even let Nazis goose step and "Seig heil!" to their heart's content, and let Communists sing the "Internationale"; hell, you can even burn the flag! You can say whatever you like, only when you act on it to harm others does government intervene. It's called "tolerance"-you should try it sometime!
Click to expand...

Funny how they only see it their way now (one way) and not in other ways, otherwise by not having tolerance towards other peoples ways, and especially the ways that have been here far before they began their attacks against the good majority of the peoples ways, in which they have fooled this nation into getting away with putting them down every time they do it now in this nation.

Chic-Fil-A supporters were coming out by a majority against these attacks, and gave a strong showing of rebuke against the left who stage them daily and routinely now in this nation, especially against the majority whom are only trying to keep what they have had for the longest time in the nation, in which has worked so well for them and their families for all this time now.  They (the majority) have had a great nation steeped in freedom and with liberty and justice for all in America until now. Now one side wants it only in their ways anymore, and they want it against the ways of those who have had it by a majority vote for so long now. The one side can't even stand it when the majority speaks anymore, just as it had done in California they can't stand it. The nation is under attack and so is the family within, where as the Chic-Fil-A situation provided the proof out in the open as to how the nation is under attack from within, and then it provided proof by what the majority thinks about the issues surrounding these attacks once they had spoken as a majority, and why these attacks will keep right on coming in the near future again and again if the majority dares to speak up again in this nation in the way that it did.


----------



## JohnA

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> luddly.neddite said:
> 
> 
> 
> Uh, this isn't the junior high choosing up sides for kickball.
> 
> Grow up.
> 
> 
> 
> Oh so my comment was childlike in your opinion, but his cursing and lame accusation was stellar and a Harvard performance according to you on his part ?
> 
> Your just to rediculous to take seriously ya know that ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Like, cmon, people are lining up to buy hate chicken? And these pictures are shown all over the world? We look like a nation of haters who don't believe in personal freedom, and where you can hate others openly. SHEESH!!!
Click to expand...

 where is the hate in chicken ? one mans views on a subject does not the whole company haters make .
 CFI  dost not disciminate against   gays as far as work or  customers and they dont limit the  freedoms  of anybody .the hate  comes from  left wing  wackos like you


----------



## ima

The Gadfly said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh so my comment was childlike in your opinion, but his cursing and lame accusation was stellar and a Harvard performance according to you on his part ?
> 
> Your just to rediculous to take seriously ya know that ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Like, cmon, people are lining up to buy hate chicken? And these pictures are shown all over the world? We look like a nation of haters who don't believe in personal freedom, and where you can hate others openly. SHEESH!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No, we look like a nation that allows freedom of speech, expression and religion. Some liberal politicians decided to interfere with Mr. Cathy's right to state his OPINION (which is all he did; nowhere in his remarks do I see any "hate", directly expressed or even implied.) Disagreement with the political agenda of any group, gay or straight, liberal or conservative, is NOT hate. Even if it were, this is not socialist Europe, and even REAL expression of hate is tolerated here (otherwise, some of you on the Left would be in jail). We even let Nazis goose step and "Seig heil!" to their heart's content, and let Communists sing the "Internationale"; hell, you can even burn the flag! You can say whatever you like, only when you act on it to harm others does government intervene. It's called "tolerance"-you should try it sometime!
Click to expand...

Freedom of speech is cool, but Abe Lincoln said it best: "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt."
Religion? You seriously think that Jesus would be hating gays like that and not wanting them to get married?
(from wiki) Hatred (or hate) is a deep and emotional extreme dislike, directed against a certain object or class of objects. The objects of such hatred can vary widely, from inanimate objects to attitudes, animals, oneself or other people, entire groups of people, people in general, existence, or the whole world.


----------



## ima

JohnA said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Oh so my comment was childlike in your opinion, but his cursing and lame accusation was stellar and a Harvard performance according to you on his part ?
> 
> Your just to rediculous to take seriously ya know that ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Like, cmon, people are lining up to buy hate chicken? And these pictures are shown all over the world? We look like a nation of haters who don't believe in personal freedom, and where you can hate others openly. SHEESH!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> where is the hate in chicken ? one mans views on a subject does not the whole company haters make .
> CFI  dost not disciminate against   gays as far as work or  customers and they dont limit the  freedoms  of anybody .the hate  comes from  left wing  wackos like you
Click to expand...

The people are lining to support the guy's hatred for homos. Please get a clue and try again.


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> The Gadfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Like, cmon, people are lining up to buy hate chicken? And these pictures are shown all over the world? We look like a nation of haters who don't believe in personal freedom, and where you can hate others openly. SHEESH!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, we look like a nation that allows freedom of speech, expression and religion. Some liberal politicians decided to interfere with Mr. Cathy's right to state his OPINION (which is all he did; nowhere in his remarks do I see any "hate", directly expressed or even implied.) Disagreement with the political agenda of any group, gay or straight, liberal or conservative, is NOT hate. Even if it were, this is not socialist Europe, and even REAL expression of hate is tolerated here (otherwise, some of you on the Left would be in jail). We even let Nazis goose step and "Seig heil!" to their heart's content, and let Communists sing the "Internationale"; hell, you can even burn the flag! You can say whatever you like, only when you act on it to harm others does government intervene. It's called "tolerance"-you should try it sometime!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Freedom of speech is cool, but Abe Lincoln said it best: "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt."
> Religion? You seriously think that Jesus would be hating gays like that and not wanting them to get married?
> (from wiki) Hatred (or hate) is a deep and emotional extreme dislike, directed against a certain object or class of objects. The objects of such hatred can vary widely, from inanimate objects to attitudes, animals, oneself or other people, entire groups of people, people in general, existence, or the whole world.
Click to expand...

I don't think you want to bring Jesus into this really, at least not before you school yourself in his word first.


----------



## OODA_Loop

Gay marriage is a State matter.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Gadfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, we look like a nation that allows freedom of speech, expression and religion. Some liberal politicians decided to interfere with Mr. Cathy's right to state his OPINION (which is all he did; nowhere in his remarks do I see any "hate", directly expressed or even implied.) Disagreement with the political agenda of any group, gay or straight, liberal or conservative, is NOT hate. Even if it were, this is not socialist Europe, and even REAL expression of hate is tolerated here (otherwise, some of you on the Left would be in jail). We even let Nazis goose step and "Seig heil!" to their heart's content, and let Communists sing the "Internationale"; hell, you can even burn the flag! You can say whatever you like, only when you act on it to harm others does government intervene. It's called "tolerance"-you should try it sometime!
> 
> 
> 
> Freedom of speech is cool, but Abe Lincoln said it best: "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt."
> Religion? You seriously think that Jesus would be hating gays like that and not wanting them to get married?
> (from wiki) Hatred (or hate) is a deep and emotional extreme dislike, directed against a certain object or class of objects. The objects of such hatred can vary widely, from inanimate objects to attitudes, animals, oneself or other people, entire groups of people, people in general, existence, or the whole world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don't think you want to bring Jesus into this really, at least not before you school yourself in his word first.
Click to expand...

What did Jesus ever say that was hateful to gays? Btw, he was probably gay himself: he only hung around with guys, fuck a girl only once to see if he'd like it (he didn't), he wore a dress and rode that gay pride animal, the donkey. And in almost all the paintings of jesus, he looks gay.


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> JohnA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Like, cmon, people are lining up to buy hate chicken? And these pictures are shown all over the world? We look like a nation of haters who don't believe in personal freedom, and where you can hate others openly. SHEESH!!!
> 
> 
> 
> where is the hate in chicken ? one mans views on a subject does not the whole company haters make .
> CFI  dost not disciminate against   gays as far as work or  customers and they dont limit the  freedoms  of anybody .the hate  comes from  left wing  wackos like you
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The people are lining to support the guy's hatred for homos. Please get a clue and try again.
Click to expand...

Maybe that is what they were doing, but maybe it is just what you think they were doing, yet it was entirely something else at play here altogether?

Maybe they (the supporters) were showing their support for this mans right to make a stand against something that he believes in, and that stand is that "Marriage" is between one man and one woman in his beliefs along with many others who believe the same, and nothing will ever change that for him in his life as he lives it or for them in their lives as they live them. Now just because he is a CEO doesn't forcefully shut his mouth closed when he is asked a question now does it ? Maybe the gay community should be angry at the one who asked the question, and this to such a prominant person having so much influence as he has had in his sucess in the nation overt these years, thus exposing their fragile war in which they (these so called gays) find themselves in trying to get their own accepted as they have been trying to do eh? If don't want the answer, then don't ask the question if scared of the outcome found in the answer.

Lets explore this aspect of it for a second, and lets say that Mr.Cathy would have went against his beliefs, and would have went against his ideals on running this company in the way that includes his beliefs in the make up of the company and/or it's operating procedures. Lets say that many who go to Chic-Fil-A go there because of what Chic-Fil-A stands for when closing on Sundays and etc. (I admit that I have went to Chic-Fil-A on a sunday to get some take out when they first came to our town, and was surprised that they were closed), and then when I asked my wife why they were closed, she said that they are Christians for whom run this place, and that they are closed on Sunday. I accepted that totally and respected that totally, and I didnot go into a fit of rage because I couldn't get me some of that chicken on Sunday, I just went to the fast food place down the street. NO PROBLEM. 

Ok back to the point I was trying to make, so what if Mr. Cathy would have went against what he stood for, and angered hundreds of thousands of his customers who support him because of him and his companies beliefs, and that they would have boycotted him over his acceptance of something in that question that they also donot accept possibly ? Now that would have been foolish of him, now wouldn't it have been ? 

It's time for the gays to carve them out a small portion in society that will accept them, and leave the rest of society that are to religious and set in their ways to accept them ALONE. This forcing America against it's free will to keep conforming to the few over the majority is getting a little bit rediculous and boring don't cha think ?


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Freedom of speech is cool, but Abe Lincoln said it best: "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt."
> Religion? You seriously think that Jesus would be hating gays like that and not wanting them to get married?
> (from wiki) Hatred (or hate) is a deep and emotional extreme dislike, directed against a certain object or class of objects. The objects of such hatred can vary widely, from inanimate objects to attitudes, animals, oneself or other people, entire groups of people, people in general, existence, or the whole world.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think you want to bring Jesus into this really, at least not before you school yourself in his word first.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What did Jesus ever say that was hateful to gays? Btw, he was probably gay himself: he only hung around with guys, fuck a girl only once to see if he'd like it (he didn't), he wore a dress and rode that gay pride animal, the donkey. And in almost all the paintings of jesus, he looks gay.
Click to expand...

You have the nerve to use him for strength in an argument or debate, but then trash him when he is of no use to you after you were outted by what you were doing ? 

If you will throw him under the bus like you just did, then you will throw anyone under the bus like you just did, thus your friends and family had best watch out for you, because you have no friends or family in which you honor and respect in life anymore, thus making you a sad little puppy having no one or nothing in which you can truly count on in your life, and that is sad for real.


----------



## The Gadfly

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Freedom of speech is cool, but Abe Lincoln said it best: "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt."
> Religion? You seriously think that Jesus would be hating gays like that and not wanting them to get married?
> (from wiki) Hatred (or hate) is a deep and emotional extreme dislike, directed against a certain object or class of objects. The objects of such hatred can vary widely, from inanimate objects to attitudes, animals, oneself or other people, entire groups of people, people in general, existence, or the whole world.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think you want to bring Jesus into this really, at least not before you school yourself in his word first.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What did Jesus ever say that was hateful to gays? Btw, he was probably gay himself: he only hung around with guys, fuck a girl only once to see if he'd like it (he didn't), he wore a dress and rode that gay pride animal, the donkey. And in almost all the paintings of jesus, he looks gay.
Click to expand...


Saying "I believe in traditional marriage" is "hateful to gays"? I don't think so. Some of them may not agree with those words, or like them; but disagreeing with a minority is not "hateful", nor is it a crime in America; and NO ONE, gay or straight, has a right to force others to say only that which they find inoffensive. Your position amounts to nothing more nor less than this: "No one shall dare utter a word which is not Politically Correct, and if he does, I have the right to demand that government use its power to punish him for doing so". THAT is a direct assault on the constitution, and on freedom itself.

P.S. No one knows what Jesus looked like, as there is no contemporary image of him (there were no cameras circa 30 C.E.).


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> JohnA said:
> 
> 
> 
> where is the hate in chicken ? one mans views on a subject does not the whole company haters make .
> CFI  dost not disciminate against   gays as far as work or  customers and they dont limit the  freedoms  of anybody .the hate  comes from  left wing  wackos like you
> 
> 
> 
> The people are lining to support the guy's hatred for homos. Please get a clue and try again.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Maybe that is what they were doing, but maybe it is just what you think they were doing, yet it was entirely something else at play here altogether?
> 
> Maybe they (the supporters) were showing their support for this mans right to make a stand against something that he believes in, and that stand is that "Marriage" is between one man and one woman in his beliefs along with many others who believe the same, and nothing will ever change that for him in his life as he lives it or for them in their lives as they live them. Now just because he is a CEO doesn't forcefully shut his mouth closed when he is asked a question now does it ? Maybe the gay community should be angry at the one who asked the question, and this to such a prominant person having so much influence as he has had in his sucess in the nation overt these years, thus exposing their fragile war in which they (these so called gays) find themselves in trying to get their own accepted as they have been trying to do eh? If don't want the answer, then don't ask the question if scared of the outcome found in the answer.
> 
> Lets explore this aspect of it for a second, and lets say that Mr.Cathy would have went against his beliefs, and would have went against his ideals on running this company in the way that includes his beliefs in the make up of the company and/or it's operating procedures. Lets say that many who go to Chic-Fil-A go there because of what Chic-Fil-A stands for when closing on Sundays and etc. (I admit that I have went to Chic-Fil-A on a sunday to get some take out when they first came to our town, and was surprised that they were closed), and then when I asked my wife why they were closed, she said that they are Christians for whom run this place, and that they are closed on Sunday. I accepted that totally and respected that totally, and I didnot go into a fit of rage because I couldn't get me some of that chicken on Sunday, I just went to the fast food place down the street. NO PROBLEM.
> 
> Ok back to the point I was trying to make, so what if Mr. Cathy would have went against what he stood for, and angered hundreds of thousands of his customers who support him because of him and his companies beliefs, and that they would have boycotted him over his acceptance of something in that question that they also donot accept possibly ? Now that would have been foolish of him, now wouldn't it have been ?
> 
> It's time for the gays to carve them out a small portion in society that will accept them, and leave the rest of society that are to religious and set in their ways to accept them ALONE. This forcing America against it's free will to keep conforming to the few over the majority is getting a little bit rediculous and boring don't cha think ?
Click to expand...


The only thing that's absurd is using a majority vote to deny a minority something that you allow the majority to do. That's not the America that I want to live in, and the Supreme Court will eventually agree with me. So it doesn't matter how much hate chicken people eat, equal rights aren't things you can outvote someone on.


----------



## ima

The Gadfly said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think you want to bring Jesus into this really, at least not before you school yourself in his word first.
> 
> 
> 
> What did Jesus ever say that was hateful to gays? Btw, he was probably gay himself: he only hung around with guys, fuck a girl only once to see if he'd like it (he didn't), he wore a dress and rode that gay pride animal, the donkey. And in almost all the paintings of jesus, he looks gay.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Saying "I believe in traditional marriage" is "hateful to gays"? I don't think so. Some of them may not agree with those words, or like them; but disagreeing with a minority is not "hateful", nor is it a crime in America; and NO ONE, gay or straight, has a right to force others to say only that which they find inoffensive. Your position amounts to nothing more nor less than this: "No one shall dare utter a word which is not Politically Correct, and if he does, I have the right to demand that government use its power to punish him for doing so". THAT is a direct assault on the constitution, and on freedom itself.
> 
> P.S. No one knows what Jesus looked like, as there is no contemporary image of him (there were no cameras circa 30 C.E.).
Click to expand...

No one is forcing you say anything you don't want to, but at the same time, you can't expect to force others to live by your code of conduct, and that just because you're homophobic that that doesn't give you the right to tell others how to live.

There's no actual proof that Jesus ever existed, but he's always painted as a gay man.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think you want to bring Jesus into this really, at least not before you school yourself in his word first.
> 
> 
> 
> What did Jesus ever say that was hateful to gays? Btw, he was probably gay himself: he only hung around with guys, fuck a girl only once to see if he'd like it (he didn't), he wore a dress and rode that gay pride animal, the donkey. And in almost all the paintings of jesus, he looks gay.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You have the nerve to use him for strength in an argument or debate, but then trash him when he is of no use to you after you were outted by what you were doing ?
> 
> If you will throw him under the bus like you just did, then you will throw anyone under the bus like you just did, thus your friends and family had best watch out for you, because you have no friends or family in which you honor and respect in life anymore, thus making you a sad little puppy having no one or nothing in which you can truly count on in your life, and that is sad for real.
Click to expand...


I didn't trash Jesus, I said he was probably gay, if he even ever existed (there's no proof that he did exist). And Judah probably outted Jesus, that's what would have gotten him killed back then.


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> The people are lining to support the guy's hatred for homos. Please get a clue and try again.
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe that is what they were doing, but maybe it is just what you think they were doing, yet it was entirely something else at play here altogether?
> 
> Maybe they (the supporters) were showing their support for this mans right to make a stand against something that he believes in, and that stand is that "Marriage" is between one man and one woman in his beliefs along with many others who believe the same, and nothing will ever change that for him in his life as he lives it or for them in their lives as they live them. Now just because he is a CEO doesn't forcefully shut his mouth closed when he is asked a question now does it ? Maybe the gay community should be angry at the one who asked the question, and this to such a prominant person having so much influence as he has had in his sucess in the nation overt these years, thus exposing their fragile war in which they (these so called gays) find themselves in trying to get their own accepted as they have been trying to do eh? If don't want the answer, then don't ask the question if scared of the outcome found in the answer.
> 
> Lets explore this aspect of it for a second, and lets say that Mr.Cathy would have went against his beliefs, and would have went against his ideals on running this company in the way that includes his beliefs in the make up of the company and/or it's operating procedures. Lets say that many who go to Chic-Fil-A go there because of what Chic-Fil-A stands for when closing on Sundays and etc. (I admit that I have went to Chic-Fil-A on a sunday to get some take out when they first came to our town, and was surprised that they were closed), and then when I asked my wife why they were closed, she said that they are Christians for whom run this place, and that they are closed on Sunday. I accepted that totally and respected that totally, and I didnot go into a fit of rage because I couldn't get me some of that chicken on Sunday, I just went to the fast food place down the street. NO PROBLEM.
> 
> Ok back to the point I was trying to make, so what if Mr. Cathy would have went against what he stood for, and angered hundreds of thousands of his customers who support him because of him and his companies beliefs, and that they would have boycotted him over his acceptance of something in that question that they also donot accept possibly ? Now that would have been foolish of him, now wouldn't it have been ?
> 
> It's time for the gays to carve them out a small portion in society that will accept them, and leave the rest of society that are to religious and set in their ways to accept them ALONE. This forcing America against it's free will to keep conforming to the few over the majority is getting a little bit rediculous and boring don't cha think ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The only thing that's absurd is using a majority vote to deny a minority something that you allow the majority to do. That's not the America that I want to live in, and the Supreme Court will eventually agree with me. So it doesn't matter how much hate chicken people eat, equal rights aren't things you can outvote someone on.
Click to expand...


What "majority" are you talking about, otherwise that would be found within and/or vocally opposed to a specific issue ? If a majority is against something found within a specific issue, then how will it be found that they would be engaging in something that they are against, and for which is found within the specific issue that they are against, like what maybe a bunch of hypocryts would do ? Otherwise how would it be found that we as in a majority who are against something on a specific issue, would somehow be secretly telling others in our same majority who are also against these things found on a specific issue, that it is ok for them to do something that we as a majority (them included) are against ? You make no sense in this wording you have presented here.

But you feel that it is ok for the minority (a few) to control the majority (many), as pertaining to a specific issue, just as they are attempting to do today, and therefore are trying to do this more and more now everyday? Sadly they do this by way of these activist judges, lawyers and rogue institutions like the ACLU, and worse an intimidated supreme court who has lost it's freakin mind over the years. You expect the people just to keep letting this stuff close in on them in America, regardless of their rights not to allow it to ? You best wake up, because it's only going to get worse if it keeps going down these roads like it is going, because some of these roads have already ended for those who have been traveling them for far to long now, (i. e. vering wildly off of the beaten path for way to long by a disfunctional internal compass), and therefore they need to get back on the "straight and narrow" roads before it is far to late for them.

As for ther majority, they will survive it all, because well they are the majority, but the few who want what they want at the majorities expense, will soon find that the majority are not so willing to keep sacrificing their own in this nation for others who are just a few in regards to their expense. It just can't and won't keep happening. Chic-Fil-A was a show of what people are thinking these days, and how they have had enough of this one sided game that has been played on them for quite sometime now in this nation.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe that is what they were doing, but maybe it is just what you think they were doing, yet it was entirely something else at play here altogether?
> 
> Maybe they (the supporters) were showing their support for this mans right to make a stand against something that he believes in, and that stand is that "Marriage" is between one man and one woman in his beliefs along with many others who believe the same, and nothing will ever change that for him in his life as he lives it or for them in their lives as they live them. Now just because he is a CEO doesn't forcefully shut his mouth closed when he is asked a question now does it ? Maybe the gay community should be angry at the one who asked the question, and this to such a prominant person having so much influence as he has had in his sucess in the nation overt these years, thus exposing their fragile war in which they (these so called gays) find themselves in trying to get their own accepted as they have been trying to do eh? If don't want the answer, then don't ask the question if scared of the outcome found in the answer.
> 
> Lets explore this aspect of it for a second, and lets say that Mr.Cathy would have went against his beliefs, and would have went against his ideals on running this company in the way that includes his beliefs in the make up of the company and/or it's operating procedures. Lets say that many who go to Chic-Fil-A go there because of what Chic-Fil-A stands for when closing on Sundays and etc. (I admit that I have went to Chic-Fil-A on a sunday to get some take out when they first came to our town, and was surprised that they were closed), and then when I asked my wife why they were closed, she said that they are Christians for whom run this place, and that they are closed on Sunday. I accepted that totally and respected that totally, and I didnot go into a fit of rage because I couldn't get me some of that chicken on Sunday, I just went to the fast food place down the street. NO PROBLEM.
> 
> Ok back to the point I was trying to make, so what if Mr. Cathy would have went against what he stood for, and angered hundreds of thousands of his customers who support him because of him and his companies beliefs, and that they would have boycotted him over his acceptance of something in that question that they also donot accept possibly ? Now that would have been foolish of him, now wouldn't it have been ?
> 
> It's time for the gays to carve them out a small portion in society that will accept them, and leave the rest of society that are to religious and set in their ways to accept them ALONE. This forcing America against it's free will to keep conforming to the few over the majority is getting a little bit rediculous and boring don't cha think ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The only thing that's absurd is using a majority vote to deny a minority something that you allow the majority to do. That's not the America that I want to live in, and the Supreme Court will eventually agree with me. So it doesn't matter how much hate chicken people eat, equal rights aren't things you can outvote someone on.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What "majority" are you talking about, otherwise that would be found within and/or vocally opposed to a specific issue ? If a majority is against something found within a specific issue, then how will it be found that they would be engaging in something that they are against, and for which is found within the specific issue that they are against, like what maybe a bunch of hypocryts would do ? Otherwise how would it be found that we as in a majority who are against something on a specific issue, would somehow be secretly telling others in our same majority who are also against these things on a specific issue, that it is ok for them to do something that we as a majority (them included) are against ? You make no sense in this wording you have presented here.
> 
> But you feel that it is ok for the minority (a few) to control the majority (many), as pertaining to a specific issue, just as they are attempting to do today, and therefore are trying to do this more and more now everyday? Sadly they do this by way of these activist judges, lawyers and rogue institutions like the ACLU, and worse an intimidated supreme court who has lost it's freakin mind over the years. You expect the people just to keep letting this stuff close in on them in America, regardless of their rights not to allow it to ? You best wake up, because it's only going to get worse if it keeps going down these roads like it is going, because some of these roads have already ended for those who have been traveling them for far to long now, (i. e. vering wildly off of the beaten path for way to long by a disfunctional internal compass), and therefore they need to get back on the "straight and narrow" roads before it is far to late for them.
> 
> As for ther majority, they will survive it all, because well they are the majority, but the few who want what they want at the majorities expense, will soon find that the majority are not so willing to keep sacrificing their own in this nation for others who are just a few in regards to their expense. It just can't and won't keep happening. Chic-Fil-A was a show of what people are thinking these days, and how they have had enough of this one sided game that has been played on them for quite sometime now in this nation.
Click to expand...


So what is it that you have against gay people?


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> The only thing that's absurd is using a majority vote to deny a minority something that you allow the majority to do. That's not the America that I want to live in, and the Supreme Court will eventually agree with me. So it doesn't matter how much hate chicken people eat, equal rights aren't things you can outvote someone on.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What "majority" are you talking about, otherwise that would be found within and/or vocally opposed to a specific issue ? If a majority is against something found within a specific issue, then how will it be found that they would be engaging in something that they are against, and for which is found within the specific issue that they are against, like what maybe a bunch of hypocryts would do ? Otherwise how would it be found that we as in a majority who are against something on a specific issue, would somehow be secretly telling others in our same majority who are also against these things on a specific issue, that it is ok for them to do something that we as a majority (them included) are against ? You make no sense in this wording you have presented here.
> 
> But you feel that it is ok for the minority (a few) to control the majority (many), as pertaining to a specific issue, just as they are attempting to do today, and therefore are trying to do this more and more now everyday? Sadly they do this by way of these activist judges, lawyers and rogue institutions like the ACLU, and worse an intimidated supreme court who has lost it's freakin mind over the years. You expect the people just to keep letting this stuff close in on them in America, regardless of their rights not to allow it to ? You best wake up, because it's only going to get worse if it keeps going down these roads like it is going, because some of these roads have already ended for those who have been traveling them for far to long now, (i. e. vering wildly off of the beaten path for way to long by a disfunctional internal compass), and therefore they need to get back on the "straight and narrow" roads before it is far to late for them.
> 
> As for ther majority, they will survive it all, because well they are the majority, but the few who want what they want at the majorities expense, will soon find that the majority are not so willing to keep sacrificing their own in this nation for others who are just a few in regards to their expense. It just can't and won't keep happening. Chic-Fil-A was a show of what people are thinking these days, and how they have had enough of this one sided game that has been played on them for quite sometime now in this nation.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So what is it that you have against gay people?
Click to expand...

Why do you narrow it down to this that you ask, I mean do you really think I have something against gay people or is it rather that I have something against people trying to make this nation conform to certain ways of thinking and/or lifestyle choices that are made, and this across the board even though made by a few, thus shutting out any beliefs or lifestyles found in a majority, who might be opposed to these lifestyles or choices made by these few, yet are then being forced in many ways as a majority to conform anyways (the supreme court will side with me, your words), when they don't have to be forced and shouldn't be forced ever, but rather should be left alone in this nation just as they should be left alone in their beliefs and lives as they do live them, and have before lived them for centuries now in this nation. It matters not what I believe, but what does matter, is what is right in this nation and what is wrong in this nation. This is what matters to the majority found on many issues that are brought up or brought foward in this nation, and they expect like any other to have their voices heard, and their rights protected as they had won them so many years ago.


----------



## Againsheila

ima said:


> The Gadfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> What did Jesus ever say that was hateful to gays? Btw, he was probably gay himself: he only hung around with guys, fuck a girl only once to see if he'd like it (he didn't), he wore a dress and rode that gay pride animal, the donkey. And in almost all the paintings of jesus, he looks gay.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Saying "I believe in traditional marriage" is "hateful to gays"? I don't think so. Some of them may not agree with those words, or like them; but disagreeing with a minority is not "hateful", nor is it a crime in America; and NO ONE, gay or straight, has a right to force others to say only that which they find inoffensive. Your position amounts to nothing more nor less than this: "No one shall dare utter a word which is not Politically Correct, and if he does, I have the right to demand that government use its power to punish him for doing so". THAT is a direct assault on the constitution, and on freedom itself.
> 
> P.S. No one knows what Jesus looked like, as there is no contemporary image of him (there were no cameras circa 30 C.E.).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No one is forcing you say anything you don't want to, but at the same time, you can't expect to force others to live by your code of conduct, and that just because you're homophobic that that doesn't give you the right to tell others how to live.
> 
> There's no actual proof that Jesus ever existed, but he's always painted as a gay man.
Click to expand...


You can tell just by looking????


----------



## beagle9

Againsheila said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Gadfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> Saying "I believe in traditional marriage" is "hateful to gays"? I don't think so. Some of them may not agree with those words, or like them; but disagreeing with a minority is not "hateful", nor is it a crime in America; and NO ONE, gay or straight, has a right to force others to say only that which they find inoffensive. Your position amounts to nothing more nor less than this: "No one shall dare utter a word which is not Politically Correct, and if he does, I have the right to demand that government use its power to punish him for doing so". THAT is a direct assault on the constitution, and on freedom itself.
> 
> P.S. No one knows what Jesus looked like, as there is no contemporary image of him (there were no cameras circa 30 C.E.).
> 
> 
> 
> No one is forcing you say anything you don't want to, but at the same time, you can't expect to force others to live by your code of conduct, and that just because you're homophobic that that doesn't give you the right to tell others how to live.
> 
> There's no actual proof that Jesus ever existed, but he's always painted as a gay man.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You can tell just by looking????
Click to expand...

I thought liberals hated profiling? OOPS!


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> What "majority" are you talking about, otherwise that would be found within and/or vocally opposed to a specific issue ? If a majority is against something found within a specific issue, then how will it be found that they would be engaging in something that they are against, and for which is found within the specific issue that they are against, like what maybe a bunch of hypocryts would do ? Otherwise how would it be found that we as in a majority who are against something on a specific issue, would somehow be secretly telling others in our same majority who are also against these things on a specific issue, that it is ok for them to do something that we as a majority (them included) are against ? You make no sense in this wording you have presented here.
> 
> But you feel that it is ok for the minority (a few) to control the majority (many), as pertaining to a specific issue, just as they are attempting to do today, and therefore are trying to do this more and more now everyday? Sadly they do this by way of these activist judges, lawyers and rogue institutions like the ACLU, and worse an intimidated supreme court who has lost it's freakin mind over the years. You expect the people just to keep letting this stuff close in on them in America, regardless of their rights not to allow it to ? You best wake up, because it's only going to get worse if it keeps going down these roads like it is going, because some of these roads have already ended for those who have been traveling them for far to long now, (i. e. vering wildly off of the beaten path for way to long by a disfunctional internal compass), and therefore they need to get back on the "straight and narrow" roads before it is far to late for them.
> 
> As for ther majority, they will survive it all, because well they are the majority, but the few who want what they want at the majorities expense, will soon find that the majority are not so willing to keep sacrificing their own in this nation for others who are just a few in regards to their expense. It just can't and won't keep happening. Chic-Fil-A was a show of what people are thinking these days, and how they have had enough of this one sided game that has been played on them for quite sometime now in this nation.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So what is it that you have against gay people?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Why do you narrow it down to this that you ask, I mean do you really think I have something against gay people or is it rather that I have something against people trying to make this nation conform to certain ways of thinking and/or lifestyle choices that are made, and this across the board even though made by a few, thus shutting out any beliefs or lifestyles found in a majority, who might be opposed to these lifestyles or choices made by these few, yet are then being forced in many ways as a majority to conform anyways (the supreme court will side with me, your words), when they don't have to be forced and shouldn't be forced ever, but rather should be left alone in this nation just as they should be left alone in their beliefs and lives as they do live them, and have before lived them for centuries now in this nation. It matters not what I believe, but what does matter, is what is right in this nation and what is wrong in this nation. This is what matters to the majority found on many issues that are brought up or brought foward in this nation, and they expect like any other to have their voices heard, and their rights protected as they had won them so many years ago.
Click to expand...


Nobody's trying to make you conform to anything. If you don't like gay marriage, don't marry a gay person. But I don't see where you get a vote to decide to stop gays from getting married just because you might have a majority in some States. Nobody's even forcing churches to marry gays either.
If the majority forced gays to sit at the back of the bus, I suppose that would be ok with you?


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> No one is forcing you say anything you don't want to, but at the same time, you can't expect to force others to live by your code of conduct, and that just because you're homophobic that that doesn't give you the right to tell others how to live.
> 
> There's no actual proof that Jesus ever existed, but he's always painted as a gay man.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can tell just by looking????
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I thought liberals hated profiling? OOPS!
Click to expand...


it's called a gaydar.


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> So what is it that you have against gay people?
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you narrow it down to this that you ask, I mean do you really think I have something against gay people or is it rather that I have something against people trying to make this nation conform to certain ways of thinking and/or lifestyle choices that are made, and this across the board even though made by a few, thus shutting out any beliefs or lifestyles found in a majority, who might be opposed to these lifestyles or choices made by these few, yet are then being forced in many ways as a majority to conform anyways (the supreme court will side with me, your words), when they don't have to be forced and shouldn't be forced ever, but rather should be left alone in this nation just as they should be left alone in their beliefs and lives as they do live them, and have before lived them for centuries now in this nation. It matters not what I believe, but what does matter, is what is right in this nation and what is wrong in this nation. This is what matters to the majority found on many issues that are brought up or brought foward in this nation, and they expect like any other to have their voices heard, and their rights protected as they had won them so many years ago.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nobody's trying to make you conform to anything. If you don't like gay marriage, don't marry a gay person. But I don't see where you get a vote to decide to stop gays from getting married just because you might have a majority in some States. Nobody's even forcing churches to marry gays either.
> If the majority forced gays to sit at the back of the bus, I suppose that would be ok with you?
Click to expand...


As highlighted above in red, I guess this is the last hope of trying to gain acceptance across the board, by adopting the cilvil rights struggle in regards to the blacks, as now to become the gay struggle in this nation as well, and this even though a majority of black families and blacks don't agree with the gay marriage issue either, but it matters not what they think does it, just so long as the plan works huh?


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> So what is it that you have against gay people?
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you narrow it down to this that you ask, I mean do you really think I have something against gay people or is it rather that I have something against people trying to make this nation conform to certain ways of thinking and/or lifestyle choices that are made, and this across the board even though made by a few, thus shutting out any beliefs or lifestyles found in a majority, who might be opposed to these lifestyles or choices made by these few, yet are then being forced in many ways as a majority to conform anyways (the supreme court will side with me, your words), when they don't have to be forced and shouldn't be forced ever, but rather should be left alone in this nation just as they should be left alone in their beliefs and lives as they do live them, and have before lived them for centuries now in this nation. It matters not what I believe, but what does matter, is what is right in this nation and what is wrong in this nation. This is what matters to the majority found on many issues that are brought up or brought foward in this nation, and they expect like any other to have their voices heard, and their rights protected as they had won them so many years ago.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nobody's trying to make you conform to anything. If you don't like gay marriage, don't marry a gay person. But I don't see where you get a vote to decide to stop gays from getting married just because you might have a majority in some States. Nobody's even forcing churches to marry gays either.
> If the majority forced gays to sit at the back of the bus, I suppose that would be ok with you?
Click to expand...


Tell that to the United States Military...


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you narrow it down to this that you ask, I mean do you really think I have something against gay people or is it rather that I have something against people trying to make this nation conform to certain ways of thinking and/or lifestyle choices that are made, and this across the board even though made by a few, thus shutting out any beliefs or lifestyles found in a majority, who might be opposed to these lifestyles or choices made by these few, yet are then being forced in many ways as a majority to conform anyways (the supreme court will side with me, your words), when they don't have to be forced and shouldn't be forced ever, but rather should be left alone in this nation just as they should be left alone in their beliefs and lives as they do live them, and have before lived them for centuries now in this nation. It matters not what I believe, but what does matter, is what is right in this nation and what is wrong in this nation. This is what matters to the majority found on many issues that are brought up or brought foward in this nation, and they expect like any other to have their voices heard, and their rights protected as they had won them so many years ago.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nobody's trying to make you conform to anything. If you don't like gay marriage, don't marry a gay person. But I don't see where you get a vote to decide to stop gays from getting married just because you might have a majority in some States. Nobody's even forcing churches to marry gays either.
> If the majority forced gays to sit at the back of the bus, I suppose that would be ok with you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Tell that to the United States Military...
Click to expand...

The military? Huh?


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why do you narrow it down to this that you ask, I mean do you really think I have something against gay people or is it rather that I have something against people trying to make this nation conform to certain ways of thinking and/or lifestyle choices that are made, and this across the board even though made by a few, thus shutting out any beliefs or lifestyles found in a majority, who might be opposed to these lifestyles or choices made by these few, yet are then being forced in many ways as a majority to conform anyways (the supreme court will side with me, your words), when they don't have to be forced and shouldn't be forced ever, but rather should be left alone in this nation just as they should be left alone in their beliefs and lives as they do live them, and have before lived them for centuries now in this nation. It matters not what I believe, but what does matter, is what is right in this nation and what is wrong in this nation. This is what matters to the majority found on many issues that are brought up or brought foward in this nation, and they expect like any other to have their voices heard, and their rights protected as they had won them so many years ago.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nobody's trying to make you conform to anything. If you don't like gay marriage, don't marry a gay person. But I don't see where you get a vote to decide to stop gays from getting married just because you might have a majority in some States. Nobody's even forcing churches to marry gays either.
> If the majority forced gays to sit at the back of the bus, I suppose that would be ok with you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> As highlighted above in red, I guess this is the last hope of trying to gain acceptance across the board, by adopting the cilvil rights struggle in regards to the blacks, as now to become the gay struggle in this nation as well, and this even though a majority of black families and blacks don't agree with the gay marriage issue either, but it matters not what they think does it, just so long as the plan works huh?
Click to expand...


So you're trying to say that blacks, after having come out of slavery and the back of the bus, are now going to turn around and start denying something they enjoy to another minority? 

And you keep saying that gays shouldn't make you conform to certain ways of thinking, but by forcing gays not to marry, aren't you doing the same?

And yes, you have something against gays, otherwise you wouldn't care. They're not asking to come and fuck you in the ass, is that what you're afraid of?


----------



## The Gadfly

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nobody's trying to make you conform to anything. If you don't like gay marriage, don't marry a gay person. But I don't see where you get a vote to decide to stop gays from getting married just because you might have a majority in some States. Nobody's even forcing churches to marry gays either.
> If the majority forced gays to sit at the back of the bus, I suppose that would be ok with you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As highlighted above in red, I guess this is the last hope of trying to gain acceptance across the board, by adopting the cilvil rights struggle in regards to the blacks, as now to become the gay struggle in this nation as well, and this even though a majority of black families and blacks don't agree with the gay marriage issue either, but it matters not what they think does it, just so long as the plan works huh?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So you're trying to say that blacks, after having come out of slavery and the back of the bus, are now going to turn around and start denying something they enjoy to another minority?
> 
> And you keep saying that gays shouldn't make you conform to certain ways of thinking, but by forcing gays not to marry, aren't you doing the same?
> 
> And yes, you have something against gays, otherwise you wouldn't care. They're not asking to come and fuck you in the ass, is that what you're afraid of?
Click to expand...


First of all, Marriage, whether by civil or religious ceremony, is legally a contractual relationship which the state has a vested public interest in regulating. This has been by legal precedent a matter which the federal government has left to the states (no federal power to regulate it is enumerated in the constitution). Note that not all heterosexual marriages are permitted by the state(s); the state may (and does) refuse to grant a marriage license to heterosexuals,if one of the parties is already legally married (bigamy); if the two parties are in certain family relationships (incest), if one or both parties has/have not reached the age of consent as defined by that state, and so on. NO ONE, heterosexual or homosexual has any legal "right to marry whoever they choose"; as demonstrated that "right" may be restricted, and the courts have consistently upheld this.

Second, for the umpteenth time, the issue in this instance is NOT "gay marriage". The issue is Mr. Cathy's constitutional right to say what he believes, without being punished or sanctioned in any way, or his company being punished or sanctioned in any way, by any government, whether local, state or federal, or any official thereof. Therefore when certain public officials threatened to violate that right, the American people showed their support for that right. Note that you, gays, or anyone else who disagrees with Mr. Cathy, are free to boycott his business; what you are NOT free to do, is have the state shut down his business for you. You are also not free to interfere with his business in a way that violates criminal or civil laws (in other words, you MAY protest peacefully; you MAY NOT riot, or breach the peace). I will absolutely support your (or anyone else's) right to do that, as private individuals, if you choose.* What I absolutely WILL NOT support is any attempt to have elected officials use the power of government to do it for you.*

You might be surprised to learn that I do not oppose homosexual marriage, so long as the parties involved otherwise meet the state requirements for same (i.e. both parties of legal ages, etc.), nor do I favor any persecution or state punishment of homosexuals for their sexual orientation (disorderly expression of same is another matter, as defined and enforced by the same laws which apply to heterosexuals). I neither support nor oppose homosexual conduct between consenting adults; I have my own moral views on the subject, but I do not seek to impose them on others. I am a Christian, however, I do not generally support the positions of the so-called "religious right".* I support their right to state their beliefs; I DO NOT support any "right" to impose those beliefs on others who do not share them.*

Is that sufficiently clear ?


----------



## beagle9

The Gadfly said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> As highlighted above in red, I guess this is the last hope of trying to gain acceptance across the board, by adopting the cilvil rights struggle in regards to the blacks, as now to become the gay struggle in this nation as well, and this even though a majority of black families and blacks don't agree with the gay marriage issue either, but it matters not what they think does it, just so long as the plan works huh?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So you're trying to say that blacks, after having come out of slavery and the back of the bus, are now going to turn around and start denying something they enjoy to another minority?
> 
> And you keep saying that gays shouldn't make you conform to certain ways of thinking, but by forcing gays not to marry, aren't you doing the same?
> 
> And yes, you have something against gays, otherwise you wouldn't care. They're not asking to come and fuck you in the ass, is that what you're afraid of?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> First of all, Marriage, whether by civil or religious ceremony, is legally a contractual relationship which the state has a vested public interest in regulating. This has been by legal precedent a matter which the federal government has left to the states (no federal power to regulate it is enumerated in the constitution). Note that not all heterosexual marriages are permitted by the state(s); the state may (and does) refuse to grant a marriage license to heterosexuals,if one of the parties is already legally married (bigamy); if the two parties are in certain family relationships (incest), if one or both parties has/have not reached the age of consent as defined by that state, and so on. NO ONE, heterosexual or homosexual has any legal "right to marry whoever they choose"; as demonstrated that "right" may be restricted, and the courts have consistently upheld this.
> 
> Second, for the umpteenth time, the issue in this instance is NOT "gay marriage". The issue is Mr. Cathy's constitutional right to say what he believes, without being punished or sanctioned in any way, or his company being punished or sanctioned in any way, by any government, whether local, state or federal, or any official thereof. Therefore when certain public officials threatened to violate that right, the American people showed their support for that right. Note that you, gays, or anyone else who disagrees with Mr. Cathy, are free to boycott his business; what you are NOT free to do, is have the state shut down his business for you. You are also not free to interfere with his business in a way that violates criminal or civil laws (in other words, you MAY protest peacefully; you MAY NOT riot, or breach the peace). I will absolutely support your (or anyone else's) right to do that, as private individuals, if you choose.* What I absolutely WILL NOT support is any attempt to have elected officials use the power of government to do it for you.*
> 
> You might be surprised to learn that I do not oppose homosexual marriage, so long as the parties involved otherwise meet the state requirements for same (i.e. both parties of legal ages, etc.), nor do I favor any persecution or state punishment of homosexuals for their sexual orientation (disorderly expression of same is another matter, as defined and enforced by the same laws which apply to heterosexuals). I neither support nor oppose homosexual conduct between consenting adults; I have my own moral views on the subject, but I do not seek to impose them on others. I am a Christian, however, I do not generally support the positions of the so-called "religious right".* I support their right to state their beliefs; I DO NOT support any "right" to impose those beliefs on others who do not share them.*
> 
> Is that sufficiently clear ?
Click to expand...

The problem is that they can't have it their way, at least without doing what you say that they shouldn't or shall not do, and this without trampling on the rights of others (at least in their minds they can't), so it will be that these things in which they are showing in great disrespect of (or) have done wrongfully in example of, especially in regards to Chic-Fil-A or any other who opposes them being married as an opinion, or even when opposed by states and/or even by the federal government (Bill Clinton signing into law the marriage act, showing by law that marriage is between one man and one woman), and yet to no acknowledgement of this by them I guess, and so they will continue this fight in the incorrect ways no matter, even though you have expressed your views to this person in a very proper and spot on way, yet it matters not what you say or anyone says to these people, as they have an agenda and they will stick with it no matter what or who their agenda tramples upon in this nation, even when done in the wrong ways it still doesn't matter to them.

How about the anger being expressed by this person, as found within such a desperate attack in that last statement in which this person had used on me ? Lets ya know just what kind of person this nation is dealing with, thus found within these kinds of exposures within these kinds of words spoken.  Good reply by you by the way...Good Job!

PS. The funny thing is or that was found in that attack or statement made, was that this person must feel that their is something wrong with a person trying to bump another person in the butt, as per the way that this person ((ima)) used that wording on me, as if it would scorn me or bother me and/or something to that affect when used...LOL.... I have never been bumped in the butt, so I wouldn't know, but by the way this person ((ima)) used it as a scare tactic on me, it must be a hurtful and vile thing I guess...LOL Now I am real scared someone will try and bump me in the butt, and it's all because of ima.. ROTFL.


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> So you're trying to say that blacks, after having come out of slavery and the back of the bus, are now going to turn around and start denying something they enjoy to another minority?



Are the two issues truly the same? Besides what do you do with the blacks who may be found also in a majority opinion against gay marriage in the nation ? Disregard their opinions and trample on their rights to not have that opinion on the matter or subject either ?  I guess that question needs to be asked of the blacks, before trying to attach the issue of gay marriage to their struggle found in the civil rights act, and this as they have known it to be or understood it to be.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> So you're trying to say that blacks, after having come out of slavery and the back of the bus, are now going to turn around and start denying something they enjoy to another minority?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are the two issues truly the same? Besides what do you do with the blacks who may be found also in a majority opinion against gay marriage in the nation ? Disregard their opinions and trample on their rights to not have that opinion on the matter or subject either ?  I guess that question needs to be asked of the blacks, before trying to attach the issue of gay marriage to their struggle found in the civil rights act, and this as they have known it to be or understood it to be.
Click to expand...


What I'm saying is that blacks understand that you can never use a majority to deny the same rights for minorities. They can disagree about anything homosexual, but only a true hypocrite black person would side with the majority over the minority.


----------



## ima

The Gadfly said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> As highlighted above in red, I guess this is the last hope of trying to gain acceptance across the board, by adopting the cilvil rights struggle in regards to the blacks, as now to become the gay struggle in this nation as well, and this even though a majority of black families and blacks don't agree with the gay marriage issue either, but it matters not what they think does it, just so long as the plan works huh?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So you're trying to say that blacks, after having come out of slavery and the back of the bus, are now going to turn around and start denying something they enjoy to another minority?
> 
> And you keep saying that gays shouldn't make you conform to certain ways of thinking, but by forcing gays not to marry, aren't you doing the same?
> 
> And yes, you have something against gays, otherwise you wouldn't care. They're not asking to come and fuck you in the ass, is that what you're afraid of?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> First of all, Marriage, whether by civil or religious ceremony, is legally a contractual relationship which the state has a vested public interest in regulating. This has been by legal precedent a matter which the federal government has left to the states (no federal power to regulate it is enumerated in the constitution). Note that not all heterosexual marriages are permitted by the state(s); the state may (and does) refuse to grant a marriage license to heterosexuals,if one of the parties is already legally married (bigamy); if the two parties are in certain family relationships (incest), if one or both parties has/have not reached the age of consent as defined by that state, and so on. NO ONE, heterosexual or homosexual has any legal "right to marry whoever they choose"; as demonstrated that "right" may be restricted, and the courts have consistently upheld this.
> 
> Second, for the umpteenth time, the issue in this instance is NOT "gay marriage". The issue is Mr. Cathy's constitutional right to say what he believes, without being punished or sanctioned in any way, or his company being punished or sanctioned in any way, by any government, whether local, state or federal, or any official thereof. Therefore when certain public officials threatened to violate that right, the American people showed their support for that right. Note that you, gays, or anyone else who disagrees with Mr. Cathy, are free to boycott his business; what you are NOT free to do, is have the state shut down his business for you. You are also not free to interfere with his business in a way that violates criminal or civil laws (in other words, you MAY protest peacefully; you MAY NOT riot, or breach the peace). I will absolutely support your (or anyone else's) right to do that, as private individuals, if you choose.* What I absolutely WILL NOT support is any attempt to have elected officials use the power of government to do it for you.*
> 
> You might be surprised to learn that I do not oppose homosexual marriage, so long as the parties involved otherwise meet the state requirements for same (i.e. both parties of legal ages, etc.), nor do I favor any persecution or state punishment of homosexuals for their sexual orientation (disorderly expression of same is another matter, as defined and enforced by the same laws which apply to heterosexuals). I neither support nor oppose homosexual conduct between consenting adults; I have my own moral views on the subject, but I do not seek to impose them on others. I am a Christian, however, I do not generally support the positions of the so-called "religious right".* I support their right to state their beliefs; I DO NOT support any "right" to impose those beliefs on others who do not share them.*
> 
> Is that sufficiently clear ?
Click to expand...


From what I can tell, the courts have consistently sided with equal right to marriage for gays. The Supremes will as well eventually.

The hate chicken guy is free to say what he wants, doesn't mean he's right just because he opened his mouth. People lining up for hate chicken can openly show their disdain for homosexuals if they want, ignorance isn't a crime usually. Oh well, if you can't hate blacks anymore, gays'll do, right?

You say;"I DO NOT support any "right" to impose those beliefs on others who do not share them." Then how about if try to stop forcing your views on marriage on gay people? It works both way.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> The Gadfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> So you're trying to say that blacks, after having come out of slavery and the back of the bus, are now going to turn around and start denying something they enjoy to another minority?
> 
> And you keep saying that gays shouldn't make you conform to certain ways of thinking, but by forcing gays not to marry, aren't you doing the same?
> 
> And yes, you have something against gays, otherwise you wouldn't care. They're not asking to come and fuck you in the ass, is that what you're afraid of?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> First of all, Marriage, whether by civil or religious ceremony, is legally a contractual relationship which the state has a vested public interest in regulating. This has been by legal precedent a matter which the federal government has left to the states (no federal power to regulate it is enumerated in the constitution). Note that not all heterosexual marriages are permitted by the state(s); the state may (and does) refuse to grant a marriage license to heterosexuals,if one of the parties is already legally married (bigamy); if the two parties are in certain family relationships (incest), if one or both parties has/have not reached the age of consent as defined by that state, and so on. NO ONE, heterosexual or homosexual has any legal "right to marry whoever they choose"; as demonstrated that "right" may be restricted, and the courts have consistently upheld this.
> 
> Second, for the umpteenth time, the issue in this instance is NOT "gay marriage". The issue is Mr. Cathy's constitutional right to say what he believes, without being punished or sanctioned in any way, or his company being punished or sanctioned in any way, by any government, whether local, state or federal, or any official thereof. Therefore when certain public officials threatened to violate that right, the American people showed their support for that right. Note that you, gays, or anyone else who disagrees with Mr. Cathy, are free to boycott his business; what you are NOT free to do, is have the state shut down his business for you. You are also not free to interfere with his business in a way that violates criminal or civil laws (in other words, you MAY protest peacefully; you MAY NOT riot, or breach the peace). I will absolutely support your (or anyone else's) right to do that, as private individuals, if you choose.* What I absolutely WILL NOT support is any attempt to have elected officials use the power of government to do it for you.*
> 
> You might be surprised to learn that I do not oppose homosexual marriage, so long as the parties involved otherwise meet the state requirements for same (i.e. both parties of legal ages, etc.), nor do I favor any persecution or state punishment of homosexuals for their sexual orientation (disorderly expression of same is another matter, as defined and enforced by the same laws which apply to heterosexuals). I neither support nor oppose homosexual conduct between consenting adults; I have my own moral views on the subject, but I do not seek to impose them on others. I am a Christian, however, I do not generally support the positions of the so-called "religious right".* I support their right to state their beliefs; I DO NOT support any "right" to impose those beliefs on others who do not share them.*
> 
> Is that sufficiently clear ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The problem is that they can't have it their way, at least without doing what you say that they shouldn't or shall not do, and this without trampling on the rights of others (at least in their minds they can't), so it will be that these things in which they are showing in great disrespect of (or) have done wrongfully in example of, especially in regards to Chic-Fil-A or any other who opposes them being married as an opinion, or even when opposed by states and/or even by the federal government (Bill Clinton signing into law the marriage act, showing by law that marriage is between one man and one woman), and yet to no acknowledgement of this by them I guess, and so they will continue this fight in the incorrect ways no matter, even though you have expressed your views to this person in a very proper and spot on way, yet it matters not what you say or anyone says to these people, as they have an agenda and they will stick with it no matter what or who their agenda tramples upon in this nation, even when done in the wrong ways it still doesn't matter to them.
> 
> How about the anger being expressed by this person, as found within such a desperate attack in that last statement in which this person had used on me ? Lets ya know just what kind of person this nation is dealing with, thus found within these kinds of exposures within these kinds of words spoken.  Good reply by you by the way...Good Job!
> 
> PS. The funny thing is or that was found in that attack or statement made, was that this person must feel that their is something wrong with a person trying to bump another person in the butt, as per the way that this person ((ima)) used that wording on me, as if it would scorn me or bother me and/or something to that affect when used...LOL.... I have never been bumped in the butt, so I wouldn't know, but by the way this person ((ima)) used it as a scare tactic on me, it must be a hurtful and vile thing I guess...LOL Now I am real scared someone will try and bump me in the butt, and it's all because of ima.. ROTFL.
Click to expand...


So if 2 gays marry, what right of yours are they trampling on? You weren't at the ceremony, you don't know them, and hell, you didn't even know that they got married, so how does that affect you? 
And if you try to stop gays from marrying, aren't you trampling on the rights of others? Why should you get to decide what everyone's rights are?


----------



## Againsheila

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nobody's trying to make you conform to anything. If you don't like gay marriage, don't marry a gay person. But I don't see where you get a vote to decide to stop gays from getting married just because you might have a majority in some States. Nobody's even forcing churches to marry gays either.
> If the majority forced gays to sit at the back of the bus, I suppose that would be ok with you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As highlighted above in red, I guess this is the last hope of trying to gain acceptance across the board, by adopting the cilvil rights struggle in regards to the blacks, as now to become the gay struggle in this nation as well, and this even though a majority of black families and blacks don't agree with the gay marriage issue either, but it matters not what they think does it, just so long as the plan works huh?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So you're trying to say that blacks, after having come out of slavery and the back of the bus, are now going to turn around and start denying something they enjoy to another minority?
> 
> And you keep saying that gays shouldn't make you conform to certain ways of thinking, but by forcing gays not to marry, aren't you doing the same?
> 
> And yes, you have something against gays, otherwise you wouldn't care. They're not asking to come and fuck you in the ass, is that what you're afraid of?
Click to expand...


How do you know someone is gay unless they tell you?  Shouldn't that be something they keep to themselves?  I mean, I don't go around yelling to the world that I'm heterosexual.  What I do in my bedroom is my business, not yours.

Yeah, I'm now all for gays getting married, as long as they can't force Churches to marry them.  Then they can shut up and go back in the closet.  I see no reason why this is being shouted out all the time.  I see no reason to shut down a business because you don't agree with the CEO on a private matter.  How about we shut down your business because we don't agree with you, for whatever reason?  How would you like that?  BTW, if they had succeeded in taking down Chick Fil A, there would have been a lot of gays unemployed.

I can't tell if someone is gay just by looking.  I don't CARE!  It's none of my business.  Stop french kissing in public, no one should be doing that.  NO ONE.  Get a room already.


----------



## Katzndogz

As long as no one has to conform or adjust themselves to accommodate gay marriage, I don't care either.


----------



## The Gadfly

ima said:


> The Gadfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> So you're trying to say that blacks, after having come out of slavery and the back of the bus, are now going to turn around and start denying something they enjoy to another minority?
> 
> And you keep saying that gays shouldn't make you conform to certain ways of thinking, but by forcing gays not to marry, aren't you doing the same?
> 
> And yes, you have something against gays, otherwise you wouldn't care. They're not asking to come and fuck you in the ass, is that what you're afraid of?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> First of all, Marriage, whether by civil or religious ceremony, is legally a contractual relationship which the state has a vested public interest in regulating. This has been by legal precedent a matter which the federal government has left to the states (no federal power to regulate it is enumerated in the constitution). Note that not all heterosexual marriages are permitted by the state(s); the state may (and does) refuse to grant a marriage license to heterosexuals,if one of the parties is already legally married (bigamy); if the two parties are in certain family relationships (incest), if one or both parties has/have not reached the age of consent as defined by that state, and so on. NO ONE, heterosexual or homosexual has any legal "right to marry whoever they choose"; as demonstrated that "right" may be restricted, and the courts have consistently upheld this.
> 
> Second, for the umpteenth time, the issue in this instance is NOT "gay marriage". The issue is Mr. Cathy's constitutional right to say what he believes, without being punished or sanctioned in any way, or his company being punished or sanctioned in any way, by any government, whether local, state or federal, or any official thereof. Therefore when certain public officials threatened to violate that right, the American people showed their support for that right. Note that you, gays, or anyone else who disagrees with Mr. Cathy, are free to boycott his business; what you are NOT free to do, is have the state shut down his business for you. You are also not free to interfere with his business in a way that violates criminal or civil laws (in other words, you MAY protest peacefully; you MAY NOT riot, or breach the peace). I will absolutely support your (or anyone else's) right to do that, as private individuals, if you choose.* What I absolutely WILL NOT support is any attempt to have elected officials use the power of government to do it for you.*
> 
> You might be surprised to learn that *I do not oppose homosexual marriage, so long as the parties involved otherwise meet the state requirements for same (i.e. both parties of legal ages, etc.)*, nor do I favor any persecution or state punishment of homosexuals for their sexual orientation (disorderly expression of same is another matter, as defined and enforced by the same laws which apply to heterosexuals). I neither support nor oppose homosexual conduct between consenting adults; I have my own moral views on the subject, but I do not seek to impose them on others. I am a Christian, however, I do not generally support the positions of the so-called "religious right".* I support their right to state their beliefs; I DO NOT support any "right" to impose those beliefs on others who do not share them.*
> 
> Is that sufficiently clear ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> From what I can tell, the courts have consistently sided with equal right to marriage for gays. The Supremes will as well eventually.
> 
> The hate chicken guy is free to say what he wants, doesn't mean he's right just because he opened his mouth. People lining up for hate chicken can openly show their disdain for homosexuals if they want, ignorance isn't a crime usually. Oh well, if you can't hate blacks anymore, gays'll do, right?
> 
> You say;"I DO NOT support any "right" to impose those beliefs on others who do not share them." Then how about if try to stop forcing your views on marriage on gay people? It works both way.
Click to expand...


What part of "I do not oppose homosexual marriage..." (as bolded above) do you fail to comprehend? Am I to understand that I am somehow "imposing my view of marriage" on a group, just by not offering my enthusiastic support for THEIR view? Sorry, I don't impose my view on others, and I don't put Political Correctness ahead of my personal convictions, either.


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> So you're trying to say that blacks, after having come out of slavery and the back of the bus, are now going to turn around and start denying something they enjoy to another minority?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are the two issues truly the same? Besides what do you do with the blacks who may be found also in a majority opinion against gay marriage in the nation ? Disregard their opinions and trample on their rights to not have that opinion on the matter or subject either ?  I guess that question needs to be asked of the blacks, before trying to attach the issue of gay marriage to their struggle found in the civil rights act, and this as they have known it to be or understood it to be.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What I'm saying is that blacks understand that you can never use a majority to deny the same rights for minorities. They can disagree about anything homosexual, but only a true hypocrite black person would side with the majority over the minority.
Click to expand...

Sounds to me that if the blacks (in your opinion) were to push back against gays being married (as in marriage) from their view or beliefs upon, then you would call them hypocryts, and you would do this because of the issue of slavery in which they over came as a completely different issue altogether, but rather was a struggle that you are trying to infuse with the gay issue in order to give the gay issue of marriage "strength" by this method as is used by you ? If the blacks come out strong with the whites or others in this nation against gay marriage, will you be wanting to throw your black brothers and sisters under the bus, because they couldn't go along with or all the way on supporting such an issue as is found with this gay marraige issue ?


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are the two issues truly the same? Besides what do you do with the blacks who may be found also in a majority opinion against gay marriage in the nation ? Disregard their opinions and trample on their rights to not have that opinion on the matter or subject either ?  I guess that question needs to be asked of the blacks, before trying to attach the issue of gay marriage to their struggle found in the civil rights act, and this as they have known it to be or understood it to be.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What I'm saying is that blacks understand that you can never use a majority to deny the same rights for minorities. They can disagree about anything homosexual, but only a true hypocrite black person would side with the majority over the minority.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sounds to me that if the blacks (in your opinion) were to push back against gays being married (as in marriage) from their view or beliefs upon, then you would call them hypocryts, and you would do this because of the issue of slavery in which they over came as a completely different issue altogether, but rather was a struggle that you are trying to infuse with the gay issue in order to give the gay issue of marriage "strength" by this method as is used by you ? If the blacks come out strong with the whites or others in this nation against gay marriage, will you be wanting to throw your black brothers and sisters under the bus, because they couldn't go along with or all the way on supporting such an issue as is found with this gay marraige issue ?
Click to expand...

I think blacks would identify with such a struggle for acceptance, absolutely. Sure, maybe some would be religiously blind like you are, but probably not that many.
So what is it you have against gays anyways?


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Gadfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> First of all, Marriage, whether by civil or religious ceremony, is legally a contractual relationship which the state has a vested public interest in regulating. This has been by legal precedent a matter which the federal government has left to the states (no federal power to regulate it is enumerated in the constitution). Note that not all heterosexual marriages are permitted by the state(s); the state may (and does) refuse to grant a marriage license to heterosexuals,if one of the parties is already legally married (bigamy); if the two parties are in certain family relationships (incest), if one or both parties has/have not reached the age of consent as defined by that state, and so on. NO ONE, heterosexual or homosexual has any legal "right to marry whoever they choose"; as demonstrated that "right" may be restricted, and the courts have consistently upheld this.
> 
> Second, for the umpteenth time, the issue in this instance is NOT "gay marriage". The issue is Mr. Cathy's constitutional right to say what he believes, without being punished or sanctioned in any way, or his company being punished or sanctioned in any way, by any government, whether local, state or federal, or any official thereof. Therefore when certain public officials threatened to violate that right, the American people showed their support for that right. Note that you, gays, or anyone else who disagrees with Mr. Cathy, are free to boycott his business; what you are NOT free to do, is have the state shut down his business for you. You are also not free to interfere with his business in a way that violates criminal or civil laws (in other words, you MAY protest peacefully; you MAY NOT riot, or breach the peace). I will absolutely support your (or anyone else's) right to do that, as private individuals, if you choose.* What I absolutely WILL NOT support is any attempt to have elected officials use the power of government to do it for you.*
> 
> You might be surprised to learn that I do not oppose homosexual marriage, so long as the parties involved otherwise meet the state requirements for same (i.e. both parties of legal ages, etc.), nor do I favor any persecution or state punishment of homosexuals for their sexual orientation (disorderly expression of same is another matter, as defined and enforced by the same laws which apply to heterosexuals). I neither support nor oppose homosexual conduct between consenting adults; I have my own moral views on the subject, but I do not seek to impose them on others. I am a Christian, however, I do not generally support the positions of the so-called "religious right".* I support their right to state their beliefs; I DO NOT support any "right" to impose those beliefs on others who do not share them.*
> 
> Is that sufficiently clear ?
> 
> 
> 
> The problem is that they can't have it their way, at least without doing what you say that they shouldn't or shall not do, and this without trampling on the rights of others (at least in their minds they can't), so it will be that these things in which they are showing in great disrespect of (or) have done wrongfully in example of, especially in regards to Chic-Fil-A or any other who opposes them being married as an opinion, or even when opposed by states and/or even by the federal government (Bill Clinton signing into law the marriage act, showing by law that marriage is between one man and one woman), and yet to no acknowledgement of this by them I guess, and so they will continue this fight in the incorrect ways no matter, even though you have expressed your views to this person in a very proper and spot on way, yet it matters not what you say or anyone says to these people, as they have an agenda and they will stick with it no matter what or who their agenda tramples upon in this nation, even when done in the wrong ways it still doesn't matter to them.
> 
> How about the anger being expressed by this person, as found within such a desperate attack in that last statement in which this person had used on me ? Lets ya know just what kind of person this nation is dealing with, thus found within these kinds of exposures within these kinds of words spoken.  Good reply by you by the way...Good Job!
> 
> PS. The funny thing is or that was found in that attack or statement made, was that this person must feel that their is something wrong with a person trying to bump another person in the butt, as per the way that this person ((ima)) used that wording on me, as if it would scorn me or bother me and/or something to that affect when used...LOL.... I have never been bumped in the butt, so I wouldn't know, but by the way this person ((ima)) used it as a scare tactic on me, it must be a hurtful and vile thing I guess...LOL Now I am real scared someone will try and bump me in the butt, and it's all because of ima.. ROTFL.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So if 2 gays marry, what right of yours are they trampling on? You weren't at the ceremony, you don't know them, and hell, you didn't even know that they got married, so how does that affect you?
> And if you try to stop gays from marrying, aren't you trampling on the rights of others? Why should you get to decide what everyone's rights are?
Click to expand...

Not just me, but rather also what a huge majority looks at in America when dealing with this stuff, and for whom does see well beyond the ceremony, and that is what the gays hope no one will figure out or think about when they are trying to get married (legitimized completely). 

What are the down the road analysis or impacts of the new agenda that gays now have in their struggle within America, and this in order to somehow go total mainstream in America finally ? Is America ready for this yet ? Who knows, because peoples rights to vote or voice their opinions in a majority on such matters, are being oppressed and silenced by a minority, while the activist media, and activist lawyers, rogue judges, and the idiot ACLU creates mass confusion in this nation now against the majority of Americans, and all by way of the infusion of one issue into another, even though they are in no way the same.


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> What I'm saying is that blacks understand that you can never use a majority to deny the same rights for minorities. They can disagree about anything homosexual, but only a true hypocrite black person would side with the majority over the minority.
> 
> 
> 
> Sounds to me that if the blacks (in your opinion) were to push back against gays being married (as in marriage) from their view or beliefs upon, then you would call them hypocryts, and you would do this because of the issue of slavery in which they over came as a completely different issue altogether, but rather was a struggle that you are trying to infuse with the gay issue in order to give the gay issue of marriage "strength" by this method as is used by you ? If the blacks come out strong with the whites or others in this nation against gay marriage, will you be wanting to throw your black brothers and sisters under the bus, because they couldn't go along with or all the way on supporting such an issue as is found with this gay marraige issue ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I think blacks would identify with such a struggle for acceptance, absolutely. Sure, maybe some would be religiously blind like you are, but probably not that many.
> So what is it you have against gays anyways?
Click to expand...

You just answered your own question in your post written, but I guess you were to blind to realize it...  It is my religious beliefs that pits me against the gay marriage issue along these lines in America.  I think it is a line that many in America don't want to give up yet or have it crossed, and so they want to push back against this step in which the gay's want to take for now, in which to them finally legitimizes their choice of lifestyle to go full mainstream in America finally.

It won't be long that the anti-gay marriage folk will be dead and gone, so as time erodes the codes, then the door will be swung wide open, but not sure how long it will last, because the nation will be moved out into open waters each time the anchor fails, and this is where she will not be so sure of her course anylonger, as she shall be set a drift in a sea of uncertainty by then.


----------



## obama_sucks

I love their food and eat there regularly.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sounds to me that if the blacks (in your opinion) were to push back against gays being married (as in marriage) from their view or beliefs upon, then you would call them hypocryts, and you would do this because of the issue of slavery in which they over came as a completely different issue altogether, but rather was a struggle that you are trying to infuse with the gay issue in order to give the gay issue of marriage "strength" by this method as is used by you ? If the blacks come out strong with the whites or others in this nation against gay marriage, will you be wanting to throw your black brothers and sisters under the bus, because they couldn't go along with or all the way on supporting such an issue as is found with this gay marraige issue ?
> 
> 
> 
> I think blacks would identify with such a struggle for acceptance, absolutely. Sure, maybe some would be religiously blind like you are, but probably not that many.
> So what is it you have against gays anyways?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You just answered your own question in your post written, but I guess you were to blind to realize it...  It is my religious beliefs that pits me against the gay marriage issue along these lines in America.  I think it is a line that many in America don't want to give up yet or have it crossed, and so they want to push back against this step in which the gay's want to take for now, in which to them finally legitimizes their choice of lifestyle to go full mainstream in America finally.
> 
> It won't be long that the anti-gay marriage folk will be dead and gone, so as time erodes the codes, then the door will be swung wide open, but not sure how long it will last, because the nation will be moved out into open waters each time the anchor fails, and this is where she will not be so sure of her course anylonger, as she shall be set a drift in a sea of uncertainty by then.
Click to expand...


The whole concept of Christian religion is gay: god threw Adam out of Eden because he was warned not to bang the woman, but he did and was banished from gay heaven.
The Supremes will out gay marriage in your lifetime. Who ya gonna hate then? What does that book of fiction, the Bible say?


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think blacks would identify with such a struggle for acceptance, absolutely. Sure, maybe some would be religiously blind like you are, but probably not that many.
> So what is it you have against gays anyways?
> 
> 
> 
> You just answered your own question in your post written, but I guess you were to blind to realize it...  It is my religious beliefs that pits me against the gay marriage issue along these lines in America.  I think it is a line that many in America don't want to give up yet or have it crossed, and so they want to push back against this step in which the gay's want to take for now, in which to them finally legitimizes their choice of lifestyle to go full mainstream in America finally.
> 
> It won't be long that the anti-gay marriage folk will be dead and gone, so as time erodes the codes, then the door will be swung wide open, but not sure how long it will last, because the nation will be moved out into open waters each time the anchor fails, and this is where she will not be so sure of her course anylonger, as she shall be set a drift in a sea of uncertainty by then.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The whole concept of Christian religion is gay: god threw Adam out of Eden because he was warned not to bang the woman, but he did and was banished from gay heaven.
> The Supremes will out gay marriage in your lifetime. Who ya gonna hate then? What does that book of fiction, the Bible say?
Click to expand...

I figured as much, that I was dealing with just another sad little devil playing on the inet, who hopes one day to make this nation his or her own when they grow up, and they want this at the destruction of this nation as it stands, and yes this is what the devils minions hope for her, because they hate their ownselves in this life, and they know it and I know it, and as well they hate this nation as it has stood for God in the past, because a nation of Godlyness won't conform to the devilishness they want for this nation, and this in order for it to finally be for them and no one else if they can't have it their way. When people see these sort of works, they see the devil at play, and if they don't take this seriously, then soon the devil will be coming for their families and the children next (already has been the case), just as he has been doing for a good many years now, but now he is intensifying his efforts as the latter days do approach him. Therefore it is that we must say to these devils "get thee behind me satan", for your days are numbered and you know that they are, as it is written so.


----------



## beagle9

obama_sucks said:


> I love their food and eat there regularly.


Wanted some today, but of course it is closed on Sundays, and I will respect that always. The other day when I passed it by, it was packed with customers, and I just smiled as I road on by. Didn't get the chance to stop that day, but "I will be bauck" as Arnold once said..


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You just answered your own question in your post written, but I guess you were to blind to realize it...  It is my religious beliefs that pits me against the gay marriage issue along these lines in America.  I think it is a line that many in America don't want to give up yet or have it crossed, and so they want to push back against this step in which the gay's want to take for now, in which to them finally legitimizes their choice of lifestyle to go full mainstream in America finally.
> 
> It won't be long that the anti-gay marriage folk will be dead and gone, so as time erodes the codes, then the door will be swung wide open, but not sure how long it will last, because the nation will be moved out into open waters each time the anchor fails, and this is where she will not be so sure of her course anylonger, as she shall be set a drift in a sea of uncertainty by then.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The whole concept of Christian religion is gay: god threw Adam out of Eden because he was warned not to bang the woman, but he did and was banished from gay heaven.
> The Supremes will out gay marriage in your lifetime. Who ya gonna hate then? What does that book of fiction, the Bible say?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I figured as much, that I was dealing with just another sad little devil playing on the inet, who hopes one day to make this nation his or her own when they grow up, and they want this at the destruction of this nation as it stands, and yes this is what the devils minions hope for her, because they hate their ownselves in this life, and they know it and I know it, and as well they hate this nation as it has stood for God in the past, because a nation of Godlyness won't conform to the devilishness they want for this nation, and this in order for it to finally be for them and no one else if they can't have it their way. When people see these sort of works, they see the devil at play, and if they don't take this seriously, then soon the devil will be coming for their families and the children next (already has been the case), just as he has been doing for a good many years now, but now he is intensifying his efforts as the latter days do approach him. Therefore it is that we must say to these devils "get thee behind me satan", for your days are numbered and you know that they are, *as it is written so*.
Click to expand...


The Bible is a made up book of myths and fairy tales. Or do you actually believe that Noah got 2 of EVERY animal on the earth and put them on a boat with food for 40 days?


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> The whole concept of Christian religion is gay: god threw Adam out of Eden because he was warned not to bang the woman, but he did and was banished from gay heaven.
> The Supremes will out gay marriage in your lifetime. Who ya gonna hate then? What does that book of fiction, the Bible say?
> 
> 
> 
> I figured as much, that I was dealing with just another sad little devil playing on the inet, who hopes one day to make this nation his or her own when they grow up, and they want this at the destruction of this nation as it stands, and yes this is what the devils minions hope for her, because they hate their ownselves in this life, and they know it and I know it, and as well they hate this nation as it has stood for God in the past, because a nation of Godlyness won't conform to the devilishness they want for this nation, and this in order for it to finally be for them and no one else if they can't have it their way. When people see these sort of works, they see the devil at play, and if they don't take this seriously, then soon the devil will be coming for their families and the children next (already has been the case), just as he has been doing for a good many years now, but now he is intensifying his efforts as the latter days do approach him. Therefore it is that we must say to these devils "get thee behind me satan", for your days are numbered and you know that they are, *as it is written so*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Bible is a made up book of myths and fairy tales. Or do you actually believe that Noah got 2 of EVERY animal on the earth and put them on a boat with food for 40 days?
Click to expand...

Ohhhh so now we are moving towards you wanting to school me (retaliate actually) on what you think that the bible is saying to you when read it, and so now you want to teach me what you think that it should say or mean to me as well, and this according to you ? Did you really go there just now or was it just another oops moment by you ?


----------



## OpenJumper1

beagle9 said:


> No it's cool that the people are standing up for their right to stand up again, instead of laying down and taking it like they have for so long now in America, and I think this is just the tip of the iceburg that is coming so hang on for the ride everybody.




  I agree. It's sick to be told to sit down and when you don't you are called every name in the book. It's just sick and we will NOT comply to lowlife's that don't have a clue what this Country was made of(still is). To sit down is giving up any little freedom we have left.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I figured as much, that I was dealing with just another sad little devil playing on the inet, who hopes one day to make this nation his or her own when they grow up, and they want this at the destruction of this nation as it stands, and yes this is what the devils minions hope for her, because they hate their ownselves in this life, and they know it and I know it, and as well they hate this nation as it has stood for God in the past, because a nation of Godlyness won't conform to the devilishness they want for this nation, and this in order for it to finally be for them and no one else if they can't have it their way. When people see these sort of works, they see the devil at play, and if they don't take this seriously, then soon the devil will be coming for their families and the children next (already has been the case), just as he has been doing for a good many years now, but now he is intensifying his efforts as the latter days do approach him. Therefore it is that we must say to these devils "get thee behind me satan", for your days are numbered and you know that they are, *as it is written so*.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Bible is a made up book of myths and fairy tales. Or do you actually believe that Noah got 2 of EVERY animal on the earth and put them on a boat with food for 40 days?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ohhhh so now we are moving towards you wanting to school me (retaliate actually) on what you think that the bible is saying to you when read it, and so now you want to teach me what you think that it should say or mean to me as well, and this according to you ? Did you really go there just now or was it just another oops moment by you ?
Click to expand...

Just answer the question, or are embarrassed with your answer?


----------



## VanceMack

Ravi said:


> I guess it's cool that people applaud intolerance....


Meh...considering Rahm Emannuel embraced a guy that called teh geyz pigs and swine the same week he stated ChickFilA didnt meet Chicago values, I would say people are just tired of moronic hypocrites that use ginned up outrage for political gain.


----------



## GHook93

Ravi said:


> I guess it's cool that people applaud intolerance....



I disagree with Cathy's view marriage. I see nothing wrong with gay marriage. In fact I see many benefits with it. However, he has a right to his opinion and I disagree with the bully-tactics of the left to suppress dissent and opposing views!


----------



## GHook93

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think blacks would identify with such a struggle for acceptance, absolutely. Sure, maybe some would be religiously blind like you are, but probably not that many.
> So what is it you have against gays anyways?
> 
> 
> 
> You just answered your own question in your post written, but I guess you were to blind to realize it...  It is my religious beliefs that pits me against the gay marriage issue along these lines in America.  I think it is a line that many in America don't want to give up yet or have it crossed, and so they want to push back against this step in which the gay's want to take for now, in which to them finally legitimizes their choice of lifestyle to go full mainstream in America finally.
> 
> It won't be long that the anti-gay marriage folk will be dead and gone, so as time erodes the codes, then the door will be swung wide open, but not sure how long it will last, because the nation will be moved out into open waters each time the anchor fails, and this is where she will not be so sure of her course anylonger, as she shall be set a drift in a sea of uncertainty by then.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The whole concept of Christian religion is gay: god threw Adam out of Eden because he was warned not to bang the woman, but he did and was banished from gay heaven.
> The Supremes will out gay marriage in your lifetime. Who ya gonna hate then? What does that book of fiction, the Bible say?
Click to expand...


From an outsiders view the Bible is a MILLION fold better than that demonic book you worship!


----------



## ConzHateUSA

Homophobic vile filthy conz are just as bigoted and full of hate and ignorance as the KKK in their day

Wait, the KKK is alive and well, isnt it, bigots

from an outsiders view the bible is a joke


----------



## ima

GHook93 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You just answered your own question in your post written, but I guess you were to blind to realize it...  It is my religious beliefs that pits me against the gay marriage issue along these lines in America.  I think it is a line that many in America don't want to give up yet or have it crossed, and so they want to push back against this step in which the gay's want to take for now, in which to them finally legitimizes their choice of lifestyle to go full mainstream in America finally.
> 
> It won't be long that the anti-gay marriage folk will be dead and gone, so as time erodes the codes, then the door will be swung wide open, but not sure how long it will last, because the nation will be moved out into open waters each time the anchor fails, and this is where she will not be so sure of her course anylonger, as she shall be set a drift in a sea of uncertainty by then.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The whole concept of Christian religion is gay: god threw Adam out of Eden because he was warned not to bang the woman, but he did and was banished from gay heaven.
> The Supremes will out gay marriage in your lifetime. Who ya gonna hate then? What does that book of fiction, the Bible say?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> From an outsiders view the Bible is a MILLION fold better than that demonic book you worship!
Click to expand...

I don't worship a book. You do.


----------



## Againsheila

ima said:


> GHook93 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> The whole concept of Christian religion is gay: god threw Adam out of Eden because he was warned not to bang the woman, but he did and was banished from gay heaven.
> The Supremes will out gay marriage in your lifetime. Who ya gonna hate then? What does that book of fiction, the Bible say?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From an outsiders view the Bible is a MILLION fold better than that demonic book you worship!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don't worship a book. You do.
Click to expand...


Christians do not worship the Bible, it is a tool.  We read it, we study it, we try to interpret it to fit our lives.  If someone burns it, they've burned a book.

Meanwhile, the Muslims do worship their Koran and if someone burns it, they kill someone one.  The Jews take very good care of their Torah.  To them it is more than a book.  I had one Jew berate me for the shape of my Bible.  I've had my Bible since 2nd grade and I read it frequently.  It is not pristine as his Torah was.


----------



## VanceMack

ConzHateUSA said:


> Homophobic vile filthy conz are just as bigoted and full of hate and ignorance as the KKK in their day
> 
> Wait, the KKK is alive and well, isnt it, bigots
> 
> from an outsiders view the bible is a joke


I know, right? Like that Obama guy...what a ****. Oh...wait...that was soooo two months ago...


----------



## Katzndogz

The only reason why atheists can call the Bible a joke is because Christians would fight for their rights to do that.

Try it in an islamic country and call the koran a joke and see how far it gets you.


----------



## ConzHateUSA

Katzndogz said:


> The only reason why atheists can call the Bible a joke is because Christians would fight for their rights to do that.
> 
> Try it in an islamic country and call the koran a joke and see how far it gets you.



You really are getting dumber by the day, how sad.


----------



## beagle9

ConzHateUSA said:


> Homophobic vile filthy conz are just as bigoted and full of hate and ignorance as the KKK in their day
> 
> Wait, the KKK is alive and well, isnt it, bigots
> 
> from an outsiders view the bible is a joke


Rep Power: 0 

Conman..


----------



## ima

Againsheila said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> GHook93 said:
> 
> 
> 
> From an outsiders view the Bible is a MILLION fold better than that demonic book you worship!
> 
> 
> 
> I don't worship a book. You do.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Christians do not worship the Bible, it is a tool.  We read it, we study it, we try to interpret it to fit our lives.  If someone burns it, they've burned a book.
> 
> Meanwhile, the Muslims do worship their Koran and if someone burns it, they kill someone one.  The Jews take very good care of their Torah.  To them it is more than a book.  I had one Jew berate me for the shape of my Bible.  I've had my Bible since 2nd grade and I read it frequently.  It is not pristine as his Torah was.
Click to expand...


Nice try. Christians think that the bible is the word of some invisible superbeing who made them! In other words, you worship it as the word of god.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ConzHateUSA said:
> 
> 
> 
> Homophobic vile filthy conz are just as bigoted and full of hate and ignorance as the KKK in their day
> 
> Wait, the KKK is alive and well, isnt it, bigots
> 
> from an outsiders view the bible is a joke
> 
> 
> 
> Rep Power: 0
> 
> Conman..
Click to expand...


So beag, you too much of a douchebag to answer my question: do you think that Noah actually gathered up 2 of EVERY animal on the earth with food for 40 days and built a boat big enough for everyone that wouldn't sink under the weight of all the excrement produced?


----------



## PuttheWhiteBack

ima said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't worship a book. You do.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Christians do not worship the Bible, it is a tool.  We read it, we study it, we try to interpret it to fit our lives.  If someone burns it, they've burned a book.
> 
> Meanwhile, the Muslims do worship their Koran and if someone burns it, they kill someone one.  The Jews take very good care of their Torah.  To them it is more than a book.  I had one Jew berate me for the shape of my Bible.  I've had my Bible since 2nd grade and I read it frequently.  It is not pristine as his Torah was.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nice try. Christians think that the bible is the word of some invisible superbeing who made them! In other words, you worship it as the word of god.
Click to expand...


Talk about intollerance!  Poking fun at religion never gets old for you "educated" liberals.  Christianity seems to be one brand of cultural heritage you just cannot support.  That's ok though, God still loves you.


----------



## ima

PuttheWhiteBack said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> 
> Christians do not worship the Bible, it is a tool.  We read it, we study it, we try to interpret it to fit our lives.  If someone burns it, they've burned a book.
> 
> Meanwhile, the Muslims do worship their Koran and if someone burns it, they kill someone one.  The Jews take very good care of their Torah.  To them it is more than a book.  I had one Jew berate me for the shape of my Bible.  I've had my Bible since 2nd grade and I read it frequently.  It is not pristine as his Torah was.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nice try. Christians think that the bible is the word of some invisible superbeing who made them! In other words, you worship it as the word of god.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Talk about intollerance!  Poking fun at religion never gets old for you "educated" liberals.  Christianity seems to be one brand of cultural heritage you just cannot support.  That's ok though, *God still loves you*.
Click to expand...


Prove it.


----------



## Againsheila

ima said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't worship a book. You do.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Christians do not worship the Bible, it is a tool.  We read it, we study it, we try to interpret it to fit our lives.  If someone burns it, they've burned a book.
> 
> Meanwhile, the Muslims do worship their Koran and if someone burns it, they kill someone one.  The Jews take very good care of their Torah.  To them it is more than a book.  I had one Jew berate me for the shape of my Bible.  I've had my Bible since 2nd grade and I read it frequently.  It is not pristine as his Torah was.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nice try. Christians think that the bible is the word of some invisible superbeing who made them! In other words, you worship it as the word of god.
Click to expand...


No one worships the Bible, like I said, it's a tool.  Many believe it's the word of God, many more believe it was written by man, inspired by God and therefore has flaws the same as we do.  That's why we read it so much.  Even as the word of God, it's in written form and therefore not a religious artifact, only a tool.  Christians are not suppose to worship idols and I believe that includes books.


----------



## Pho_King

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ConzHateUSA said:
> 
> 
> 
> Homophobic vile filthy conz are just as bigoted and full of hate and ignorance as the KKK in their day
> 
> Wait, the KKK is alive and well, isnt it, bigots
> 
> from an outsiders view the bible is a joke
> 
> 
> 
> Rep Power: 0
> 
> Conman..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So beag, you too much of a douchebag to answer my question: do you think that Noah actually gathered up 2 of EVERY animal on the earth with food for 40 days and built a boat big enough for everyone that wouldn't sink under the weight of all the excrement produced?
Click to expand...


Maybe.  you presumably grew up in a house that could handle the massive quantities of horseshit that flies out both your holes.  Ain't no plumbing system in the world that could discharge all that.


----------



## Pho_King

ima said:


> PuttheWhiteBack said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nice try. Christians think that the bible is the word of some invisible superbeing who made them! In other words, you worship it as the word of god.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Talk about intollerance!  Poking fun at religion never gets old for you "educated" liberals.  Christianity seems to be one brand of cultural heritage you just cannot support.  That's ok though, *God still loves you*.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Prove it.
Click to expand...


He probably doesn't.  You are an unloveable tickterd.


----------



## beagle9

Againsheila said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> 
> Christians do not worship the Bible, it is a tool.  We read it, we study it, we try to interpret it to fit our lives.  If someone burns it, they've burned a book.
> 
> Meanwhile, the Muslims do worship their Koran and if someone burns it, they kill someone one.  The Jews take very good care of their Torah.  To them it is more than a book.  I had one Jew berate me for the shape of my Bible.  I've had my Bible since 2nd grade and I read it frequently.  It is not pristine as his Torah was.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nice try. Christians think that the bible is the word of some invisible superbeing who made them! In other words, you worship it as the word of god.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No one worships the Bible, like I said, it's a tool.  Many believe it's the word of God, many more believe it was written by man, inspired by God and therefore has flaws the same as we do.  That's why we read it so much.  Even as the word of God, it's in written form and therefore not a religious artifact, only a tool.  Christians are not suppose to worship idols and I believe that includes books.
Click to expand...

Very good point, but it needs to be thrown away by ima (no matter what the very good point is or how good it was when it was made), because he or she must justify their lifestyle or choices now in which they have made, and this no matter what, so it is useless to try and change or argue with them at this point in time. It is that they have now made personal choices in their lives, and so if the book of life (the bible as we read it and believe it) says that he or she is sadly in the wrong when interpreted by us upon our understanding when read it, then in no way will you or I or anyone else ever get through to them on such a point, and this until their own choices come back to bite them hard in their own lives as they have chosen them. Even so they will rebuke what is true or is found to be truth by them, and even within their own sorrows will they still rebuke this truth, in which will be proven to them later on down the line sadly enough, especially when find that they were wrong & the bible was right. This is as it always has been in such cases found over the years, yet sadly to their lack of understanding, and all because of a worldly PRIDE in their lives now, will they then rebuke this truth no matter what, so you at this point are waisting your breath I'm afraid, and so was I at this point in time also.


----------



## Peach

Chick Fi LARD did it the old fashioned way: APPEAL TO THE LOWEST COMMON DENOMINATOR.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nice try. Christians think that the bible is the word of some invisible superbeing who made them! In other words, you worship it as the word of god.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No one worships the Bible, like I said, it's a tool.  Many believe it's the word of God, many more believe it was written by man, inspired by God and therefore has flaws the same as we do.  That's why we read it so much.  Even as the word of God, it's in written form and therefore not a religious artifact, only a tool.  Christians are not suppose to worship idols and I believe that includes books.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Very good point, but it needs to be thrown away by ima (no matter what the very good point is or how good it was when it was made), because he or she must justify their lifestyle or choices now in which they have made, and this no matter what, so it is useless to try and change or argue with them at this point in time. It is that they have now made personal choices in their lives, and so if the book of life (the bible as we read it and believe it) says that he or she is sadly in the wrong when interpreted by us upon our understanding when read it, then in no way will you or I or anyone else ever get through to them on such a point, and this until their own choices come back to bite them hard in their own lives as they have chosen them. Even so they will rebuke what is true or is found to be truth by them, and even within their own sorrows will they still rebuke this truth, in which will be proven to them later on down the line sadly enough, especially when find that they were wrong & *the bible was right*. This is as it always has been in such cases found over the years, yet sadly to their lack of understanding, and all because of a worldly PRIDE in their lives now, will they then rebuke this truth no matter what, so you at this point are waisting your breath I'm afraid, and so was I at this point in time also.
Click to expand...


Beag, I'm genuinely interested to know how you can prove any of the major points in the bible, like making the world in 6 days, Noah, the parting of the sea, making a woman out of a man's rib... Like seriously, they all sound like made up stories, where's the proof?


----------



## Pho_King

Peach said:


> Chick Fi LARD did it the old fashioned way: APPEAL TO THE LOWEST COMMON DENOMINATOR.



Yeah.  The faithful really are the lowest common denominator in this country.   They are way worse than you OWS parasites.


----------



## ConzHateUSA

Peach said:


> Chick Fi LARD did it the old fashioned way: APPEAL TO THE LOWEST COMMON DENOMINATOR.



They are an unusually horrible company, they dont just hate Gays, and they really hate Gays, they hate their own franchisees as I read it...


----------



## Pho_King

ConzHateUSA said:


> Peach said:
> 
> 
> 
> Chick Fi LARD did it the old fashioned way: APPEAL TO THE LOWEST COMMON DENOMINATOR.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They are an unusually horrible company, they dont just hate Gays, and they really hate Gays, they hate their own franchisees as I read it...
Click to expand...


Try speaking from your mouth.   Your insistence in using your ass to talk results in nothing but shit being produced.


----------



## Gadawg73

Bottom line:
Chick Fil A, their owners and their customers can say what they want.
We all can agree or disagree as we all want to whatever side we want.
Taxpayer funds or suppport should never be used to attack the rights of private industry and their opinions as opinions are only words.
If people do not like what businesses say publicly no one forces them to trade there.
Born and raised in the south. Although I do not agree with what many Southern Baptists believe in I will fight to the death for their right to say it. Freedom of speech.
The Cathy family has walked the walk. They do a lot of good. They are fine folks.
If they want to send $$$ to groups that claim quack ideas such as gays can be "cured" and BS as that they have every right to do so. None of my business and I have gay folk in my family.
I am a supporter of gay rights 100% but this fight set them back. 
Choose your battles wisely. This one backfired on them, no pun intended.
I see nothing wrong whatsoever with folk that wanted to go support Cathy and his ideas that night at Chick Fil A. Place was packed. I believe in equality for everyone and did not attend but do not oppose the right of anyone to express their opinion by going there that night. MOre power to them as this is America and I respect them for expressing their opinion.
I still eat at Chick Fil A as they have a quality product and good staff and also at a local Italian place that 2 gay guys own.


----------



## Gadawg73

ConzHateUSA said:


> Peach said:
> 
> 
> 
> Chick Fi LARD did it the old fashioned way: APPEAL TO THE LOWEST COMMON DENOMINATOR.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They are an unusually horrible company, they dont just hate Gays, and they really hate Gays, they hate their own franchisees as I read it...
Click to expand...


Bull shit. They don't hate anyone. Many do but most do not.
Yes, many folk do hate with a passion gay folk but not the Cathy family. 
I do not agree with their opinion that "the gay lifestyle is a choice and a sin" as my church does not believe that.
But just because they believe them does not make them haters of anything.
I know many of these folks and they do not hate gays. In fact a good friend of mine is strict Southern Baptist and just last week I was at the football field and he was at the fence watching practice talking to an openly gay teacher at the school and the discussion was football, not politics or religion.
I KNOW THESE FOLKS, most of them I do not agree with many of their religous beliefs, but they are fine and decent people.
Shame their good name gets slaughtered in the media. Maybe their support of some of the organizations causes some more folk to hate gays but you can not fault them for that.


----------



## ConzHateUSA

chick fil a supports hate

the owner gives money to extremist org's that seek to eliminate Gay people from the planet

they are horrible, just because they have the right to be horrifically disgusting people with their actions, doesnt mean they should not be exposed for the garbage they are


----------



## Pho_King

ConzHateUSA said:


> chick fil a supports hate
> 
> the owner gives money to extremist org's that seek to eliminate Gay people from the planet
> 
> they are horrible, just because they have the right to be horrifically disgusting people with their actions, doesnt mean they should not be exposed for the garbage they are



Shut the fuck up you mongoloid.


----------



## ConzHateUSA

Pho_King said:


> ConzHateUSA said:
> 
> 
> 
> chick fil a supports hate
> 
> the owner gives money to extremist org's that seek to eliminate Gay people from the planet
> 
> they are horrible, just because they have the right to be horrifically disgusting people with their actions, doesnt mean they should not be exposed for the garbage they are
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Shut the fuck up you mongoloid.
Click to expand...


So, freedom of speech for people like you who promote hate, but not for me, who exposes it



You are a fine example of an American


----------



## Gadawg73

ConzHateUSA said:


> chick fil a supports hate
> 
> the owner gives money to extremist org's that seek to eliminate Gay people from the planet
> 
> they are horrible, just because they have the right to be horrifically disgusting people with their actions, doesnt mean they should not be exposed for the garbage they are



I have gay family members that I LOVE and I support them 100%.
I do not agree with some of the organizations that CFA contributes to but NONE of them advocate killing gays.
Show me and educate me otherwise.


----------



## ConzHateUSA

Gadawg73 said:


> ConzHateUSA said:
> 
> 
> 
> chick fil a supports hate
> 
> the owner gives money to extremist org's that seek to eliminate Gay people from the planet
> 
> they are horrible, just because they have the right to be horrifically disgusting people with their actions, doesnt mean they should not be exposed for the garbage they are
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have gay family members that I LOVE and I support them 100%.
> I do not agree with some of the organizations that CFA contributes to but NONE of them advocate killing gays.
> Show me and educate me otherwise.
Click to expand...


do your own research, it is well known the foreign entity he has contributed to that seeks to eliminate or at a minimum "fix" Gays


----------



## Gadawg73

On the flip side this does not do much good either for the anti gay marriage movement.
With all the 100s of other of other problems we face as a nation they were stuck on gay marriage, a NON ISSUE.
But the uproar over free speech was also a NON ISSUE.
They have every damn right there is to say what they want and contribute to what they want.
FREE SPEECH.
Amazing though the correct supporters of freedom here do not walk the walk when it comes to the rights of gay folk to get married.
True defenders of freedom seek to protect the rights of those THEY MAY DESPISE THE MOST.
No true conservative opposes gay marriage.
But that still does nothing for the 100% correct case that what CFA and their owners did WAS FREE SPEECH.
I am off to get a sandwich and waffle fries with home made lemonaid.
Before my 1 o'clock meeting.


----------



## ConzHateUSA

Chick-Fil-A's Anti-Gay Donations Totaled Nearly $2 Million In 2010: Report

you should pay me for doing your homework for you

PURE hate


----------



## Gadawg73

ConzHateUSA said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ConzHateUSA said:
> 
> 
> 
> chick fil a supports hate
> 
> the owner gives money to extremist org's that seek to eliminate Gay people from the planet
> 
> they are horrible, just because they have the right to be horrifically disgusting people with their actions, doesnt mean they should not be exposed for the garbage they are
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have gay family members that I LOVE and I support them 100%.
> I do not agree with some of the organizations that CFA contributes to but NONE of them advocate killing gays.
> Show me and educate me otherwise.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> do your own research, it is well known the foreign entity he has contributed to that seeks to eliminate or at a minimum "fix" Gays
Click to expand...


OK, I will as I am one here that prefers to do that than rely on other's BS links.
But I do not believe it now.


----------



## ConzHateUSA

Gadawg73 said:


> ConzHateUSA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have gay family members that I LOVE and I support them 100%.
> I do not agree with some of the organizations that CFA contributes to but NONE of them advocate killing gays.
> Show me and educate me otherwise.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> do your own research, it is well known the foreign entity he has contributed to that seeks to eliminate or at a minimum "fix" Gays
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> OK, I will as I am one here that prefers to do that than rely on other's BS links.
> But I do not believe it now.
Click to expand...


frc
exodus

these are hate groups, extreme hate groups...

dont pretend to support Gay rights and say you dont know this, or after you are informed as you are now, I assume you will change your position?


----------



## Gadawg73

ConzHateUSA said:


> Chick-Fil-A's Anti-Gay Donations Totaled Nearly $2 Million In 2010: Report
> 
> you should pay me for doing your homework for you
> 
> PURE hate



You need to back up the "they are killing gays" claim.
Where is that?
They can do what they want with their $$$. I oppose a lot of things and a lot of folks hate this and that.
Where are the death squads in this?


----------



## ConzHateUSA

Gadawg73 said:


> ConzHateUSA said:
> 
> 
> 
> Chick-Fil-A's Anti-Gay Donations Totaled Nearly $2 Million In 2010: Report
> 
> you should pay me for doing your homework for you
> 
> PURE hate
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You need to back up the "they are killing gays" claim.
> Where is that?
> They can do what they want with their $$$. I oppose a lot of things and a lot of folks hate this and that.
> Where are the death squads in this?
Click to expand...


stop pretending to support Gays, you dont

you cant if you are a rightwinger, sorry

yes, they seek to eliminate Gay people, again, if you arent willing to do the research, then stop posting about what you know nothing about


----------



## ima

Pho_King said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PuttheWhiteBack said:
> 
> 
> 
> Talk about intollerance!  Poking fun at religion never gets old for you "educated" liberals.  Christianity seems to be one brand of cultural heritage you just cannot support.  That's ok though, *God still loves you*.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prove it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He probably doesn't.  You are an unloveable tickterd.
Click to expand...


Wasn't I made in His image?


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> 
> No one worships the Bible, like I said, it's a tool.  Many believe it's the word of God, many more believe it was written by man, inspired by God and therefore has flaws the same as we do.  That's why we read it so much.  Even as the word of God, it's in written form and therefore not a religious artifact, only a tool.  Christians are not suppose to worship idols and I believe that includes books.
> 
> 
> 
> Very good point, but it needs to be thrown away by ima (no matter what the very good point is or how good it was when it was made), because he or she must justify their lifestyle or choices now in which they have made, and this no matter what, so it is useless to try and change or argue with them at this point in time. It is that they have now made personal choices in their lives, and so if the book of life (the bible as we read it and believe it) says that he or she is sadly in the wrong when interpreted by us upon our understanding when read it, then in no way will you or I or anyone else ever get through to them on such a point, and this until their own choices come back to bite them hard in their own lives as they have chosen them. Even so they will rebuke what is true or is found to be truth by them, and even within their own sorrows will they still rebuke this truth, in which will be proven to them later on down the line sadly enough, especially when find that they were wrong & *the bible was right*. This is as it always has been in such cases found over the years, yet sadly to their lack of understanding, and all because of a worldly PRIDE in their lives now, will they then rebuke this truth no matter what, so you at this point are waisting your breath I'm afraid, and so was I at this point in time also.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Beag, I'm genuinely interested to know how you can prove any of the major points in the bible, like making the world in 6 days, Noah, the parting of the sea, making a woman out of a man's rib... Like seriously, they all sound like made up stories, where's the proof?
Click to expand...

It's an old game that you are playing, just as the mockers in Jesus time also played this same ancient game, by otherwise demanding our Lord prove himself to them while he was upon the cross & upon the earth. It is the same game back then as it is right now, so it seems that nothing changes along these lines of questioning over the years and/or centuries (of course it doesn't). This game is played by those who are evil to their cores, and therefore work directly for the evil one himself in their lives right now to date. Go into the new testement and read about these things, and by what significance those who are evil upon this earth placed upon the word "IF", and this when they spoke during those times regarding the Lord our God who art in Heaven till this very day, as he had given the ultimate sacrifice for our sins in order that we might be saved for whom do believe, and have faith in this belief until the very end. 

Your own character and questioning is proof enough that you are on a side of life that is very dangerous unto your own soul, but you demand proof from me, when all you have to do is listen to your ownself speak, and then for more proof, just go into the Bible and find those who are of the same character or were of the same character for which is exactly as you are, and also for what role that they had played in those times in which your signature is all over, and is found within these same roles in which you and them had played or still play, yet you act as if you donot know this or can't figure this out ? So sad ! 

How is it that the character of a person can transend generations, and still be the same character be it either good or bad that was written about so many years ago ? Then think about the truth in this that I speak, and then think about for what it speaks of even further within the word, in which also tells about what will eventually happen to those who have taken on these attributes or chatacteristics within their own lives, as to be found in example of just as well.


----------



## Pho_King

ima said:


> Pho_King said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Prove it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He probably doesn't.  You are an unloveable tickterd.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wasn't I made in His image?
Click to expand...


No.  You were made in the image of His excrement.


----------



## beagle9

Gadawg73 said:


> ConzHateUSA said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Peach said:
> 
> 
> 
> Chick Fi LARD did it the old fashioned way: APPEAL TO THE LOWEST COMMON DENOMINATOR.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They are an unusually horrible company, they dont just hate Gays, and they really hate Gays, they hate their own franchisees as I read it...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Bull shit. They don't hate anyone. Many do but most do not.
> Yes, many folk do hate with a passion gay folk but not the Cathy family.
> I do not agree with their opinion that "the gay lifestyle is a choice and a sin" as my church does not believe that.
> But just because they believe them does not make them haters of anything.
> I know many of these folks and they do not hate gays. In fact a good friend of mine is strict Southern Baptist and just last week I was at the football field and he was at the fence watching practice talking to an openly gay teacher at the school and the discussion was football, not politics or religion.
> I KNOW THESE FOLKS, most of them I do not agree with many of their religous beliefs, but they are fine and decent people.
> Shame their good name gets slaughtered in the media. Maybe their support of some of the organizations causes some more folk to hate gays but you can not fault them for that.
Click to expand...

What I don't understand is this, how can a church say that they are a church that believes in the word of God, for which is found all through their Bibles as pertaining to each period that is being spoken of or is being spoken to, and this as it is found within their bibles to be therefore agreed upon by the church, and is agreed upon that it is their doctrine in which their foundation is built upon (or) that their teachings of the Bible are being done in the spirit of gaining membership or converting people to a better understanding of life, just as it is learned from the book in which they believe in, and do read as truth, but then somehow along the way they become sympothetic with the devil or his ways for which is found along the path in which they begin (straying), to then begin twisting the word to conform to what man decides is his truth, and not that of the Lords truth in which the church therefore was built upon in this truth ? 

If entertained by them enough, it causes many a bad thing to begin to come upon them and their society of people in which they have preached to over the years, but now have gone another way. They even place the church in peril itself I think, when this sort of thing begins to go on, but they do it anyway and no matter these days it seems. 

I just don't get this really. 

Either you believe the Bible and the time periods for which it is speaking to amongst the generations or you don't believe in any of it at all. Right now we are living within the New Testement period, where many understandings are being learned from within these periods as it was written for, and if we just let the wisdom of the period as is found within the book speak to us again, and not deny it as "ima" is trying to do for us all, then we may begin to learn something again.  I listen to what the spirit has to say, and I follow no man or woman upon this earth unless they have something profitable to offer in their words spoken, then I may entertain their thoughts for which may become wisdom or profitable unto me, and this as pertaining to the Bible and the word within it that is profitable unto me, and only then will I do this entertaining of.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Very good point, but it needs to be thrown away by ima (no matter what the very good point is or how good it was when it was made), because he or she must justify their lifestyle or choices now in which they have made, and this no matter what, so it is useless to try and change or argue with them at this point in time. It is that they have now made personal choices in their lives, and so if the book of life (the bible as we read it and believe it) says that he or she is sadly in the wrong when interpreted by us upon our understanding when read it, then in no way will you or I or anyone else ever get through to them on such a point, and this until their own choices come back to bite them hard in their own lives as they have chosen them. Even so they will rebuke what is true or is found to be truth by them, and even within their own sorrows will they still rebuke this truth, in which will be proven to them later on down the line sadly enough, especially when find that they were wrong & *the bible was right*. This is as it always has been in such cases found over the years, yet sadly to their lack of understanding, and all because of a worldly PRIDE in their lives now, will they then rebuke this truth no matter what, so you at this point are waisting your breath I'm afraid, and so was I at this point in time also.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Beag, I'm genuinely interested to know how you can prove any of the major points in the bible, like making the world in 6 days, Noah, the parting of the sea, making a woman out of a man's rib... Like seriously, they all sound like made up stories, where's the proof?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> It's an old game that you are playing, just as the mockers in Jesus time also played this same ancient game, by otherwise demanding our Lord prove himself to them while he was upon the cross & upon the earth. It is the same game back then as it is right now, so it seems that nothing changes along these lines of questioning over the years and/or centuries (of course it doesn't). This game is played by those who are evil to their cores, and therefore work directly for the evil one himself in their lives right now to date. Go into the new testement and read about these things, and by what significance those who are evil upon this earth placed upon the word "IF", and this when they spoke during those times regarding the Lord our God who art in Heaven till this very day, as he had given the ultimate sacrifice for our sins in order that we might be saved for whom do believe, and have faith in this belief until the very end.
> 
> Your own character and questioning is proof enough that you are on a side of life that is very dangerous unto your own soul, but you demand proof from me, when all you have to do is listen to your ownself speak, and then for more proof, just go into the Bible and find those who are of the same character or were of the same character for which is exactly as you are, and also for what role that they had played in those times in which your signature is all over, and is found within these same roles in which you and them had played or still play, yet you act as if you donot know this or can't figure this out ? So sad !
> 
> How is it that the character of a person can transend generations, and still be the same character be it either good or bad that was written about so many years ago ? Then think about the truth in this that I speak, and then think about for what it speaks of even further within the word, in which also tells about what will eventually happen to those who have taken on these attributes or chatacteristics within their own lives, as to be found in example of just as well.
Click to expand...

Man, you're seriously whacked!

I ask you for proof and you have none, kinda like living your life in a fantasy world.
The bible is just a book written by men. As for Jesus, there is no actual proof that he actually existed. If you have any, I'd be very interested to hear what you have.
PS the devil doesn't exist either.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ConzHateUSA said:
> 
> 
> 
> They are an unusually horrible company, they dont just hate Gays, and they really hate Gays, they hate their own franchisees as I read it...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bull shit. They don't hate anyone. Many do but most do not.
> Yes, many folk do hate with a passion gay folk but not the Cathy family.
> I do not agree with their opinion that "the gay lifestyle is a choice and a sin" as my church does not believe that.
> But just because they believe them does not make them haters of anything.
> I know many of these folks and they do not hate gays. In fact a good friend of mine is strict Southern Baptist and just last week I was at the football field and he was at the fence watching practice talking to an openly gay teacher at the school and the discussion was football, not politics or religion.
> I KNOW THESE FOLKS, most of them I do not agree with many of their religous beliefs, but they are fine and decent people.
> Shame their good name gets slaughtered in the media. Maybe their support of some of the organizations causes some more folk to hate gays but you can not fault them for that.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What I don't understand is this, how can a church say that they are a church that believes in the word of God, for which is found all through their Bibles as pertaining to each period that is being spoken of or is being spoken to, and this as it is found within their bibles to be therefore agreed upon by the church, and is agreed upon that it is their doctrine in which their foundation is built upon (or) that their teachings of the Bible are being done in the spirit of gaining membership or converting people to a better understanding of life, just as it is learned from the book in which they believe in, and do read as truth, but then somehow along the way they become sympothetic with the devil or his ways for which is found along the path in which they begin (straying), to then begin twisting the word to conform to what man decides is his truth, and not that of the Lords truth in which the church therefore was built upon in this truth ?
> 
> If entertained by them enough, it causes many a bad thing to begin to come upon them and their society of people in which they have preached to over the years, but now have gone another way. They even place the church in peril itself I think, when this sort of thing begins to go on, but they do it anyway and no matter these days it seems.
> 
> I just don't get this really.
> 
> Either you believe the Bible and the time periods for which it is speaking to amongst the generations or you don't believe in any of it at all. Right now we are living within the New Testement period, where many understandings are being learned from within these periods as it was written for, and if we just let the wisdom of the period as is found within the book speak to us again, and not deny it as "ima" is trying to do for us all, then we may begin to learn something again.  I listen to what the spirit has to say, and I follow no man or woman upon this earth unless they have something profitable to offer in their words spoken, then I may entertain their thoughts for which may become wisdom or profitable unto me, and this as pertaining to the Bible and the word within it that is profitable unto me, and only then will I do this entertaining of.
Click to expand...


So how do you explain that most priests are pedophiles?


----------



## gallantwarrior

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Bull shit. They don't hate anyone. Many do but most do not.
> Yes, many folk do hate with a passion gay folk but not the Cathy family.
> I do not agree with their opinion that "the gay lifestyle is a choice and a sin" as my church does not believe that.
> But just because they believe them does not make them haters of anything.
> I know many of these folks and they do not hate gays. In fact a good friend of mine is strict Southern Baptist and just last week I was at the football field and he was at the fence watching practice talking to an openly gay teacher at the school and the discussion was football, not politics or religion.
> I KNOW THESE FOLKS, most of them I do not agree with many of their religous beliefs, but they are fine and decent people.
> Shame their good name gets slaughtered in the media. Maybe their support of some of the organizations causes some more folk to hate gays but you can not fault them for that.
> 
> 
> 
> What I don't understand is this, how can a church say that they are a church that believes in the word of God, for which is found all through their Bibles as pertaining to each period that is being spoken of or is being spoken to, and this as it is found within their bibles to be therefore agreed upon by the church, and is agreed upon that it is their doctrine in which their foundation is built upon (or) that their teachings of the Bible are being done in the spirit of gaining membership or converting people to a better understanding of life, just as it is learned from the book in which they believe in, and do read as truth, but then somehow along the way they become sympothetic with the devil or his ways for which is found along the path in which they begin (straying), to then begin twisting the word to conform to what man decides is his truth, and not that of the Lords truth in which the church therefore was built upon in this truth ?
> 
> If entertained by them enough, it causes many a bad thing to begin to come upon them and their society of people in which they have preached to over the years, but now have gone another way. They even place the church in peril itself I think, when this sort of thing begins to go on, but they do it anyway and no matter these days it seems.
> 
> I just don't get this really.
> 
> Either you believe the Bible and the time periods for which it is speaking to amongst the generations or you don't believe in any of it at all. Right now we are living within the New Testement period, where many understandings are being learned from within these periods as it was written for, and if we just let the wisdom of the period as is found within the book speak to us again, and not deny it as "ima" is trying to do for us all, then we may begin to learn something again.  I listen to what the spirit has to say, and I follow no man or woman upon this earth unless they have something profitable to offer in their words spoken, then I may entertain their thoughts for which may become wisdom or profitable unto me, and this as pertaining to the Bible and the word within it that is profitable unto me, and only then will I do this entertaining of.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So how do you explain that most priests are pedophiles?
Click to expand...


Link?  How do you know that most priests are pedophiles?


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Beag, I'm genuinely interested to know how you can prove any of the major points in the bible, like making the world in 6 days, Noah, the parting of the sea, making a woman out of a man's rib... Like seriously, they all sound like made up stories, where's the proof?
> 
> 
> 
> It's an old game that you are playing, just as the mockers in Jesus time also played this same ancient game, by otherwise demanding our Lord prove himself to them while he was upon the cross & upon the earth. It is the same game back then as it is right now, so it seems that nothing changes along these lines of questioning over the years and/or centuries (of course it doesn't). This game is played by those who are evil to their cores, and therefore work directly for the evil one himself in their lives right now to date. Go into the new testement and read about these things, and by what significance those who are evil upon this earth placed upon the word "IF", and this when they spoke during those times regarding the Lord our God who art in Heaven till this very day, as he had given the ultimate sacrifice for our sins in order that we might be saved for whom do believe, and have faith in this belief until the very end.
> 
> Your own character and questioning is proof enough that you are on a side of life that is very dangerous unto your own soul, but you demand proof from me, when all you have to do is listen to your ownself speak, and then for more proof, just go into the Bible and find those who are of the same character or were of the same character for which is exactly as you are, and also for what role that they had played in those times in which your signature is all over, and is found within these same roles in which you and them had played or still play, yet you act as if you donot know this or can't figure this out ? So sad !
> 
> How is it that the character of a person can transend generations, and still be the same character be it either good or bad that was written about so many years ago ? Then think about the truth in this that I speak, and then think about for what it speaks of even further within the word, in which also tells about what will eventually happen to those who have taken on these attributes or chatacteristics within their own lives, as to be found in example of just as well.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Man, you're seriously whacked!
> 
> I ask you for proof and you have none, kinda like living your life in a fantasy world.
> The bible is just a book written by men. As for Jesus, there is no actual proof that he actually existed. If you have any, I'd be very interested to hear what you have.
> PS the devil doesn't exist either.
Click to expand...

Whacked eh? I bet you are one of those ones who would say that the "holocoust" never happened either, and would argue that point to know end, just like it is found in another for whom could easily be your associate in this world, the un-famous "Mach-mood Ademajod".

Read what Jesus said to Pilot when Pilot asked Jesus to speak in his defense as far as proving something goes, ummmmm but then again it will do no good with you, just as it would have done no good with Pilot as Jesus knew also during that time, because your mind is made up or either you are just pure evil, and thus your own little world in which you live within a world has since been created by you, and this is where the game is being played from, in which is as a thorn being cast into the Christians side by you, and this from your side of the tracks but why? What is it gaining you to be this thorn as you try and be in your life unto others, I mean instead of you just living your life as you see fit & within reason (keeping your bedroom habits to yourself), and letting others live their lives as they see fit and/or within reason in the same ? Are you jealous maybe or are you abused in life, what is it with you I wonder, because it's something bad, but you won't tell that part of it, oh no you won't go there will you?


----------



## beagle9

gallantwarrior said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> What I don't understand is this, how can a church say that they are a church that believes in the word of God, for which is found all through their Bibles as pertaining to each period that is being spoken of or is being spoken to, and this as it is found within their bibles to be therefore agreed upon by the church, and is agreed upon that it is their doctrine in which their foundation is built upon (or) that their teachings of the Bible are being done in the spirit of gaining membership or converting people to a better understanding of life, just as it is learned from the book in which they believe in, and do read as truth, but then somehow along the way they become sympothetic with the devil or his ways for which is found along the path in which they begin (straying), to then begin twisting the word to conform to what man decides is his truth, and not that of the Lords truth in which the church therefore was built upon in this truth ?
> 
> If entertained by them enough, it causes many a bad thing to begin to come upon them and their society of people in which they have preached to over the years, but now have gone another way. They even place the church in peril itself I think, when this sort of thing begins to go on, but they do it anyway and no matter these days it seems.
> 
> I just don't get this really.
> 
> Either you believe the Bible and the time periods for which it is speaking to amongst the generations or you don't believe in any of it at all. Right now we are living within the New Testement period, where many understandings are being learned from within these periods as it was written for, and if we just let the wisdom of the period as is found within the book speak to us again, and not deny it as "ima" is trying to do for us all, then we may begin to learn something again.  I listen to what the spirit has to say, and I follow no man or woman upon this earth unless they have something profitable to offer in their words spoken, then I may entertain their thoughts for which may become wisdom or profitable unto me, and this as pertaining to the Bible and the word within it that is profitable unto me, and only then will I do this entertaining of.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So how do you explain that most priests are pedophiles?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Link?  How do you know that most priests are pedophiles?
Click to expand...

ima feels that any information (no matter what the ratio's) is viable in her attacks, and this all due to his or her disgruntleness and disliking of his or her own life as he or she has known it to be, and so their way of venting that disgruntleness is by what he or she is doing in this thread to date.

Good point by the way, but ima thinks he or she is so superior in his or her intelect, that he or she is even smarter than God himself. Now that is an ego of epic proportions in which this ima has, but it is blinding him or her to a life far removed from the woes of this world and such, and with such an ego as this for which is being reviewed here, it is imprisoning him or her to a life as is lived alone most of the time, and this as far as any compassionate loving companionship goes I'm thinking, so we are seeing the results of such an ima life being written about yet  again right here on this screen by him and/or by her for all to review upon this inet. It's a sad story so far, it really is..


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> So how do you explain that most priests are pedophiles?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Link?  How do you know that most priests are pedophiles?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ima feels that any information (no matter what the ratio's) is viable in her attacks, and this all due to his or her disgruntleness and disliking of his or her own life as he or she has known it to be, and so their way of venting that disgruntleness is by what he or she is doing in this thread to date.
> 
> Good point by the way, but ima thinks he or she is so superior in his or her intelect, that he or she is even smarter than God himself. Now that is an ego of epic proportions in which this ima has, but it is blinding him or her to a life far removed from the woes of this world and such, and with such an ego as this for which is being reviewed here, it is imprisoning him or her to a life as is lived alone most of the time, and this as far as any compassionate loving companionship goes I'm thinking, so we are seeing the results of such an ima life being written about yet  again right here on this screen by him and/or by her for all to review upon this inet. It's a sad story so far, it really is..
Click to expand...


The only sad story is that you profess to be a follower of Jesus, yet you spew all kinds of hatred, scorn, belittling and other insults. Maybe we're talking about a different Jesus? And I think that YOU'RE the deluded one who thinks he can walk on water.
All this because you believe in a book of fairy tales? Cmon, prove ONE major thing, i.e., Noah, the pillar of salt, the parting of the sea... ANYTHING!!!! I dare you. 

About the gay priests, well, I guess you never got the memo from the Vatican.


----------



## Againsheila

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Beag, I'm genuinely interested to know how you can prove any of the major points in the bible, like making the world in 6 days, Noah, the parting of the sea, making a woman out of a man's rib... Like seriously, they all sound like made up stories, where's the proof?
> 
> 
> 
> It's an old game that you are playing, just as the mockers in Jesus time also played this same ancient game, by otherwise demanding our Lord prove himself to them while he was upon the cross & upon the earth. It is the same game back then as it is right now, so it seems that nothing changes along these lines of questioning over the years and/or centuries (of course it doesn't). This game is played by those who are evil to their cores, and therefore work directly for the evil one himself in their lives right now to date. Go into the new testement and read about these things, and by what significance those who are evil upon this earth placed upon the word "IF", and this when they spoke during those times regarding the Lord our God who art in Heaven till this very day, as he had given the ultimate sacrifice for our sins in order that we might be saved for whom do believe, and have faith in this belief until the very end.
> 
> Your own character and questioning is proof enough that you are on a side of life that is very dangerous unto your own soul, but you demand proof from me, when all you have to do is listen to your ownself speak, and then for more proof, just go into the Bible and find those who are of the same character or were of the same character for which is exactly as you are, and also for what role that they had played in those times in which your signature is all over, and is found within these same roles in which you and them had played or still play, yet you act as if you donot know this or can't figure this out ? So sad !
> 
> How is it that the character of a person can transend generations, and still be the same character be it either good or bad that was written about so many years ago ? Then think about the truth in this that I speak, and then think about for what it speaks of even further within the word, in which also tells about what will eventually happen to those who have taken on these attributes or chatacteristics within their own lives, as to be found in example of just as well.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Man, you're seriously whacked!
> 
> I ask you for proof and you have none, kinda like living your life in a fantasy world.
> The bible is just a book written by men. As for Jesus, there is no actual proof that he actually existed. If you have any, I'd be very interested to hear what you have.
> PS the devil doesn't exist either.
Click to expand...


You need to open your eyes.  Try watching some documentaries.  They've shown that yes the Pharaoh did have that many horses and chariots, that it was possible the Reed sea that was parted due to some tsunami or earthquake happening at that time in another part of the world.  There is a building on Mt Sinai, you can see it from airplanes, it's made of wood.  The government won't let anybody in to check it out but there is speculation that was Noah's ark.  There's also speculation of other places it could have been.  Do you really think all these scientists would go around coming up with examples and proof if there was none?  Yes, it's impossible to someone to get 2 of each kind of animal in one building today, does that mean it was impossible several thousand years ago?  Or is it possible that Noah only save some of the animals?  Or was "the great flood" actually when the flooding of the black sea happened?  They've found signs of early settlements on the floor of the black sea.  Almost every civilization in history has a story of a great flood, even the Aztecs. Do you think they're all lying?  

You don't have to take the Bible verbatim to know that there are truths in it.  Do you believe there was a Robin Hood?  Yeah, I know, not in the Bible.  While historians have found no "real" Robin Hood, they've found several listings of people called "Rob Hood".  It's speculated that the tale came from a conglomeration of those people.  

Most myths and legends have something they are based on, even those in the Bible.  The fact that YOU do not believe it because it's in the Bible doesn't make it any less true.  Scientific evidence show that Egypt did suffer from the plagues mentioned in the Bible.  They even know scientifically how the first born could have been targeted.  Seems that back then, when the grain was scarce, the first born got the most food because he was the most important.  There was mold on the grain, and while the others may have gotten sick, the first born ate enough to kill him.  Because the Jews had certain laws concerning cleaning out old grain, their kids didn't get the illness. Documentaries are really interesting, try watching some.


----------



## ima

Againsheila said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's an old game that you are playing, just as the mockers in Jesus time also played this same ancient game, by otherwise demanding our Lord prove himself to them while he was upon the cross & upon the earth. It is the same game back then as it is right now, so it seems that nothing changes along these lines of questioning over the years and/or centuries (of course it doesn't). This game is played by those who are evil to their cores, and therefore work directly for the evil one himself in their lives right now to date. Go into the new testement and read about these things, and by what significance those who are evil upon this earth placed upon the word "IF", and this when they spoke during those times regarding the Lord our God who art in Heaven till this very day, as he had given the ultimate sacrifice for our sins in order that we might be saved for whom do believe, and have faith in this belief until the very end.
> 
> Your own character and questioning is proof enough that you are on a side of life that is very dangerous unto your own soul, but you demand proof from me, when all you have to do is listen to your ownself speak, and then for more proof, just go into the Bible and find those who are of the same character or were of the same character for which is exactly as you are, and also for what role that they had played in those times in which your signature is all over, and is found within these same roles in which you and them had played or still play, yet you act as if you donot know this or can't figure this out ? So sad !
> 
> How is it that the character of a person can transend generations, and still be the same character be it either good or bad that was written about so many years ago ? Then think about the truth in this that I speak, and then think about for what it speaks of even further within the word, in which also tells about what will eventually happen to those who have taken on these attributes or chatacteristics within their own lives, as to be found in example of just as well.
> 
> 
> 
> Man, you're seriously whacked!
> 
> I ask you for proof and you have none, kinda like living your life in a fantasy world.
> The bible is just a book written by men. As for Jesus, there is no actual proof that he actually existed. If you have any, I'd be very interested to hear what you have.
> PS the devil doesn't exist either.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You need to open your eyes.  Try watching some documentaries.  They've shown that yes the Pharaoh did have that many horses and chariots, that it was possible the Reed sea that was parted due to some tsunami or earthquake happening at that time in another part of the world.  There is a building on Mt Sinai, you can see it from airplanes, it's made of wood.  The government won't let anybody in to check it out but there is speculation that was Noah's ark.  There's also speculation of other places it could have been.  Do you really think all these scientists would go around coming up with examples and proof if there was none?  Yes, it's impossible to someone to get 2 of each kind of animal in one building today, does that mean it was impossible several thousand years ago?  Or is it possible that Noah only save some of the animals?  Or was "the great flood" actually when the flooding of the black sea happened?  They've found signs of early settlements on the floor of the black sea.  Almost every civilization in history has a story of a great flood, even the Aztecs. Do you think they're all lying?
> 
> You don't have to take the Bible verbatim to know that there are truths in it.  Do you believe there was a Robin Hood?  Yeah, I know, not in the Bible.  While historians have found no "real" Robin Hood, they've found several listings of people called "Rob Hood".  It's speculated that the tale came from a conglomeration of those people.
> 
> Most myths and legends have something they are based on, even those in the Bible.  The fact that YOU do not believe it because it's in the Bible doesn't make it any less true.  Scientific evidence show that Egypt did suffer from the plagues mentioned in the Bible.  They even know scientifically how the first born could have been targeted.  Seems that back then, when the grain was scarce, the first born got the most food because he was the most important.  There was mold on the grain, and while the others may have gotten sick, the first born ate enough to kill him.  Because the Jews had certain laws concerning cleaning out old grain, their kids didn't get the illness. Documentaries are really interesting, try watching some.
Click to expand...


I'm not talking about every civilization that had a flood, I'm asking about Noah. So either the flood didn't happen or Noah had about 30,000 animals (about 6,000 species of mammals and 10,000 different kinds of birds, times two, and hoping nobody dies) and if you add reptiles and amphibians that's another 30,000. And where did all the plants come from since 40 days and night of flooding completely would kill all the plants.
Plus all the food for everyone.
So the size of boat mentioned in the bible could never have held that many animals and food...
I'm all for believing, but the story's just not credible.


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> Link?  How do you know that most priests are pedophiles?
> 
> 
> 
> ima feels that any information (no matter what the ratio's) is viable in her attacks, and this all due to his or her disgruntleness and disliking of his or her own life as he or she has known it to be, and so their way of venting that disgruntleness is by what he or she is doing in this thread to date.
> 
> Good point by the way, but ima thinks he or she is so superior in his or her intelect, that he or she is even smarter than God himself. Now that is an ego of epic proportions in which this ima has, but it is blinding him or her to a life far removed from the woes of this world and such, and with such an ego as this for which is being reviewed here, it is imprisoning him or her to a life as is lived alone most of the time, and this as far as any compassionate loving companionship goes I'm thinking, so we are seeing the results of such an ima life being written about yet  again right here on this screen by him and/or by her for all to review upon this inet. It's a sad story so far, it really is..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The only sad story is that you profess to be a follower of Jesus, yet you spew all kinds of hatred, scorn, belittling and other insults. Maybe we're talking about a different Jesus? And I think that YOU'RE the deluded one who thinks he can walk on water.
> All this because you believe in a book of fairy tales? Cmon, prove ONE major thing, i.e., Noah, the pillar of salt, the parting of the sea... ANYTHING!!!! I dare you.
> 
> About the gay priests, well, I guess you never got the memo from the Vatican.
Click to expand...

Link to my meaness I dare you ! Oh you can't find any with me being mean etc. as you now claim, other than me maybe having to respond to others idiocy and meaness on this site, but even then I am respectful and non-hateful in my responses. I have seen hateful responses and dis-respect on this site, and that is not me, so now you are grabbing at straws I guess.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ima feels that any information (no matter what the ratio's) is viable in her attacks, and this all due to his or her disgruntleness and disliking of his or her own life as he or she has known it to be, and so their way of venting that disgruntleness is by what he or she is doing in this thread to date.
> 
> Good point by the way, but ima thinks he or she is so superior in his or her intelect, that he or she is even smarter than God himself. Now that is an ego of epic proportions in which this ima has, but it is blinding him or her to a life far removed from the woes of this world and such, and with such an ego as this for which is being reviewed here, it is imprisoning him or her to a life as is lived alone most of the time, and this as far as any compassionate loving companionship goes I'm thinking, so we are seeing the results of such an ima life being written about yet  again right here on this screen by him and/or by her for all to review upon this inet. It's a sad story so far, it really is..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The only sad story is that you profess to be a follower of Jesus, yet you spew all kinds of hatred, scorn, belittling and other insults. Maybe we're talking about a different Jesus? And I think that YOU'RE the deluded one who thinks he can walk on water.
> All this because you believe in a book of fairy tales? Cmon, prove ONE major thing, i.e., Noah, the pillar of salt, the parting of the sea... ANYTHING!!!! I dare you.
> 
> About the gay priests, well, I guess you never got the memo from the Vatican.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Link to my meaness I dare you ! Oh you can't find any with me being mean etc. as you now claim, other than me maybe having to respond to others idiocy and meaness on this site, but even then I am respectful and non-hateful in my responses. I have seen hateful responses and dis-respect on this site, and that is not me, so now you are grabbing at straws I guess.
Click to expand...


So god made the world in 6 days? And he rested on the 7th? Was he tired?


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Man, you're seriously whacked!
> 
> I ask you for proof and you have none, kinda like living your life in a fantasy world.
> The bible is just a book written by men. As for Jesus, there is no actual proof that he actually existed. If you have any, I'd be very interested to hear what you have.
> PS the devil doesn't exist either.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You need to open your eyes.  Try watching some documentaries.  They've shown that yes the Pharaoh did have that many horses and chariots, that it was possible the Reed sea that was parted due to some tsunami or earthquake happening at that time in another part of the world.  There is a building on Mt Sinai, you can see it from airplanes, it's made of wood.  The government won't let anybody in to check it out but there is speculation that was Noah's ark.  There's also speculation of other places it could have been.  Do you really think all these scientists would go around coming up with examples and proof if there was none?  Yes, it's impossible to someone to get 2 of each kind of animal in one building today, does that mean it was impossible several thousand years ago?  Or is it possible that Noah only save some of the animals?  Or was "the great flood" actually when the flooding of the black sea happened?  They've found signs of early settlements on the floor of the black sea.  Almost every civilization in history has a story of a great flood, even the Aztecs. Do you think they're all lying?
> 
> You don't have to take the Bible verbatim to know that there are truths in it.  Do you believe there was a Robin Hood?  Yeah, I know, not in the Bible.  While historians have found no "real" Robin Hood, they've found several listings of people called "Rob Hood".  It's speculated that the tale came from a conglomeration of those people.
> 
> Most myths and legends have something they are based on, even those in the Bible.  The fact that YOU do not believe it because it's in the Bible doesn't make it any less true.  Scientific evidence show that Egypt did suffer from the plagues mentioned in the Bible.  They even know scientifically how the first born could have been targeted.  Seems that back then, when the grain was scarce, the first born got the most food because he was the most important.  There was mold on the grain, and while the others may have gotten sick, the first born ate enough to kill him.  Because the Jews had certain laws concerning cleaning out old grain, their kids didn't get the illness. Documentaries are really interesting, try watching some.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm not talking about every civilization that had a flood, I'm asking about Noah. So either the flood didn't happen or Noah had about 30,000 animals (about 6,000 species of mammals and 10,000 different kinds of birds, times two, and hoping nobody dies) and if you add reptiles and amphibians that's another 30,000. And where did all the plants come from since 40 days and night of flooding completely would kill all the plants.
> Plus all the food for everyone.
> So the size of boat mentioned in the bible could never have held that many animals and food...
> I'm all for believing, but the story's just not credible.
Click to expand...

Are you so sure of the exact amount of species that were living in that time period? I thought you would be one to believe in a certain amount evolving or evolution found amongst the species over time, so do you think that Noah actually rounded up all the species in which you only have records of from your time period into that boat back then (or) was it that he was tasked to bring aboard two of the animals each from his time period, that to be loaded within that boat from that time period? You think in terms of population numbers, but do you think that over 300,000,000 people were on the earth back then? Well the same goes for the animals then and now.


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> The only sad story is that you profess to be a follower of Jesus, yet you spew all kinds of hatred, scorn, belittling and other insults. Maybe we're talking about a different Jesus? And I think that YOU'RE the deluded one who thinks he can walk on water.
> All this because you believe in a book of fairy tales? Cmon, prove ONE major thing, i.e., Noah, the pillar of salt, the parting of the sea... ANYTHING!!!! I dare you.
> 
> About the gay priests, well, I guess you never got the memo from the Vatican.
> 
> 
> 
> Link to my meaness I dare you ! Oh you can't find any with me being mean etc. as you now claim, other than me maybe having to respond to others idiocy and meaness on this site, but even then I am respectful and non-hateful in my responses. I have seen hateful responses and dis-respect on this site, and that is not me, so now you are grabbing at straws I guess.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So god made the world in 6 days? And he rested on the 7th? Was he tired?
Click to expand...

What does the word "rest" mean to you ? Would that answer your question ? You always are writing stuff in questions, even though within your questions written, you have answered yourself oddly enough within the question as is written, but you don't see that and go on with the question anyway. B )


----------



## gallantwarrior

beagle9 said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> So how do you explain that most priests are pedophiles?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Link?  How do you know that most priests are pedophiles?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> ima feels that any information (no matter what the ratio's) is viable in her attacks, and this all due to his or her disgruntleness and disliking of his or her own life as he or she has known it to be, and so their way of venting that disgruntleness is by what he or she is doing in this thread to date.
> 
> Good point by the way, but ima thinks he or she is so superior in his or her intelect, that he or she is even smarter than God himself. Now that is an ego of epic proportions in which this ima has, but it is blinding him or her to a life far removed from the woes of this world and such, and with such an ego as this for which is being reviewed here, it is imprisoning him or her to a life as is lived alone most of the time, and this as far as any compassionate loving companionship goes I'm thinking, so we are seeing the results of such an ima life being written about yet  again right here on this screen by him and/or by her for all to review upon this inet. It's a sad story so far, it really is..
Click to expand...


Are you suggesting he/she/it has finally painted the windows in his/her/its mother's basement black?


----------



## gallantwarrior

Againsheila said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's an old game that you are playing, just as the mockers in Jesus time also played this same ancient game, by otherwise demanding our Lord prove himself to them while he was upon the cross & upon the earth. It is the same game back then as it is right now, so it seems that nothing changes along these lines of questioning over the years and/or centuries (of course it doesn't). This game is played by those who are evil to their cores, and therefore work directly for the evil one himself in their lives right now to date. Go into the new testement and read about these things, and by what significance those who are evil upon this earth placed upon the word "IF", and this when they spoke during those times regarding the Lord our God who art in Heaven till this very day, as he had given the ultimate sacrifice for our sins in order that we might be saved for whom do believe, and have faith in this belief until the very end.
> 
> Your own character and questioning is proof enough that you are on a side of life that is very dangerous unto your own soul, but you demand proof from me, when all you have to do is listen to your ownself speak, and then for more proof, just go into the Bible and find those who are of the same character or were of the same character for which is exactly as you are, and also for what role that they had played in those times in which your signature is all over, and is found within these same roles in which you and them had played or still play, yet you act as if you donot know this or can't figure this out ? So sad !
> 
> How is it that the character of a person can transend generations, and still be the same character be it either good or bad that was written about so many years ago ? Then think about the truth in this that I speak, and then think about for what it speaks of even further within the word, in which also tells about what will eventually happen to those who have taken on these attributes or chatacteristics within their own lives, as to be found in example of just as well.
> 
> 
> 
> Man, you're seriously whacked!
> 
> I ask you for proof and you have none, kinda like living your life in a fantasy world.
> The bible is just a book written by men. As for Jesus, there is no actual proof that he actually existed. If you have any, I'd be very interested to hear what you have.
> PS the devil doesn't exist either.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You need to open your eyes.  Try watching some documentaries.  They've shown that yes the Pharaoh did have that many horses and chariots, that it was possible the Reed sea that was parted due to some tsunami or earthquake happening at that time in another part of the world.  There is a building on Mt Sinai, you can see it from airplanes, it's made of wood.  The government won't let anybody in to check it out but there is speculation that was Noah's ark.  There's also speculation of other places it could have been.  Do you really think all these scientists would go around coming up with examples and proof if there was none?  Yes, it's impossible to someone to get 2 of each kind of animal in one building today, does that mean it was impossible several thousand years ago?  Or is it possible that Noah only save some of the animals?  Or was "the great flood" actually when the flooding of the black sea happened?  They've found signs of early settlements on the floor of the black sea.  Almost every civilization in history has a story of a great flood, even the Aztecs. Do you think they're all lying?
> 
> You don't have to take the Bible verbatim to know that there are truths in it.  Do you believe there was a Robin Hood?  Yeah, I know, not in the Bible.  While historians have found no "real" Robin Hood, they've found several listings of people called "Rob Hood".  It's speculated that the tale came from a conglomeration of those people.
> 
> Most myths and legends have something they are based on, even those in the Bible.  The fact that YOU do not believe it because it's in the Bible doesn't make it any less true.  Scientific evidence show that Egypt did suffer from the plagues mentioned in the Bible.  They even know scientifically how the first born could have been targeted.  Seems that back then, when the grain was scarce, the first born got the most food because he was the most important.  There was mold on the grain, and while the others may have gotten sick, the first born ate enough to kill him.  Because the Jews had certain laws concerning cleaning out old grain, their kids didn't get the illness. Documentaries are really interesting, try watching some.
Click to expand...


For anyone interested in some pretty fascinating stuff, read the "Biblical Archaeological Review".  It's a periodical that explores lots of those stories.  
I'm not sure how all christians will take the information, though. I thought I was doing my sister a favor by returning her gift subscription to the "Watchtower" by gifting her with a subscription to this magazine.  Went over like a lead balloon.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> 
> You need to open your eyes.  Try watching some documentaries.  They've shown that yes the Pharaoh did have that many horses and chariots, that it was possible the Reed sea that was parted due to some tsunami or earthquake happening at that time in another part of the world.  There is a building on Mt Sinai, you can see it from airplanes, it's made of wood.  The government won't let anybody in to check it out but there is speculation that was Noah's ark.  There's also speculation of other places it could have been.  Do you really think all these scientists would go around coming up with examples and proof if there was none?  Yes, it's impossible to someone to get 2 of each kind of animal in one building today, does that mean it was impossible several thousand years ago?  Or is it possible that Noah only save some of the animals?  Or was "the great flood" actually when the flooding of the black sea happened?  They've found signs of early settlements on the floor of the black sea.  Almost every civilization in history has a story of a great flood, even the Aztecs. Do you think they're all lying?
> 
> You don't have to take the Bible verbatim to know that there are truths in it.  Do you believe there was a Robin Hood?  Yeah, I know, not in the Bible.  While historians have found no "real" Robin Hood, they've found several listings of people called "Rob Hood".  It's speculated that the tale came from a conglomeration of those people.
> 
> Most myths and legends have something they are based on, even those in the Bible.  The fact that YOU do not believe it because it's in the Bible doesn't make it any less true.  Scientific evidence show that Egypt did suffer from the plagues mentioned in the Bible.  They even know scientifically how the first born could have been targeted.  Seems that back then, when the grain was scarce, the first born got the most food because he was the most important.  There was mold on the grain, and while the others may have gotten sick, the first born ate enough to kill him.  Because the Jews had certain laws concerning cleaning out old grain, their kids didn't get the illness. Documentaries are really interesting, try watching some.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not talking about every civilization that had a flood, I'm asking about Noah. So either the flood didn't happen or Noah had about 30,000 animals (about 6,000 species of mammals and 10,000 different kinds of birds, times two, and hoping nobody dies) and if you add reptiles and amphibians that's another 30,000. And where did all the plants come from since 40 days and night of flooding completely would kill all the plants.
> Plus all the food for everyone.
> So the size of boat mentioned in the bible could never have held that many animals and food...
> I'm all for believing, but the story's just not credible.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Are you so sure of the exact amount of species that were living in that time period? I thought you would be one to believe in a certain amount evolving or evolution found amongst the species over time, so do you think that Noah actually rounded up all the species in which you only have records of from your time period into that boat back then (or) was it that he was tasked to bring aboard two of the animals each from his time period, that to be loaded within that boat from that time period? You think in terms of population numbers, but do you think that over 300,000,000 people were on the earth back then? Well the same goes for the animals then and now.
Click to expand...


But the bible doesn't endorse evolution, so the amount of animal species on earth is constant and the same amount of species that exist today existed back then.
So how do you explain animals in South America? Did Noah go there to get all those animals? Or did they magically fly over to his boat?


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Link to my meaness I dare you ! Oh you can't find any with me being mean etc. as you now claim, other than me maybe having to respond to others idiocy and meaness on this site, but even then I am respectful and non-hateful in my responses. I have seen hateful responses and dis-respect on this site, and that is not me, so now you are grabbing at straws I guess.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So god made the world in 6 days? And he rested on the 7th? Was he tired?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What does the word "rest" mean to you ? Would that answer your question ? You always are writing stuff in questions, even though within your questions written, you have answered yourself oddly enough within the question as is written, but you don't see that and go on with the question anyway. B )
Click to expand...


So how do you know that the world was made in 6 days?


----------



## Againsheila

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> The only sad story is that you profess to be a follower of Jesus, yet you spew all kinds of hatred, scorn, belittling and other insults. Maybe we're talking about a different Jesus? And I think that YOU'RE the deluded one who thinks he can walk on water.
> All this because you believe in a book of fairy tales? Cmon, prove ONE major thing, i.e., Noah, the pillar of salt, the parting of the sea... ANYTHING!!!! I dare you.
> 
> About the gay priests, well, I guess you never got the memo from the Vatican.
> 
> 
> 
> Link to my meaness I dare you ! Oh you can't find any with me being mean etc. as you now claim, other than me maybe having to respond to others idiocy and meaness on this site, but even then I am respectful and non-hateful in my responses. I have seen hateful responses and dis-respect on this site, and that is not me, so now you are grabbing at straws I guess.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So god made the world in 6 days? And he rested on the 7th? Was he tired?
Click to expand...


Define the length of a day.  How do you know how long a day was back in the beginning?


----------



## Gadawg73

Againsheila said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Link to my meaness I dare you ! Oh you can't find any with me being mean etc. as you now claim, other than me maybe having to respond to others idiocy and meaness on this site, but even then I am respectful and non-hateful in my responses. I have seen hateful responses and dis-respect on this site, and that is not me, so now you are grabbing at straws I guess.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So god made the world in 6 days? And he rested on the 7th? Was he tired?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Define the length of a day.  How do you know how long a day was back in the beginning?
Click to expand...


Axis of the earth turning around the sun.
Actually the days used to be shorter as the gravitational pull of the moon has decreased the days in a year. 
The God made the earth in 7 days part of the Bible is myth as is a lot of the Bible.


----------



## beagle9

gallantwarrior said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Man, you're seriously whacked!
> 
> I ask you for proof and you have none, kinda like living your life in a fantasy world.
> The bible is just a book written by men. As for Jesus, there is no actual proof that he actually existed. If you have any, I'd be very interested to hear what you have.
> PS the devil doesn't exist either.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You need to open your eyes.  Try watching some documentaries.  They've shown that yes the Pharaoh did have that many horses and chariots, that it was possible the Reed sea that was parted due to some tsunami or earthquake happening at that time in another part of the world.  There is a building on Mt Sinai, you can see it from airplanes, it's made of wood.  The government won't let anybody in to check it out but there is speculation that was Noah's ark.  There's also speculation of other places it could have been.  Do you really think all these scientists would go around coming up with examples and proof if there was none?  Yes, it's impossible to someone to get 2 of each kind of animal in one building today, does that mean it was impossible several thousand years ago?  Or is it possible that Noah only save some of the animals?  Or was "the great flood" actually when the flooding of the black sea happened?  They've found signs of early settlements on the floor of the black sea.  Almost every civilization in history has a story of a great flood, even the Aztecs. Do you think they're all lying?
> 
> You don't have to take the Bible verbatim to know that there are truths in it.  Do you believe there was a Robin Hood?  Yeah, I know, not in the Bible.  While historians have found no "real" Robin Hood, they've found several listings of people called "Rob Hood".  It's speculated that the tale came from a conglomeration of those people.
> 
> Most myths and legends have something they are based on, even those in the Bible.  The fact that YOU do not believe it because it's in the Bible doesn't make it any less true.  Scientific evidence show that Egypt did suffer from the plagues mentioned in the Bible.  They even know scientifically how the first born could have been targeted.  Seems that back then, when the grain was scarce, the first born got the most food because he was the most important.  There was mold on the grain, and while the others may have gotten sick, the first born ate enough to kill him.  Because the Jews had certain laws concerning cleaning out old grain, their kids didn't get the illness. Documentaries are really interesting, try watching some.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> For anyone interested in some pretty fascinating stuff, read the "Biblical Archaeological Review".  It's a periodical that explores lots of those stories.
> I'm not sure how all christians will take the information, though. I thought I was doing my sister a favor by returning her gift subscription to the "Watchtower" by gifting her with a subscription to this magazine.  Went over like a lead balloon.
Click to expand...

How old is this review, because there has been a huge push to create all sorts of studies, reviews and opinions now, but they are most all out anymore to disprove the Bible in everyway that they can now. They even wrap it all up in packaging that would make a person think that they are reading or watching something that is Bible friendly, and is still out to strengthen the word instead of trying to destroy it, but then we find that the review or study is created to cast a reasonable doubt somehow for it's readers, and that is what it tries to convict the Bible on. Your sister must be grounded pret-ty good, and therefore she recognized the problem in this work immediately. I like the light hearted humor you used between you and your sister in the post.. B )


----------



## beagle9

Gadawg73 said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> So god made the world in 6 days? And he rested on the 7th? Was he tired?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Define the length of a day.  How do you know how long a day was back in the beginning?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Axis of the earth turning around the sun.
> Actually the days used to be shorter as the gravitational pull of the moon has decreased the days in a year.
> The God made the earth in 7 days part of the Bible is myth as is a lot of the Bible.
Click to expand...

You still donot know the exact length based upon your quick answer, because the earth and it's axis, speed and other such conditions over time changes daily, yearly and throughout the centuries.

It is that the days have become shorter since the beginning, and the age of man has become shorter as well since the beginning. It all makes since that it would trend in these ways, because we are not here forever in the state of sinfullness and condition in which we now live in upon this earth, and that which has also increased over time, so it only shows if one takes it all in, that we are nearing the final call or have sped up dramatically over time in just about everything that we know of and understand, but still yet no man shall know the time nor the hour, so it best to be ready when the final trumpet sounds.


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> So god made the world in 6 days? And he rested on the 7th? Was he tired?
> 
> 
> 
> What does the word "rest" mean to you ? Would that answer your question ? You always are writing stuff in questions, even though within your questions written, you have answered yourself oddly enough within the question as is written, but you don't see that and go on with the question anyway. B )
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So how do you know that the world was made in 6 days?
Click to expand...

How do you know that it was not made in 6 days, and therefore the seventh was rested upon ?

You see it is a choice between the two of us to make in our own lives, and it defines what you and I believe that is different from each other in life, and you have no right to try and make me along with countless others believe that we are wrong, and that therefore you as in a few are right in such a mess, and it is just that simple really.


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not talking about every civilization that had a flood, I'm asking about Noah. So either the flood didn't happen or Noah had about 30,000 animals (about 6,000 species of mammals and 10,000 different kinds of birds, times two, and hoping nobody dies) and if you add reptiles and amphibians that's another 30,000. And where did all the plants come from since 40 days and night of flooding completely would kill all the plants.
> Plus all the food for everyone.
> So the size of boat mentioned in the bible could never have held that many animals and food...
> I'm all for believing, but the story's just not credible.
> 
> 
> 
> Are you so sure of the exact amount of species that were living in that time period? I thought you would be one to believe in a certain amount evolving or evolution found amongst the species over time, so do you think that Noah actually rounded up all the species in which you only have records of from your time period into that boat back then (or) was it that he was tasked to bring aboard two of the animals each from his time period, that to be loaded within that boat from that time period? You think in terms of population numbers, but do you think that over 300,000,000 people were on the earth back then? Well the same goes for the animals then and now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> But the bible doesn't endorse evolution, so the amount of animal species on earth is constant and the same amount of species that exist today existed back then.
> So how do you explain animals in South America? Did Noah go there to get all those animals? Or did they magically fly over to his boat?
Click to expand...

Explain how annoconda's are in South Florida now, did they just magically apear there somehow or better yet explain how a great white shark can be all over the world within any given time period as is now known by scientist who are studying them ? Scientist are making break throughs everyday on that which was for so long unexplained (knowledge explosion), so maybe you should wait on the scientist to finally get around to convincing you, since you don't want to get it from the book that already knows about most of these things in which were touched upon in covering over two thosand years of generations and this world, and even though there is much that is still not known by us, just as the Bible also says, it all will be soon known by us when we come into his kingdom upon that glorious day, and within the twinkling of an eye shall it be that we will be there, and the days of old shall be done.


----------



## Katzndogz

Animals are the same animals they have always been, even if, at different times they didn't look the same as they do now.

Even if you believe in evolution you don't believe that men evolved from apes.  They might have evolved from men who, at the time, looked more like monkeys, but the DNA would prove that they were and are humans.    The dinosaurs never disappeared, but they look far different today than they did.  Today they look like eagles and Komodo Dragons but they are the descendants of the same creatures.


----------



## Luddly Neddite

BTW, chik fil a is NOT making history. They're just blindly following other hate groups - like Westboro. 

Don't think.

Just hate. 

And, if you can't face up to your own sexuality, really hate a whole hell of a lot.


----------



## Katzndogz

Chick Fil A made history by being the subject of a little general rebellion.  People putting millions of dollars on their principles.   The first time that has happened in many years.


----------



## beagle9

Katzndogz said:


> Animals are the same animals they have always been, even if, at different times they didn't look the same as they do now.
> 
> Even if you believe in evolution you don't believe that men evolved from apes.  They might have evolved from men who, at the time, looked more like monkeys, but the DNA would prove that they were and are humans.    The dinosaurs never disappeared, but they look far different today than they did.  Today they look like eagles and Komodo Dragons but they are the descendants of the same creatures.


I agree, but are they in the same amount of numbers back then as they are today and/or were they scattered about back then as much they are today or have been in different periods throughout time ? This is something that no one knows or can answer truly today, but I garantee you that a liberal will try their very best to put a scientific answer of somekind to it, even if they have to make one up.


----------



## Katzndogz

beagle9 said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Animals are the same animals they have always been, even if, at different times they didn't look the same as they do now.
> 
> Even if you believe in evolution you don't believe that men evolved from apes.  They might have evolved from men who, at the time, looked more like monkeys, but the DNA would prove that they were and are humans.    The dinosaurs never disappeared, but they look far different today than they did.  Today they look like eagles and Komodo Dragons but they are the descendants of the same creatures.
> 
> 
> 
> I agree, but are they in the same amount of numbers back then as they are today and/or were they scattered about back then as much they are today or have been in different periods throughout time ? This is something that no one knows or can answer truly today, but I garantee you that a liberal will try their very best to put a scientific answer of somekind to it, even if they have to make one up.
Click to expand...


That's true!

Ask them what the anomaly was that caused the Big Bang, watch their heads explode.


----------



## beagle9

Katzndogz said:


> Chick Fil A made history by being the subject of a little general rebellion.  People putting millions of dollars on their principles.   The first time that has happened in many years.


Our local Chic-Fil-A is still profiting big time from that day, as it was packed again today when I went by it, and I just smiled again a big smile as I road by looking at history still being made in respect to the American people finally having enough of what they were being spoon fed by the feds in this nation for way to long now. Hooray for Chic-Fil-A... B )


----------



## beagle9

Katzndogz said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Animals are the same animals they have always been, even if, at different times they didn't look the same as they do now.
> 
> Even if you believe in evolution you don't believe that men evolved from apes.  They might have evolved from men who, at the time, looked more like monkeys, but the DNA would prove that they were and are humans.    The dinosaurs never disappeared, but they look far different today than they did.  Today they look like eagles and Komodo Dragons but they are the descendants of the same creatures.
> 
> 
> 
> I agree, but are they in the same amount of numbers back then as they are today and/or were they scattered about back then as much they are today or have been in different periods throughout time ? This is something that no one knows or can answer truly today, but I garantee you that a liberal will try their very best to put a scientific answer of somekind to it, even if they have to make one up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's true!
> 
> Ask them what the anomaly was that caused the Big Bang, watch their heads explode.
Click to expand...

I know right !! LOL


----------



## Luddly Neddite

Katzndogz said:


> Animals are the same animals they have always been, even if, at different times they didn't look the same as they do now.
> 
> Even if you believe in evolution you don't believe that men evolved from apes.  They might have evolved from men who, at the time, looked more like monkeys, but the DNA would prove that they were and are humans.    The dinosaurs never disappeared, but they look far different today than they did.  Today they look like eagles and Komodo Dragons but they are the descendants of the same creatures.



You make absolutely no sense at all. You make less sense every day. Its like you don't know what you're typing.

If you have not been to the museum with the dinosaur with a saddle on its back, you'd love it. Its just as looney as you are.


----------



## Luddly Neddite

beagle9 said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Chick Fil A made history by being the subject of a little general rebellion.  People putting millions of dollars on their principles.   The first time that has happened in many years.
> 
> 
> 
> Our local Chic-Fil-A is still profiting big time from that day, as it was packed again today when I went by it, and I just smiled again a big smile as I road by looking at history still being made in respect to the American people finally having enough of what they were being spoon fed by the feds in this nation for way to long now. Hooray for Chic-Fil-A... B )
Click to expand...


If true, and I doubt it,  you conjure up a vision of fat, dumpy ignorant Americans, shoving fatty shit food in their face =

Feeding on hate and fear that they just might be homa-Sacks-shul their own selves. 

That's some really sick shit you fools are gobbling down. 

Happy Heart Attacks to One and ALL.


----------



## Katzndogz

beagle9 said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Chick Fil A made history by being the subject of a little general rebellion.  People putting millions of dollars on their principles.   The first time that has happened in many years.
> 
> 
> 
> Our local Chic-Fil-A is still profiting big time from that day, as it was packed again today when I went by it, and I just smiled again a big smile as I road by looking at history still being made in respect to the American people finally having enough of what they were being spoon fed by the feds in this nation for way to long now. Hooray for Chic-Fil-A... B )
Click to expand...


Before I went to CFA to support the company I had never been before.   Now that I know how good it is, I've been back a few times.  Their grilled sandwich is really good.


----------



## The Gadfly

luddly.neddite said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Chick Fil A made history by being the subject of a little general rebellion.  People putting millions of dollars on their principles.   The first time that has happened in many years.
> 
> 
> 
> Our local Chic-Fil-A is still profiting big time from that day, as it was packed again today when I went by it, and I just smiled again a big smile as I road by looking at history still being made in respect to the American people finally having enough of what they were being spoon fed by the feds in this nation for way to long now. Hooray for Chic-Fil-A... B )
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If true, and I doubt it,  you conjure up a vision of fat, dumpy ignorant Americans, shoving fatty shit food in their face =
> 
> Feeding on hate and fear that they just might be homa-Sacks-shul their own selves.
> 
> That's some really sick shit you fools are gobbling down.
> 
> Happy Heart Attacks to One and ALL.
Click to expand...


Luddly, what you libs refuse to get, is that this was not about hating gays, it was about many, many ordinary Americans being completely fed up with Political Correctness, whether it involves gays or anything else. You finally took PC too far, and you got yourselves bitch slapped for it. Now stop whining.


----------



## Luddly Neddite

The Gadfly said:


> luddly.neddite said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Our local Chic-Fil-A is still profiting big time from that day, as it was packed again today when I went by it, and I just smiled again a big smile as I road by looking at history still being made in respect to the American people finally having enough of what they were being spoon fed by the feds in this nation for way to long now. Hooray for Chic-Fil-A... B )
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If true, and I doubt it,  you conjure up a vision of fat, dumpy ignorant Americans, shoving fatty shit food in their face =
> 
> Feeding on hate and fear that they just might be homa-Sacks-shul their own selves.
> 
> That's some really sick shit you fools are gobbling down.
> 
> Happy Heart Attacks to One and ALL.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Luddly, what you libs refuse to get, is that this was not about hating gays, it was about many, many ordinary Americans being completely fed up with Political Correctness, whether it involves gays or anything else. You finally took PC too far, and you got yourselves bitch slapped for it. Now stop whining.
Click to expand...


So now its Politically Correct to deny a segment of our society the rights that the entire rest of out society enjoys?

That's a crock and you and i both know it. 

I don't care what chick fil a does and I don't care who eats shit that I wouldn't feed my dog. Chow down, die young, who cares? The bible thumper that owns it can spout any hate crap he wants. Who cares? Not me.

What I care about is that scum rw's fight to keep EQUAL RIGHTS that are guaranteed by our Constitution (that the rw's hate) from people they are afraid of. 

Its wrong. 

Plain and simple. 

I value our Constitution and I'll fight you to keep it in force. I'll fight asshole bible thumpers too. He can do what he wants, you can do what you want but what you cannot do is force your hate and fear on others.


----------



## Againsheila

Gadawg73 said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> So god made the world in 6 days? And he rested on the 7th? Was he tired?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Define the length of a day.  How do you know how long a day was back in the beginning?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Axis of the earth turning around the sun.
> Actually the days used to be shorter as the gravitational pull of the moon has decreased the days in a year.
> The God made the earth in 7 days part of the Bible is myth as is a lot of the Bible.
Click to expand...


Doesn't mean that's how the people writing the Bible defined a day.


----------



## gallantwarrior

beagle9 said:


> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> 
> You need to open your eyes.  Try watching some documentaries.  They've shown that yes the Pharaoh did have that many horses and chariots, that it was possible the Reed sea that was parted due to some tsunami or earthquake happening at that time in another part of the world.  There is a building on Mt Sinai, you can see it from airplanes, it's made of wood.  The government won't let anybody in to check it out but there is speculation that was Noah's ark.  There's also speculation of other places it could have been.  Do you really think all these scientists would go around coming up with examples and proof if there was none?  Yes, it's impossible to someone to get 2 of each kind of animal in one building today, does that mean it was impossible several thousand years ago?  Or is it possible that Noah only save some of the animals?  Or was "the great flood" actually when the flooding of the black sea happened?  They've found signs of early settlements on the floor of the black sea.  Almost every civilization in history has a story of a great flood, even the Aztecs. Do you think they're all lying?
> 
> You don't have to take the Bible verbatim to know that there are truths in it.  Do you believe there was a Robin Hood?  Yeah, I know, not in the Bible.  While historians have found no "real" Robin Hood, they've found several listings of people called "Rob Hood".  It's speculated that the tale came from a conglomeration of those people.
> 
> Most myths and legends have something they are based on, even those in the Bible.  The fact that YOU do not believe it because it's in the Bible doesn't make it any less true.  Scientific evidence show that Egypt did suffer from the plagues mentioned in the Bible.  They even know scientifically how the first born could have been targeted.  Seems that back then, when the grain was scarce, the first born got the most food because he was the most important.  There was mold on the grain, and while the others may have gotten sick, the first born ate enough to kill him.  Because the Jews had certain laws concerning cleaning out old grain, their kids didn't get the illness. Documentaries are really interesting, try watching some.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For anyone interested in some pretty fascinating stuff, read the "Biblical Archaeological Review".  It's a periodical that explores lots of those stories.
> I'm not sure how all christians will take the information, though. I thought I was doing my sister a favor by returning her gift subscription to the "Watchtower" by gifting her with a subscription to this magazine.  Went over like a lead balloon.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How old is this review, because there has been a huge push to create all sorts of studies, reviews and opinions now, but they are most all out anymore to disprove the Bible in everyway that they can now. They even wrap it all up in packaging that would make a person think that they are reading or watching something that is Bible friendly, and is still out to strengthen the word instead of trying to destroy it, but then we find that the review or study is created to cast a reasonable doubt somehow for it's readers, and that is what it tries to convict the Bible on. Your sister must be grounded pret-ty good, and therefore she recognized the problem in this work immediately. I like the light hearted humor you used between you and your sister in the post.. B )
Click to expand...


It isn't just one review, it's a magazine.  I forget how often it is published, once a month or maybe every other month.  It actually explores archaeological explorations of biblical sites and history.  It's not anti-bible, at least not the last time I subscribed.  If you can get hold of one, see if you don't like it.
As far as her grounding, my sister is a Witness.  They reject a lot of concepts that other christians accept.  At least she has a sense of humor.  After listening to her describe what being a Jehovah's Witness was all about, I called her an Amway salesman for god.  At least she didn't disown me.


----------



## beagle9

luddly.neddite said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Animals are the same animals they have always been, even if, at different times they didn't look the same as they do now.
> 
> Even if you believe in evolution you don't believe that men evolved from apes.  They might have evolved from men who, at the time, looked more like monkeys, but the DNA would prove that they were and are humans.    The dinosaurs never disappeared, but they look far different today than they did.  Today they look like eagles and Komodo Dragons but they are the descendants of the same creatures.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You make absolutely no sense at all. You make less sense every day. Its like you don't know what you're typing.
> 
> If you have not been to the museum with the dinosaur with a saddle on its back, you'd love it. Its just as looney as you are.
Click to expand...

Ok, then maybe you explain it to us here.... Were waiting, still waiting, and I guess we will still be waiting for a long time, so how long will you take to school us all on the issue or do you just like making noise around the site ?


----------



## beagle9

luddly.neddite said:


> The Gadfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> luddly.neddite said:
> 
> 
> 
> If true, and I doubt it,  you conjure up a vision of fat, dumpy ignorant Americans, shoving fatty shit food in their face =
> 
> Feeding on hate and fear that they just might be homa-Sacks-shul their own selves.
> 
> That's some really sick shit you fools are gobbling down.
> 
> Happy Heart Attacks to One and ALL.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Luddly, what you libs refuse to get, is that this was not about hating gays, it was about many, many ordinary Americans being completely fed up with Political Correctness, whether it involves gays or anything else. You finally took PC too far, and you got yourselves bitch slapped for it. Now stop whining.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So now its Politically Correct to deny a segment of our society the rights that the entire rest of out society enjoys?
> 
> That's a crock and you and i both know it.
> 
> I don't care what chick fil a does and I don't care who eats shit that I wouldn't feed my dog. Chow down, die young, who cares? The bible thumper that owns it can spout any hate crap he wants. Who cares? Not me.
> 
> What I care about is that scum rw's fight to keep EQUAL RIGHTS that are guaranteed by our Constitution (that the rw's hate) from people they are afraid of.
> 
> Its wrong.
> 
> Plain and simple.
> 
> I value our Constitution and I'll fight you to keep it in force. I'll fight asshole bible thumpers too. He can do what he wants, you can do what you want but what you cannot do is force your hate and fear on others.
Click to expand...

Who cares eh, but here you are angry as Hell over the issue, and feeling that you need to comment here on the issue because uhhh well ummmm I guess you care, so oh yes you care alright, but you think that we are to dum to realize that you care when commenting like you do, especially with this backed into a corner post that you just wrote.  For goodness sakes, can't you be honest for a second here about your feelings on the matter ? You tell someone else that they are making less sense everyday, but then look at your ownself having to eat those very words in which you just accused or attacked another with...wow...


----------



## beagle9

gallantwarrior said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> gallantwarrior said:
> 
> 
> 
> For anyone interested in some pretty fascinating stuff, read the "Biblical Archaeological Review".  It's a periodical that explores lots of those stories.
> I'm not sure how all christians will take the information, though. I thought I was doing my sister a favor by returning her gift subscription to the "Watchtower" by gifting her with a subscription to this magazine.  Went over like a lead balloon.
> 
> 
> 
> How old is this review, because there has been a huge push to create all sorts of studies, reviews and opinions now, but they are most all out anymore to disprove the Bible in everyway that they can now. They even wrap it all up in packaging that would make a person think that they are reading or watching something that is Bible friendly, and is still out to strengthen the word instead of trying to destroy it, but then we find that the review or study is created to cast a reasonable doubt somehow for it's readers, and that is what it tries to convict the Bible on. Your sister must be grounded pret-ty good, and therefore she recognized the problem in this work immediately. I like the light hearted humor you used between you and your sister in the post.. B )
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It isn't just one review, it's a magazine.  I forget how often it is published, once a month or maybe every other month.  It actually explores archaeological explorations of biblical sites and history.  It's not anti-bible, at least not the last time I subscribed.  If you can get hold of one, see if you don't like it.
> As far as her grounding, my sister is a Witness.  They reject a lot of concepts that other christians accept.  At least she has a sense of humor.  After listening to her describe what being a Jehovah's Witness was all about, I called her an Amway salesman for god.  At least she didn't disown me.
Click to expand...

Smile, and that is all one can expect on the differing of opinions, just as we all have in our daily lives from time to time, but some are so agenda oriented these days, and are working directly for the devil these days, that they will kill someone over an issue, and that is ashame how far this nation has crumbled like this over time, but the majority of the people have been asleep for to long now, and it's high time that they wake back up from their stuper, especially to what has been going on for to long against them now.


----------



## beagle9

luddly.neddite said:


> The Gadfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> luddly.neddite said:
> 
> 
> 
> If true, and I doubt it,  you conjure up a vision of fat, dumpy ignorant Americans, shoving fatty shit food in their face =
> 
> Feeding on hate and fear that they just might be homa-Sacks-shul their own selves.
> 
> That's some really sick shit you fools are gobbling down.
> 
> Happy Heart Attacks to One and ALL.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Luddly, what you libs refuse to get, is that this was not about hating gays, it was about many, many ordinary Americans being completely fed up with Political Correctness, whether it involves gays or anything else. You finally took PC too far, and you got yourselves bitch slapped for it. Now stop whining.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So now its Politically Correct to deny a segment of our society the rights that the entire rest of out society enjoys?
> 
> That's a crock and you and i both know it.
> 
> I don't care what chick fil a does and I don't care who eats shit that I wouldn't feed my dog. Chow down, die young, who cares? The bible thumper that owns it can spout any hate crap he wants. Who cares? Not me.
> 
> What I care about is that scum rw's fight to keep EQUAL RIGHTS that are guaranteed by our Constitution (that the rw's hate) from people they are afraid of.
> 
> Its wrong.
> 
> Plain and simple.
> 
> I value our Constitution and I'll fight you to keep it in force. I'll fight asshole bible thumpers too. He can do what he wants, you can do what you want but what you cannot do is force your hate and fear on others.
Click to expand...

My opinion on rights in America: - Equal rights are always earned and are not just a given, as is with any rights we have in America as it's citizens the same should always apply, but for to long now we have seen equal rights given to some individuals that didn't deserve them, especially given freely without question of, and this even when the intention that they (the recipient) had when granted these same equal rights, was to then take those rights and use them against this nation and it's citizens in a bad way, and this once given to them, yet they were still given to them as individuals no matter, even though they were known to be bad people by many qualifiers or flags flying against them. 

The bad ones mainly operate as individuals and not as groups, but sometimes these bad charactered individuals who are accepted without question of, do inflitrate the group, and then they begin leading the group astray in America, and that is the goal if they are successful at it, and sometimes they are very sucessful at it. 

This is the work of the devil himself, once he gets a person who will work for him, the person then takes the equal rights of freedom in America as granted to him or her, and next begins to use the equal rights of passage in order to destroy with instead of being productive and helpful with. 

The bad person then uses this in this way, instead of assisting the nation in good, along with every other good citizen who are granted these same rights due their being good citizens within the nation also, and not bad citizens within the nation who are gaining the same somehow, but shouldn't have gained anything. The feds seemed to have lost their minds in the past over these specific issues as found in ones character, and this within the nation when bad, where as they strictly judged people based on them being in a blanket minority group or being a blanket color within a race or group when protecting them and granting them rights, and not as it should have been where it should always be based upon the individual character instead. 

MLK didn't even believe in this type of judgement by the federal government, as he knew that their were those who were amongst the groups as individuals, that would undermine his religious attempts at gaining equal rights for human beings (the good blacks was his goal at the time), but he stressed that they must have good character, and it was not for any human beings whom had bad character regardless of their color or status as a minority, and this as was spoken about in his "I have a dream" speech.

The feds should have promoted good character equally in this nation amongst all races, but this has not been the case sorry to say by them, in which has seperated us all along specific lines to this very day, and all because of this fallacy or error it has since caused a seperation for years due to their idiocy on such matters over time. Now the numbers are just growing, and are including even more and more characters into the equasion as they grow, but what kind of character will this nation continue to support and hold up over another, so that is the question that many now want answered in this nation moving forward. It is no longer a race issue at all in my honest opinion, but rather a character issue amongst the many differing people now, so what is it going to be federal government, what is it going to be ?

I say support Americanism and all Americans of any race or culture (as long as their character or culture is good), and most of all united as American, (letting character fall where it lays on the scale), and if it is good then so be it, but if it is bad then it should be denide the same rights as those who are good always. Example: I would say that a drug dealer shouldnot be able to purchase equally a home in an anti-drug neighborhood or etc., and that is the way it should be in America again. We could keep building on this concept or premise, and the nation may begin turning again for the betterment of all, and this by leaving bad character in the dust finally, but not races or cultures and other that is of good character, where as we should always build them up, thus making America united and strong in character again.


----------



## ima

Againsheila said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> 
> Define the length of a day.  How do you know how long a day was back in the beginning?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Axis of the earth turning around the sun.
> Actually the days used to be shorter as the gravitational pull of the moon has decreased the days in a year.
> The God made the earth in 7 days part of the Bible is myth as is a lot of the Bible.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Doesn't mean that's how the people writing the Bible defined a day.
Click to expand...


So how long is one of those days?


----------



## ima

Katzndogz said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Animals are the same animals they have always been, even if, at different times they didn't look the same as they do now.
> 
> Even if you believe in evolution you don't believe that men evolved from apes.  They might have evolved from men who, at the time, looked more like monkeys, but the DNA would prove that they were and are humans.    The dinosaurs never disappeared, but they look far different today than they did.  Today they look like eagles and Komodo Dragons but they are the descendants of the same creatures.
> 
> 
> 
> I agree, but are they in the same amount of numbers back then as they are today and/or were they scattered about back then as much they are today or have been in different periods throughout time ? This is something that no one knows or can answer truly today, but I garantee you that a liberal will try their very best to put a scientific answer of somekind to it, even if they have to make one up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's true!
> 
> Ask them what the anomaly was that caused the Big Bang, watch their heads explode.
Click to expand...


Not knowing what caused the Big Bang doesn't mean that a god produced it. At this point, we just don't know. But at least scientists are still looking. If religion had had its way, the world would still be flat and at the centre of the universe.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you so sure of the exact amount of species that were living in that time period? I thought you would be one to believe in a certain amount evolving or evolution found amongst the species over time, so do you think that Noah actually rounded up all the species in which you only have records of from your time period into that boat back then (or) was it that he was tasked to bring aboard two of the animals each from his time period, that to be loaded within that boat from that time period? You think in terms of population numbers, but do you think that over 300,000,000 people were on the earth back then? Well the same goes for the animals then and now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But the bible doesn't endorse evolution, so the amount of animal species on earth is constant and the same amount of species that exist today existed back then.
> So how do you explain animals in South America? Did Noah go there to get all those animals? Or did they magically fly over to his boat?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Explain how annoconda's are in South Florida now, did they just magically apear there somehow or better yet explain how a great white shark can be all over the world within any given time period as is now known by scientist who are studying them ? Scientist are making break throughs everyday on that which was for so long unexplained (knowledge explosion), so maybe you should wait on the scientist to finally get around to convincing you, since you don't want to get it from the book that already knows about most of these things in which were touched upon in covering over two thosand years of generations and this world, and even though there is much that is still not known by us, just as the Bible also says, it all will be soon known by us when we come into his kingdom upon that glorious day, and within the twinkling of an eye shall it be that we will be there, and the days of old shall be done.
Click to expand...


You're totally brainwashed and can't think for yourself, and especially, you're critical thinking in impaired. 
So now you're claiming that all the animals of the world all existed around where Noah was? Anacondas have never existed in the Middle East, they were brought to S.Flo by HUMANS!!!!! And not all shark species live all over the world. Man, lucky for you that breathing is an innate function or you might have trouble figuring that out as well. 
Oh well, at least you have the glorious day when you disappear to look forward to.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> My opinion on rights in America: - Equal rights are always earned and are not just a given, as is with any rights we have in America as it's citizens the same should always apply, but for to long now we have seen equal rights given to some individuals that didn't deserve them, especially given freely without question of, and this even when the intention that they (the recipient) had when granted these same equal rights, was to then take those rights and use them against this nation and it's citizens in a bad way, and this once given to them, yet they were still given to them as individuals no matter, even though they were known to be bad people by many qualifiers or flags flying against them.
> 
> The bad ones mainly operate as individuals and not as groups, but sometimes these bad charactered individuals who are accepted without question of, do inflitrate the group, and then they begin leading the group astray in America, and that is the goal if they are successful at it, and sometimes they are very sucessful at it.
> 
> This is the work of the devil himself, once he gets a person who will work for him, the person then takes the equal rights of freedom in America as granted to him or her, and next begins to use the equal rights of passage in order to destroy with instead of being productive and helpful with.
> 
> The bad person then uses this in this way, instead of assisting the nation in good, along with every other good citizen who are granted these same rights due their being good citizens within the nation also, and not bad citizens within the nation who are gaining the same somehow, but shouldn't have gained anything. The feds seemed to have lost their minds in the past over these specific issues as found in ones character, and this within the nation when bad, where as they strictly judged people based on them being in a blanket minority group or being a blanket color within a race or group when protecting them and granting them rights, and not as it should have been where it should always be based upon the individual character instead.
> 
> MLK didn't even believe in this type of judgement by the federal government, as he knew that their were those who were amongst the groups as individuals, that would undermine his religious attempts at gaining equal rights for human beings (the good blacks was his goal at the time), but he stressed that they must have good character, and it was not for any human beings whom had bad character regardless of their color or status as a minority, and this as was spoken about in his "I have a dream" speech.
> 
> The feds should have promoted good character equally in this nation amongst all races, but this has not been the case sorry to say by them, in which has seperated us all along specific lines to this very day, and all because of this fallacy or error it has since caused a seperation for years due to their idiocy on such matters over time. Now the numbers are just growing, and are including even more and more characters into the equasion as they grow, but what kind of character will this nation continue to support and hold up over another, so that is the question that many now want answered in this nation moving forward. It is no longer a race issue at all in my honest opinion, but rather a character issue amongst the many differing people now, so what is it going to be federal government, what is it going to be ?
> 
> I say support Americanism and all Americans of any race or culture (as long as their character or culture is good), and most of all united as American, (letting character fall where it lays on the scale), and if it is good then so be it, but if it is bad then it should be denide the same rights as those who are good always. Example: I would say that a drug dealer shouldnot be able to purchase equally a home in an anti-drug neighborhood or etc., and that is the way it should be in America again. We could keep building on this concept or premise, and the nation may begin turning again for the betterment of all, and this by leaving bad character in the dust finally, but not races or cultures and other that is of good character, where as we should always build them up, thus making America united and strong in character again.



Equal rights are earned? 

For the rest of your rant about the devil and his evildoers, you're seriously out of touch with reality, please seek help.


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> But the bible doesn't endorse evolution, so the amount of animal species on earth is constant and the same amount of species that exist today existed back then.
> So how do you explain animals in South America? Did Noah go there to get all those animals? Or did they magically fly over to his boat?
> 
> 
> 
> Explain how annoconda's are in South Florida now, did they just magically apear there somehow or better yet explain how a great white shark can be all over the world within any given time period as is now known by scientist who are studying them ? Scientist are making break throughs everyday on that which was for so long unexplained (knowledge explosion), so maybe you should wait on the scientist to finally get around to convincing you, since you don't want to get it from the book that already knows about most of these things in which were touched upon in covering over two thosand years of generations and this world, and even though there is much that is still not known by us, just as the Bible also says, it all will be soon known by us when we come into his kingdom upon that glorious day, and within the twinkling of an eye shall it be that we will be there, and the days of old shall be done.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're totally brainwashed and can't think for yourself, and especially, you're critical thinking in impaired.
> So now you're claiming that all the animals of the world all existed around where Noah was? Anacondas have never existed in the Middle East, they were brought to S.Flo by HUMANS!!!!! And not all shark species live all over the world. Man, lucky for you that breathing is an innate function or you might have trouble figuring that out as well.
> Oh well, at least you have the glorious day when you disappear to look forward to.
Click to expand...

You said that a man brought the snake to South Florida? Well imagine that, where as I can't believe that you actually admitted such a thing as this, because I thought you said that a man couldnot have done such things as you put into your example of Noah whom being a man also, in no way could have done (move animals around like that) ? 

Here is what your futuristic family light years down the road from you now (if the earth would last that long), might would say when looking back at your time, that in no way could a man have moved a snake to South Florida from somewhere else in the world or ever caused the now read about back then damages to other things within this world, so he would have had to have had help from another planet maybe, but we don't know actually, because all records were burnt up in the "GREAT FIRE" that we read about in which came upon the earth back in those days, but it's good imaginary stuff to now read about, as was found within the artifacts we dug up or that man had somehow written down in record of from that time period, but of course man wrote it right, so it couldn't be true from what we know about man or our kind today or could it be? How would you feel about a futuristic generation looking at your life, works or words in which were real at this time period, as imaginary stuff far away into the past by them, in which was the truth in which you would be screaming from your grave about, but no one is listening anymore ?

Who knows the exact size of the Garden of Eden that existed upon the earth back in the beginning, in which has been expanding from that point ever since, so you say that the animals were all over the earth in the beginning or the whole time ? You believe in the expansion of the universe of course, as stars are being born everyday, every hour and etc., but you can't wrap your head around the inhabitants of this earth expanding from certain areas and lower populations, to the huge and expanded population that we have right now today ? Do you hear the reports that we will be at this number population by this certain date and time, otherwise signaling that the population is still increasing upon this earth and not going in the other direction ? Why is it so hard for you to look back and understand the past better, just as you feel that you understand the future and/or the present ? I know that I am waisting my time with you, but oh well here I am doing this for some un-Godly reason anyway, where as you got me scatching my head now as to why I'm even bothering with you like this.

PS. Again you donot know what species existed back then, so your claims of truth within these area's are false just as well, and this just as you claim others knowledge is false within these areas also.


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> My opinion on rights in America: - Equal rights are always earned and are not just a given, as is with any rights we have in America as it's citizens the same should always apply, but for to long now we have seen equal rights given to some individuals that didn't deserve them, especially given freely without question of, and this even when the intention that they (the recipient) had when granted these same equal rights, was to then take those rights and use them against this nation and it's citizens in a bad way, and this once given to them, yet they were still given to them as individuals no matter, even though they were known to be bad people by many qualifiers or flags flying against them.
> 
> The bad ones mainly operate as individuals and not as groups, but sometimes these bad charactered individuals who are accepted without question of, do inflitrate the group, and then they begin leading the group astray in America, and that is the goal if they are successful at it, and sometimes they are very sucessful at it.
> 
> This is the work of the devil himself, once he gets a person who will work for him, the person then takes the equal rights of freedom in America as granted to him or her, and next begins to use the equal rights of passage in order to destroy with instead of being productive and helpful with.
> 
> The bad person then uses this in this way, instead of assisting the nation in good, along with every other good citizen who are granted these same rights due their being good citizens within the nation also, and not bad citizens within the nation who are gaining the same somehow, but shouldn't have gained anything. The feds seemed to have lost their minds in the past over these specific issues as found in ones character, and this within the nation when bad, where as they strictly judged people based on them being in a blanket minority group or being a blanket color within a race or group when protecting them and granting them rights, and not as it should have been where it should always be based upon the individual character instead.
> 
> MLK didn't even believe in this type of judgement by the federal government, as he knew that their were those who were amongst the groups as individuals, that would undermine his religious attempts at gaining equal rights for human beings (the good blacks was his goal at the time), but he stressed that they must have good character, and it was not for any human beings whom had bad character regardless of their color or status as a minority, and this as was spoken about in his "I have a dream" speech.
> 
> The feds should have promoted good character equally in this nation amongst all races, but this has not been the case sorry to say by them, in which has seperated us all along specific lines to this very day, and all because of this fallacy or error it has since caused a seperation for years due to their idiocy on such matters over time. Now the numbers are just growing, and are including even more and more characters into the equasion as they grow, but what kind of character will this nation continue to support and hold up over another, so that is the question that many now want answered in this nation moving forward. It is no longer a race issue at all in my honest opinion, but rather a character issue amongst the many differing people now, so what is it going to be federal government, what is it going to be ?
> 
> I say support Americanism and all Americans of any race or culture (as long as their character or culture is good), and most of all united as American, (letting character fall where it lays on the scale), and if it is good then so be it, but if it is bad then it should be denide the same rights as those who are good always. Example: I would say that a drug dealer shouldnot be able to purchase equally a home in an anti-drug neighborhood or etc., and that is the way it should be in America again. We could keep building on this concept or premise, and the nation may begin turning again for the betterment of all, and this by leaving bad character in the dust finally, but not races or cultures and other that is of good character, where as we should always build them up, thus making America united and strong in character again.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Equal rights are earned?
> 
> For the rest of your rant about the devil and his evildoers, you're seriously out of touch with reality, please seek help.
Click to expand...

Any right given a human upon this earth is earned, and if you commit a crime or live your life to hurt other humans while here, then everyone of those rights are taken away (it's called put in prison, executed or if one is lucky jail). Some commit small acts found within their words even and/or smaller issues that don't warrant any consideration of, but yet they are being put on a watch list by their own government, thus causing them to lose their right to privacy as they once knew it, and this is being cried about by many also to date (or) you may be a Sandusky that is free until find that you are violating other peoples rights to not be sodomized, and these victims also having a right to their own safety (especially as children), just as it supposed to be found in this nation always or as it should be, but do you think that Sandusky should have the same equal rights as you continue to have as a free person in this society now, especially once he has lost those rights ? Can Sandusky earn his right to freedom again ? No he can't, but he earned his rights in this nation (before commiting these crimes) as he did, just like everyone else earns their righst in this nation also.  Until he commited the terrible acts that he commited he had the same rights in this nation as the rest of us, but then he lost his rights as it should be once he is convicted.  What part of these things can't you wrap your little mind around ?


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Explain how annoconda's are in South Florida now, did they just magically apear there somehow or better yet explain how a great white shark can be all over the world within any given time period as is now known by scientist who are studying them ? Scientist are making break throughs everyday on that which was for so long unexplained (knowledge explosion), so maybe you should wait on the scientist to finally get around to convincing you, since you don't want to get it from the book that already knows about most of these things in which were touched upon in covering over two thosand years of generations and this world, and even though there is much that is still not known by us, just as the Bible also says, it all will be soon known by us when we come into his kingdom upon that glorious day, and within the twinkling of an eye shall it be that we will be there, and the days of old shall be done.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You're totally brainwashed and can't think for yourself, and especially, you're critical thinking in impaired.
> So now you're claiming that all the animals of the world all existed around where Noah was? Anacondas have never existed in the Middle East, they were brought to S.Flo by HUMANS!!!!! And not all shark species live all over the world. Man, lucky for you that breathing is an innate function or you might have trouble figuring that out as well.
> Oh well, at least you have the glorious day when you disappear to look forward to.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You said that a man brought the snake to South Florida? Well imagine that, where as I can't believe that you actually admitted such a thing as this, because I thought you said that a man couldnot have done such things as you put into your example of Noah whom being a man also, in no way could have done (move animals around like that) ?
> 
> Here is what your futuristic family light years down the road from you now (if the earth would last that long), might would say when looking back at your time, that in no way could a man have moved a snake to South Florida from somewhere else in the world or ever caused the now read about back then damages to other things within this world, so he would have had to have had help from another planet maybe, but we don't know actually, because all records were burnt up in the "GREAT FIRE" that we read about in which came upon the earth back in those days, but it's good imaginary stuff to now read about, as was found within the artifacts we dug up or that man had somehow written down in record of from that time period, but of course man wrote it right, so it couldn't be true from what we know about man or our kind today or could it be? How would you feel about a futuristic generation looking at your life, works or words in which were real at this time period, as imaginary stuff far away into the past by them, in which was the truth in which you would be screaming from your grave about, but no one is listening anymore ?
> 
> Who knows the exact size of the Garden of Eden that existed upon the earth back in the beginning, in which has been expanding from that point ever since, so you say that the animals were all over the earth in the beginning or the whole time ? You believe in the expansion of the universe of course, as stars are being born everyday, every hour and etc., but you can't wrap your head around the inhabitants of this earth expanding from certain areas and lower populations, to the huge and expanded population that we have right now today ? Do you hear the reports that we will be at this number population by this certain date and time, otherwise signaling that the population is still increasing upon this earth and not going in the other direction ? Why is it so hard for you to look back and understand the past better, just as you feel that you understand the future and/or the present ? I know that I am waisting my time with you, but oh well here I am doing this for some un-Godly reason anyway, where as you got me scatching my head now as to why I'm even bothering with you like this.
> 
> PS. Again you donot know what species existed back then, so your claims of truth within these area's are false just as well, and this just as you claim others knowledge is false within these areas also.
Click to expand...

A man brought ONE snake, not every animal on earth? So now you're saying that Noah went to South America and got some snakes? How did he manage that? Did he have another boat? A spaceship?

2000 or 3000 years ago isn't enough time for evolution of species, so what ever existed in Noah's time exists now, unless it became extinct, usually because of man. So Noah went to every continent and got all the animals? Or they all came to him? And he had enough food for everyone for 40 days?


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I agree, but are they in the same amount of numbers back then as they are today and/or were they scattered about back then as much they are today or have been in different periods throughout time ? This is something that no one knows or can answer truly today, but I garantee you that a liberal will try their very best to put a scientific answer of somekind to it, even if they have to make one up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's true!
> 
> Ask them what the anomaly was that caused the Big Bang, watch their heads explode.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not knowing what caused the Big Bang doesn't mean that a god produced it. At this point, we just don't know. But at least scientists are still looking. If religion had had its way, the world would still be flat and at the centre of the universe.
Click to expand...

How is it that you know so little as expressed in this post by you, but yet you know how to tell a Christian that everything they believe in is false, and this according to your arrogance on such matters ?


----------



## Samson

ima said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I agree, but are they in the same amount of numbers back then as they are today and/or were they scattered about back then as much they are today or have been in different periods throughout time ? This is something that no one knows or can answer truly today, but I garantee you that a liberal will try their very best to put a scientific answer of somekind to it, even if they have to make one up.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's true!
> 
> Ask them what the anomaly was that caused the Big Bang, watch their heads explode.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not knowing what caused the Big Bang doesn't mean that a god produced it. At this point, we just don't know. But at least scientists are still looking. If religion had had its way, the world would still be flat and at the centre of the universe.
Click to expand...


I suppose you're reference to The Big Bang, is not about some Queer Orgy Filmed on Fire Island.


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> You're totally brainwashed and can't think for yourself, and especially, you're critical thinking in impaired.
> So now you're claiming that all the animals of the world all existed around where Noah was? Anacondas have never existed in the Middle East, they were brought to S.Flo by HUMANS!!!!! And not all shark species live all over the world. Man, lucky for you that breathing is an innate function or you might have trouble figuring that out as well.
> Oh well, at least you have the glorious day when you disappear to look forward to.
> 
> 
> 
> You said that a man brought the snake to South Florida? Well imagine that, where as I can't believe that you actually admitted such a thing as this, because I thought you said that a man couldnot have done such things as you put into your example of Noah whom being a man also, in no way could have done (move animals around like that) ?
> 
> Here is what your futuristic family light years down the road from you now (if the earth would last that long), might would say when looking back at your time, that in no way could a man have moved a snake to South Florida from somewhere else in the world or ever caused the now read about back then damages to other things within this world, so he would have had to have had help from another planet maybe, but we don't know actually, because all records were burnt up in the "GREAT FIRE" that we read about in which came upon the earth back in those days, but it's good imaginary stuff to now read about, as was found within the artifacts we dug up or that man had somehow written down in record of from that time period, but of course man wrote it right, so it couldn't be true from what we know about man or our kind today or could it be? How would you feel about a futuristic generation looking at your life, works or words in which were real at this time period, as imaginary stuff far away into the past by them, in which was the truth in which you would be screaming from your grave about, but no one is listening anymore ?
> 
> Who knows the exact size of the Garden of Eden that existed upon the earth back in the beginning, in which has been expanding from that point ever since, so you say that the animals were all over the earth in the beginning or the whole time ? You believe in the expansion of the universe of course, as stars are being born everyday, every hour and etc., but you can't wrap your head around the inhabitants of this earth expanding from certain areas and lower populations, to the huge and expanded population that we have right now today ? Do you hear the reports that we will be at this number population by this certain date and time, otherwise signaling that the population is still increasing upon this earth and not going in the other direction ? Why is it so hard for you to look back and understand the past better, just as you feel that you understand the future and/or the present ? I know that I am waisting my time with you, but oh well here I am doing this for some un-Godly reason anyway, where as you got me scatching my head now as to why I'm even bothering with you like this.
> 
> PS. Again you donot know what species existed back then, so your claims of truth within these area's are false just as well, and this just as you claim others knowledge is false within these areas also.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> A man brought ONE snake, not every animal on earth? So now you're saying that Noah went to South America and got some snakes? How did he manage that? Did he have another boat? A spaceship?
> 
> 2000 or 3000 years ago isn't enough time for evolution of species, so what ever existed in Noah's time exists now, unless it became extinct, usually because of man. So Noah went to every continent and got all the animals? Or they all came to him? And he had enough food for everyone for 40 days?
Click to expand...

You know everything, so why don't you go on and tell me or us here Mr. or Mrs. smarty pants.. Oh that's right in another post you claim you don't know, but you figure somehow that I am just dum enough to make you look like you know something (thinking I make you look smarter in your life), when infact you are not that smart at all, just a good bull crapper is what you are, and everyone see's through your bull crap, but do carry on please. LOL


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> My opinion on rights in America: - Equal rights are always earned and are not just a given, as is with any rights we have in America as it's citizens the same should always apply, but for to long now we have seen equal rights given to some individuals that didn't deserve them, especially given freely without question of, and this even when the intention that they (the recipient) had when granted these same equal rights, was to then take those rights and use them against this nation and it's citizens in a bad way, and this once given to them, yet they were still given to them as individuals no matter, even though they were known to be bad people by many qualifiers or flags flying against them.
> 
> The bad ones mainly operate as individuals and not as groups, but sometimes these bad charactered individuals who are accepted without question of, do inflitrate the group, and then they begin leading the group astray in America, and that is the goal if they are successful at it, and sometimes they are very sucessful at it.
> 
> This is the work of the devil himself, once he gets a person who will work for him, the person then takes the equal rights of freedom in America as granted to him or her, and next begins to use the equal rights of passage in order to destroy with instead of being productive and helpful with.
> 
> The bad person then uses this in this way, instead of assisting the nation in good, along with every other good citizen who are granted these same rights due their being good citizens within the nation also, and not bad citizens within the nation who are gaining the same somehow, but shouldn't have gained anything. The feds seemed to have lost their minds in the past over these specific issues as found in ones character, and this within the nation when bad, where as they strictly judged people based on them being in a blanket minority group or being a blanket color within a race or group when protecting them and granting them rights, and not as it should have been where it should always be based upon the individual character instead.
> 
> MLK didn't even believe in this type of judgement by the federal government, as he knew that their were those who were amongst the groups as individuals, that would undermine his religious attempts at gaining equal rights for human beings (the good blacks was his goal at the time), but he stressed that they must have good character, and it was not for any human beings whom had bad character regardless of their color or status as a minority, and this as was spoken about in his "I have a dream" speech.
> 
> The feds should have promoted good character equally in this nation amongst all races, but this has not been the case sorry to say by them, in which has seperated us all along specific lines to this very day, and all because of this fallacy or error it has since caused a seperation for years due to their idiocy on such matters over time. Now the numbers are just growing, and are including even more and more characters into the equasion as they grow, but what kind of character will this nation continue to support and hold up over another, so that is the question that many now want answered in this nation moving forward. It is no longer a race issue at all in my honest opinion, but rather a character issue amongst the many differing people now, so what is it going to be federal government, what is it going to be ?
> 
> I say support Americanism and all Americans of any race or culture (as long as their character or culture is good), and most of all united as American, (letting character fall where it lays on the scale), and if it is good then so be it, but if it is bad then it should be denide the same rights as those who are good always. Example: I would say that a drug dealer shouldnot be able to purchase equally a home in an anti-drug neighborhood or etc., and that is the way it should be in America again. We could keep building on this concept or premise, and the nation may begin turning again for the betterment of all, and this by leaving bad character in the dust finally, but not races or cultures and other that is of good character, where as we should always build them up, thus making America united and strong in character again.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Equal rights are earned?
> 
> For the rest of your rant about the devil and his evildoers, you're seriously out of touch with reality, please seek help.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Any right given a human upon this earth is earned, and if you commit a crime or live your life to hurt other humans while here, then everyone of those rights are taken away (it's called put in prison, executed or if one is lucky jail). Some commit small acts found within their words even and/or smaller issues that don't warrant any consideration of, but yet they are being put on a watch list by their own government, thus causing them to lose their right to privacy as they once knew it, and this is being cried about by many also to date (or) you may be a Sandusky that is free until find that you are violating other peoples rights to not be sodomized, and these victims also having a right to their own safety (especially as children), just as it supposed to be found in this nation always or as it should be, but do you think that Sandusky should have the same equal rights as you continue to have as a free person in this society now, especially once he has lost those rights ? Can Sandusky earn his right to freedom again ? No he can't, but he earned his rights in this nation (before commiting these crimes) as he did, just like everyone else earns their righst in this nation also.  Until he commited the terrible acts that he commited he had the same rights in this nation as the rest of us, but then he lost his rights as it should be once he is convicted.  What part of these things can't you wrap your little mind around ?
Click to expand...


So you're equating convicted felons and others under criminal investigation with homosexuals trying to marry? So how do gays "earn" their rights?


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You said that a man brought the snake to South Florida? Well imagine that, where as I can't believe that you actually admitted such a thing as this, because I thought you said that a man couldnot have done such things as you put into your example of Noah whom being a man also, in no way could have done (move animals around like that) ?
> 
> Here is what your futuristic family light years down the road from you now (if the earth would last that long), might would say when looking back at your time, that in no way could a man have moved a snake to South Florida from somewhere else in the world or ever caused the now read about back then damages to other things within this world, so he would have had to have had help from another planet maybe, but we don't know actually, because all records were burnt up in the "GREAT FIRE" that we read about in which came upon the earth back in those days, but it's good imaginary stuff to now read about, as was found within the artifacts we dug up or that man had somehow written down in record of from that time period, but of course man wrote it right, so it couldn't be true from what we know about man or our kind today or could it be? How would you feel about a futuristic generation looking at your life, works or words in which were real at this time period, as imaginary stuff far away into the past by them, in which was the truth in which you would be screaming from your grave about, but no one is listening anymore ?
> 
> Who knows the exact size of the Garden of Eden that existed upon the earth back in the beginning, in which has been expanding from that point ever since, so you say that the animals were all over the earth in the beginning or the whole time ? You believe in the expansion of the universe of course, as stars are being born everyday, every hour and etc., but you can't wrap your head around the inhabitants of this earth expanding from certain areas and lower populations, to the huge and expanded population that we have right now today ? Do you hear the reports that we will be at this number population by this certain date and time, otherwise signaling that the population is still increasing upon this earth and not going in the other direction ? Why is it so hard for you to look back and understand the past better, just as you feel that you understand the future and/or the present ? I know that I am waisting my time with you, but oh well here I am doing this for some un-Godly reason anyway, where as you got me scatching my head now as to why I'm even bothering with you like this.
> 
> PS. Again you donot know what species existed back then, so your claims of truth within these area's are false just as well, and this just as you claim others knowledge is false within these areas also.
> 
> 
> 
> A man brought ONE snake, not every animal on earth? So now you're saying that Noah went to South America and got some snakes? How did he manage that? Did he have another boat? A spaceship?
> 
> 2000 or 3000 years ago isn't enough time for evolution of species, so what ever existed in Noah's time exists now, unless it became extinct, usually because of man. So Noah went to every continent and got all the animals? Or they all came to him? And he had enough food for everyone for 40 days?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You know everything, so why don't you go on and tell me or us here Mr. or Mrs. smarty pants.. Oh that's right in another post you claim you don't know, but you figure somehow that I am just dum enough to make you look like you know something (thinking I make you look smarter in your life), when infact you are not that smart at all, just a good bull crapper is what you are, and everyone see's through your bull crap, but do carry on please. LOL
Click to expand...


You can't/won't answer my questions so you try to denigrate me. Not surprised really.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's true!
> 
> Ask them what the anomaly was that caused the Big Bang, watch their heads explode.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not knowing what caused the Big Bang doesn't mean that a god produced it. At this point, we just don't know. But at least scientists are still looking. If religion had had its way, the world would still be flat and at the centre of the universe.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How is it that you know so little as expressed in this post by you, but yet you know how to tell a Christian that everything they believe in is false, and this according to your arrogance on such matters ?
Click to expand...


I'm saying that if you think the world was made in 6 days, please provide some actual proof so that I'm not just agreeing to some fairy tale.
And at least I can admit that we don't know everything. But what we do know largely contradicts what's written in the bible. That I do know.


----------



## ima

Samson said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's true!
> 
> Ask them what the anomaly was that caused the Big Bang, watch their heads explode.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not knowing what caused the Big Bang doesn't mean that a god produced it. At this point, we just don't know. But at least scientists are still looking. If religion had had its way, the world would still be flat and at the centre of the universe.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I suppose you're reference to The Big Bang, is not about some Queer Orgy Filmed on Fire Island.
Click to expand...


Why, you have the starring role in that movie?


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Equal rights are earned?
> 
> For the rest of your rant about the devil and his evildoers, you're seriously out of touch with reality, please seek help.
> 
> 
> 
> Any right given a human upon this earth is earned, and if you commit a crime or live your life to hurt other humans while here, then everyone of those rights are taken away (it's called put in prison, executed or if one is lucky jail). Some commit small acts found within their words even and/or smaller issues that don't warrant any consideration of, but yet they are being put on a watch list by their own government, thus causing them to lose their right to privacy as they once knew it, and this is being cried about by many also to date (or) you may be a Sandusky that is free until find that you are violating other peoples rights to not be sodomized, and these victims also having a right to their own safety (especially as children), just as it supposed to be found in this nation always or as it should be, but do you think that Sandusky should have the same equal rights as you continue to have as a free person in this society now, especially once he has lost those rights ? Can Sandusky earn his right to freedom again ? No he can't, but he earned his rights in this nation (before commiting these crimes) as he did, just like everyone else earns their righst in this nation also.  Until he commited the terrible acts that he commited he had the same rights in this nation as the rest of us, but then he lost his rights as it should be once he is convicted.  What part of these things can't you wrap your little mind around ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So you're equating convicted felons and others under criminal investigation with homosexuals trying to marry? So how do gays "earn" their rights?
Click to expand...

They have rights as everyone else in America does or as Americans do as citizens for whom all live within the public setting together, yet within limited reasoning these rights were born out of or do exist within reason, and this while out and about in America in the public sectors or settings, yet we all only have these specific rights under certain agreed upon terms as found within a majority in America, that does agree upon these rights and agreed upon terms that exist within such rights in which we have always had in America. The right for gays to be married as pertaining to or in opposition to the sacred traditional morals and values held within the various states or even according to the feds by a law signed into place by Clinton, in which now makes marriage between one man and one woman federal law stops them for now getting married if the states refuse this marriage between them, therefore it holds back such a right to be granted unto these gays until further notice or rather maybe that a huge decline of the majority comes about next, that would maybe change the situation for them where ever this may become the case, and this is because the majority vote within these states donot except that marriage would also become between a man and a man or a woman with another woman, but rather it remain sacred between a man and a woman as it always has been according to a majority within the states in which is agreed upon by them (or) is also recognized by the feds in the same respect by law now. There will always be the few gays who want to go public in the face of those in opposition to this always, wherefore the gays are still up against a majority that teach their children that being this way is not an acceptable practice nor should it ever be recognized by marriage in the traditional sense that marriage has always been in America.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Any right given a human upon this earth is earned, and if you commit a crime or live your life to hurt other humans while here, then everyone of those rights are taken away (it's called put in prison, executed or if one is lucky jail). Some commit small acts found within their words even and/or smaller issues that don't warrant any consideration of, but yet they are being put on a watch list by their own government, thus causing them to lose their right to privacy as they once knew it, and this is being cried about by many also to date (or) you may be a Sandusky that is free until find that you are violating other peoples rights to not be sodomized, and these victims also having a right to their own safety (especially as children), just as it supposed to be found in this nation always or as it should be, but do you think that Sandusky should have the same equal rights as you continue to have as a free person in this society now, especially once he has lost those rights ? Can Sandusky earn his right to freedom again ? No he can't, but he earned his rights in this nation (before commiting these crimes) as he did, just like everyone else earns their righst in this nation also.  Until he commited the terrible acts that he commited he had the same rights in this nation as the rest of us, but then he lost his rights as it should be once he is convicted.  What part of these things can't you wrap your little mind around ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So you're equating convicted felons and others under criminal investigation with homosexuals trying to marry? So how do gays "earn" their rights?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> They have rights as everyone else in America does or as Americans do as citizens for whom all live within the public setting together, yet within limited reasoning these rights were born out of or do exist within reason, and this while out and about in America in the public sectors or settings, yet we all only have these specific rights under certain agreed upon terms as found within a majority in America, that does agree upon these rights and agreed upon terms that exist within such rights in which we have always had in America. The right for gays to be married as pertaining to or in opposition to the sacred traditional morals and values held within the various states or even according to the feds by a law signed into place by Clinton, in which now makes marriage between one man and one woman federal law stops them for now getting married if the states refuse this marriage between them, therefore it holds back such a right to be granted unto these gays until further notice or rather maybe that a huge decline of the majority comes about next, that would maybe change the situation for them where ever this may become the case, and this is because the majority vote within these states donot except that marriage would also become between a man and a man or a woman with another woman, but rather it remain sacred between a man and a woman as it always has been according to a majority within the states in which is agreed upon by them (or) is also recognized by the feds in the same respect by law now. There will always be the few gays who want to go public in the face of those in opposition to this always, wherefore the gays are still up against a majority that teach their children that being this way is not an acceptable practice nor should it ever be recognized by marriage in the traditional sense that marriage has always been in America.
Click to expand...


Nice how you avoid my other posts because you can't answer them. 
As for this post, if you're against gay marriage, simply don't marry a gay person. But if Jesus did exist, I seriously doubt that he would have spouted any homophobic statements like you do. Jesus was about love and acceptance, and apparently he never said a cross word about anyone? he was an inclusive person, or so he's portrayed.
So are you actually saying that Jesus was anti-gay?


----------



## newpolitics

beagle9 said:


> Today Chic-Fil-A made history, and so does the power of facebook by staging a support Chic-Fil-A day, where thousands upon thousands turned out in support for the chicken sandwich franchise, thus sending a strong message to those who think that the American voters will just lay silent anymore, when infact they (the boycotters) have another thought coming for sure on that note, because the sleeping giant has once again been awoken.
> 
> Today in many states where Chic-Fil-A is located, people came out by the thousands in support of the resteraunt chain, causing traffic jams and flooding in ajoining parking lots and more. It was all due mainly in support of the chain and it's personal right to make a statement, and this when asked about it's values and morals as an American business that is run on those values and morals. It then caused an uprising or uproar amongst a minority of Americans when answered, for whom thought that they could afterwards take on the chain by calling for a boycott of it, but the Americans who support the chain weren't having any of it, so they came out in support of the chain today big time, in one of the biggest (counter boycott) moves the nation has seen in a long time. I have a friend who called me and said his wife waited in line for two hours today, but it was worth the wait no matter he said that she said. My wife just came from up town around 8:00 o'clock PM evening time, and she said that the lines were still long and the chain flooded with supporters still at 8:00 o'clock. It was strong in support of all day long and into the night. I wonder how the Media will cover it ? Lets see who they (the media) really belongs to as well in the situation.
> 
> I bet this is what will happen to Obama this election, so he had better get ready for the storm, even though it won't help him none otherwise to get ready and counter the Americans on the same views and ideals in which they have had for Chic-Fil-A, and this especially so if the same turn out happens with this election, that also happened with Chic-Fil-A today. WOW!



 Get off your high horses you religious zealots. Homosexuality has nothing to do with morality. The animal cruelty that goes into chic-fil-a's chicken sandwiches, however, does. Start focusing on actual suffering and making we can make this world a better place. Otherwise, worship your ideals on your own time.


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ce4DJh-L7Ys]Earthlings - Full length documentary (multi-subtitles) - YouTube[/ame]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THIODWTqx5E]Farm to Fridge - The Truth Behind Meat Production - YouTube[/ame]

If you don't have the guts to watch this and learn the TRUTH about where animal products come from, then you shouldn't be buying meat, dairy, or eggs.


----------



## Katzndogz

Jesus did not come to abolish God's law but fulfill it.

Jesus did not speak directly against homosexuality? Simply put, He assumed the moral tenets of the Mosaic law, as did the people He spoke to. He also didnt directly speak against bestiality, genocide, child molestation, or gang rape because these things were assumed, based on the Mosaic Law, to be sinful.

If Jesus was silent on an issue, this did not mean that there was tacit approval of that conduct.


----------



## Pho_King

newpolitics said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Today Chic-Fil-A made history, and so does the power of facebook by staging a support Chic-Fil-A day, where thousands upon thousands turned out in support for the chicken sandwich franchise, thus sending a strong message to those who think that the American voters will just lay silent anymore, when infact they (the boycotters) have another thought coming for sure on that note, because the sleeping giant has once again been awoken.
> 
> Today in many states where Chic-Fil-A is located, people came out by the thousands in support of the resteraunt chain, causing traffic jams and flooding in ajoining parking lots and more. It was all due mainly in support of the chain and it's personal right to make a statement, and this when asked about it's values and morals as an American business that is run on those values and morals. It then caused an uprising or uproar amongst a minority of Americans when answered, for whom thought that they could afterwards take on the chain by calling for a boycott of it, but the Americans who support the chain weren't having any of it, so they came out in support of the chain today big time, in one of the biggest (counter boycott) moves the nation has seen in a long time. I have a friend who called me and said his wife waited in line for two hours today, but it was worth the wait no matter he said that she said. My wife just came from up town around 8:00 o'clock PM evening time, and she said that the lines were still long and the chain flooded with supporters still at 8:00 o'clock. It was strong in support of all day long and into the night. I wonder how the Media will cover it ? Lets see who they (the media) really belongs to as well in the situation.
> 
> I bet this is what will happen to Obama this election, so he had better get ready for the storm, even though it won't help him none otherwise to get ready and counter the Americans on the same views and ideals in which they have had for Chic-Fil-A, and this especially so if the same turn out happens with this election, that also happened with Chic-Fil-A today. WOW!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Get off your high horses you religious zealots. Homosexuality has nothing to do with morality. The animal cruelty that goes into chic-fil-a's chicken sandwiches, however, does. Start focusing on actual suffering and making we can make this world a better place. Otherwise, worship your ideals on your own time.
> 
> 
> [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ce4DJh-L7Ys]Earthlings - Full length documentary (multi-subtitles) - YouTube[/ame]
> 
> [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THIODWTqx5E]Farm to Fridge - The Truth Behind Meat Production - YouTube[/ame]
> 
> If you don't have the guts to watch this and learn the TRUTH about where animal products come from, then you shouldn't be buying meat, dairy, or eggs.
Click to expand...


Christ, another parasitic OWS homo, raining against us normal people that think lesbians are hideous and meat tastes great.


----------



## Katzndogz

Chick Fil A made history by the number of people willing to support them, and the amount of money they were willing to spend to do it.

It was a little rebellion among the people.


----------



## ima

Katzndogz said:


> Jesus did not come to abolish God's law but fulfill it.
> 
> Jesus did not speak directly against homosexuality? Simply put, He assumed the moral tenets of the Mosaic law, as did the people He spoke to. He also didnt directly speak against bestiality, genocide, child molestation, or gang rape because these things were assumed, based on the Mosaic Law, to be sinful.
> 
> If Jesus was silent on an issue, this did not mean that there was tacit approval of that conduct.



Doesn't mean he was against it either. So how did the anti-gay stuff get in the bible? Just the preference of the guy(s) who wrote it?


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> So you're equating convicted felons and others under criminal investigation with homosexuals trying to marry? So how do gays "earn" their rights?
> 
> 
> 
> They have rights as everyone else in America does or as Americans do as citizens for whom all live within the public setting together, yet within limited reasoning these rights were born out of or do exist within reason, and this while out and about in America in the public sectors or settings, yet we all only have these specific rights under certain agreed upon terms as found within a majority in America, that does agree upon these rights and agreed upon terms that exist within such rights in which we have always had in America. The right for gays to be married as pertaining to or in opposition to the sacred traditional morals and values held within the various states or even according to the feds by a law signed into place by Clinton, in which now makes marriage between one man and one woman federal law stops them for now getting married if the states refuse this marriage between them, therefore it holds back such a right to be granted unto these gays until further notice or rather maybe that a huge decline of the majority comes about next, that would maybe change the situation for them where ever this may become the case, and this is because the majority vote within these states donot except that marriage would also become between a man and a man or a woman with another woman, but rather it remain sacred between a man and a woman as it always has been according to a majority within the states in which is agreed upon by them (or) is also recognized by the feds in the same respect by law now. There will always be the few gays who want to go public in the face of those in opposition to this always, wherefore the gays are still up against a majority that teach their children that being this way is not an acceptable practice nor should it ever be recognized by marriage in the traditional sense that marriage has always been in America.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nice how you avoid my other posts because you can't answer them.
> As for this post, if you're against gay marriage, simply don't marry a gay person. But if Jesus did exist, I seriously doubt that he would have spouted any homophobic statements like you do. Jesus was about love and acceptance, and apparently he never said a cross word about anyone? he was an inclusive person, or so he's portrayed.
> So are you actually saying that Jesus was anti-gay?
Click to expand...

You need help do you know that? I really am serious because on the one hand you trash Jesus in your words written, then on the other hand or when it is convienant, you try and use him to empower your message.


----------



## beagle9

newpolitics said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Today Chic-Fil-A made history, and so does the power of facebook by staging a support Chic-Fil-A day, where thousands upon thousands turned out in support for the chicken sandwich franchise, thus sending a strong message to those who think that the American voters will just lay silent anymore, when infact they (the boycotters) have another thought coming for sure on that note, because the sleeping giant has once again been awoken.
> 
> Today in many states where Chic-Fil-A is located, people came out by the thousands in support of the resteraunt chain, causing traffic jams and flooding in ajoining parking lots and more. It was all due mainly in support of the chain and it's personal right to make a statement, and this when asked about it's values and morals as an American business that is run on those values and morals. It then caused an uprising or uproar amongst a minority of Americans when answered, for whom thought that they could afterwards take on the chain by calling for a boycott of it, but the Americans who support the chain weren't having any of it, so they came out in support of the chain today big time, in one of the biggest (counter boycott) moves the nation has seen in a long time. I have a friend who called me and said his wife waited in line for two hours today, but it was worth the wait no matter he said that she said. My wife just came from up town around 8:00 o'clock PM evening time, and she said that the lines were still long and the chain flooded with supporters still at 8:00 o'clock. It was strong in support of all day long and into the night. I wonder how the Media will cover it ? Lets see who they (the media) really belongs to as well in the situation.
> 
> I bet this is what will happen to Obama this election, so he had better get ready for the storm, even though it won't help him none otherwise to get ready and counter the Americans on the same views and ideals in which they have had for Chic-Fil-A, and this especially so if the same turn out happens with this election, that also happened with Chic-Fil-A today. WOW!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Get off your high horses you religious zealots. Homosexuality has nothing to do with morality. The animal cruelty that goes into chic-fil-a's chicken sandwiches, however, does. Start focusing on actual suffering and making we can make this world a better place. Otherwise, worship your ideals on your own time.
> 
> 
> [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ce4DJh-L7Ys]Earthlings - Full length documentary (multi-subtitles) - YouTube[/ame]
> 
> [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THIODWTqx5E]Farm to Fridge - The Truth Behind Meat Production - YouTube[/ame]
> 
> If you don't have the guts to watch this and learn the TRUTH about where animal products come from, then you shouldn't be buying meat, dairy, or eggs.
Click to expand...

Oh brother another agitator sent up from Hell, and for whom is what,  maybe one that is willing to use what the devil has caused in this nation over time, to now fight back with or use as amunition on me and my words spoken here?.... Is Chic-Fil-A's name shown anywhere in the video's, and if not, then how do you know that they are involved in what you have presented here ? I don't have time to watch this stuff, so let me know if Chic-Fil-A's name is actually associated with these videos that you have used in your attack, and if so then I may take a glance at them.

I bet you could never put a worm on a fishing hook either could you ? I am not for abuse of animals ever, so let me know if Chic-Fil-A is linked to your videos. Get off the high horse you say ? Hmmmmm isn't it best to be upon a high horse when walking through bull crap as is spewed by someone like you.....LOL


----------



## HomeInspect

Ravi said:


> I guess it's cool that people applaud intolerance....



The intolerance was first shown by those who couldn't stand a business owner voicing his opinion. Like the mayors in San Fran, Chicago, and D.C. who made it a point to make the issue political while being intolerant.


----------



## ima

HomeInspect said:


> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I guess it's cool that people applaud intolerance....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The intolerance was first shown by those who couldn't stand a business owner voicing his opinion. Like the mayors in San Fran, Chicago, and D.C. who made it a point to make the issue political while being intolerant.
Click to expand...


No. Intolerance is thinking that gay people aren't equal to all others.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> They have rights as everyone else in America does or as Americans do as citizens for whom all live within the public setting together, yet within limited reasoning these rights were born out of or do exist within reason, and this while out and about in America in the public sectors or settings, yet we all only have these specific rights under certain agreed upon terms as found within a majority in America, that does agree upon these rights and agreed upon terms that exist within such rights in which we have always had in America. The right for gays to be married as pertaining to or in opposition to the sacred traditional morals and values held within the various states or even according to the feds by a law signed into place by Clinton, in which now makes marriage between one man and one woman federal law stops them for now getting married if the states refuse this marriage between them, therefore it holds back such a right to be granted unto these gays until further notice or rather maybe that a huge decline of the majority comes about next, that would maybe change the situation for them where ever this may become the case, and this is because the majority vote within these states donot except that marriage would also become between a man and a man or a woman with another woman, but rather it remain sacred between a man and a woman as it always has been according to a majority within the states in which is agreed upon by them (or) is also recognized by the feds in the same respect by law now. There will always be the few gays who want to go public in the face of those in opposition to this always, wherefore the gays are still up against a majority that teach their children that being this way is not an acceptable practice nor should it ever be recognized by marriage in the traditional sense that marriage has always been in America.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nice how you avoid my other posts because you can't answer them.
> As for this post, if you're against gay marriage, simply don't marry a gay person. But if Jesus did exist, I seriously doubt that he would have spouted any homophobic statements like you do. Jesus was about love and acceptance, and apparently he never said a cross word about anyone? he was an inclusive person, or so he's portrayed.
> So are you actually saying that Jesus was anti-gay?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You need help do you know that? I really am serious because on the one hand you trash Jesus in your words written, then on the other hand or when it is convienant, you try and use him to empower your message.
Click to expand...

You keep avoiding my questions. Was Jesus an inclusive sort of chap or was he anti-gay?
Also, if you think the world was made in 6 days, please provide some actual proof so that I'm not just agreeing to some fairy tale.
And did Noah go get all the animals in South America, Asia and Africa, or did all the animals come to him? Since we know that not all species inhabit all parts of the earth.
And if there was a flood for 40 days, how did the plants survive?


----------



## HomeInspect

ima said:


> HomeInspect said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ravi said:
> 
> 
> 
> I guess it's cool that people applaud intolerance....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The intolerance was first shown by those who couldn't stand a business owner voicing his opinion. Like the mayors in San Fran, Chicago, and D.C. who made it a point to make the issue political while being intolerant.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No. Intolerance is thinking that gay people aren't equal to all others.
Click to expand...



When did someone say that?  Or was that voices in your head? Equal does not mean the same. Men and women can have equal rights, but they are not the same. The owner of Chick Fil A is entitled to his opinion and entitled to share it. The intolerance is from those who think he doesn't have the right to share it. Mayors of 4 cities have gone way beyong intolerance. They want to sanction a business due to the owner's beliefs. Can you imagine if this was a Muslim owned business? This is more about a political agenda and the hypocrsy of the left. (kind of like when NOW had nothing to say about Clinton's antics)  If the owner of a business discriminates for any reason based on sexuality, then it's a different story. The owner of Chick Fil A is as tolerant as the next guy. He chooses to believe that marraige is only between a man and woman, under the eyes of God, based on his religion. The people that don't think he has the right to his opinion, are the intolerant ones.​


----------



## OODA_Loop

HomeInspect said:


> . The owner of Chick Fil A is as tolerant as the next guy. He chooses to believe that marraige is only between a man and woman, under the eyes of God, based on his religion.



And under the eyes of Federal law enacted by Clinton.


----------



## Gadawg73

Katzndogz said:


> Chick Fil A made history by the number of people willing to support them, and the amount of money they were willing to spend to do it.
> 
> It was a little rebellion among the people.



You mean the amount of $$$ that publicity stunt brought to them.
I eat their sandwiches still, like their food.
And I support 100% whatever they want to say and believe as that is their right of free speech. Plus I do not support government sponsored bans on them for exercising their right to free speech.
But anyone that gives a shit about what a fast food restaurant believes about marriage has a loose screw. 
On both sides, gay or straight.
Who cares? Why does it matter so much that a fast food restaurant opposes gay marriage?
Chicken sammiches-gay marriage.
Where is the connection there?


----------



## Gadawg73

I also agree with the fact that if one opposes gay marriage then do not marry a gay.
Neal Boortz, a strong conservative talk show host, has it right.

It is a NON issue.


----------



## The Gadfly

newpolitics said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Today Chic-Fil-A made history, and so does the power of facebook by staging a support Chic-Fil-A day, where thousands upon thousands turned out in support for the chicken sandwich franchise, thus sending a strong message to those who think that the American voters will just lay silent anymore, when infact they (the boycotters) have another thought coming for sure on that note, because the sleeping giant has once again been awoken.
> 
> Today in many states where Chic-Fil-A is located, people came out by the thousands in support of the resteraunt chain, causing traffic jams and flooding in ajoining parking lots and more. It was all due mainly in support of the chain and it's personal right to make a statement, and this when asked about it's values and morals as an American business that is run on those values and morals. It then caused an uprising or uproar amongst a minority of Americans when answered, for whom thought that they could afterwards take on the chain by calling for a boycott of it, but the Americans who support the chain weren't having any of it, so they came out in support of the chain today big time, in one of the biggest (counter boycott) moves the nation has seen in a long time. I have a friend who called me and said his wife waited in line for two hours today, but it was worth the wait no matter he said that she said. My wife just came from up town around 8:00 o'clock PM evening time, and she said that the lines were still long and the chain flooded with supporters still at 8:00 o'clock. It was strong in support of all day long and into the night. I wonder how the Media will cover it ? Lets see who they (the media) really belongs to as well in the situation.
> 
> I bet this is what will happen to Obama this election, so he had better get ready for the storm, even though it won't help him none otherwise to get ready and counter the Americans on the same views and ideals in which they have had for Chic-Fil-A, and this especially so if the same turn out happens with this election, that also happened with Chic-Fil-A today. WOW!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Get off your high horses you religious zealots. Homosexuality has nothing to do with morality. The animal cruelty that goes into chic-fil-a's chicken sandwiches, however, does. Start focusing on actual suffering and making we can make this world a better place. Otherwise, worship your ideals on your own time.
> 
> 
> [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ce4DJh-L7Ys]Earthlings - Full length documentary (multi-subtitles) - YouTube[/ame]
> 
> [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THIODWTqx5E]Farm to Fridge - The Truth Behind Meat Production - YouTube[/ame]
> 
> If you don't have the guts to watch this and learn the TRUTH about where animal products come from, then you shouldn't be buying meat, dairy, or eggs.
Click to expand...


I grew up on the farm, you brain-dead citified twit. I've gathered eggs, milked a cow, and butchered hogs, along with catching chickens, wringing their necks, plucking and cleaning them. I've known all my life where the stuff comes from, how you raise it, and how it gets from live to on the table. What; you city people think the stuff just magically appears, skinned and neatly wrapped in the meat department? BWAAAAAAA!

Gawd, if you people weren't serious, you'd be hilarious!


----------



## beagle9

The Gadfly said:


> newpolitics said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Today Chic-Fil-A made history, and so does the power of facebook by staging a support Chic-Fil-A day, where thousands upon thousands turned out in support for the chicken sandwich franchise, thus sending a strong message to those who think that the American voters will just lay silent anymore, when infact they (the boycotters) have another thought coming for sure on that note, because the sleeping giant has once again been awoken.
> 
> Today in many states where Chic-Fil-A is located, people came out by the thousands in support of the resteraunt chain, causing traffic jams and flooding in ajoining parking lots and more. It was all due mainly in support of the chain and it's personal right to make a statement, and this when asked about it's values and morals as an American business that is run on those values and morals. It then caused an uprising or uproar amongst a minority of Americans when answered, for whom thought that they could afterwards take on the chain by calling for a boycott of it, but the Americans who support the chain weren't having any of it, so they came out in support of the chain today big time, in one of the biggest (counter boycott) moves the nation has seen in a long time. I have a friend who called me and said his wife waited in line for two hours today, but it was worth the wait no matter he said that she said. My wife just came from up town around 8:00 o'clock PM evening time, and she said that the lines were still long and the chain flooded with supporters still at 8:00 o'clock. It was strong in support of all day long and into the night. I wonder how the Media will cover it ? Lets see who they (the media) really belongs to as well in the situation.
> 
> I bet this is what will happen to Obama this election, so he had better get ready for the storm, even though it won't help him none otherwise to get ready and counter the Americans on the same views and ideals in which they have had for Chic-Fil-A, and this especially so if the same turn out happens with this election, that also happened with Chic-Fil-A today. WOW!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Get off your high horses you religious zealots. Homosexuality has nothing to do with morality. The animal cruelty that goes into chic-fil-a's chicken sandwiches, however, does. Start focusing on actual suffering and making we can make this world a better place. Otherwise, worship your ideals on your own time.
> 
> 
> [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ce4DJh-L7Ys]Earthlings - Full length documentary (multi-subtitles) - YouTube[/ame]
> 
> [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THIODWTqx5E]Farm to Fridge - The Truth Behind Meat Production - YouTube[/ame]
> 
> If you don't have the guts to watch this and learn the TRUTH about where animal products come from, then you shouldn't be buying meat, dairy, or eggs.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I grew up on the farm, you brain-dead citified twit. I've gathered eggs, milked a cow, and butchered hogs, along with catching chickens, wringing their necks, plucking and cleaning them. I've known all my life where the stuff comes from, how you raise it, and how it gets from live to on the table. What; you city people think the stuff just magically appears, skinned and neatly wrapped in the meat department? BWAAAAAAA!
> 
> Gawd, if you people weren't serious, you'd be hilarious!
Click to expand...

Yet they are serious, and that is what makes them so dangerous, and this because they have away with the youth in this nation, where as they exploit their naive minds (very easily influenced), and that is who they target and are conforming today (these youth) whille the youths parents undoubtedly are un-aware of this huge and empowering (through manipulation of) teaching until it's to late.


----------



## newpolitics

beagle9 said:


> The Gadfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> newpolitics said:
> 
> 
> 
> Get off your high horses you religious zealots. Homosexuality has nothing to do with morality. The animal cruelty that goes into chic-fil-a's chicken sandwiches, however, does. Start focusing on actual suffering and making we can make this world a better place. Otherwise, worship your ideals on your own time.
> 
> 
> Earthlings - Full length documentary (multi-subtitles) - YouTube
> 
> Farm to Fridge - The Truth Behind Meat Production - YouTube
> 
> If you don't have the guts to watch this and learn the TRUTH about where animal products come from, then you shouldn't be buying meat, dairy, or eggs.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I grew up on the farm, you brain-dead citified twit. I've gathered eggs, milked a cow, and butchered hogs, along with catching chickens, wringing their necks, plucking and cleaning them. I've known all my life where the stuff comes from, how you raise it, and how it gets from live to on the table. What; you city people think the stuff just magically appears, skinned and neatly wrapped in the meat department? BWAAAAAAA!
> 
> Gawd, if you people weren't serious, you'd be hilarious!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yet they are serious, and that is what makes them so dangerous, and this because they have away with the youth in this nation, where as they exploit their naive minds (very easily influenced), and that is who they target and are conforming today (these youth) whille the youths parents undoubtedly are un-aware of this huge and empowering (through manipulation of) teaching until it's to late.
Click to expand...


Are you two serious? So, you think because you grew up on a small, private farm, that's where all animal products comes from? You've obviously attempted to learn nothing since that time. Don't get on that "old man" talk about the youth being perverted. I have learned the truth about where are animal products come from, and you scoff, in your ignorance, THAT is hilarious, and completely pathetic.

It's called FACTORY FARMING. Learn about it. The family farm is dead, at least, statistically. Factory Farming exists to increase efficiency and create economies of scale, as it is in all other industries, except here, it has commodotized living beings who are seen as cogs in a machine, and made to suffer to achieve economic efficiency in order to increase profits for one of the four large corporations who comprise 80% of the market in this industry.  99% of animals used for our food products are raised in factory farms, leaving only %1 to be raised in the ideallic (and nearly extinct) situation you remember, which doesn't even matter, because ALL animals, no matter where they are raised, must be slaughtered in factory slaughter houses where there are "USDA Inspectors", a place where (to save money) "speed" is the name of the game, where animals are commonly stunned incorrectly, meaning they are forced to suffer a torturous death, being (for cows) skinned alive, de-boweled alive, (for chickens and pigs) boiled alive. On factory farms, animals are placed into extremely confined living situations, where they commonly die from the stress, and must be fed anti-biotics in order to remain alive, which humans then ingest, known to cause health problems such as cancer. Not to mention the environmental degradation of factory farming, our water being fowled by the large amount of excrement secreted by livestock that gets dumped into cesspool that then leak into our water table. YOU HAVE NO ARGUMENT. I don't care where you grew up. Get with the times.


----------



## Billo_Really




----------



## HomeInspect

LOL... now the mindless want to divert the attention to animal rights, when they know they have a losing argument.  Folks, this issue is nothing more than freedom of religion and freedom of speech, and the mindless who forget where those two rules are. I personally have no problem with gay marraige, or anything else two consenting adults want to do. And I believe that to be a "conservative" idea, because the government shouldn't be dictating the lives of consenting adults who don't effect the lives of others through thier actions. But I am not religious, and I will at the same time defend the right for anyone to practice thier religion and voice thier opinion like Cathy did. Again, it's all about freedom of religion and speech, and leftist hypocrsy concerning it.


----------



## ima

HomeInspect said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HomeInspect said:
> 
> 
> 
> The intolerance was first shown by those who couldn't stand a business owner voicing his opinion. Like the mayors in San Fran, Chicago, and D.C. who made it a point to make the issue political while being intolerant.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No. Intolerance is thinking that gay people aren't equal to all others.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> When did someone say that?  Or was that voices in your head? Equal does not mean the same. Men and women can have equal rights, but they are not the same. The owner of Chick Fil A is entitled to his opinion and entitled to share it. The intolerance is from those who think he doesn't have the right to share it. Mayors of 4 cities have gone way beyong intolerance. They want to sanction a business due to the owner's beliefs. Can you imagine if this was a Muslim owned business? This is more about a political agenda and the hypocrsy of the left. (kind of like when NOW had nothing to say about Clinton's antics)  If the owner of a business discriminates for any reason based on sexuality, then it's a different story. The owner of Chick Fil A is as tolerant as the next guy. He chooses to believe that marraige is only between a man and woman, under the eyes of God, based on his religion. The people that don't think he has the right to his opinion, are the intolerant ones.​
Click to expand...


He's allowed to say what he wants, I'll give him that, but everyone is judged on what comes out of their mouths. Like, for example, if he had said "blacks shouldn't marry", he would have been crucified by everyone, just like the senator and what he said about rape.

So basically, it comes down to his views and the views of his religion are homophobic, and discriminate against gays. You have to at least own up to your words.


----------



## ima

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nice how you avoid my other posts because you can't answer them.
> As for this post, if you're against gay marriage, simply don't marry a gay person. But if Jesus did exist, I seriously doubt that he would have spouted any homophobic statements like you do. Jesus was about love and acceptance, and apparently he never said a cross word about anyone? he was an inclusive person, or so he's portrayed.
> So are you actually saying that Jesus was anti-gay?
> 
> 
> 
> You need help do you know that? I really am serious because on the one hand you trash Jesus in your words written, then on the other hand or when it is convienant, you try and use him to empower your message.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You keep avoiding my questions. Was Jesus an inclusive sort of chap or was he anti-gay?
> Also, if you think the world was made in 6 days, please provide some actual proof so that I'm not just agreeing to some fairy tale.
> And did Noah go get all the animals in South America, Asia and Africa, or did all the animals come to him? Since we know that not all species inhabit all parts of the earth.
> And if there was a flood for 40 days, how did the plants survive?
Click to expand...


I'm still waiting Beag....


----------



## HomeInspect

ima said:


> HomeInspect said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> No. Intolerance is thinking that gay people aren't equal to all others.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When did someone say that?  Or was that voices in your head? Equal does not mean the same. Men and women can have equal rights, but they are not the same. The owner of Chick Fil A is entitled to his opinion and entitled to share it. The intolerance is from those who think he doesn't have the right to share it. Mayors of 4 cities have gone way beyong intolerance. They want to sanction a business due to the owner's beliefs. Can you imagine if this was a Muslim owned business? This is more about a political agenda and the hypocrsy of the left. (kind of like when NOW had nothing to say about Clinton's antics)  If the owner of a business discriminates for any reason based on sexuality, then it's a different story. The owner of Chick Fil A is as tolerant as the next guy. He chooses to believe that marraige is only between a man and woman, under the eyes of God, based on his religion. The people that don't think he has the right to his opinion, are the intolerant ones.​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He's allowed to say what he wants, I'll give him that, but everyone is judged on what comes out of their mouths. Like, for example, if he had said "blacks shouldn't marry", he would have been crucified by everyone, just like the senator and what he said about rape.
> 
> So basically, it comes down to his views and the views of his religion are homophobic, and discriminate against gays. You have to at least own up to your words.
Click to expand...


Sorry, you are wrong again. Homophobia  (or fear of gays) has nothing to do with his religious beliefs.  I don't fear sheep, but I don't think a human should marry one. If Cathy discriminates for any reason, he should take the consequences. Let me know if that ever happens.


----------



## ima

HomeInspect said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HomeInspect said:
> 
> 
> 
> When did someone say that?  Or was that voices in your head? Equal does not mean the same. Men and women can have equal rights, but they are not the same. The owner of Chick Fil A is entitled to his opinion and entitled to share it. The intolerance is from those who think he doesn't have the right to share it. Mayors of 4 cities have gone way beyong intolerance. They want to sanction a business due to the owner's beliefs. Can you imagine if this was a Muslim owned business? This is more about a political agenda and the hypocrsy of the left. (kind of like when NOW had nothing to say about Clinton's antics)  If the owner of a business discriminates for any reason based on sexuality, then it's a different story. The owner of Chick Fil A is as tolerant as the next guy. He chooses to believe that marraige is only between a man and woman, under the eyes of God, based on his religion. The people that don't think he has the right to his opinion, are the intolerant ones.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He's allowed to say what he wants, I'll give him that, but everyone is judged on what comes out of their mouths. Like, for example, if he had said "blacks shouldn't marry", he would have been crucified by everyone, just like the senator and what he said about rape.
> 
> So basically, it comes down to his views and the views of his religion are homophobic, and discriminate against gays. You have to at least own up to your words.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sorry, you are wrong again. Homophobia  (or fear of gays) has nothing to do with his religious beliefs.  I don't fear sheep, but I don't think a human should marry one. If Cathy discriminates for any reason, he should take the consequences. Let me know if that ever happens.
Click to expand...


So comparing gays to sheep isn't discriminating? You should buy a dictionary.

Cathy is just using religion to make money, it's an old trick, just ask the Vatican.

Personally, I'm a vegetarian, so his restaurant is meaningless to me.


----------



## beagle9

newpolitics said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Gadfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> I grew up on the farm, you brain-dead citified twit. I've gathered eggs, milked a cow, and butchered hogs, along with catching chickens, wringing their necks, plucking and cleaning them. I've known all my life where the stuff comes from, how you raise it, and how it gets from live to on the table. What; you city people think the stuff just magically appears, skinned and neatly wrapped in the meat department? BWAAAAAAA!
> 
> Gawd, if you people weren't serious, you'd be hilarious!
> 
> 
> 
> Yet they are serious, and that is what makes them so dangerous, and this because they have away with the youth in this nation, where as they exploit their naive minds (very easily influenced), and that is who they target and are conforming today (these youth) whille the youths parents undoubtedly are un-aware of this huge and empowering (through manipulation of) teaching until it's to late.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are you two serious? So, you think because you grew up on a small, private farm, that's where all animal products comes from? You've obviously attempted to learn nothing since that time. Don't get on that "old man" talk about the youth being perverted. I have learned the truth about where are animal products come from, and you scoff, in your ignorance, THAT is hilarious, and completely pathetic.
> 
> It's called FACTORY FARMING. Learn about it. The family farm is dead, at least, statistically. Factory Farming exists to increase efficiency and create economies of scale, as it is in all other industries, except here, it has commodotized living beings who are seen as cogs in a machine, and made to suffer to achieve economic efficiency in order to increase profits for one of the four large corporations who comprise 80% of the market in this industry.  99% of animals used for our food products are raised in factory farms, leaving only %1 to be raised in the ideallic (and nearly extinct) situation you remember, which doesn't even matter, because ALL animals, no matter where they are raised, must be slaughtered in factory slaughter houses where there are "USDA Inspectors", a place where (to save money) "speed" is the name of the game, where animals are commonly stunned incorrectly, meaning they are forced to suffer a torturous death, being (for cows) skinned alive, de-boweled alive, (for chickens and pigs) boiled alive. On factory farms, animals are placed into extremely confined living situations, where they commonly die from the stress, and must be fed anti-biotics in order to remain alive, which humans then ingest, known to cause health problems such as cancer. Not to mention the environmental degradation of factory farming, our water being fowled by the large amount of excrement secreted by livestock that gets dumped into cesspool that then leak into our water table. YOU HAVE NO ARGUMENT. I don't care where you grew up. Get with the times.
Click to expand...



I agree that there are differences in which you do speak of, and yes I am ignorant to alot of stuff due to my country living and up bringing in which I still live on a farm, but you have used this in a thread concerning gay's being married or not, and this as in the minds of some or many people who donot believe this to be ok. This has thrown me off a little, because I was trying to tie this into what it has to do with gay's being married in my mind or the freedom of speech issue involved. I think that chickens and corporate abuses has nothing to do with gays getting married at all (or) even about someone answering the question that was asked them about the subject honestly, so how about lets keep it on topic and quit with the distractions in which this has become. Lets instruct the jury to strike this from the record and lets all move forward now please.

I am against corporate abuses always, and this in regards to anything that is being abused, so we shall agree on that always.


----------



## HomeInspect

ima said:


> HomeInspect said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> He's allowed to say what he wants, I'll give him that, but everyone is judged on what comes out of their mouths. Like, for example, if he had said "blacks shouldn't marry", he would have been crucified by everyone, just like the senator and what he said about rape.
> 
> So basically, it comes down to his views and the views of his religion are homophobic, and discriminate against gays. You have to at least own up to your words.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, you are wrong again. Homophobia  (or fear of gays) has nothing to do with his religious beliefs.  I don't fear sheep, but I don't think a human should marry one. If Cathy discriminates for any reason, he should take the consequences. Let me know if that ever happens.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So comparing gays to sheep isn't discriminating? You should buy a dictionary.
> 
> Cathy is just using religion to make money, it's an old trick, just ask the Vatican.
> 
> Personally, I'm a vegetarian, so his restaurant is meaningless to me.
Click to expand...


It's an anology, not a comparison. Nobody compared gays to sheep. You need some comprehension lessons.  Cathy may indeed be using religion to make money. How does that change any of my points?  He has the right to voice his opinion, and not have idiots like Rahm Emanual jump down his throat, while embracing Louis Farrakan, who is speaks out against gay marraige evry chance he gets.


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> HomeInspect said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> No. Intolerance is thinking that gay people aren't equal to all others.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When did someone say that?  Or was that voices in your head? Equal does not mean the same. Men and women can have equal rights, but they are not the same. The owner of Chick Fil A is entitled to his opinion and entitled to share it. The intolerance is from those who think he doesn't have the right to share it. Mayors of 4 cities have gone way beyong intolerance. They want to sanction a business due to the owner's beliefs. Can you imagine if this was a Muslim owned business? This is more about a political agenda and the hypocrsy of the left. (kind of like when NOW had nothing to say about Clinton's antics)  If the owner of a business discriminates for any reason based on sexuality, then it's a different story. The owner of Chick Fil A is as tolerant as the next guy. He chooses to believe that marraige is only between a man and woman, under the eyes of God, based on his religion. The people that don't think he has the right to his opinion, are the intolerant ones.​
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> He's allowed to say what he wants, I'll give him that, but everyone is judged on what comes out of their mouths. Like, for example, if he had said "blacks shouldn't marry", he would have been crucified by everyone, just like the senator and what he said about rape.
> 
> So basically, it comes down to his views and the views of his religion are homophobic, and discriminate against gays. You have to at least own up to your words.
Click to expand...

Do you think that there should be absolutely no discrimination/rebuking/seperation to come in life, and this what so ever to be found against anyone, anything or upon any issue that exist in this nation or in the world for that matter between people, and even if or when at odds with the situation, yet all depending on the situations involved, does it still apply openly and/or without borders ? 

This is the way the word discrimination or to discriminate is used in this nation (blanketly) to mean one can't ever seperate themselves or ourselves from anything and/or anyone evil, as long as this word is invoked into the conversation anymore, and this even when it doesn't apply by definition into every conversation that is brought, but it is used anyways no matter, as if no one is ever allowed to use it or apply it when it is nessesary against a tresspasser and rightfully so, even if and when it is nessesary to use this action when a person is incompatible to a persons self beliefs, opinions, and their families the same, and this as they (the person or family) sees fit to use it when it is nessesary? 

Is it never allowed within their lives as one see's nessesary by him/her/them to use and/or to counter, in order to remain free from unfit acts, indecency, abusiveness etc. in which is all caused by human beings against another, for whom are usually the innocent as is found within their lives or life as they know it and try to live it for whom are then abused by such a thing ?

Does this word have multiple meanings that could apply all depending, or does it only have one meaning, and therefore what is this one meaning that it has and why ? Do explain please !


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HomeInspect said:
> 
> 
> 
> When did someone say that?  Or was that voices in your head? Equal does not mean the same. Men and women can have equal rights, but they are not the same. The owner of Chick Fil A is entitled to his opinion and entitled to share it. The intolerance is from those who think he doesn't have the right to share it. Mayors of 4 cities have gone way beyong intolerance. They want to sanction a business due to the owner's beliefs. Can you imagine if this was a Muslim owned business? This is more about a political agenda and the hypocrsy of the left. (kind of like when NOW had nothing to say about Clinton's antics)  If the owner of a business discriminates for any reason based on sexuality, then it's a different story. The owner of Chick Fil A is as tolerant as the next guy. He chooses to believe that marraige is only between a man and woman, under the eyes of God, based on his religion. The people that don't think he has the right to his opinion, are the intolerant ones.​
> 
> 
> 
> 
> He's allowed to say what he wants, I'll give him that, but everyone is judged on what comes out of their mouths. Like, for example, if he had said "blacks shouldn't marry", he would have been crucified by everyone, just like the senator and what he said about rape.
> 
> So basically, it comes down to his views and the views of his religion are homophobic, and discriminate against gays. You have to at least own up to your words.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Do you think that there should be absolutely no discrimination/rebuking/seperation to come in life, and this what so ever to be found against anyone, anything or upon any issue that exist in this nation or in the world for that matter between people, and even if or when at odds with the situation, yet all depending on the situations involved, does it still apply openly and/or without borders ?
> 
> This is the way the word discrimination or to discriminate is used in this nation (blanketly) to mean one can't ever seperate themselves or ourselves from anything and/or anyone evil, as long as this word is invoked into the conversation anymore, and this even when it doesn't apply by definition into every conversation that is brought, but it is used anyways no matter, as if no one is ever allowed to use it or apply it when it is nessesary against a tresspasser and rightfully so, even if and when it is nessesary to use this action when a person is incompatible to a persons self beliefs, opinions, and their families the same, and this as they (the person or family) sees fit to use it when it is nessesary?
> 
> Is it never allowed within their lives as one see's nessesary by him/her/them to use and/or to counter, in order to remain free from unfit acts, indecency, abusiveness etc. in which is all caused by human beings against another, for whom are usually the innocent as is found within their lives or life as they know it and try to live it for whom are then abused by such a thing ?
> 
> Does this word have multiple meanings that could apply all depending, or does it only have one meaning, and therefore what is this one meaning that it has and why ? Do explain please !
Click to expand...


We're not talking about every single instance of discrimination, we're talking about gay marriage, (although you'd have to give me a few examples where you think discrimination against any subset of humans is valid, because I'm having trouble coming up with any right now).
Also, I'd like for you to explain to me why gay marriage is evil, I don't get that.
People can have and do have incompatible beliefs, I say live and let live, as long as no one, especially children, are getting harmed. We have enough religious wars in the world today because everyone thinks it's ok to impose their own views on others. Is this what religion is about?


----------



## ima

HomeInspect said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HomeInspect said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, you are wrong again. Homophobia  (or fear of gays) has nothing to do with his religious beliefs.  I don't fear sheep, but I don't think a human should marry one. If Cathy discriminates for any reason, he should take the consequences. Let me know if that ever happens.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So comparing gays to sheep isn't discriminating? You should buy a dictionary.
> 
> Cathy is just using religion to make money, it's an old trick, just ask the Vatican.
> 
> Personally, I'm a vegetarian, so his restaurant is meaningless to me.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's an anology, not a comparison. Nobody compared gays to sheep. You need some comprehension lessons.  Cathy may indeed be using religion to make money. How does that change any of my points?  He has the right to voice his opinion, and not have idiots like Rahm Emanual jump down his throat, while embracing Louis Farrakan, who is speaks out against gay marraige evry chance he gets.
Click to expand...


I said he can say what he wants, he can close on sunday... He can burn fucking korans, bibles and torahs in one big pile for all I care. That's what America is all about. But if you say shit like the Senator said about rape, you might get booed. And you might also be wrong. Like the Senator.
I don't know who this Rahm guy is, but there are always crazies who never got their 15 minutes so they come looking for the spotlight. No biggie. Is he crazier that Cathy? Hmmm, let me get out the dooffus yardstick.


----------



## HomeInspect

ima said:


> HomeInspect said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> So comparing gays to sheep isn't discriminating? You should buy a dictionary.
> 
> Cathy is just using religion to make money, it's an old trick, just ask the Vatican.
> 
> Personally, I'm a vegetarian, so his restaurant is meaningless to me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's an anology, not a comparison. Nobody compared gays to sheep. You need some comprehension lessons.  Cathy may indeed be using religion to make money. How does that change any of my points?  He has the right to voice his opinion, and not have idiots like Rahm Emanual jump down his throat, while embracing Louis Farrakan, who is speaks out against gay marraige evry chance he gets.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I said he can say what he wants, he can close on sunday... He can burn fucking korans, bibles and torahs in one big pile for all I care. That's what America is all about. But if you say shit like the Senator said about rape, you might get booed. And you might also be wrong. Like the Senator.
> I don't know who this Rahm guy is, but there are always crazies who never got their 15 minutes so they come looking for the spotlight. No biggie. Is he crazier that Cathy? Hmmm, let me get out the dooffus yardstick.
Click to expand...


If you don't know who Rahm is, why are you even commenting in this thread?  This entire issue is about one guy's opinion, and the hypocrsy of the left, wanting to take down his business for it.


----------



## ima

HomeInspect said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HomeInspect said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's an anology, not a comparison. Nobody compared gays to sheep. You need some comprehension lessons.  Cathy may indeed be using religion to make money. How does that change any of my points?  He has the right to voice his opinion, and not have idiots like Rahm Emanual jump down his throat, while embracing Louis Farrakan, who is speaks out against gay marraige evry chance he gets.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I said he can say what he wants, he can close on sunday... He can burn fucking korans, bibles and torahs in one big pile for all I care. That's what America is all about. But if you say shit like the Senator said about rape, you might get booed. And you might also be wrong. Like the Senator.
> I don't know who this Rahm guy is, but there are always crazies who never got their 15 minutes so they come looking for the spotlight. No biggie. Is he crazier that Cathy? Hmmm, let me get out the dooffus yardstick.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If you don't know who Rahm is, why are you even commenting in this thread?  This entire issue is *about one guy's opinion, and the hypocrsy of the left*, wanting to take down his business for it.
Click to expand...


It makes no sense what you say, so this guy's the official mouthpiece of the whole left?


----------



## HomeInspect

ima said:


> HomeInspect said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> I said he can say what he wants, he can close on sunday... He can burn fucking korans, bibles and torahs in one big pile for all I care. That's what America is all about. But if you say shit like the Senator said about rape, you might get booed. And you might also be wrong. Like the Senator.
> I don't know who this Rahm guy is, but there are always crazies who never got their 15 minutes so they come looking for the spotlight. No biggie. Is he crazier that Cathy? Hmmm, let me get out the dooffus yardstick.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you don't know who Rahm is, why are you even commenting in this thread?  This entire issue is *about one guy's opinion, and the hypocrsy of the left*, wanting to take down his business for it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It makes no sense what you say, so this guy's the official mouthpiece of the whole left?
Click to expand...



No, he is an example of the hypcrisy, as is the mayor of DC, San Fran, and Boston. Three more examples you might want to read about. Do you think these four mayors would even peep, if Chick Fil A was a Muslim owned business ?


----------



## ima

HomeInspect said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HomeInspect said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you don't know who Rahm is, why are you even commenting in this thread?  This entire issue is *about one guy's opinion, and the hypocrsy of the left*, wanting to take down his business for it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It makes no sense what you say, so this guy's the official mouthpiece of the whole left?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No, he is an example of the hypcrisy, as is the mayor of DC, San Fran, and Boston. Three more examples you might want to read about. Do you think these four mayors would even peep, if Chick Fil A was a Muslim owned business ?
Click to expand...


Dunno, let's see if they ever openly hate gays in the US.


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> HomeInspect said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> It makes no sense what you say, so this guy's the official mouthpiece of the whole left?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, he is an example of the hypcrisy, as is the mayor of DC, San Fran, and Boston. Three more examples you might want to read about. Do you think these four mayors would even peep, if Chick Fil A was a Muslim owned business ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Dunno, let's see if they ever openly hate gays in the US.
Click to expand...

Do gays not hate on many issues in the nation and/or do they also not hate upon specific people or groups in the US, and this as imperfect human beings do or even out in the world for that matter as imperfect human beings do ? Yes they do !!!


----------



## HomeInspect

ima said:


> HomeInspect said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> It makes no sense what you say, so this guy's the official mouthpiece of the whole left?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, he is an example of the hypcrisy, as is the mayor of DC, San Fran, and Boston. Three more examples you might want to read about. Do you think these four mayors would even peep, if Chick Fil A was a Muslim owned business ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Dunno, let's see if they ever openly hate gays in the US.
Click to expand...


You must know nothing about Islam and their practices. Please tell me where Cathy indicated that he hates gay people,  (or is that just your emotional over reaction?)


----------



## ima

HomeInspect said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HomeInspect said:
> 
> 
> 
> No, he is an example of the hypcrisy, as is the mayor of DC, San Fran, and Boston. Three more examples you might want to read about. Do you think these four mayors would even peep, if Chick Fil A was a Muslim owned business ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dunno, let's see if they ever openly hate gays in the US.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You must know nothing about Islam and their practices. Please tell me where Cathy indicated that he hates gay people,  (or is that just your emotional over reaction?)
Click to expand...


The fact that he's against gay marriage shows that he's homophobic, anti-gay and a loser.
The fact that he closes his restaurant on sundays because of the bible shows that he's a religious fanatic, doesn't understand Jesus' message (Who always was inclusive and not a hater), and is a loser.
It's pretty simple really.


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> HomeInspect said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Dunno, let's see if they ever openly hate gays in the US.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You must know nothing about Islam and their practices. Please tell me where Cathy indicated that he hates gay people,  (or is that just your emotional over reaction?)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The fact that he's against gay marriage shows that he's homophobic, anti-gay and a loser.
> The fact that he closes his restaurant on sundays because of the bible shows that he's a religious fanatic, doesn't understand Jesus' message (Who always was inclusive and not a hater), and is a loser.
> It's pretty simple really.
Click to expand...

According to your rep power, ummmm who is the loser here? Think about it !!


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HomeInspect said:
> 
> 
> 
> You must know nothing about Islam and their practices. Please tell me where Cathy indicated that he hates gay people,  (or is that just your emotional over reaction?)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The fact that he's against gay marriage shows that he's homophobic, anti-gay and a loser.
> The fact that he closes his restaurant on sundays because of the bible shows that he's a religious fanatic, doesn't understand Jesus' message (Who always was inclusive and not a hater), and is a loser.
> It's pretty simple really.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> According to your rep power, ummmm who is the loser here? Think about it !!
Click to expand...

So since I'm a big loser, doesn't that make me an expert on losers?
And since you didn't dispute what I actually said, does that mean that you agree with me?

Heteros coming out publicly against gay marriage shows intolerance to the nth degree. Like, wtf do heteros care what gays get up to? Is that what America is all about, telling minorities how to live their lives? I mean seriously, they're not hurting anyone by getting married, like sacrificing their first born or something, so just live and let live, I say, because if you really want to know who the fucking nutters are, it's people like Cathy, not gays.
It would be interesting to hear what Cathy actually thinks about gays, he looks like he could whip off a good rant...


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> The fact that he's against gay marriage shows that he's homophobic, anti-gay and a loser.
> The fact that he closes his restaurant on sundays because of the bible shows that he's a religious fanatic, doesn't understand Jesus' message (Who always was inclusive and not a hater), and is a loser.
> It's pretty simple really.
> 
> 
> 
> According to your rep power, ummmm who is the loser here? Think about it !!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So since I'm a big loser, doesn't that make me an expert on losers?
> And since you didn't dispute what I actually said, does that mean that you agree with me?
> 
> Heteros coming out publicly against gay marriage shows intolerance to the nth degree. Like, wtf do heteros care what gays get up to? Is that what America is all about, telling minorities how to live their lives? I mean seriously, they're not hurting anyone by getting married, like sacrificing their first born or something, so just live and let live, I say, because if you really want to know who the fucking nutters are, it's people like Cathy, not gays.
> It would be interesting to hear what Cathy actually thinks about gays, he looks like he could whip off a good rant...
Click to expand...

I guess it's a bit of payback now, because the minorities have been telling the majority how to live their lives for around 50 years now. I think it's defintely time for a change, so get ready.. B )


----------



## HomeInspect

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HomeInspect said:
> 
> 
> 
> You must know nothing about Islam and their practices. Please tell me where Cathy indicated that he hates gay people,  (or is that just your emotional over reaction?)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The fact that he's against gay marriage shows that he's homophobic, anti-gay and a loser.
> The fact that he closes his restaurant on sundays because of the bible shows that he's a religious fanatic, doesn't understand Jesus' message (Who always was inclusive and not a hater), and is a loser.
> It's pretty simple really.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> According to your rep power, ummmm who is the loser here? Think about it !!
Click to expand...


Since he is against gay marraige , he is homophobic?  LOL..  you have no idea what phobias are, do you?


----------



## Peach

A marketing campaign aimed at the lowest common denominator....its been done......


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> According to your rep power, ummmm who is the loser here? Think about it !!
> 
> 
> 
> So since I'm a big loser, doesn't that make me an expert on losers?
> And since you didn't dispute what I actually said, does that mean that you agree with me?
> 
> Heteros coming out publicly against gay marriage shows intolerance to the nth degree. Like, wtf do heteros care what gays get up to? Is that what America is all about, telling minorities how to live their lives? I mean seriously, they're not hurting anyone by getting married, like sacrificing their first born or something, so just live and let live, I say, because if you really want to know who the fucking nutters are, it's people like Cathy, not gays.
> It would be interesting to hear what Cathy actually thinks about gays, he looks like he could whip off a good rant...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I guess it's a bit of payback now, because the minorities have been telling the majority how to live their lives for around 50 years now. I think it's defintely time for a change, so get ready.. B )
Click to expand...


Please explain wtf you're talking about.


----------



## idb

Could there be another country in the world that could consider the consumption of junk food a defiant political action?

I can imagine the hard-core political activists now - 250 pounds plus, with grease-stained shirts and chins, spitting bits of bun and chicken while they angrily chant U S A, U S A before manoeuvring their stressed trousers into a restaurant chair, ready to make another protest.


----------



## ima

HomeInspect said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> The fact that he's against gay marriage shows that he's homophobic, anti-gay and a loser.
> The fact that he closes his restaurant on sundays because of the bible shows that he's a religious fanatic, doesn't understand Jesus' message (Who always was inclusive and not a hater), and is a loser.
> It's pretty simple really.
> 
> 
> 
> According to your rep power, ummmm who is the loser here? Think about it !!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Since he is against gay marraige , he is homophobic?  LOL..  you have no idea what phobias are, do you?
Click to expand...


From wiki: "Homophobia is observable in critical and hostile behavior such as discrimination and violence on the basis of sexual orientations that are non-heterosexual." "Homophobia is a range of negative attitudes and feelings toward homosexuality or people who are identified or perceived as being lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender "

Homophobia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## HomeInspect

ima said:


> HomeInspect said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> According to your rep power, ummmm who is the loser here? Think about it !!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Since he is against gay marraige , he is homophobic?  LOL..  you have no idea what phobias are, do you?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> From wiki: "Homophobia is observable in critical and hostile behavior such as discrimination and violence on the basis of sexual orientations that are non-heterosexual." "Homophobia is a range of negative attitudes and feelings toward homosexuality or people who are identified or perceived as being lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender "
> 
> Homophobia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...


Thanks for proving my point. You ddn't have a clue when throwing around the term. Please tell me when and where Cathy had hostile behavior, discriminated, or was violent against Gays. Or Even had neagative attitudes and feelings. He just thinks that marraige should be between a man and a woman.  I have no problem with Gays marrying, but Cathy does. And I will support the right for him to voice his opinion, as much as I support the the right for any two adults to marry if they want to. That's the difference between me and the clueless, hypocritical Left. Calling someone "homophobic" because they think marraige is between a man and a woman, makes as mush sense as calling someone "Islamaphobic" because they fell that Muslims should follow US laws and not Sharia Law.


----------



## ima

HomeInspect said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HomeInspect said:
> 
> 
> 
> Since he is against gay marraige , he is homophobic?  LOL..  you have no idea what phobias are, do you?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From wiki: "Homophobia is observable in critical and hostile behavior such as discrimination and violence on the basis of sexual orientations that are non-heterosexual." "Homophobia is a range of negative attitudes and feelings toward homosexuality or people who are identified or perceived as being lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender "
> 
> Homophobia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Thanks for proving my point. You ddn't have a clue when throwing around the term. Please tell me when and where Cathy had hostile behavior, discriminated, or was violent against Gays. Or Even had neagative attitudes and feelings. He just thinks that marraige should be between a man and a woman.  I have no problem with Gays marrying, but Cathy does. And I will support the right for him to voice his opinion, as much as I support the the right for any two adults to marry if they want to. That's the difference between me and the clueless, hypocritical Left. Calling someone "homophobic" because they think marraige is between a man and a woman, makes as mush sense as calling someone "Islamaphobic" because they fell that Muslims should follow US laws and not Sharia Law.
Click to expand...


Cmon, you and I both know that being against gay marriage is just the tip of the iceberg for people like Cathy. He closes his restaurant on sunday, meaning he's a religious fanatic, so his feelings about gays certainly go deeper than just marriage, wouldn't you say?


----------



## HomeInspect

ima said:


> HomeInspect said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> From wiki: "Homophobia is observable in critical and hostile behavior such as discrimination and violence on the basis of sexual orientations that are non-heterosexual." "Homophobia is a range of negative attitudes and feelings toward homosexuality or people who are identified or perceived as being lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender "
> 
> Homophobia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for proving my point. You ddn't have a clue when throwing around the term. Please tell me when and where Cathy had hostile behavior, discriminated, or was violent against Gays. Or Even had neagative attitudes and feelings. He just thinks that marraige should be between a man and a woman.  I have no problem with Gays marrying, but Cathy does. And I will support the right for him to voice his opinion, as much as I support the the right for any two adults to marry if they want to. That's the difference between me and the clueless, hypocritical Left. Calling someone "homophobic" because they think marraige is between a man and a woman, makes as mush sense as calling someone "Islamaphobic" because they fell that Muslims should follow US laws and not Sharia Law.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Cmon, you and I both know that being against gay marriage is just the tip of the iceberg for people like Cathy. He closes his restaurant on sunday, meaning he's a religious fanatic, so his feelings about gays certainly go deeper than just marriage, wouldn't you say?
Click to expand...


LOL.. Closing you business on Sunday means you are a religious fanatic?  wow.. do you have issue?.  I guess the my enitre state were religious fanatics up until 1983, when we still had "Blue Laws" keeping business closed or understaffed on Sunday.  How do you know what "feelings" Cathy has, other than to respect the tradition of his religion. More evidence of the intolerant, hyporcrital Left. Always full of false assumptions


----------



## ima

HomeInspect said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HomeInspect said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for proving my point. You ddn't have a clue when throwing around the term. Please tell me when and where Cathy had hostile behavior, discriminated, or was violent against Gays. Or Even had neagative attitudes and feelings. He just thinks that marraige should be between a man and a woman.  I have no problem with Gays marrying, but Cathy does. And I will support the right for him to voice his opinion, as much as I support the the right for any two adults to marry if they want to. That's the difference between me and the clueless, hypocritical Left. Calling someone "homophobic" because they think marraige is between a man and a woman, makes as mush sense as calling someone "Islamaphobic" because they fell that Muslims should follow US laws and not Sharia Law.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cmon, you and I both know that being against gay marriage is just the tip of the iceberg for people like Cathy. He closes his restaurant on sunday, meaning he's a religious fanatic, so his feelings about gays certainly go deeper than just marriage, wouldn't you say?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> LOL.. Closing you business on Sunday means you are a religious fanatic?  wow.. do you have issue?.  I guess the my enitre state were religious fanatics up until 1983, when we still had "Blue Laws" keeping business closed or understaffed on Sunday.  How do you know what "feelings" Cathy has, other than to respect the tradition of his religion. More evidence of the intolerant, hyporcrital Left. Always full of false assumptions
Click to expand...


A lot of Christian and Catholic religions and teachings are for sure homophobic and anti-gay, no question. And closing on sunday definitely means you're a hard line religionite.
I find it religiously fanatical to close an entire state on sunday, but societies evolve. Unfortunately, religions not so much. In fact, a lot of Christian religions don't even believe in evolution.


----------



## Too Tall

beagle9 said:


> No it's cool that the people are standing up for their right to stand up again, instead of laying down and taking it like they have for so long now in America, and I think this is just the tip of the iceburg that is coming so hang on for the ride everybody.



Exactly, the vast majority of the people understand that marriage should be between a man and woman.  I went to CFA yesterday and they have had to put in TWO drive thru lanes.  Support for this position is a reality, not a passing fad.


----------



## ima

Too Tall said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> No it's cool that the people are standing up for their right to stand up again, instead of laying down and taking it like they have for so long now in America, and I think this is just the tip of the iceburg that is coming so hang on for the ride everybody.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly, the vast majority of the people understand that marriage should be between a man and woman.  I went to CFA yesterday and they have had to put in TWO drive thru lanes.  Support for this position is a reality, not a passing fad.
Click to expand...


Back long ago, religion thought that the world was flat. They were wrong then also. Or can the majority never be wrong? Like, if the majority voted to put negros back into slavery, would people "understand" that slavery should be between a white man and his *******?


----------



## Too Tall

ima said:


> HomeInspect said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Cmon, you and I both know that being against gay marriage is just the tip of the iceberg for people like Cathy. He closes his restaurant on sunday, meaning he's a religious fanatic, so his feelings about gays certainly go deeper than just marriage, wouldn't you say?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LOL.. Closing you business on Sunday means you are a religious fanatic?  wow.. do you have issue?.  I guess the my enitre state were religious fanatics up until 1983, when we still had "Blue Laws" keeping business closed or understaffed on Sunday.  How do you know what "feelings" Cathy has, other than to respect the tradition of his religion. More evidence of the intolerant, hyporcrital Left. Always full of false assumptions
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> A lot of Christian and Catholic religions and teachings are for sure homophobic and anti-gay, no question. And closing on sunday definitely means you're a hard line religionite.
> I find it religiously fanatical to close an entire state on sunday, but societies evolve. Unfortunately, religions not so much. In fact, a lot of Christian religions don't even believe in evolution.
Click to expand...


All sinners, and that even includes gay and lesbian sinners are welcome in all Christian and Catholic churches that I am familiar with.   Closing a business on Sunday is the owner of that business' decision, and it merely makes him/her a Christian observing the tenet that Sunday is a day of rest.  

I find it religious bigotry to condemn those that prefer to worship the God of their choice in Church instead of worshiping the mighty dollar they could make by staying open on Sunday.

Blue laws have been virtually eliminated, and I agree with that decision.  There are still areas of the country where the sale of alcohol on Sunday is still prohibited, but that is a local decision that is a work in progress by the people in those communities (county or city).


----------



## ima

Too Tall said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HomeInspect said:
> 
> 
> 
> LOL.. Closing you business on Sunday means you are a religious fanatic?  wow.. do you have issue?.  I guess the my enitre state were religious fanatics up until 1983, when we still had "Blue Laws" keeping business closed or understaffed on Sunday.  How do you know what "feelings" Cathy has, other than to respect the tradition of his religion. More evidence of the intolerant, hyporcrital Left. Always full of false assumptions
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A lot of Christian and Catholic religions and teachings are for sure homophobic and anti-gay, no question. And closing on sunday definitely means you're a hard line religionite.
> I find it religiously fanatical to close an entire state on sunday, but societies evolve. Unfortunately, religions not so much. In fact, a lot of Christian religions don't even believe in evolution.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> All sinners, and that even includes gay and lesbian sinners are welcome in all Christian and Catholic churches that I am familiar with.   Closing a business on Sunday is the owner of that business' decision, and it merely makes him/her a Christian observing the tenet that Sunday is a day of rest.
> 
> I find it religious bigotry to condemn those that prefer to worship the God of their choice in Church instead of worshiping the mighty dollar they could make by staying open on Sunday.
> 
> Blue laws have been virtually eliminated, and I agree with that decision.  There are still areas of the country where the sale of alcohol on Sunday is still prohibited, but that is a local decision that is a work in progress by the people in those communities (county or city).
Click to expand...

Please prove to me why gays and lesbians are sinners. And please no fiction.


----------



## ima

Too Tall said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HomeInspect said:
> 
> 
> 
> LOL.. Closing you business on Sunday means you are a religious fanatic?  wow.. do you have issue?.  I guess the my enitre state were religious fanatics up until 1983, when we still had "Blue Laws" keeping business closed or understaffed on Sunday.  How do you know what "feelings" Cathy has, other than to respect the tradition of his religion. More evidence of the intolerant, hyporcrital Left. Always full of false assumptions
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A lot of Christian and Catholic religions and teachings are for sure homophobic and anti-gay, no question. And closing on sunday definitely means you're a hard line religionite.
> I find it religiously fanatical to close an entire state on sunday, but societies evolve. Unfortunately, religions not so much. In fact, a lot of Christian religions don't even believe in evolution.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> All sinners, and that even includes gay and lesbian sinners are welcome in all Christian and Catholic churches that I am familiar with.   Closing a business on Sunday is the owner of that business' decision, and it merely makes him/her a Christian observing the tenet that Sunday is a day of rest.
> 
> I find it religious bigotry to condemn those that prefer to worship the God of their choice in Church instead of worshiping the mighty dollar they could make by staying open on Sunday.
> 
> Blue laws have been virtually eliminated, and I agree with that decision.  There are still areas of the country where the sale of alcohol on Sunday is still prohibited, but that is a local decision that is a work in progress by the people in those communities (county or city).
Click to expand...


Closing your business on sunday is forcing your religion on others. Since I'm pretty sure a lot of his employees would work on sunday, and a lot of people would buy his products on sunday. So who's not tolerating others? Unless Cathy owns all the outlets, then he's forcing independent owners to close on sunday, most likely against their will.
But at this point, they're making so much money on the religion of hate, I think their about to win an award from the Vatican.


----------



## HomeInspect

ima said:


> HomeInspect said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Cmon, you and I both know that being against gay marriage is just the tip of the iceberg for people like Cathy. He closes his restaurant on sunday, meaning he's a religious fanatic, so his feelings about gays certainly go deeper than just marriage, wouldn't you say?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> LOL.. Closing you business on Sunday means you are a religious fanatic?  wow.. do you have issue?.  I guess the my enitre state were religious fanatics up until 1983, when we still had "Blue Laws" keeping business closed or understaffed on Sunday.  How do you know what "feelings" Cathy has, other than to respect the tradition of his religion. More evidence of the intolerant, hyporcrital Left. Always full of false assumptions
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> A lot of Christian and Catholic religions and teachings are for sure homophobic and anti-gay, no question. And closing on sunday definitely means you're a hard line religionite.
> I find it religiously fanatical to close an entire state on sunday, but societies evolve. Unfortunately, religions not so much. In fact, a lot of Christian religions don't even believe in evolution.
Click to expand...



So bowing towards Mecca, or taking communion, or going to church on Sunday, or lighting a Minora (sp?) means you are a religious fanatic?  How is choosing to close your business on Sunday any different? These all all choices people make in recognizing their faith. Why is it, in your mind, they a "fanatics" ?  You and the mayors of four major cities just don't seem to be tolerant of other people's beliefs.


----------



## Too Tall

ima said:


> Too Tall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> A lot of Christian and Catholic religions and teachings are for sure homophobic and anti-gay, no question. And closing on sunday definitely means you're a hard line religionite.
> I find it religiously fanatical to close an entire state on sunday, but societies evolve. Unfortunately, religions not so much. In fact, a lot of Christian religions don't even believe in evolution.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All sinners, and that even includes gay and lesbian sinners are welcome in all Christian and Catholic churches that I am familiar with.   Closing a business on Sunday is the owner of that business' decision, and it merely makes him/her a Christian observing the tenet that Sunday is a day of rest.
> 
> I find it religious bigotry to condemn those that prefer to worship the God of their choice in Church instead of worshiping the mighty dollar they could make by staying open on Sunday.
> 
> Blue laws have been virtually eliminated, and I agree with that decision.  There are still areas of the country where the sale of alcohol on Sunday is still prohibited, but that is a local decision that is a work in progress by the people in those communities (county or city).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Closing your business on sunday is forcing your religion on others. Since I'm pretty sure a lot of his employees would work on sunday, and a lot of people would buy his products on sunday. So who's not tolerating others? Unless Cathy owns all the outlets, then he's forcing independent owners to close on sunday, most likely against their will.
> But at this point, they're making so much money on the religion of hate, I think their about to win an award from the Vatican.
Click to expand...


You are a rather typical religion hating bigot and are completely wrong.  Your refusal to capitalize the S in Sunday says it all.  Do you have a link to any of the bullshit you post about 'a lot of his employees would work on Sunday'?  Most folks like to go to the beach or watch football on Sunday.

All CFA restaurants are company owned and those that buy a franchise to operate the restaurant sign a contract that clearly states that they will not open on Sunday.  No one forces them to sign the contract and there are thousands standing in line to buy a franchise.  

They are making money, even though they are closed on Sunday, and religion is about the love of Christ and of one another, even the haters like you.


----------



## ima

fa·nat·ic&#8194; &#8194;[fuh-nat-ik]  Show IPA
noun
1.
a person with an extreme and uncritical enthusiasm or zeal, as in religion or politics.

Fanatic | Define Fanatic at Dictionary.com

I tolerate people's faith, doesn't mean that I don't think that religion is stupid. Or that it isn't stupid to worship an invisible being in another dimension that no one has ever seen.


----------



## ima

Too Tall said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Too Tall said:
> 
> 
> 
> All sinners, and that even includes gay and lesbian sinners are welcome in all Christian and Catholic churches that I am familiar with.   Closing a business on Sunday is the owner of that business' decision, and it merely makes him/her a Christian observing the tenet that Sunday is a day of rest.
> 
> I find it religious bigotry to condemn those that prefer to worship the God of their choice in Church instead of worshiping the mighty dollar they could make by staying open on Sunday.
> 
> Blue laws have been virtually eliminated, and I agree with that decision.  There are still areas of the country where the sale of alcohol on Sunday is still prohibited, but that is a local decision that is a work in progress by the people in those communities (county or city).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Closing your business on sunday is forcing your religion on others. Since I'm pretty sure a lot of his employees would work on sunday, and a lot of people would buy his products on sunday. So who's not tolerating others? Unless Cathy owns all the outlets, then he's forcing independent owners to close on sunday, most likely against their will.
> But at this point, they're making so much money on the religion of hate, I think their about to win an award from the Vatican.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are a rather typical religion hating bigot and are completely wrong.  Your refusal to capitalize the S in Sunday says it all.  Do you have a link to any of the bullshit you post about 'a lot of his employees would work on Sunday'?  Most folks like to go to the beach or watch football on Sunday.
> 
> All CFA restaurants are company owned and those that buy a franchise to operate the restaurant sign a contract that clearly states that they will not open on Sunday.  No one forces them to sign the contract and there are thousands standing in line to buy a franchise.
> 
> They are making money, even though they are closed on Sunday, and religion is about the love of Christ and of one another, even the haters like you.
Click to expand...

So you like to watch football. Did you know that to put on a football game you have to hire ushers, players, parking people, beer vendors, cops, announcers, play by play guys, cameramen, directors... newspaper people to cover the game and a ton of other people like subway drivers, bus drivers, coaches, doctors... really a lot of people who enjoy going to work on sunday, just for a football game. Imagine that!!! Just think, you love watching sinners at work!! 

I get it that people who agree with lesbian hating chicken will buy a franchise. Just look at all the money they're making off of hating gays. The Vatican is so proud. Just like gun makers make a fortune off of 10,000 people a year who die from gunshots every year in the US. Ain't America fucking great? We should figure out a way to make money off of hating arabs, we could make a fortune!!!!!!


----------



## Too Tall

ima said:


> Too Tall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> No it's cool that the people are standing up for their right to stand up again, instead of laying down and taking it like they have for so long now in America, and I think this is just the tip of the iceburg that is coming so hang on for the ride everybody.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly, the vast majority of the people understand that marriage should be between a man and woman.  I went to CFA yesterday and they have had to put in TWO drive thru lanes.  Support for this position is a reality, not a passing fad.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Back long ago, religion thought that the world was flat. They were wrong then also. Or can the majority never be wrong? Like, if the majority voted to put negros back into slavery, would people "understand" that slavery should be between a white man and his *******?
Click to expand...


Back long ago, many scholars believed the earth was flat.  Good luck with your crusade to get the majority to vote the return to slavery.  I vote NAY.


----------



## Too Tall

ima said:


> Too Tall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Closing your business on sunday is forcing your religion on others. Since I'm pretty sure a lot of his employees would work on sunday, and a lot of people would buy his products on sunday. So who's not tolerating others? Unless Cathy owns all the outlets, then he's forcing independent owners to close on sunday, most likely against their will.
> But at this point, they're making so much money on the religion of hate, I think their about to win an award from the Vatican.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are a rather typical religion hating bigot and are completely wrong.  Your refusal to capitalize the S in Sunday says it all.  Do you have a link to any of the bullshit you post about 'a lot of his employees would work on Sunday'?  Most folks like to go to the beach or watch football on Sunday.
> 
> All CFA restaurants are company owned and those that buy a franchise to operate the restaurant sign a contract that clearly states that they will not open on Sunday.  No one forces them to sign the contract and there are thousands standing in line to buy a franchise.
> 
> They are making money, even though they are closed on Sunday, and religion is about the love of Christ and of one another, even the haters like you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So you like to watch football. Did you know that to put on a football game you have to hire ushers, players, parking people, beer vendors, cops, announcers, play by play guys, cameramen, directors... newspaper people to cover the game and a ton of other people like subway drivers, bus drivers, coaches, doctors... really a lot of people who enjoy going to work on sunday, just for a football game. Imagine that!!! Just think, you love watching sinners at work!!
> 
> I get it that people who agree with lesbian hating chicken will buy a franchise. Just look at all the money they're making off of hating gays. The Vatican is so proud. Just like gun m.akers make a fortune off of 10,000 people a year who die from gunshots every year in the US. Ain't America fucking great? We should figure out a way to make money off of hating arabs, we could make a fortune!!!!!!
Click to expand...


Football games are played Sunday afternoon after Church and we are all sinners.  Without sinners their would be no need for a Church.

Do you really think that lesbian hatred is the driving force behind anyone who owns or seeks to own a CFA franchise?  There are fools and there are damned fools and you fit the latter.


----------



## ima

Too Tall said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Too Tall said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are a rather typical religion hating bigot and are completely wrong.  Your refusal to capitalize the S in Sunday says it all.  Do you have a link to any of the bullshit you post about 'a lot of his employees would work on Sunday'?  Most folks like to go to the beach or watch football on Sunday.
> 
> All CFA restaurants are company owned and those that buy a franchise to operate the restaurant sign a contract that clearly states that they will not open on Sunday.  No one forces them to sign the contract and there are thousands standing in line to buy a franchise.
> 
> They are making money, even though they are closed on Sunday, and religion is about the love of Christ and of one another, even the haters like you.
> 
> 
> 
> So you like to watch football. Did you know that to put on a football game you have to hire ushers, players, parking people, beer vendors, cops, announcers, play by play guys, cameramen, directors... newspaper people to cover the game and a ton of other people like subway drivers, bus drivers, coaches, doctors... really a lot of people who enjoy going to work on sunday, just for a football game. Imagine that!!! Just think, you love watching sinners at work!!
> 
> I get it that people who agree with lesbian hating chicken will buy a franchise. Just look at all the money they're making off of hating gays. The Vatican is so proud. Just like gun m.akers make a fortune off of 10,000 people a year who die from gunshots every year in the US. Ain't America fucking great? We should figure out a way to make money off of hating arabs, we could make a fortune!!!!!!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Football games are played Sunday afternoon after Church and we are all sinners.  Without sinners their would be no need for a Church.
> 
> Do you really think that lesbian hatred is the driving force behind anyone who owns or seeks to own a CFA franchise?  There are fools and there are damned fools and you fit the latter.
Click to expand...

A damn fool is someone who eats fast food chicken. I'm a vegetarian, so you can go clog your arteries as much as you want, his chickens are disgusting.
So what do you have against gays? Jesus (if he even existed) was probably gay.


----------



## HomeInspect

ima said:


> fa·nat·ic&#8194; &#8194;[fuh-nat-ik]  Show IPA
> noun
> 1.
> a person with an extreme and uncritical enthusiasm or zeal, as in religion or politics.
> 
> Fanatic | Define Fanatic at Dictionary.com
> 
> I tolerate people's faith, doesn't mean that I don't think that religion is stupid. Or that it isn't stupid to worship an invisible being in another dimension that no one has ever seen.



You don't tolerate people's faith at all, if you are critical of their simple ways of observing their faith. Taking off on Sundays is one of them. You are more of a fanatic being a vegetarian. There are more people who practice religion in some form, than people who will not eat meat. Which makes you more the outcast, and more extreme, by your definition.


----------



## Gadawg73

Man can open and close his business when he wants to, it is HIS business.
I do not treat gay folk as sinners.
How have they sinned on me by being gay?
We treat gay folk as equals at my church. 
No straight folk are labeled as sinners for their sexual orientation.
Amazing to see the "gays are sinners" and deny them marriage but a man convicted of mass murder can legally be married. The man and a woman argument holds no weight and is absurd. 
We are a nation OF LAWS, not men and their various and changing like the wind religous beliefs.
Okay to smoke, drink and do all kinds of crap banned in The Bible and where are the right wing Onward Christian Soldiers having rallies to fight those folks?
JUST like a man can open and close his business when he wants to and not be labeled anything for it folks can believe what they want to about gay folk being sinners or not and that does not make them right or wrong.
But as usual the religous right wants it both ways.


----------



## Gadawg73

Being obese is a sin yet how many call them sinners?


----------



## HomeInspect

Gadawg73 said:


> Man can open and close his business when he wants to, it is HIS business.
> I do not treat gay folk as sinners.
> How have they sinned on me by being gay?
> We treat gay folk as equals at my church.
> No straight folk are labeled as sinners for their sexual orientation.
> Amazing to see the "gays are sinners" and deny them marriage but a man convicted of mass murder can legally be married. The man and a woman argument holds no weight and is absurd.
> We are a nation OF LAWS, not men and their various and changing like the wind religous beliefs.
> Okay to smoke, drink and do all kinds of crap banned in The Bible and where are the right wing Onward Christian Soldiers having rallies to fight those folks?
> JUST like a man can open and close his business when he wants to and not be labeled anything for it folks can believe what they want to about gay folk being sinners or not and that does not make them right or wrong.
> But as usual the religous right wants it both ways.



Why is it the religious "right"?   Religion is neither left or right. It is the the minority vote (strongly African American) who vote Democrat that kept gay marraige out of California, and they vote left on most everything.. Their politics and religion are two different things. As they _should_ be two seperate things. The mayors of Boston, DC, San Fan, and Chicago are leftist hypocrits, and can't keep their politics out of religion.


----------



## beagle9

Gadawg73 said:


> Man can open and close his business when he wants to, it is HIS business.
> I do not treat gay folk as sinners.
> How have they sinned on me by being gay?
> We treat gay folk as equals at my church.
> No straight folk are labeled as sinners for their sexual orientation.
> Amazing to see the "gays are sinners" and deny them marriage but a man convicted of mass murder can legally be married. The man and a woman argument holds no weight and is absurd.
> We are a nation OF LAWS, not men and their various and changing like the wind religous beliefs.
> Okay to smoke, drink and do all kinds of crap banned in The Bible and where are the right wing Onward Christian Soldiers having rallies to fight those folks?
> JUST like a man can open and close his business when he wants to and not be labeled anything for it folks can believe what they want to about gay folk being sinners or not and that does not make them right or wrong.
> But as usual the religous right wants it both ways.




 Playing the fence as you do, is really revealing actually... The Lord says that he detest a fence rider, for he would rather that one be for or either against than to be in the middle. He says that he will spew a person out who is found on the fence as people try to ride it as they do so much these days, thus making them hypocryts sooner or later down this road in which they try and travel upon. During the nations run for many years and centuries now, it had shown that it was a Christian nation in a high percentage of or within a high ratio of, but over the years as the devil has had his way with her (breaking her into pieces by the use of those who he see's usable in this respect), in order that she be broken down to exactly where we all are at right now in this nation, and that is being constantly in a state of confusion, where no one knows if their rights here are even good or not anymore when spoken about, but the devil is the author of confusion, and this is exactly how he has wanted it ever since the nation had gained her independence so many years ago. The proof is right here in these threads and in many other political sites around this net by the thousands, but I guess that is all fiction or make believe just as well when stated, even though the evidence is right before our very eyes.


----------



## Gadawg73

HomeInspect said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Man can open and close his business when he wants to, it is HIS business.
> I do not treat gay folk as sinners.
> How have they sinned on me by being gay?
> We treat gay folk as equals at my church.
> No straight folk are labeled as sinners for their sexual orientation.
> Amazing to see the "gays are sinners" and deny them marriage but a man convicted of mass murder can legally be married. The man and a woman argument holds no weight and is absurd.
> We are a nation OF LAWS, not men and their various and changing like the wind religous beliefs.
> Okay to smoke, drink and do all kinds of crap banned in The Bible and where are the right wing Onward Christian Soldiers having rallies to fight those folks?
> JUST like a man can open and close his business when he wants to and not be labeled anything for it folks can believe what they want to about gay folk being sinners or not and that does not make them right or wrong.
> But as usual the religous right wants it both ways.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why is it the religious "right"?   Religion is neither left or right. It is the the minority vote (strongly African American) who vote Democrat that kept gay marraige out of California, and they vote left on most everything.. Their politics and religion are two different things. As they _should_ be two seperate things. The mayors of Boston, DC, San Fan, and Chicago are leftist hypocrits, and can't keep their politics out of religion.
Click to expand...


Obviously, you have never been to Georgia.
The religous right has tried to take over the Republican party from their inception in the 70s.
Bush I won the primary here and at our convention they came and demanded that Pat Robertson and his anti abortion and anti gay crusade get the nod.
We had TWO DELEGATIONS at the GOP national convention that year and were the laughing stock of the nation.
Had it not been for Bob Barr and other men of courage they religous right kooks would have total control of our party here now.
Same with most southern states.
And I vote Republican since 1972.
Bring back a Goldwater. He warned us about these folks in the 70s. 
Barry despised all of them. They ruined our party.
And fuck the Democrats. Just because they take a shit in your face it is okay for Republicans to do it?
What kind of logic is that good man?


----------



## idb

Gadawg73 said:


> Being obese is a sin yet how many call them sinners?



Being obese can be a political statement in America..."I'll eat whatever and whenever I want Michelle...and I'll only eat fried chicken sandwiches to stick it up those lefties and homos!"


----------



## Gadawg73

beagle9 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Man can open and close his business when he wants to, it is HIS business.
> I do not treat gay folk as sinners.
> How have they sinned on me by being gay?
> We treat gay folk as equals at my church.
> No straight folk are labeled as sinners for their sexual orientation.
> Amazing to see the "gays are sinners" and deny them marriage but a man convicted of mass murder can legally be married. The man and a woman argument holds no weight and is absurd.
> We are a nation OF LAWS, not men and their various and changing like the wind religous beliefs.
> Okay to smoke, drink and do all kinds of crap banned in The Bible and where are the right wing Onward Christian Soldiers having rallies to fight those folks?
> JUST like a man can open and close his business when he wants to and not be labeled anything for it folks can believe what they want to about gay folk being sinners or not and that does not make them right or wrong.
> But as usual the religous right wants it both ways.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Playing the fence as you do, is really revealing actually... The Lord says that he detest a fence rider, for he would rather that one be for or either against than to be in the middle. He says that he will spew a person out who is found on the fence as people try to ride it as they do so much these days, thus making them hypocryts sooner or later down this road in which they try and travel upon. During the nations run for many years and centuries now, it had shown that it was a Christian nation in a high percentage of or within a high ratio of, but over the years as the devil has had his way with her (breaking her into pieces by the use of those who he see's usable in this respect), in order that she be broken down to exactly where we all are at right now in this nation, and that is being constantly in a state of confusion, where no one knows if their rights here are even good or not anymore when spoken about, but the devil is the author of confusion, and this is exactly how he has wanted it ever since the nation had gained her independence so many years ago. The proof is right here in these threads and in many other political sites around this net by the thousands, but I guess that is all fiction or make believe just as well when stated, even though the evidence is right before our very eyes.
Click to expand...


You are the hypocrit. You are judging and lecturing me.
The proof is in your posts.
Granny taught me that a true Christian NEVER has to tell, preach and lecture anyone about anything Christian.
True Christians never have to say a word. Folk will know it by YOUR ACTIONS.
Govern yourself accordingly. You are a brain washed cultist.
I will pray for you.


----------



## Gadawg73

beagle9 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Man can open and close his business when he wants to, it is HIS business.
> I do not treat gay folk as sinners.
> How have they sinned on me by being gay?
> We treat gay folk as equals at my church.
> No straight folk are labeled as sinners for their sexual orientation.
> Amazing to see the "gays are sinners" and deny them marriage but a man convicted of mass murder can legally be married. The man and a woman argument holds no weight and is absurd.
> We are a nation OF LAWS, not men and their various and changing like the wind religous beliefs.
> Okay to smoke, drink and do all kinds of crap banned in The Bible and where are the right wing Onward Christian Soldiers having rallies to fight those folks?
> JUST like a man can open and close his business when he wants to and not be labeled anything for it folks can believe what they want to about gay folk being sinners or not and that does not make them right or wrong.
> But as usual the religous right wants it both ways.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Playing the fence as you do, is really revealing actually... The Lord says that he detest a fence rider, for he would rather that one be for or either against than to be in the middle. He says that he will spew a person out who is found on the fence as people try to ride it as they do so much these days, thus making them hypocryts sooner or later down this road in which they try and travel upon. During the nations run for many years and centuries now, it had shown that it was a Christian nation in a high percentage of or within a high ratio of, but over the years as the devil has had his way with her (breaking her into pieces by the use of those who he see's usable in this respect), in order that she be broken down to exactly where we all are at right now in this nation, and that is being constantly in a state of confusion, where no one knows if their rights here are even good or not anymore when spoken about, but the devil is the author of confusion, and this is exactly how he has wanted it ever since the nation had gained her independence so many years ago. The proof is right here in these threads and in many other political sites around this net by the thousands, but I guess that is all fiction or make believe just as well when stated, even though the evidence is right before our very eyes.
Click to expand...


Your "playing the fence" statement is revealing.
You assign a right versus wrong one side or the other argument to ordinary folks.
You claim that one has to be 100% behind Chik Fil A and take their side 100% in this gay issue.
What a shallow juvenile approach. 
2 issues, one a business issue and another a legal issue.
Neither of them have NOT ONE DAMN THING to do with your religous beliefs or religion in any way.
But Iran does it your way and allows religion to run their country.
Delta is ready when you are.


----------



## beagle9

Gadawg73 said:


> Being obese is a sin yet how many call them sinners?


Don't have to be mean and call anyone sinners for what might be clearly and directly related to or indirectly related to sinfulness in which they indulge in their daily lives, and in which may have caused their obesity as gained through gluttney/gluttenizing (defined as a sin yes). It will be a punisher for them if they don't get help for their problem sooner or later. All sin spoken about in the Bible has consequences, and if people keep revisiting their sin after knowing better, then it could finally be part of what could finish them off in life, and this whether it be in the short term or in the long term, yet all depending upon the extent of the complications involved in which they had created for themselves and/or had brought upon themselves while toying with sin.  Due to created obsessive disorders in which many have created by themselves & for themselves or were heavily influenced by another amongst the generations in doing these things just as well in their life, there is now help for much of it, because it has been recognized as a problem, even when it was told when people engaged that it would be no problem for them, be it in the past or in their futures. Well somebody lied didn't they ?


----------



## beagle9

Gadawg73 said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Man can open and close his business when he wants to, it is HIS business.
> I do not treat gay folk as sinners.
> How have they sinned on me by being gay?
> We treat gay folk as equals at my church.
> No straight folk are labeled as sinners for their sexual orientation.
> Amazing to see the "gays are sinners" and deny them marriage but a man convicted of mass murder can legally be married. The man and a woman argument holds no weight and is absurd.
> We are a nation OF LAWS, not men and their various and changing like the wind religous beliefs.
> Okay to smoke, drink and do all kinds of crap banned in The Bible and where are the right wing Onward Christian Soldiers having rallies to fight those folks?
> JUST like a man can open and close his business when he wants to and not be labeled anything for it folks can believe what they want to about gay folk being sinners or not and that does not make them right or wrong.
> But as usual the religous right wants it both ways.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Playing the fence as you do, is really revealing actually... The Lord says that he detest a fence rider, for he would rather that one be for or either against than to be in the middle. He says that he will spew a person out who is found on the fence as people try to ride it as they do so much these days, thus making them hypocryts sooner or later down this road in which they try and travel upon. During the nations run for many years and centuries now, it had shown that it was a Christian nation in a high percentage of or within a high ratio of, but over the years as the devil has had his way with her (breaking her into pieces by the use of those who he see's usable in this respect), in order that she be broken down to exactly where we all are at right now in this nation, and that is being constantly in a state of confusion, where no one knows if their rights here are even good or not anymore when spoken about, but the devil is the author of confusion, and this is exactly how he has wanted it ever since the nation had gained her independence so many years ago. The proof is right here in these threads and in many other political sites around this net by the thousands, but I guess that is all fiction or make believe just as well when stated, even though the evidence is right before our very eyes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are the hypocrit. You are judging and lecturing me.
> The proof is in your posts.
> Granny taught me that a true Christian NEVER has to tell, preach and lecture anyone about anything Christian.
> True Christians never have to say a word. Folk will know it by YOUR ACTIONS.
> Govern yourself accordingly. You are a brain washed cultist.
> I will pray for you.
Click to expand...



I figured the truth would hurt, and it shows by your reactions in this reply.

If you don't mind, I want you to go and find anything I have been hypocrytical about, and bring it to my attention with links back to each statement that would contridict another statement made by me, thus making me the hypocryt that you just called me. Come on now, put you credibility where your mouth is if you can, we will be waiting.

Granny taught me that a true Christian NEVER has to tell, preach and lecture anyone about anything Christian?

To bad your granny wasn't around to teach the devils students the same thing when it comes to them wanting to teach and preach to everyone about what they believe in about this life, and how they want everyone to just throw away their Christian learnings or beliefs in order to make way for them to rule in this life over the majority, instead of any Christians having the right to do the same.

True Christians never have to say a word eh?, well how about telling that to those who should do the same (lets just all be silent and let the people choose based upon our actions and lives lived by a vote), oh no that wouldn't work for the devils recruiters now would it ? Or rather it would be the perfect dream of the devil to then come true in such a suggestion, wherefore the Christians would somehow apply such a one sided ideal as this would be that you speak of for them.  You see only the Christians should be silent in America now, isn't that right by your standard and/or ideology learned in your life ? Who is the cultist ?


----------



## Too Tall

ima said:


> Too Tall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> A lot of Christian and Catholic religions and teachings are for sure homophobic and anti-gay, no question. And closing on sunday definitely means you're a hard line religionite.
> I find it religiously fanatical to close an entire state on sunday, but societies evolve. Unfortunately, religions not so much. In fact, a lot of Christian religions don't even believe in evolution.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All sinners, and that even includes gay and lesbian sinners are welcome in all Christian and Catholic churches that I am familiar with.   Closing a business on Sunday is the owner of that business' decision, and it merely makes him/her a Christian observing the tenet that Sunday is a day of rest.
> 
> I find it religious bigotry to condemn those that prefer to worship the God of their choice in Church instead of worshiping the mighty dollar they could make by staying open on Sunday.
> 
> Blue laws have been virtually eliminated, and I agree with that decision.  There are still areas of the country where the sale of alcohol on Sunday is still prohibited, but that is a local decision that is a work in progress by the people in those communities (county or city).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Please prove to me why gays and lesbians are sinners. And please no fiction.
Click to expand...


We are all sinners, period.


----------



## beagle9

Gadawg73 said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Man can open and close his business when he wants to, it is HIS business.
> I do not treat gay folk as sinners.
> How have they sinned on me by being gay?
> We treat gay folk as equals at my church.
> No straight folk are labeled as sinners for their sexual orientation.
> Amazing to see the "gays are sinners" and deny them marriage but a man convicted of mass murder can legally be married. The man and a woman argument holds no weight and is absurd.
> We are a nation OF LAWS, not men and their various and changing like the wind religous beliefs.
> Okay to smoke, drink and do all kinds of crap banned in The Bible and where are the right wing Onward Christian Soldiers having rallies to fight those folks?
> JUST like a man can open and close his business when he wants to and not be labeled anything for it folks can believe what they want to about gay folk being sinners or not and that does not make them right or wrong.
> But as usual the religous right wants it both ways.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Playing the fence as you do, is really revealing actually... The Lord says that he detest a fence rider, for he would rather that one be for or either against than to be in the middle. He says that he will spew a person out who is found on the fence as people try to ride it as they do so much these days, thus making them hypocryts sooner or later down this road in which they try and travel upon. During the nations run for many years and centuries now, it had shown that it was a Christian nation in a high percentage of or within a high ratio of, but over the years as the devil has had his way with her (breaking her into pieces by the use of those who he see's usable in this respect), in order that she be broken down to exactly where we all are at right now in this nation, and that is being constantly in a state of confusion, where no one knows if their rights here are even good or not anymore when spoken about, but the devil is the author of confusion, and this is exactly how he has wanted it ever since the nation had gained her independence so many years ago. The proof is right here in these threads and in many other political sites around this net by the thousands, but I guess that is all fiction or make believe just as well when stated, even though the evidence is right before our very eyes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your "playing the fence" statement is revealing.
> You assign a right versus wrong one side or the other argument to ordinary folks.
> You claim that one has to be 100% behind Chik Fil A and take their side 100% in this gay issue.
> What a shallow juvenile approach.
> 2 issues, one a business issue and another a legal issue.
> Neither of them have NOT ONE DAMN THING to do with your religous beliefs or religion in any way.
> But Iran does it your way and allows religion to run their country.
> Delta is ready when you are.
Click to expand...

Iran does it my way eh (the religious way) as if all religion is somehow equal in your mind or in your implication there of. People are smarter than this, so why do you try and speak in these ways as if they aren't ?

There is only one way, and yes it is true, where as there are many religions sure, yet they melt into the melting pot of that one way (by understanding and knowing God), even though their are many climbing up the mountain from all sides upon the earth, they all reach for the same goals and the same God along the way when making it to the top, but of course there are those who climb beside the others, yet they are only climbing in order to counter those who are climbing for God, and even from around all sides of this earth they are climbing for God in differnet langauges and ways, yet the others who are working for the other self appointed god, climb in hopes to make all others fall all the way back to the bottom somehow, in which they whom chaseth after the truth had begun their long journey from. This nation is being drug all the way back to the bottom, just take a look around and we all can clearly see.


----------



## beagle9

Gadawg73 said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Man can open and close his business when he wants to, it is HIS business.
> I do not treat gay folk as sinners.
> How have they sinned on me by being gay?
> We treat gay folk as equals at my church.
> No straight folk are labeled as sinners for their sexual orientation.
> Amazing to see the "gays are sinners" and deny them marriage but a man convicted of mass murder can legally be married. The man and a woman argument holds no weight and is absurd.
> We are a nation OF LAWS, not men and their various and changing like the wind religous beliefs.
> Okay to smoke, drink and do all kinds of crap banned in The Bible and where are the right wing Onward Christian Soldiers having rallies to fight those folks?
> JUST like a man can open and close his business when he wants to and not be labeled anything for it folks can believe what they want to about gay folk being sinners or not and that does not make them right or wrong.
> But as usual the religous right wants it both ways.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Playing the fence as you do, is really revealing actually... The Lord says that he detest a fence rider, for he would rather that one be for or either against than to be in the middle. He says that he will spew a person out who is found on the fence as people try to ride it as they do so much these days, thus making them hypocryts sooner or later down this road in which they try and travel upon. During the nations run for many years and centuries now, it had shown that it was a Christian nation in a high percentage of or within a high ratio of, but over the years as the devil has had his way with her (breaking her into pieces by the use of those who he see's usable in this respect), in order that she be broken down to exactly where we all are at right now in this nation, and that is being constantly in a state of confusion, where no one knows if their rights here are even good or not anymore when spoken about, but the devil is the author of confusion, and this is exactly how he has wanted it ever since the nation had gained her independence so many years ago. The proof is right here in these threads and in many other political sites around this net by the thousands, but I guess that is all fiction or make believe just as well when stated, even though the evidence is right before our very eyes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Your "playing the fence" statement is revealing.
> You assign a right versus wrong one side or the other argument to ordinary folks.
> You claim that one has to be 100% behind Chik Fil A and take their side 100% in this gay issue.
> What a shallow juvenile approach.
> 2 issues, one a business issue and another a legal issue.
> Neither of them have NOT ONE DAMN THING to do with your religous beliefs or religion in any way.
> But Iran does it your way and allows religion to run their country.
> Delta is ready when you are.
Click to expand...

Did I actually say that people had to be 100% behind Chic-Fil-A or else ? Link me to that statement please..


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Man can open and close his business when he wants to, it is HIS business.
> I do not treat gay folk as sinners.
> How have they sinned on me by being gay?
> We treat gay folk as equals at my church.
> No straight folk are labeled as sinners for their sexual orientation.
> Amazing to see the "gays are sinners" and deny them marriage but a man convicted of mass murder can legally be married. The man and a woman argument holds no weight and is absurd.
> We are a nation OF LAWS, not men and their various and changing like the wind religous beliefs.
> Okay to smoke, drink and do all kinds of crap banned in The Bible and where are the right wing Onward Christian Soldiers having rallies to fight those folks?
> JUST like a man can open and close his business when he wants to and not be labeled anything for it folks can believe what they want to about gay folk being sinners or not and that does not make them right or wrong.
> But as usual the religous right wants it both ways.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Playing the fence as you do, is really revealing actually... The Lord says that he detest a fence rider, for he would rather that one be for or either against than to be in the middle. He says that he will spew a person out who is found on the fence as people try to ride it as they do so much these days, thus making them hypocryts sooner or later down this road in which they try and travel upon. During the nations run for many years and centuries now, it had shown that it was a Christian nation in a high percentage of or within a high ratio of, but over the years as the devil has had his way with her (breaking her into pieces by the use of those who he see's usable in this respect), in order that she be broken down to exactly where we all are at right now in this nation, and that is being constantly in a state of confusion, where no one knows if their rights here are even good or not anymore when spoken about, but the devil is the author of confusion, and this is exactly how he has wanted it ever since the nation had gained her independence so many years ago. The proof is right here in these threads and in many other political sites around this net by the thousands, but I guess *that is all fiction* or make believe just as well when stated, even though the evidence is right before our very eyes.
Click to expand...


The biggest load of fiction is the bible, or can you prove any of the major acts or points?

You also mention "the Lord says..." when in fact it's a man who writes that and if he really does hear voices, there's meds for that these days. Or do you have any real proof that the lord spoke to someone?


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Being obese is a sin yet how many call them sinners?
> 
> 
> 
> Don't have to be mean and call anyone sinners for what might be clearly and directly related to or indirectly related to sinfulness in which they indulge in their daily lives, and in which may have caused their obesity as gained through gluttney/gluttenizing (defined as a sin yes). It will be a punisher for them if they don't get help for their problem sooner or later. All sin spoken about in the Bible has consequences, and if people keep revisiting their sin after knowing better, then it could finally be part of what could finish them off in life, and this whether it be in the short term or in the long term, yet all depending upon the extent of the complications involved in which they had created for themselves and/or had brought upon themselves while toying with sin.  Due to created obsessive disorders in which many have created by themselves & for themselves or were heavily influenced by another amongst the generations in doing these things just as well in their life, there is now help for much of it, because it has been recognized as a problem, even when it was told when people engaged that it would be no problem for them, be it in the past or in their futures. Well somebody lied didn't they ?
Click to expand...

Anyone without a medical reason for being obese is a FUCKING RETARD!!!!!
Like seriously, how many obese people have won a Nobel or any other worthwhile award?


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Playing the fence as you do, is really revealing actually... The Lord says that he detest a fence rider, for he would rather that one be for or either against than to be in the middle. He says that he will spew a person out who is found on the fence as people try to ride it as they do so much these days, thus making them hypocryts sooner or later down this road in which they try and travel upon. During the nations run for many years and centuries now, it had shown that it was a Christian nation in a high percentage of or within a high ratio of, but over the years as the devil has had his way with her (breaking her into pieces by the use of those who he see's usable in this respect), in order that she be broken down to exactly where we all are at right now in this nation, and that is being constantly in a state of confusion, where no one knows if their rights here are even good or not anymore when spoken about, but the devil is the author of confusion, and this is exactly how he has wanted it ever since the nation had gained her independence so many years ago. The proof is right here in these threads and in many other political sites around this net by the thousands, but I guess that is all fiction or make believe just as well when stated, even though the evidence is right before our very eyes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are the hypocrit. You are judging and lecturing me.
> The proof is in your posts.
> Granny taught me that a true Christian NEVER has to tell, preach and lecture anyone about anything Christian.
> True Christians never have to say a word. Folk will know it by YOUR ACTIONS.
> Govern yourself accordingly. You are a brain washed cultist.
> I will pray for you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I figured the truth would hurt, and it shows by your reactions in this reply.
> 
> If you don't mind, I want you to go and find anything I have been hypocrytical about, and bring it to my attention with links back to each statement that would contridict another statement made by me, thus making me the hypocryt that you just called me. Come on now, put you credibility where your mouth is if you can, we will be waiting.
> 
> Granny taught me that a true Christian NEVER has to tell, preach and lecture anyone about anything Christian?
> 
> To bad your granny wasn't around to teach the devils students the same thing when it comes to them wanting to teach and preach to everyone about what they believe in about this life, and how they want everyone to just throw away their Christian learnings or beliefs in order to make way for them* to rule in this life over the majority, instead of any Christians having the right to do the same.*
> 
> True Christians never have to say a word eh?, well how about telling that to those who should do the same (lets just all be silent and let the people choose based upon our actions and lives lived by a vote), oh no that wouldn't work for the devils recruiters now would it ? Or rather it would be the perfect dream of the devil to then come true in such a suggestion, wherefore the Christians would somehow apply such a one sided ideal as this would be that you speak of for them.  You see only the Christians should be silent in America now, isn't that right by your standard and/or ideology learned in your life ? Who is the cultist ?
Click to expand...


So to you, telling minorities how to live is the christian way of life?


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Playing the fence as you do, is really revealing actually... The Lord says that he detest a fence rider, for he would rather that one be for or either against than to be in the middle. He says that he will spew a person out who is found on the fence as people try to ride it as they do so much these days, thus making them hypocryts sooner or later down this road in which they try and travel upon. During the nations run for many years and centuries now, it had shown that it was a Christian nation in a high percentage of or within a high ratio of, but over the years as the devil has had his way with her (breaking her into pieces by the use of those who he see's usable in this respect), in order that she be broken down to exactly where we all are at right now in this nation, and that is being constantly in a state of confusion, where no one knows if their rights here are even good or not anymore when spoken about, but the devil is the author of confusion, and this is exactly how he has wanted it ever since the nation had gained her independence so many years ago. The proof is right here in these threads and in many other political sites around this net by the thousands, but I guess that is all fiction or make believe just as well when stated, even though the evidence is right before our very eyes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your "playing the fence" statement is revealing.
> You assign a right versus wrong one side or the other argument to ordinary folks.
> You claim that one has to be 100% behind Chik Fil A and take their side 100% in this gay issue.
> What a shallow juvenile approach.
> 2 issues, one a business issue and another a legal issue.
> Neither of them have NOT ONE DAMN THING to do with your religous beliefs or religion in any way.
> But Iran does it your way and allows religion to run their country.
> Delta is ready when you are.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Iran does it my way eh (the religious way) as if all religion is somehow equal in your mind or in your implication there of. People are smarter than this, so why do you try and speak in these ways as if they aren't ?
> 
> There is only one way, and yes it is true, where as there are many religions sure, yet they melt into the melting pot of that one way (by understanding and knowing God), even though their are many climbing up the mountain from all sides upon the earth, they all reach for the same goals and the same God along the way when making it to the top, but of course there are those who climb beside the others, yet they are only climbing in order to counter those who are climbing for God, and even from around all sides of this earth they are climbing for God in differnet langauges and ways, yet the others who are working for the other self appointed god, climb in hopes to make all others fall all the way back to the bottom somehow, in which they whom chaseth after the truth had begun their long journey from. This nation is being drug all the way back to the bottom, just take a look around and we all can clearly see.
Click to expand...


The US has always been a christian nation with religious laws at its foundation... and we've been at war nearly constantly since our inception. Praise the lord and pass the ammunition!!!!


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Man can open and close his business when he wants to, it is HIS business.
> I do not treat gay folk as sinners.
> How have they sinned on me by being gay?
> We treat gay folk as equals at my church.
> No straight folk are labeled as sinners for their sexual orientation.
> Amazing to see the "gays are sinners" and deny them marriage but a man convicted of mass murder can legally be married. The man and a woman argument holds no weight and is absurd.
> We are a nation OF LAWS, not men and their various and changing like the wind religous beliefs.
> Okay to smoke, drink and do all kinds of crap banned in The Bible and where are the right wing Onward Christian Soldiers having rallies to fight those folks?
> JUST like a man can open and close his business when he wants to and not be labeled anything for it folks can believe what they want to about gay folk being sinners or not and that does not make them right or wrong.
> But as usual the religous right wants it both ways.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Playing the fence as you do, is really revealing actually... The Lord says that he detest a fence rider, for he would rather that one be for or either against than to be in the middle. He says that he will spew a person out who is found on the fence as people try to ride it as they do so much these days, thus making them hypocryts sooner or later down this road in which they try and travel upon. During the nations run for many years and centuries now, it had shown that it was a Christian nation in a high percentage of or within a high ratio of, but over the years as the devil has had his way with her (breaking her into pieces by the use of those who he see's usable in this respect), in order that she be broken down to exactly where we all are at right now in this nation, and that is being constantly in a state of confusion, where no one knows if their rights here are even good or not anymore when spoken about, but the devil is the author of confusion, and this is exactly how he has wanted it ever since the nation had gained her independence so many years ago. The proof is right here in these threads and in many other political sites around this net by the thousands, but I guess *that is all fiction* or make believe just as well when stated, even though the evidence is right before our very eyes.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The biggest load of fiction is the bible, or can you prove any of the major acts or points?
> 
> You also mention "the Lord says..." when in fact it's a man who writes that and if he really does hear voices, there's meds for that these days. Or do you have any real proof that the lord spoke to someone?
Click to expand...

How old are you? I ask this because I believe that you are very young still, and very green when it comes to attempting to play at the levels in which you are trying or attempting to play at, especially when it comes to having wisdom or dealing with the wise as you attempt to do. Right now you are like a young fly that just bugs people as is found within your adelessence and/or speak found in proof there of, and if you don't change soon, you will someday grow up to be an old fly that really bugs people. Do you like being a pest ? B )


----------



## Gadawg73

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Playing the fence as you do, is really revealing actually... The Lord says that he detest a fence rider, for he would rather that one be for or either against than to be in the middle. He says that he will spew a person out who is found on the fence as people try to ride it as they do so much these days, thus making them hypocryts sooner or later down this road in which they try and travel upon. During the nations run for many years and centuries now, it had shown that it was a Christian nation in a high percentage of or within a high ratio of, but over the years as the devil has had his way with her (breaking her into pieces by the use of those who he see's usable in this respect), in order that she be broken down to exactly where we all are at right now in this nation, and that is being constantly in a state of confusion, where no one knows if their rights here are even good or not anymore when spoken about, but the devil is the author of confusion, and this is exactly how he has wanted it ever since the nation had gained her independence so many years ago. The proof is right here in these threads and in many other political sites around this net by the thousands, but I guess *that is all fiction* or make believe just as well when stated, even though the evidence is right before our very eyes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The biggest load of fiction is the bible, or can you prove any of the major acts or points?
> 
> You also mention "the Lord says..." when in fact it's a man who writes that and if he really does hear voices, there's meds for that these days. Or do you have any real proof that the lord spoke to someone?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How old are you? I ask this because I believe that you are very young still, and very green when it comes to attempting to play at the levels in which you are trying or attempting to play at, especially when it comes to having wisdom or dealing with the wise as you attempt to do. Right now you are like a young fly that just bugs people as is found within your adelessence and/or speak found in proof there of, and if you don't change soon, you will someday grow up to be an old fly that really bugs people. Do you like being a pest ? B )
Click to expand...


How old are you?
I saw first hand gay folks forced out of a church at age 9 in the early 60s and saw the same church turn away blacks that wanted to attend at the same time.
Jesus does not care if you are gay or straight, black or white but the Bible is full of references to acceptance and promotion of slavery and has 3 passages against gay folk.
And most important is the fact that THE LAW, THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION does NOT mention God anywhere.
We are a nation OF LAW, not men and their various changing like the wind religous beliefs.
Get used to it. The United States  is founded on THE LAW, not religion.
Again, as a Christian I will pray for your lost soul.


----------



## beagle9

Gadawg73 said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> The biggest load of fiction is the bible, or can you prove any of the major acts or points?
> 
> You also mention "the Lord says..." when in fact it's a man who writes that and if he really does hear voices, there's meds for that these days. Or do you have any real proof that the lord spoke to someone?
> 
> 
> 
> How old are you? I ask this because I believe that you are very young still, and very green when it comes to attempting to play at the levels in which you are trying or attempting to play at, especially when it comes to having wisdom or dealing with the wise as you attempt to do. Right now you are like a young fly that just bugs people as is found within your adelessence and/or speak found in proof there of, and if you don't change soon, you will someday grow up to be an old fly that really bugs people. Do you like being a pest ? B )
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How old are you?
> I saw first hand gay folks forced out of a church at age 9 in the early 60s and saw the same church turn away blacks that wanted to attend at the same time.
> Jesus does not care if you are gay or straight, black or white but the Bible is full of references to acceptance and promotion of slavery and has 3 passages against gay folk.
> And most important is the fact that THE LAW, THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION does NOT mention God anywhere.
> We are a nation OF LAW, not men and their various changing like the wind religous beliefs.
> Get used to it. The United States  is founded on THE LAW, not religion.
> Again, as a Christian I will pray for your lost soul.
Click to expand...


And here it is again folks, the teaming of the gays and the black struggle together in America, and this I guess is being done in order to help the gays have strength in their cause, because they are not being successful at it on their own. This is being done because without it they (the gays) are weak and without the majority agreeing with them on the issues, and this as if the two issues are somehow the same when they are not. Go ask the blacks in California what they think of your tying them together with the black struggle in this way, because the black vote was the deciding vote out there when it came to a man not marrying a man, and a woman not marrying a woman in that state.

Let everyones cause or revolution stand on it's own merits is what I say, then let the people decide by their vote, just like they did in California. Even then the vote is still not accepted sadly enough, and that is ashame and disgrace for what some call a democracy, when it is absolutely not by these measures.


----------



## Gadawg73

beagle9 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> How old are you? I ask this because I believe that you are very young still, and very green when it comes to attempting to play at the levels in which you are trying or attempting to play at, especially when it comes to having wisdom or dealing with the wise as you attempt to do. Right now you are like a young fly that just bugs people as is found within your adelessence and/or speak found in proof there of, and if you don't change soon, you will someday grow up to be an old fly that really bugs people. Do you like being a pest ? B )
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How old are you?
> I saw first hand gay folks forced out of a church at age 9 in the early 60s and saw the same church turn away blacks that wanted to attend at the same time.
> Jesus does not care if you are gay or straight, black or white but the Bible is full of references to acceptance and promotion of slavery and has 3 passages against gay folk.
> And most important is the fact that THE LAW, THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION does NOT mention God anywhere.
> We are a nation OF LAW, not men and their various changing like the wind religous beliefs.
> Get used to it. The United States  is founded on THE LAW, not religion.
> Again, as a Christian I will pray for your lost soul.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> And here it is again folks, the teaming of the gays and the black struggle together in America, and this I guess is being done in order to help the gays have strength in their cause, because they are not being successful at it on their own. This is being done because without it they (the gays) are weak and without the majority agreeing with them on the issues, and this as if the two issues are somehow the same when they are not. Go ask the blacks in California what they think of your tying them together with the black struggle in this way, because the black vote was the deciding vote out there when it came to a man not marrying a man, and a woman not marrying a woman in that state.
> 
> Let everyones cause or revolution stand on it's own merits is what I say, then let the people decide by their vote, just like they did in California. Even then the vote is still not accepted sadly enough, and that is ashame and disgrace for what some call a democracy, when it is absolutely not by these measures.
Click to expand...


Another good dodge by you once again beagle.
You ask someone else how old they are and when asked yourself you slant, distort and side step.
You are a fraud of the highest order.
Only a DUMBASS believes The United States of America is a democracy. We were never intended to be a democracy.
Democracy is MOB RULE. 
The Founders did everything possible TO AVOID democracy, one man one vote. Just like God is NEVER mentioned in THE LAW, THE CONSTITUTION, democracy is not there either.
The Founders deliberately constructed and established a republic to constrain the excesses of democracy, SPECIFICALLY those that wanted to spread their religous influences on others.
They had you in their sights beagle. Weren't they smart?
You and your friends love democracy as that spreads bigger and bigger central governments and your kind wants that to influence it and take it over with YOUR religous beliefs.
Sorry about that Moe, you lose once again.
Something about THE LAW. The United States Constitution. 
An interesting document. You should try reading it.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Playing the fence as you do, is really revealing actually... The Lord says that he detest a fence rider, for he would rather that one be for or either against than to be in the middle. He says that he will spew a person out who is found on the fence as people try to ride it as they do so much these days, thus making them hypocryts sooner or later down this road in which they try and travel upon. During the nations run for many years and centuries now, it had shown that it was a Christian nation in a high percentage of or within a high ratio of, but over the years as the devil has had his way with her (breaking her into pieces by the use of those who he see's usable in this respect), in order that she be broken down to exactly where we all are at right now in this nation, and that is being constantly in a state of confusion, where no one knows if their rights here are even good or not anymore when spoken about, but the devil is the author of confusion, and this is exactly how he has wanted it ever since the nation had gained her independence so many years ago. The proof is right here in these threads and in many other political sites around this net by the thousands, but I guess *that is all fiction* or make believe just as well when stated, even though the evidence is right before our very eyes.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The biggest load of fiction is the bible, or can you prove any of the major acts or points?
> 
> You also mention "the Lord says..." when in fact it's a man who writes that and if he really does hear voices, there's meds for that these days. Or do you have any real proof that the lord spoke to someone?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How old are you? I ask this because I believe that you are very young still, and very green when it comes to attempting to play at the levels in which you are trying or attempting to play at, especially when it comes to having wisdom or dealing with the wise as you attempt to do. Right now you are like a young fly that just bugs people as is found within your adelessence and/or speak found in proof there of, and if you don't change soon, you will someday grow up to be an old fly that really bugs people. Do you like being a pest ? B )
Click to expand...


So you're the "wise"?  Then you must have some actual proof that jesus existed. Or is it "wise" to believe in made up people and an invisible god? Maybe you should buy a dictionary. 

Notice everyone how beag can't refute what I say.


----------



## idb

Mmmmmm...chicken!!!!


----------



## HomeInspect

_Then you must have some actual proof that jesus existed._ 

People don't have proof in any religion. That's why they call it "faith"
Why are you so intolerant of those who wish to observe their faith?


----------



## Too Tall

Gadawg73 said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> The biggest load of fiction is the bible, or can you prove any of the major acts or points?
> 
> You also mention "the Lord says..." when in fact it's a man who writes that and if he really does hear voices, there's meds for that these days. Or do you have any real proof that the lord spoke to someone?
> 
> 
> 
> How old are you? I ask this because I believe that you are very young still, and very green when it comes to attempting to play at the levels in which you are trying or attempting to play at, especially when it comes to having wisdom or dealing with the wise as you attempt to do. Right now you are like a young fly that just bugs people as is found within your adelessence and/or speak found in proof there of, and if you don't change soon, you will someday grow up to be an old fly that really bugs people. Do you like being a pest ? B )
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How old are you?
> I saw first hand gay folks forced out of a church at age 9 in the early 60s and saw the same church turn away blacks that wanted to attend at the same time.
> Jesus does not care if you are gay or straight, black or white but the Bible is full of references to acceptance and promotion of slavery and has 3 passages against gay folk.
> And most important is the fact that THE LAW, THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION does NOT mention God anywhere.
> We are a nation OF LAW, not men and their various changing like the wind religous beliefs.
> Get used to it. The United States  is founded on THE LAW, not religion.
> Again, as a Christian I will pray for your lost soul.
Click to expand...


Times have changed since the '60s and the Declaration of Independence had several references to God.

Declaration of Independence:

&#8220;When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature&#8217;s God entitles them . . .

&#8220;We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights . . .

&#8220;And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, We mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.&#8221;

I don't know what Church you attend, but every single person in the congregation, choir as well as the Pastor in my church are sinners.  And that includes any of them that are gay or lesbian.


----------



## ima

HomeInspect said:


> _Then you must have some actual proof that jesus existed._
> 
> People don't have proof in any religion. That's why they call it "faith"
> Why are you so intolerant of those who wish to observe their faith?



beag is the one trying to put me down for not believing in ghosts and myths and acting like what he believes in is real, when it's all made up stuff. I'm trying to understand his delusion, it's always fascinated me that people can believe in made up shit like it's actually real. That's all. And like beag, it's usually people who can't thinking critically, have no direction in life so they grab onto something popular that gives them a warm fuzzy feeling that no matter how much they suck in this life, when they die, they will be rewarded.


----------



## HomeInspect

ima said:


> HomeInspect said:
> 
> 
> 
> _Then you must have some actual proof that jesus existed._
> 
> People don't have proof in any religion. That's why they call it "faith"
> Why are you so intolerant of those who wish to observe their faith?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beag is the one trying to put me down for not believing in ghosts and myths and acting like what he believes in is real, when it's all made up stuff. I'm trying to understand his delusion, it's always fascinated me that people can believe in made up shit like it's actually real. That's all. And like beag, it's usually people who can't thinking critically, have no direction in life so they grab onto something popular that gives them a warm fuzzy feeling that no matter how much they suck in this life, when they die, they will be rewarded.
Click to expand...


Nah, it's more than that. All of your posts in this thread have been critical of observance of faith, starting with Cathy choosing to close CFA stores on Sunday. (calling him fanatic) I'll be the first to admit, many use religion as a crutch, or look for answers through religion. But freedom of religion, last I checked, was still in our laws. It's just more PC today to fight for freedom of buggery.


----------



## ima

HomeInspect said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HomeInspect said:
> 
> 
> 
> _Then you must have some actual proof that jesus existed._
> 
> People don't have proof in any religion. That's why they call it "faith"
> Why are you so intolerant of those who wish to observe their faith?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beag is the one trying to put me down for not believing in ghosts and myths and acting like what he believes in is real, when it's all made up stuff. I'm trying to understand his delusion, it's always fascinated me that people can believe in made up shit like it's actually real. That's all. And like beag, it's usually people who can't think critically, have no direction in life so they grab onto something popular that gives them a warm fuzzy feeling that no matter how much they suck in this life, when they die, they will be rewarded.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nah, it's more than that. All of your posts in this thread have been critical of observance of faith, starting with Cathy choosing to close CFA stores on Sunday. (calling him fanatic) I'll be the first to admit, many use religion as a crutch, or look for answers through religion. But freedom of religion, last I checked, was still in our laws. It's just more PC today to fight for freedom of buggery.
Click to expand...

I think it's pretty fanatical to close on sunday. I don't care, I'm a vegetarian, and anyways like you say, he can do what he wants, as long as it's not hurting anyone, although by being a bigot, he's getting closer to that line, I would say. 

Did you know that a) heteros ingage in anal sex? And b) lesbians don't? And c) Not all gay men are catchers? And d) Some of the most vocal anti-gay people are leading a secret gay life?


----------



## gkjpalmer

Men who are kind to animals are not real men.

Sorry, your fired. Sorry, you cant drink from this fountain or sit at this counter. We only support real men and if your kind to Animals, your a threat to us real men who know Animals are for eatin'.

Sponcered By Daves Dog Burgers and Filets


----------



## Gadawg73

HomeInspect said:


> _Then you must have some actual proof that jesus existed._
> 
> People don't have proof in any religion. That's why they call it "faith"
> Why are you so intolerant of those who wish to observe their faith?



I am not intolerant of anyone.
But when their faith extends to influencing decisions that impact the lives of other lawabiding citizens it is no longer just faith.
That would be POLITICS.
But as I stated earlier I have NO problem with anything Cathy or Chik Fil A said or did.
Free speech.
But I still do not get it. 
Chicken sammiches-gay marriage.
Where is the connection here?


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> HomeInspect said:
> 
> 
> 
> _Then you must have some actual proof that jesus existed._
> 
> People don't have proof in any religion. That's why they call it "faith"
> Why are you so intolerant of those who wish to observe their faith?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beag is the one trying to put me down for not believing in ghosts and myths and acting like what he believes in is real, when it's all made up stuff. I'm trying to understand his delusion, it's always fascinated me that people can believe in made up shit like it's actually real. That's all. And like beag, it's usually people who can't thinking critically, have no direction in life so they grab onto something popular that gives them a warm fuzzy feeling that no matter how much they suck in this life, when they die, they will be rewarded.
Click to expand...


Let them keep on talking, and finally they put that big ole foot right into that big lying mouth.

Now where did I ever put you down for not believing in what I believe in ? Link please....


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You are the hypocrit. You are judging and lecturing me.
> The proof is in your posts.
> Granny taught me that a true Christian NEVER has to tell, preach and lecture anyone about anything Christian.
> True Christians never have to say a word. Folk will know it by YOUR ACTIONS.
> Govern yourself accordingly. You are a brain washed cultist.
> I will pray for you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I figured the truth would hurt, and it shows by your reactions in this reply.
> 
> If you don't mind, I want you to go and find anything I have been hypocrytical about, and bring it to my attention with links back to each statement that would contridict another statement made by me, thus making me the hypocryt that you just called me. Come on now, put you credibility where your mouth is if you can, we will be waiting.
> 
> Granny taught me that a true Christian NEVER has to tell, preach and lecture anyone about anything Christian?
> 
> To bad your granny wasn't around to teach the devils students the same thing when it comes to them wanting to teach and preach to everyone about what they believe in about this life, and how they want everyone to just throw away their Christian learnings or beliefs in order to make way for them* to rule in this life over the majority, instead of any Christians having the right to do the same.*
> 
> True Christians never have to say a word eh?, well how about telling that to those who should do the same (lets just all be silent and let the people choose based upon our actions and lives lived by a vote), oh no that wouldn't work for the devils recruiters now would it ? Or rather it would be the perfect dream of the devil to then come true in such a suggestion, wherefore the Christians would somehow apply such a one sided ideal as this would be that you speak of for them.  You see only the Christians should be silent in America now, isn't that right by your standard and/or ideology learned in your life ? Who is the cultist ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So to you, telling minorities how to live is the christian way of life?
Click to expand...

No, but them telling the majority of people how to live their lives or what they should accept in their lives, especially when they who are doing the telling these days, are clearly in the minority within the situations (meaning among the few), and it is a big time wrong that has been going on in this nation for way to long now, because they want it their way only in many things, and they don't allow any other to dare have it in the opposite of their way, and this is especially so if they can help it or can do anything about it. It has since become a huge problem for America these days, and many know it now.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HomeInspect said:
> 
> 
> 
> _Then you must have some actual proof that jesus existed._
> 
> People don't have proof in any religion. That's why they call it "faith"
> Why are you so intolerant of those who wish to observe their faith?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beag is the one trying to put me down for not believing in ghosts and myths and acting like what he believes in is real, when it's all made up stuff. I'm trying to understand his delusion, it's always fascinated me that people can believe in made up shit like it's actually real. That's all. And like beag, it's usually people who can't thinking critically, have no direction in life so they grab onto something popular that gives them a warm fuzzy feeling that no matter how much they suck in this life, when they die, they will be rewarded.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Let them keep on talking, and finally they put that big ole foot right into that big lying mouth.
> 
> Now where did I ever put you down for not believing in what I believe in ? Link please....
Click to expand...


Pretty much any post in this thread.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I figured the truth would hurt, and it shows by your reactions in this reply.
> 
> If you don't mind, I want you to go and find anything I have been hypocrytical about, and bring it to my attention with links back to each statement that would contridict another statement made by me, thus making me the hypocryt that you just called me. Come on now, put you credibility where your mouth is if you can, we will be waiting.
> 
> Granny taught me that a true Christian NEVER has to tell, preach and lecture anyone about anything Christian?
> 
> To bad your granny wasn't around to teach the devils students the same thing when it comes to them wanting to teach and preach to everyone about what they believe in about this life, and how they want everyone to just throw away their Christian learnings or beliefs in order to make way for them* to rule in this life over the majority, instead of any Christians having the right to do the same.*
> 
> True Christians never have to say a word eh?, well how about telling that to those who should do the same (lets just all be silent and let the people choose based upon our actions and lives lived by a vote), oh no that wouldn't work for the devils recruiters now would it ? Or rather it would be the perfect dream of the devil to then come true in such a suggestion, wherefore the Christians would somehow apply such a one sided ideal as this would be that you speak of for them.  You see only the Christians should be silent in America now, isn't that right by your standard and/or ideology learned in your life ? Who is the cultist ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So to you, telling minorities how to live is the christian way of life?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No, but them telling the majority of people how to live their lives or what they should accept in their lives, especially when they who are doing the telling these days, are clearly in the minority within the situations (meaning among the few), and it is a big time wrong that has been going on in this nation for way to long now, because they want it their way only in many things, and they don't allow any other to dare have it in the opposite of their way, and this is especially so if they can help it or can do anything about it. It has since become a huge problem for America these days, and many know it now.
Click to expand...

Nobody's forcing you to accept gay marriage. If you don't like it, don't marry a gay person.  Very simple. But telling gay people they can't marry IS forcing them to accept your agenda.
Personally, I'm for gay marriage, but it's not like I'm keeping myself abreast of what goes on with gay people, I don't care and I don't obsessively follow their actions... unlike some people.

So beag, I'm curious, who wrote the part in the bibble about the world being made in 6 days, and where did he get his information?


----------



## Gadawg73

Would be nice if these holy rollers were for heterosexual marriage where over 50% fail. Instead of volunteering to do something about that they stick their heads in the sand and have to find someone to persecute.
The gay boogeyman.
Same with gays in the military, used to be with gays teaching in the schools and before that gays were imprisoned. 
Allowing gays to marry will affect no one. What we have is a bunch of mother hen busy bodies "Ethel, did you know Seth and Barbara's daughter is a lesbian"  "Heavens no Elvira, tell me how you think they do it" 
Running clinics at their churches on how to lose weight, quit smoking, stay married and a dozen other things would be a start for the holy rollers.
But they will not do that as the cash would slow down in the plate.
GO AFTER THE GAYS!! It brings cash to the church!!!


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> beag is the one trying to put me down for not believing in ghosts and myths and acting like what he believes in is real, when it's all made up stuff. I'm trying to understand his delusion, it's always fascinated me that people can believe in made up shit like it's actually real. That's all. And like beag, it's usually people who can't thinking critically, have no direction in life so they grab onto something popular that gives them a warm fuzzy feeling that no matter how much they suck in this life, when they die, they will be rewarded.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let them keep on talking, and finally they put that big ole foot right into that big lying mouth.
> 
> Now where did I ever put you down for not believing in what I believe in ? Link please....
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Pretty much any post in this thread.
Click to expand...

You came here, and I didn't go seek you out to personally put you down, but ths is how it is with people like you, where as you come seeking out something in which you feel is opposite from what you believe in, and then you attack. Then when someone who knows nothing of you or where it is that you came in from, tries to defend against your attack, you then claim that the person attacked you first when an on looker wonders in and then is wondering what is going on.  Then when the on looker comments with their opinion next, and it is against your ideals or opinion, thus giving strength to mine in this thread, you instantly went into this sympothy role of "he's putting me down" type of senario........ Interesting!


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Let them keep on talking, and finally they put that big ole foot right into that big lying mouth.
> 
> Now where did I ever put you down for not believing in what I believe in ? Link please....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Pretty much any post in this thread.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You came here, and I didn't go seek you out to personally put you down, but ths is how it is with people like you, where as you come seeking out something in which you feel is opposite from what you believe in, and then you attack. Then when someone who knows nothing of you or where it is that you came in from, tries to defend against your attack, you then claim that the person attacked you first when an on looker wonders in and then is wondering what is going on.  Then when the on looker comments with their opinion next, and it is against your ideals or opinion, thus giving strength to mine in this thread, you instantly went into this sympothy role of "he's putting me down" type of senario........ Interesting!
Click to expand...


I never said you attacked me first. What I said was that you respond with attempted put downs and that, for a religious person, is kinda hypocritical. 

So beag, I'm curious, who wrote the part in the bibble about the world being made in 6 days, and where did he get his information?


----------



## beagle9

Gadawg73 said:


> Would be nice if these holy rollers were for heterosexual marriage where over 50% fail. Instead of volunteering to do something about that they stick their heads in the sand and have to find someone to persecute.
> The gay boogeyman.
> Same with gays in the military, used to be with gays teaching in the schools and before that gays were imprisoned.
> Allowing gays to marry will affect no one. What we have is a bunch of mother hen busy bodies "Ethel, did you know Seth and Barbara's daughter is a lesbian"  "Heavens no Elvira, tell me how you think they do it"
> Running clinics at their churches on how to lose weight, quit smoking, stay married and a dozen other things would be a start for the holy rollers.
> But they will not do that as the cash would slow down in the plate.
> GO AFTER THE GAYS!! It brings cash to the church!!!


Go after the gay's, it brings cash to the church ???? Kidding me right ? You comment on things you have actually no clue what so ever about, but man you try and make it sound so good when you do.. Ever thought about being a car salesman, because I think you might have missed your calling in life.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Would be nice if these holy rollers were for heterosexual marriage where over 50% fail. Instead of volunteering to do something about that they stick their heads in the sand and have to find someone to persecute.
> The gay boogeyman.
> Same with gays in the military, used to be with gays teaching in the schools and before that gays were imprisoned.
> Allowing gays to marry will affect no one. What we have is a bunch of mother hen busy bodies "Ethel, did you know Seth and Barbara's daughter is a lesbian"  "Heavens no Elvira, tell me how you think they do it"
> Running clinics at their churches on how to lose weight, quit smoking, stay married and a dozen other things would be a start for the holy rollers.
> But they will not do that as the cash would slow down in the plate.
> GO AFTER THE GAYS!! It brings cash to the church!!!
> 
> 
> 
> Go after the gay's, it brings cash to the church ???? Kidding me right ? You comment on things you have actually no clue what so ever about, but man you try and make it sound so good when you do.. Ever thought about being a car salesman, because I think you might have missed your calling in life.
Click to expand...


The Vatican is heavily anti-gay and they rake in billions...


----------



## blastoff

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Would be nice if these holy rollers were for heterosexual marriage where over 50% fail. Instead of volunteering to do something about that they stick their heads in the sand and have to find someone to persecute.
> The gay boogeyman.
> Same with gays in the military, used to be with gays teaching in the schools and before that gays were imprisoned.
> Allowing gays to marry will affect no one. What we have is a bunch of mother hen busy bodies "Ethel, did you know Seth and Barbara's daughter is a lesbian"  "Heavens no Elvira, tell me how you think they do it"
> Running clinics at their churches on how to lose weight, quit smoking, stay married and a dozen other things would be a start for the holy rollers.
> But they will not do that as the cash would slow down in the plate.
> GO AFTER THE GAYS!! It brings cash to the church!!!
> 
> 
> 
> Go after the gay's, it brings cash to the church ???? Kidding me right ? You comment on things you have actually no clue what so ever about, but man you try and make it sound so good when you do.. Ever thought about being a car salesman, because I think you might have missed your calling in life.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Vatican is heavily anti-gay and they rake in billions...
Click to expand...


Anti-gay?  Have you seen how those clowns at the Vatican dress?  How many pairs of red slippers does the average straight guy own?


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Pretty much any post in this thread.
> 
> 
> 
> You came here, and I didn't go seek you out to personally put you down, but ths is how it is with people like you, where as you come seeking out something in which you feel is opposite from what you believe in, and then you attack. Then when someone who knows nothing of you or where it is that you came in from, tries to defend against your attack, you then claim that the person attacked you first when an on looker wonders in and then is wondering what is going on.  Then when the on looker comments with their opinion next, and it is against your ideals or opinion, thus giving strength to mine in this thread, you instantly went into this sympothy role of "he's putting me down" type of senario........ Interesting!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I never said you attacked me first. What I said was that you respond with attempted put downs and that, for a religious person, is kinda hypocritical.
> 
> So beag, I'm curious, who wrote the part in the bibble about the world being made in 6 days, and where did he get his information?
Click to expand...

Listen ima, you are waisting your time with these rediculous framed questions you keep asking me, so how about moving on to something that you can speak more worldly upon, because you have no understanding of the bible and the spiritual world what so ever, and that is ashame, but it is your choice I understand, and I will honor your choice in that, so how about honoring my choice in what I believe, and also what Mr. Cathy believes as a choice in which he and millions more have made in their lives also that they believe, and as well do teach their children to believe in which is their right to do so last time I checked. So ((No)) you can't have their children's minds to shape and form by what you believe against what they as parents of their own children believe and do teach them, so why don't you just give it up already?


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You came here, and I didn't go seek you out to personally put you down, but ths is how it is with people like you, where as you come seeking out something in which you feel is opposite from what you believe in, and then you attack. Then when someone who knows nothing of you or where it is that you came in from, tries to defend against your attack, you then claim that the person attacked you first when an on looker wonders in and then is wondering what is going on.  Then when the on looker comments with their opinion next, and it is against your ideals or opinion, thus giving strength to mine in this thread, you instantly went into this sympothy role of "he's putting me down" type of senario........ Interesting!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I never said you attacked me first. What I said was that you respond with attempted put downs and that, for a religious person, is kinda hypocritical.
> 
> So beag, I'm curious, who wrote the part in the bibble about the world being made in 6 days, and where did he get his information?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Listen ima, you are waisting your time with these rediculous framed questions you keep asking me, so how about moving on to something that you can speak more worldly upon, because you have no understanding of the bible and the spiritual world what so ever, and that is ashame, but it is your choice I understand, and I will honor your choice in that, so how about honoring my choice in what I believe, and also what Mr. Cathy believes as a choice in which he and millions more have made in their lives also that they believe, and as well do teach their children to believe in which is their right to do so last time I checked. So ((No)) you can't have their children's minds to shape and form by what you believe against what they as parents of their own children believe and do teach them, so why don't you just give it up already?
Click to expand...


I'd like to learn about god. Help me get closer to Him. So who wrote the part in the bible about the world being made in 6 days, and where did he get his information?


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Would be nice if these holy rollers were for heterosexual marriage where over 50% fail. Instead of volunteering to do something about that they stick their heads in the sand and have to find someone to persecute.
> The gay boogeyman.
> Same with gays in the military, used to be with gays teaching in the schools and before that gays were imprisoned.
> Allowing gays to marry will affect no one. What we have is a bunch of mother hen busy bodies "Ethel, did you know Seth and Barbara's daughter is a lesbian"  "Heavens no Elvira, tell me how you think they do it"
> Running clinics at their churches on how to lose weight, quit smoking, stay married and a dozen other things would be a start for the holy rollers.
> But they will not do that as the cash would slow down in the plate.
> GO AFTER THE GAYS!! It brings cash to the church!!!
> 
> 
> 
> Go after the gay's, it brings cash to the church ???? Kidding me right ? You comment on things you have actually no clue what so ever about, but man you try and make it sound so good when you do.. Ever thought about being a car salesman, because I think you might have missed your calling in life.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Vatican is heavily anti-gay and they rake in billions...
Click to expand...

Billions from whom? Ohhhhh must be the majority who believe that the practice is sinful as found in that belief system, and they don't want it to interfer with their beliefs that *it is sinful *or upon their teachings of this that it is sinful in which they teach to their children to believe so as well, and soooooo that's where all that money comes from in part there of, now who'd a thunk it ? All I can say is do you have billions to counter that system or even the physical numbers strong enough to counter it (or) will you just keep doing it the best way you know how, and that is to fake the numbers and use the minority in number biased media groups like MSNBC, the now rogue justice system at the federal level, the Idiotic ACLU, the attached not to their liking black struggle, the over grown and vulnerable feds who will cater or try to cater to every whim now, and what just so these idiotic senators will stay in power, so they can meet with seventeen year olds behind rest stop restrooms and such (abuse of power?), and this goes for most of them up there sadly enough for whom are using and abusing their power these days. This nation has lost it's way big time, where as it can only be a matter of time before it all just implodes finally under the weight of it all, and you think the economy is bad now? The social issues of this nation has completely wrecked the econmy of this nation, and this by way of the federal governments help sadly enough, and it is only getting worse by the day and by the hour.


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> I never said you attacked me first. What I said was that you respond with attempted put downs and that, for a religious person, is kinda hypocritical.
> 
> So beag, I'm curious, who wrote the part in the bibble about the world being made in 6 days, and where did he get his information?
> 
> 
> 
> Listen ima, you are waisting your time with these rediculous framed questions you keep asking me, so how about moving on to something that you can speak more worldly upon, because you have no understanding of the bible and the spiritual world what so ever, and that is ashame, but it is your choice I understand, and I will honor your choice in that, so how about honoring my choice in what I believe, and also what Mr. Cathy believes as a choice in which he and millions more have made in their lives also that they believe, and as well do teach their children to believe in which is their right to do so last time I checked. So ((No)) you can't have their children's minds to shape and form by what you believe against what they as parents of their own children believe and do teach them, so why don't you just give it up already?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'd like to learn about god. Help me get closer to Him. So who wrote the part in the bible about the world being made in 6 days, and where did he get his information?
Click to expand...

Ok, then go read the Bible and learn, but make sure it is the God with a capital G, so why do you ask me or anyone else when you know how to read it yourself?  Then just draw your own conclusions from it, just as everyone else has done in the past.

So, if you are so ignorant right now about it all, as you just said you were (lying), then how do you justify trying to tell others that they are wrong in what they believe by calling it fiction, and this once they had read it and say that they do believe ? Oh, it's because you think that you are much smarter than they are, so you don't have to believe in anything other than what you believe in, because it justifies your actions and your words when spoken in your mind, and you want that belief honored no matter what, but yet you won't honor the beliefs of others even in a majority over the few who may think like you do ? Now that is as arrogant as it gets, but you don't see it that way do you ?


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> I'd like to learn about god



Can't help you with this, because my God uses the capital G, and your god wished for by you to learn more about or of ((uses the small g)) Two different beings altogether..

I knew you wanted to learn more about this god, and maybe his ways, but I can't help you with that one.


----------



## Againsheila

Gadawg73 said:


> Would be nice if these holy rollers were for heterosexual marriage where over 50% fail. Instead of volunteering to do something about that they stick their heads in the sand and have to find someone to persecute.
> The gay boogeyman.
> Same with gays in the military, used to be with gays teaching in the schools and *before that gays were imprisoned. *
> Allowing gays to marry will affect no one. What we have is a bunch of mother hen busy bodies "Ethel, did you know Seth and Barbara's daughter is a lesbian"  "Heavens no Elvira, tell me how you think they do it"
> Running clinics at their churches on how to lose weight, quit smoking, stay married and a dozen other things would be a start for the holy rollers.
> But they will not do that as the cash would slow down in the plate.
> GO AFTER THE GAYS!! It brings cash to the church!!!



Actually gays were institutionalized.  It was considered a mental illness.


----------



## Polk

Because putting people in a mental hospital is so much better than prison...


----------



## beagle9

Againsheila said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Would be nice if these holy rollers were for heterosexual marriage where over 50% fail. Instead of volunteering to do something about that they stick their heads in the sand and have to find someone to persecute.
> The gay boogeyman.
> Same with gays in the military, used to be with gays teaching in the schools and *before that gays were imprisoned. *
> Allowing gays to marry will affect no one. What we have is a bunch of mother hen busy bodies "Ethel, did you know Seth and Barbara's daughter is a lesbian"  "Heavens no Elvira, tell me how you think they do it"
> Running clinics at their churches on how to lose weight, quit smoking, stay married and a dozen other things would be a start for the holy rollers.
> But they will not do that as the cash would slow down in the plate.
> GO AFTER THE GAYS!! It brings cash to the church!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually gays were institutionalized.  It was considered a mental illness.
Click to expand...

Personally, I think it is a mental illness actually, but I am not for institutionalizing people who are not violent in society or are not a danger to themselves either, but I do think they should seek help with their illness, especially if there are those who are amongst them that see it as an illness, just as the smoker see's their condition as an addictiveness, which inturn is caused by a weakness in their minds that helps them become addicts, and in which in turn brings on the illness later on as a result of their minds addictiveness and weakness to such a thing, in which is something that they had choosen freely to do, and that is found in such an area within their lives as they have since learned about or have known about as such that brought about their illness as a result of.


----------



## Gadawg73

Againsheila said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Would be nice if these holy rollers were for heterosexual marriage where over 50% fail. Instead of volunteering to do something about that they stick their heads in the sand and have to find someone to persecute.
> The gay boogeyman.
> Same with gays in the military, used to be with gays teaching in the schools and *before that gays were imprisoned. *
> Allowing gays to marry will affect no one. What we have is a bunch of mother hen busy bodies "Ethel, did you know Seth and Barbara's daughter is a lesbian"  "Heavens no Elvira, tell me how you think they do it"
> Running clinics at their churches on how to lose weight, quit smoking, stay married and a dozen other things would be a start for the holy rollers.
> But they will not do that as the cash would slow down in the plate.
> GO AFTER THE GAYS!! It brings cash to the church!!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Actually gays were institutionalized.  It was considered a mental illness.
Click to expand...


They were sent to PRISON in Georgia. 
And mental institutions in other states.
Because people are stupid and believe it is a "choice".
Long history of persecution of gay folk in America.
ALL IN THE NAME OF RELIGION.


----------



## Gadawg73

Sodomy was a death penalty in Virginia until Jefferson introduced legislation to go easy on gays and just castrate them in 1778. 
The Christians objected to that and stuck with the death penalty.
Jesus would have been proud.
Prior to 1962 any homosexual activity was a felony in EVERY state, most with a mandatory 10 year sentence, NO probation. 
In 3 states it is still a FELONY to love someone of the same sex and have intimate relations with them.
Amazing that people have NO clue.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Listen ima, you are waisting your time with these rediculous framed questions you keep asking me, so how about moving on to something that you can speak more worldly upon, because you have no understanding of the bible and the spiritual world what so ever, and that is ashame, but it is your choice I understand, and I will honor your choice in that, so how about honoring my choice in what I believe, and also what Mr. Cathy believes as a choice in which he and millions more have made in their lives also that they believe, and as well do teach their children to believe in which is their right to do so last time I checked. So ((No)) you can't have their children's minds to shape and form by what you believe against what they as parents of their own children believe and do teach them, so why don't you just give it up already?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'd like to learn about god. Help me get closer to Him. So who wrote the part in the bible about the world being made in 6 days, and where did he get his information?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ok, then go read the Bible and learn, but make sure it is the God with a capital G, so why do you ask me or anyone else when you know how to read it yourself?  Then just draw your own conclusions from it, just as everyone else has done in the past.
> 
> So, if you are so ignorant right now about it all, as you just said you were (lying), then how do you justify trying to tell others that they are wrong in what they believe by calling it fiction, and this once they had read it and say that they do believe ? Oh, it's because you think that you are much smarter than they are, so you don't have to believe in anything other than what you believe in, because it justifies your actions and your words when spoken in your mind, and you want that belief honored no matter what, but yet you won't honor the beliefs of others even in a majority over the few who may think like you do ? Now that is as arrogant as it gets, but you don't see it that way do you ?
Click to expand...


We've all seen the movie. So I know a little something about it, in fact when I was little I went to sunday school for a couple of years and also went to a religious school where we took catechism classes as well. But help me get past the first part: who wrote that God made the whole in 6 days and where did he get his info from?
I don't give a crap whether you "honor" my beliefs or not, that's irrelevant. But I've noticed that religious people get offended when you laugh at their belief in an invisible superbeing who rules their world. So maybe if you help me get past the first part of the bible, I'll get closer to understanding why you believe what you do, and it might start to make sense to me.


----------



## ima

Gadawg73 said:


> Sodomy was a death penalty in Virginia until Jefferson introduced legislation to go easy on gays and just castrate them in 1778.
> The Christians objected to that and stuck with the death penalty.
> Jesus would have been proud.
> Prior to 1962 any homosexual activity was a felony in EVERY state, most with a mandatory 10 year sentence, NO probation.
> In 3 states it is still a FELONY to love someone of the same sex and have intimate relations with them.
> Amazing that people have NO clue.



I've always thought that Jesus, if he existed, was possibly gay himself, and that's the reason he was crucified.


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'd like to learn about god. Help me get closer to Him. So who wrote the part in the bible about the world being made in 6 days, and where did he get his information?
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, then go read the Bible and learn, but make sure it is the God with a capital G, so why do you ask me or anyone else when you know how to read it yourself?  Then just draw your own conclusions from it, just as everyone else has done in the past.
> 
> So, if you are so ignorant right now about it all, as you just said you were (lying), then how do you justify trying to tell others that they are wrong in what they believe by calling it fiction, and this once they had read it and say that they do believe ? Oh, it's because you think that you are much smarter than they are, so you don't have to believe in anything other than what you believe in, because it justifies your actions and your words when spoken in your mind, and you want that belief honored no matter what, but yet you won't honor the beliefs of others even in a majority over the few who may think like you do ? Now that is as arrogant as it gets, but you don't see it that way do you ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We've all seen the movie. So I know a little something about it, in fact when I was little I went to sunday school for a couple of years and also went to a religious school where we took catechism classes as well. But help me get past the first part: who wrote that God made the whole in 6 days and where did he get his info from?
> I don't give a crap whether you "honor" my beliefs or not, that's irrelevant. But I've noticed that religious people get offended when you laugh at their belief in an invisible superbeing who rules their world. So maybe if you help me get past the first part of the bible, I'll get closer to understanding why you believe what you do, and it might start to make sense to me.
Click to expand...

I am not here to train nor to save you from yourself, that is something only Jesus can do for you personally, so if you don't believe in him at all, then in no way can I help you ever (even though this is not what you want anyway), so go play somewhere else with your petty non-sense, because I tire of such ignorant non-sense you espouse on this thread. You are making a fool of yourself, and people are seeing this, but even then you push foward with your non-sense.


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sodomy was a death penalty in Virginia until Jefferson introduced legislation to go easy on gays and just castrate them in 1778.
> The Christians objected to that and stuck with the death penalty.
> Jesus would have been proud.
> Prior to 1962 any homosexual activity was a felony in EVERY state, most with a mandatory 10 year sentence, NO probation.
> In 3 states it is still a FELONY to love someone of the same sex and have intimate relations with them.
> Amazing that people have NO clue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've always thought that Jesus, if he existed, was possibly gay himself, and that's the reason he was crucified.
Click to expand...

No he was crucified because he loved us, but he didnot love the sin in which we had encountered, and being gay or committing acts in such are also included in this sin) and therefore we couldnot escape from it on our own, so he lay down his life for us, in order that his sacrifice would be sufficient for us to be saved from these sins, yet only by our acceptance of this act of sacrifice upon our behalfs can we be saved.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, then go read the Bible and learn, but make sure it is the God with a capital G, so why do you ask me or anyone else when you know how to read it yourself?  Then just draw your own conclusions from it, just as everyone else has done in the past.
> 
> So, if you are so ignorant right now about it all, as you just said you were (lying), then how do you justify trying to tell others that they are wrong in what they believe by calling it fiction, and this once they had read it and say that they do believe ? Oh, it's because you think that you are much smarter than they are, so you don't have to believe in anything other than what you believe in, because it justifies your actions and your words when spoken in your mind, and you want that belief honored no matter what, but yet you won't honor the beliefs of others even in a majority over the few who may think like you do ? Now that is as arrogant as it gets, but you don't see it that way do you ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We've all seen the movie. So I know a little something about it, in fact when I was little I went to sunday school for a couple of years and also went to a religious school where we took catechism classes as well. But help me get past the first part: who wrote that God made the whole in 6 days and where did he get his info from?
> I don't give a crap whether you "honor" my beliefs or not, that's irrelevant. But I've noticed that religious people get offended when you laugh at their belief in an invisible superbeing who rules their world. So maybe if you help me get past the first part of the bible, I'll get closer to understanding why you believe what you do, and it might start to make sense to me.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I am not here to train nor to save you from yourself, that is something only Jesus can do for you personally, so if you don't believe in him at all, then in no way can I help you ever (even though this is not what you want anyway), so go play somewhere else with your petty non-sense, because I tire of such ignorant non-sense you espouse on this thread. You are making a fool of yourself, and people are seeing this, but even then you push foward with your non-sense.
Click to expand...

Looks like YOU need to study the bibble some more, you don't even know who wrote the 6 day thing and where he got his info.

Btw, got any actual proof that Jesus ever existed? Or is it like one of those tooth fairy things?


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sodomy was a death penalty in Virginia until Jefferson introduced legislation to go easy on gays and just castrate them in 1778.
> The Christians objected to that and stuck with the death penalty.
> Jesus would have been proud.
> Prior to 1962 any homosexual activity was a felony in EVERY state, most with a mandatory 10 year sentence, NO probation.
> In 3 states it is still a FELONY to love someone of the same sex and have intimate relations with them.
> Amazing that people have NO clue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've always thought that Jesus, if he existed, was possibly gay himself, and that's the reason he was crucified.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No he was crucified because he loved us, but he didnot love the sin in which we had encountered, and being gay or committing acts in such are also included in this sin) and therefore we couldnot escape from it on our own, so he lay down his life for us, in order that his sacrifice would be sufficient for us to be saved from these sins, yet only by our acceptance of this act of sacrifice upon our behalfs can we be saved.
Click to expand...


Apparently, as legend has it, Jesus hung around with a bunch of guys, only fucked a woman once (to see if he'd like it, he didn't), wore a dress, is always drawn or painted to look effeminate, and he rode that old world symbol of gay pride, the donkey (real men rode horses, only women and children rode donkeys). So it's VERY likely Judas outed him.


----------



## The Professor

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> midcan5 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Long live intolerance and disrespect for others, may the intolerant hold hands in their un-American disrespect for people who only want equal rights under the law. Rights that many of these same Americans fought for, now denied. Long live hatred of the other. Take a bow America or stay seated you've sunk low under religious bigotry.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> its Federal law ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Constitutional case law, to deny same-sex couples equal access to marriage is a violation of the 14th Amendments Equal Protection Clause. See: _Perry v. Brown._
Click to expand...


Perry v. Brown case has been appealed to the SCOTUS and may be heard this Fall;  however, there is a chance the SCOTUS will refuse to hear it thus affirming the lower court's decision that California's Proposition 8 (an attempt to make gay marriages illegal) violated the Constitutional rights of gays.   

Alliance Alert » news from the frontlines of the culture war


----------



## beagle9

The Professor said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OODA_Loop said:
> 
> 
> 
> its Federal law ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Constitutional case law, to deny same-sex couples equal access to marriage is a violation of the 14th Amendments Equal Protection Clause. See: _Perry v. Brown._
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Perry v. Brown case has been appealed to the SCOTUS and may be heard this Fall;  however, there is a chance the SCOTUS will refuse to hear it thus affirming the lower court's decision that California's Proposition 8 (an attempt to make gay marriages illegal) violated the Constitutional rights of gays.
> 
> Alliance Alert » news from the frontlines of the culture war
Click to expand...

The Lord says, that if you teach my children to sin, then it would be better for you to place a talent around your neck, and to sink yourself to the bottom of the sea. I'm guessing that this makes one who does these kinds of teachings or is ok with these kinds of teachings "the lowest human being on the earth" at that point. Think about it people. Where are we going in this nation and world anymore when it comes to what we are teaching the children these days ? Just sayin !


----------



## Gadawg73

beagle9 said:


> The Professor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> 
> Constitutional case law, to deny same-sex couples equal access to marriage is a violation of the 14th Amendments Equal Protection Clause. See: _Perry v. Brown._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Perry v. Brown case has been appealed to the SCOTUS and may be heard this Fall;  however, there is a chance the SCOTUS will refuse to hear it thus affirming the lower court's decision that California's Proposition 8 (an attempt to make gay marriages illegal) violated the Constitutional rights of gays.
> 
> Alliance Alert » news from the frontlines of the culture war
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> The Lord says, that if you teach my children to sin, then it would be better for you to place a talent around your neck, and to sink yourself to the bottom of the sea. I'm guessing that this makes one who does these kinds of teachings or is ok with these kinds of teachings "the lowest human being on the earth" at that point. Think about it people. Where are we going in this nation and world anymore when it comes to what we are teaching the children these days ? Just sayin !
Click to expand...


I am sure there are a lot of folks out there that are teaching their children to do bad things such as murder, steal cars, loot, embezzle and burn houses down.
Where do you get this stuff beagle? Do you make it up on the fly?
Do parents do that in your neck of the woods? They teach their kids to be criminals?
Move over here to this side of the tracks dude. We raise our kids right over here.


----------



## beagle9

Gadawg73 said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Professor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Perry v. Brown case has been appealed to the SCOTUS and may be heard this Fall;  however, there is a chance the SCOTUS will refuse to hear it thus affirming the lower court's decision that California's Proposition 8 (an attempt to make gay marriages illegal) violated the Constitutional rights of gays.
> 
> Alliance Alert » news from the frontlines of the culture war
> 
> 
> 
> The Lord says, that if you teach my children to sin, then it would be better for you to place a talent around your neck, and to sink yourself to the bottom of the sea. I'm guessing that this makes one who does these kinds of teachings or is ok with these kinds of teachings "the lowest human being on the earth" at that point. Think about it people. Where are we going in this nation and world anymore when it comes to what we are teaching the children these days ? Just sayin !
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I am sure there are a lot of folks out there that are teaching their children to do bad things such as murder, steal cars, loot, embezzle and burn houses down.
> Where do you get this stuff beagle? Do you make it up on the fly?
> Do parents do that in your neck of the woods? They teach their kids to be criminals?
> Move over here to this side of the tracks dude. We raise our kids right over here.
Click to expand...

Hmmm comprehension may be lacking a bit here dawg, so try it again and see if you can get my point being made in all of this... Thanks


----------



## HomeInspect

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> I've always thought that Jesus, if he existed, was possibly gay himself, and that's the reason he was crucified.
> 
> 
> 
> No he was crucified because he loved us, but he didnot love the sin in which we had encountered, and being gay or committing acts in such are also included in this sin) and therefore we couldnot escape from it on our own, so he lay down his life for us, in order that his sacrifice would be sufficient for us to be saved from these sins, yet only by our acceptance of this act of sacrifice upon our behalfs can we be saved.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Apparently, as legend has it, Jesus hung around with a bunch of guys, only fucked a woman once (to see if he'd like it, he didn't), wore a dress, is always drawn or painted to look effeminate, and he rode that old world symbol of gay pride, the donkey (real men rode horses, only women and children rode donkeys). So it's VERY likely Judas outed him.
Click to expand...


Another mindless lefty, intolerant of people's faith


----------



## Gadawg73

HomeInspect said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> No he was crucified because he loved us, but he didnot love the sin in which we had encountered, and being gay or committing acts in such are also included in this sin) and therefore we couldnot escape from it on our own, so he lay down his life for us, in order that his sacrifice would be sufficient for us to be saved from these sins, yet only by our acceptance of this act of sacrifice upon our behalfs can we be saved.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, as legend has it, Jesus hung around with a bunch of guys, only fucked a woman once (to see if he'd like it, he didn't), wore a dress, is always drawn or painted to look effeminate, and he rode that old world symbol of gay pride, the donkey (real men rode horses, only women and children rode donkeys). So it's VERY likely Judas outed him.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Another mindless lefty, intolerant of people's faith
Click to expand...


Where is the intolerance? All he did was post his opinion.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> The Professor said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> 
> Constitutional case law, to deny same-sex couples equal access to marriage is a violation of the 14th Amendments Equal Protection Clause. See: _Perry v. Brown._
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Perry v. Brown case has been appealed to the SCOTUS and may be heard this Fall;  however, there is a chance the SCOTUS will refuse to hear it thus affirming the lower court's decision that California's Proposition 8 (an attempt to make gay marriages illegal) violated the Constitutional rights of gays.
> 
> Alliance Alert » news from the frontlines of the culture war
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *The Lord says,* that if you teach my children to sin, then it would be better for you to place a talent around your neck, and to sink yourself to the bottom of the sea. I'm guessing that this makes one who does these kinds of teachings or is ok with these kinds of teachings "the lowest human being on the earth" at that point. Think about it people. Where are we going in this nation and world anymore when it comes to what we are teaching the children these days ? Just sayin !
Click to expand...

"The Lord says"? Someone's hearing voices? There's a diagnosis for that these days. 

Ya teaching kids that our planet was made in 6 days and that humans like Noah can live until they're 600 years old is just plain wacky. I can't say that it makes the children any smarter either.


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Professor said:
> 
> 
> 
> Perry v. Brown case has been appealed to the SCOTUS and may be heard this Fall;  however, there is a chance the SCOTUS will refuse to hear it thus affirming the lower court's decision that California's Proposition 8 (an attempt to make gay marriages illegal) violated the Constitutional rights of gays.
> 
> Alliance Alert » news from the frontlines of the culture war
> 
> 
> 
> *The Lord says,* that if you teach my children to sin, then it would be better for you to place a talent around your neck, and to sink yourself to the bottom of the sea. I'm guessing that this makes one who does these kinds of teachings or is ok with these kinds of teachings "the lowest human being on the earth" at that point. Think about it people. Where are we going in this nation and world anymore when it comes to what we are teaching the children these days ? Just sayin !
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> "The Lord says"? Someone's hearing voices? There's a diagnosis for that these days.
> 
> Ya teaching kids that our planet was made in 6 days and that humans like Noah can live until they're 600 years old is just plain wacky. I can't say that it makes the children any smarter either.
Click to expand...

When you read something where someone had spoken, and was therefore written about by another, and you then comprehend or interpret it in that way to your understanding, agreeing with and to your liking also, then what do you say they did afterwards, I mean especially if fowarding that message onward (you again quote the person being written about right?), and this if the message is worth repeating or empowers your opinion because of the specific message that was given, in which was spoken by the original speaker, and yet was written about by another either within the time period it was spoken from or upon (or) afterwards be it some time forward as pertaining to our Lord Christ when he had walked upon this earth, and the accounts there of as were written about by others about that time period and even before then it was written about as well. 

Yes men wrote the Bible of course, but these were men who were inspired by God through spirtual consciousness and awareness of God in which they did believe and always will believe, to then write down the accounts of a very important message and time period in which would last throughout mankinds passage upon this earth. I don't know why I bother with you, because you are as an evil follower of that which is evil upon this earth, whom seeks to destroy and to tear down for what undoubtedly is your master for whom you do this for, and for whom controls you daily in your life as is eveident therefore upon these boards.


----------



## beagle9

Gadawg73 said:


> HomeInspect said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Apparently, as legend has it, Jesus hung around with a bunch of guys, only fucked a woman once (to see if he'd like it, he didn't), wore a dress, is always drawn or painted to look effeminate, and he rode that old world symbol of gay pride, the donkey (real men rode horses, only women and children rode donkeys). So it's VERY likely Judas outed him.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another mindless lefty, intolerant of people's faith
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Where is the intolerance? All he did was post his opinion.
Click to expand...

That's all Mr. Cathy did also, but where is your support for him in this same way?


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *The Lord says,* that if you teach my children to sin, then it would be better for you to place a talent around your neck, and to sink yourself to the bottom of the sea. I'm guessing that this makes one who does these kinds of teachings or is ok with these kinds of teachings "the lowest human being on the earth" at that point. Think about it people. Where are we going in this nation and world anymore when it comes to what we are teaching the children these days ? Just sayin !
> 
> 
> 
> "The Lord says"? Someone's hearing voices? There's a diagnosis for that these days.
> 
> Ya teaching kids that our planet was made in 6 days and that humans like Noah can live until they're 600 years old is just plain wacky. I can't say that it makes the children any smarter either.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> When you read something where someone had spoken, and was therefore written about by another, and you then comprehend or interpret it in that way to your understanding, agreeing with and to your liking also, then what do you say they did afterwards, I mean especially if fowarding that message onward (you again quote the person being written about right?), and this if the message is worth repeating or empowers your opinion because of the specific message that was given, in which was spoken by the original speaker, and yet was written about by another either within the time period it was spoken from or upon (or) afterwards be it some time forward as pertaining to our Lord Christ when he had walked upon this earth, and the accounts there of as were written about by others about that time period and even before then it was written about as well.
> 
> Yes men wrote the Bible of course, but these were men who were inspired by God through spirtual consciousness and awareness of God in which they did believe and always will believe, to then write down the accounts of a very important message and time period in which would last throughout mankinds passage upon this earth. I don't know why I bother with you, because you are as an evil follower of that which is evil upon this earth, whom seeks to destroy and to tear down for what undoubtedly is your master for whom you do this for, and for whom controls you daily in your life as is eveident therefore upon these boards.
Click to expand...


If what Jesus might have actually said was so important, why didn't they write it down while he was talking? I'm pretty sure that writing had been invented already by then.

So you're talking about someone writing down what someone else said decades and in some cases centuries after the fact. It's like someone who died in 1902 has me writing "well, he said this, and this, and walked on water...". 

I think if there is a god, he would EXPECT ME to think critically and not just accept the first load of made up stuff that comes down the pipe.


----------



## Gadawg73

beagle9 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HomeInspect said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Another mindless lefty, intolerant of people's faith
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Where is the intolerance? All he did was post his opinion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> That's all Mr. Cathy did also, but where is your support for him in this same way?
Click to expand...


I supported him TOTALLY 100% IN ALL MY POSTS.
And you called me a "fence sitter" for doing so.


----------



## beagle9

Gadawg73 said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Where is the intolerance? All he did was post his opinion.
> 
> 
> 
> That's all Mr. Cathy did also, but where is your support for him in this same way?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I supported him TOTALLY 100% IN ALL MY POSTS.
> And you called me a "fence sitter" for doing so.
Click to expand...

Ok so how do you justify this statement/comment to another (calling him intolerant), if he is only doing the same as you did ? Are we now a hypocryt and a fence sitter ?


----------



## Gadawg73

beagle9 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's all Mr. Cathy did also, but where is your support for him in this same way?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I supported him TOTALLY 100% IN ALL MY POSTS.
> And you called me a "fence sitter" for doing so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ok so how do you justify this statement/comment to another (calling him intolerant), if he is only doing the same as you did ? Are we now a hypocryt and a fence sitter ?
Click to expand...


Where did I claim he was intolerant?

Put brain in gear before mouth in motion. I NEVER stated he was intolerant.
Are we now a fibber and bull shitter?


----------



## beagle9

Gadawg73 said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I supported him TOTALLY 100% IN ALL MY POSTS.
> And you called me a "fence sitter" for doing so.
> 
> 
> 
> Ok so how do you justify this statement/comment to another (calling him intolerant), if he is only doing the same as you did ? Are we now a hypocryt and a fence sitter ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Where did I claim he was intolerant?
> 
> Put brain in gear before mouth in motion. I NEVER stated he was intolerant.
> Are we now a fibber and bull shitter?
Click to expand...

Wouldn't it be the reason that you are on this thread, and speaking in the opposite to all who are in defense of Mr.Cathy and his views, and this because you felt that Mr.Cathy's words spoken were intolerant maybe of your views on the subject ? You claimed that you have family members who are gay, so I can only guess that you would think that they should be allowed to be married if they want to (you even said so), and does that place you in line with Mr. Cathy's views on the matter (or) place you in opposition of those views ? Do you feel that Mr. Cathy's words were those of "intolerance" as others have stated here, even though the left has championed the word over the years as well when it comes to certain issues? Where do you stand fence rider ? Oh this is why you ride the fence, because you can jump to either side when ever nessesary right?


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ok so how do you justify this statement/comment to another (calling him intolerant), if he is only doing the same as you did ? Are we now a hypocryt and a fence sitter ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Where did I claim he was intolerant?
> 
> Put brain in gear before mouth in motion. I NEVER stated he was intolerant.
> Are we now a fibber and bull shitter?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Wouldn't it be the reason that you are on this thread, and speaking in the opposite to all who are in defense of Mr.Cathy and his views, and this because you felt that Mr.Cathy's words spoken were intolerant maybe of your views on the subject ? You claimed that you have family members who are gay, so I can only guess that you would think that they should be allowed to be married if they want to (you even said so), and does that place you in line with Mr. Cathy's views on the matter (or) place you in opposition of those views ? Do you feel that Mr. Cathy's words were those of "intolerance" as others have stated here, even though the left has championed the word over the years as well when it comes to certain issues? Where do you stand fence rider ? Oh this is why you ride the fence, because you can jump to either side when ever nessesary right?
Click to expand...


Cathy can speak his mind, but what came out what indeed intolerant. See how simple that is?


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Where did I claim he was intolerant?
> 
> Put brain in gear before mouth in motion. I NEVER stated he was intolerant.
> Are we now a fibber and bull shitter?
> 
> 
> 
> Wouldn't it be the reason that you are on this thread, and speaking in the opposite to all who are in defense of Mr.Cathy and his views, and this because you felt that Mr.Cathy's words spoken were intolerant maybe of your views on the subject ? You claimed that you have family members who are gay, so I can only guess that you would think that they should be allowed to be married if they want to (you even said so), and does that place you in line with Mr. Cathy's views on the matter (or) place you in opposition of those views ? Do you feel that Mr. Cathy's words were those of "intolerance" as others have stated here, even though the left has championed the word over the years as well when it comes to certain issues? Where do you stand fence rider ? Oh this is why you ride the fence, because you can jump to either side when ever nessesary right?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Cathy can speak his mind, but what came out what indeed intolerant. See how simple that is?
Click to expand...

Ok, but the argument is that is found in all of this, is that isn't the left or people who oppose Mr.Cathy's views when spoken, also "intolerant" as well of his beliefs and views on the subject ? Views in which co-inside with a huge majority whom also feel the same way as he (Mr.Cathy) does on such issues in America? So why does the left or those who oppose Mr. Cathy, wish to have their views honored by the system over the majority, if that majority feels the same way that Mr.Cathy feels on the subject ?

Should the minority on all issues brought (because of them being in a minority in this nation) trump or always over ride the majority on issues in this nation when brought, and if so do explain why it is that you think that should be the case in this nation (without the invoking of the black struggle) when doing so.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wouldn't it be the reason that you are on this thread, and speaking in the opposite to all who are in defense of Mr.Cathy and his views, and this because you felt that Mr.Cathy's words spoken were intolerant maybe of your views on the subject ? You claimed that you have family members who are gay, so I can only guess that you would think that they should be allowed to be married if they want to (you even said so), and does that place you in line with Mr. Cathy's views on the matter (or) place you in opposition of those views ? Do you feel that Mr. Cathy's words were those of "intolerance" as others have stated here, even though the left has championed the word over the years as well when it comes to certain issues? Where do you stand fence rider ? Oh this is why you ride the fence, because you can jump to either side when ever nessesary right?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cathy can speak his mind, but what came out what indeed intolerant. See how simple that is?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ok, but the argument is that is found in all of this, is that isn't the left or people who oppose Mr.Cathy's views when spoken, also "intolerant" as well of his beliefs and views on the subject ? Views in which co-inside with a huge majority whom also feel the same way as he (Mr.Cathy) does on such issues in America? So why does the left or those who oppose Mr. Cathy, wish to have their views honored by the system over the majority, if that majority feels the same way that Mr.Cathy feels on the subject ?
> 
> Should the minority on all issues brought (because of them being in a minority in this nation) trump or always over ride the majority on issues in this nation when brought, and if so do explain why it is that you think that should be the case in this nation (without the invoking of the black struggle) when doing so.
Click to expand...


The views of the minority don't have to override the majority, otherwise we'd be all kissing carpets facing Mecca. But in this case, denying people something that you have yourself because you think that the way their live their lives is wrong, is totally un-American and Taliban-esque. We're supposed to be the land of the free, remember? I don't push my views on you and you don't push your views on me. If you're against gay marriage, ignore them. See how simple that is?


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Cathy can speak his mind, but what came out what indeed intolerant. See how simple that is?
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, but the argument is that is found in all of this, is that isn't the left or people who oppose Mr.Cathy's views when spoken, also "intolerant" as well of his beliefs and views on the subject ? Views in which co-inside with a huge majority whom also feel the same way as he (Mr.Cathy) does on such issues in America? So why does the left or those who oppose Mr. Cathy, wish to have their views honored by the system over the majority, if that majority feels the same way that Mr.Cathy feels on the subject ?
> 
> Should the minority on all issues brought (because of them being in a minority in this nation) trump or always over ride the majority on issues in this nation when brought, and if so do explain why it is that you think that should be the case in this nation (without the invoking of the black struggle) when doing so.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The views of the minority don't have to override the majority, otherwise we'd be all kissing carpets facing Mecca. But in this case, denying people something that you have yourself because you think that the way their live their lives is wrong, is totally un-American and Taliban-esque. We're supposed to be the land of the free, remember? I don't push my views on you and you don't push your views on me. If you're against gay marriage, ignore them. See how simple that is?
Click to expand...

You think it's that simple eh ? What about the attrocious gay pride parade that took place recently in California, that shocked families who were ignorant enough to think that they could go along with that situation, only to have become repulsed and shocked as to what they were exposing their children to, and themselves in that situation when they participated ? I bet alot of people got a good eye opener in that situation, and have probably re-thought their positions on what it is that they are actually supporting in America. Oh and the kissing carpets, well that might very well be next in America, so don't count Obama out yet.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, but the argument is that is found in all of this, is that isn't the left or people who oppose Mr.Cathy's views when spoken, also "intolerant" as well of his beliefs and views on the subject ? Views in which co-inside with a huge majority whom also feel the same way as he (Mr.Cathy) does on such issues in America? So why does the left or those who oppose Mr. Cathy, wish to have their views honored by the system over the majority, if that majority feels the same way that Mr.Cathy feels on the subject ?
> 
> Should the minority on all issues brought (because of them being in a minority in this nation) trump or always over ride the majority on issues in this nation when brought, and if so do explain why it is that you think that should be the case in this nation (without the invoking of the black struggle) when doing so.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The views of the minority don't have to override the majority, otherwise we'd be all kissing carpets facing Mecca. But in this case, denying people something that you have yourself because you think that the way their live their lives is wrong, is totally un-American and Taliban-esque. We're supposed to be the land of the free, remember? I don't push my views on you and you don't push your views on me. If you're against gay marriage, ignore them. See how simple that is?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You think it's that simple eh ? What about the attrocious gay pride parade that took place recently in California, that shocked families who were ignorant enough to think that they could go along with that situation, only to have become repulsed and shocked as to what they were exposing their children to, and themselves in that situation when they participated ? I bet alot of people got a good eye opener in that situation, and have probably re-thought their positions on what it is that they are actually supporting in America. Oh and the kissing carpets, well *that might very well be next in America, so don't count Obama out yet.*
Click to expand...


 Good one. Even though he has nothing to do with it. Still funny how you associate him with that.

As for the parade, just don't go. I'm against eating meat and factory farms repulse me. So I don't eat meat, but if others want to eat unhealthy stuff like Cathy's chicken, go for it. Makes no difference to me. But don't tell me that just because I'm a minority that the majority is going to outlaw a vegetarian meal being called "supper" because the bible says to eat meat. Know what I mean?


----------



## Gadawg73

beagle9 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Ok so how do you justify this statement/comment to another (calling him intolerant), if he is only doing the same as you did ? Are we now a hypocryt and a fence sitter ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Where did I claim he was intolerant?
> 
> Put brain in gear before mouth in motion. I NEVER stated he was intolerant.
> Are we now a fibber and bull shitter?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Wouldn't it be the reason that you are on this thread, and speaking in the opposite to all who are in defense of Mr.Cathy and his views, and this because you felt that Mr.Cathy's words spoken were intolerant maybe of your views on the subject ? You claimed that you have family members who are gay, so I can only guess that you would think that they should be allowed to be married if they want to (you even said so), and does that place you in line with Mr. Cathy's views on the matter (or) place you in opposition of those views ? Do you feel that Mr. Cathy's words were those of "intolerance" as others have stated here, even though the left has championed the word over the years as well when it comes to certain issues? Where do you stand fence rider ? Oh this is why you ride the fence, because you can jump to either side when ever nessesary right?
Click to expand...


So if I disagree with someone I believe they are intolerant?
You are beyond a dumb ass. 
Cathy can say whatever the hell he wants to. This is America.
Just because I oppose someone does not mean I believe they are intolerant.
Your arguments are so weak you can not even tell us WHAT YOU THINK.
I do have family members that are gay. 
"so I can only guess" BINGO.
You need to grow up.


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> The views of the minority don't have to override the majority, otherwise we'd be all kissing carpets facing Mecca. But in this case, denying people something that you have yourself because you think that the way their live their lives is wrong, is totally un-American and Taliban-esque. We're supposed to be the land of the free, remember? I don't push my views on you and you don't push your views on me. If you're against gay marriage, ignore them. See how simple that is?
> 
> 
> 
> You think it's that simple eh ? What about the attrocious gay pride parade that took place recently in California, that shocked families who were ignorant enough to think that they could go along with that situation, only to have become repulsed and shocked as to what they were exposing their children to, and themselves in that situation when they participated ? I bet alot of people got a good eye opener in that situation, and have probably re-thought their positions on what it is that they are actually supporting in America. Oh and the kissing carpets, well *that might very well be next in America, so don't count Obama out yet.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Good one. Even though he has nothing to do with it. Still funny how you associate him with that.
> 
> As for the parade, just don't go. I'm against eating meat and factory farms repulse me. So I don't eat meat, but if others want to eat unhealthy stuff like Cathy's chicken, go for it. Makes no difference to me. But don't tell me that just because I'm a minority that the majority is going to outlaw a vegetarian meal being called "supper" because the bible says to eat meat. Know what I mean?
Click to expand...

I don't think you have to worry about a majority forcing you to eat what you don't want to eat in life, but now with the Obama administration, you might want to watch out for them, because him and his good buddy mayors may want to do just that, soon to be coming in the next 4 years if they get half the chance.


----------



## beagle9

Gadawg73 said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Where did I claim he was intolerant?
> 
> Put brain in gear before mouth in motion. I NEVER stated he was intolerant.
> Are we now a fibber and bull shitter?
> 
> 
> 
> Wouldn't it be the reason that you are on this thread, and speaking in the opposite to all who are in defense of Mr.Cathy and his views, and this because you felt that Mr.Cathy's words spoken were intolerant maybe of your views on the subject ? You claimed that you have family members who are gay, so I can only guess that you would think that they should be allowed to be married if they want to (you even said so), and does that place you in line with Mr. Cathy's views on the matter (or) place you in opposition of those views ? Do you feel that Mr. Cathy's words were those of "intolerance" as others have stated here, even though the left has championed the word over the years as well when it comes to certain issues? Where do you stand fence rider ? Oh this is why you ride the fence, because you can jump to either side when ever nessesary right?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So if I disagree with someone I believe they are intolerant?
> You are beyond a dumb ass.
> Cathy can say whatever the hell he wants to. This is America.
> Just because I oppose someone does not mean I believe they are intolerant.
> Your arguments are so weak you can not even tell us WHAT YOU THINK.
> I do have family members that are gay.
> "so I can only guess" BINGO.
> You need to grow up.
Click to expand...

What is it that you dis-agree with then, otherwise when it comes to Mr.Cathy and his opinion ? Do tell...

Then we can tell whether you feel he is intolerant or not according to your opinion.... (checkmate)


----------



## Gadawg73

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You think it's that simple eh ? What about the attrocious gay pride parade that took place recently in California, that shocked families who were ignorant enough to think that they could go along with that situation, only to have become repulsed and shocked as to what they were exposing their children to, and themselves in that situation when they participated ? I bet alot of people got a good eye opener in that situation, and have probably re-thought their positions on what it is that they are actually supporting in America. Oh and the kissing carpets, well *that might very well be next in America, so don't count Obama out yet.*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good one. Even though he has nothing to do with it. Still funny how you associate him with that.
> 
> As for the parade, just don't go. I'm against eating meat and factory farms repulse me. So I don't eat meat, but if others want to eat unhealthy stuff like Cathy's chicken, go for it. Makes no difference to me. But don't tell me that just because I'm a minority that the majority is going to outlaw a vegetarian meal being called "supper" because the bible says to eat meat. Know what I mean?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I don't think you have to worry about a majority forcing you to eat what you don't want to eat in life, but now with the Obama administration, you might want to watch out for them, because him and his good buddy mayors may want to do just that, soon to be coming in the next 4 years if they get half the chance.
Click to expand...


Get ready for your health insurance company telling you what you can and can not do.
Called Wellness Programs and Humana does it now.
Fat? Lose weight or we drop you or raise the group premiums that you are on a ton.
Smoke? Quit or we drop you period.
Do not participate in our nutrition program? Your ass is fired.
Free market and I am for it. Will lead us away from dependency on group health care plans and government mandates.


----------



## beagle9

Gadawg73 said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Good one. Even though he has nothing to do with it. Still funny how you associate him with that.
> 
> As for the parade, just don't go. I'm against eating meat and factory farms repulse me. So I don't eat meat, but if others want to eat unhealthy stuff like Cathy's chicken, go for it. Makes no difference to me. But don't tell me that just because I'm a minority that the majority is going to outlaw a vegetarian meal being called "supper" because the bible says to eat meat. Know what I mean?
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think you have to worry about a majority forcing you to eat what you don't want to eat in life, but now with the Obama administration, you might want to watch out for them, because him and his good buddy mayors may want to do just that, soon to be coming in the next 4 years if they get half the chance.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Get ready for your health insurance company telling you what you can and can not do.
> Called Wellness Programs and Humana does it now.
> Fat? Lose weight or we drop you or raise the group premiums that you are on a ton.
> Smoke? Quit or we drop you period.
> Do not participate in our nutrition program? Your ass is fired.
> Free market and I am for it. Will lead us away from dependency on group health care plans and government mandates.
Click to expand...

Yep, this is the new way around Obamacare for them I guess, otherwise the loop holes looked for..


----------



## Gadawg73

beagle9 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wouldn't it be the reason that you are on this thread, and speaking in the opposite to all who are in defense of Mr.Cathy and his views, and this because you felt that Mr.Cathy's words spoken were intolerant maybe of your views on the subject ? You claimed that you have family members who are gay, so I can only guess that you would think that they should be allowed to be married if they want to (you even said so), and does that place you in line with Mr. Cathy's views on the matter (or) place you in opposition of those views ? Do you feel that Mr. Cathy's words were those of "intolerance" as others have stated here, even though the left has championed the word over the years as well when it comes to certain issues? Where do you stand fence rider ? Oh this is why you ride the fence, because you can jump to either side when ever nessesary right?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So if I disagree with someone I believe they are intolerant?
> You are beyond a dumb ass.
> Cathy can say whatever the hell he wants to. This is America.
> Just because I oppose someone does not mean I believe they are intolerant.
> Your arguments are so weak you can not even tell us WHAT YOU THINK.
> I do have family members that are gay.
> "so I can only guess" BINGO.
> You need to grow up.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What is it that you dis-agree with then, otherwise when it comes to Mr.Cathy and his opinion ? Do tell...
> 
> Then we can tell whether you feel he is intolerant or not according to your opinion.... (checkmate)
Click to expand...


You can tell whether I feel he is intolerant or not *BY WHAT I SAY*.
I do not believe he is intolerant of gay folks. He hires them. 
You are one arrogant prick for telling others what they believe because you are having such a hard time telling us WHAT YOU BELIEVE.


----------



## Gadawg73

beagle9 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think you have to worry about a majority forcing you to eat what you don't want to eat in life, but now with the Obama administration, you might want to watch out for them, because him and his good buddy mayors may want to do just that, soon to be coming in the next 4 years if they get half the chance.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Get ready for your health insurance company telling you what you can and can not do.
> Called Wellness Programs and Humana does it now.
> Fat? Lose weight or we drop you or raise the group premiums that you are on a ton.
> Smoke? Quit or we drop you period.
> Do not participate in our nutrition program? Your ass is fired.
> Free market and I am for it. Will lead us away from dependency on group health care plans and government mandates.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Yep, this is the new way around Obamacare for them I guess, otherwise the loop holes looked for..
Click to expand...


No loopholes. The insurance companies are the death panels NOW. I own 3 companies and pay enough in premiums per year as what most people make in a year.
Wellness Programs is the best option. Why should I have to pay for people to be fat, smoke and eat unhealthy foods?


----------



## beagle9

Gadawg73 said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> So if I disagree with someone I believe they are intolerant?
> You are beyond a dumb ass.
> Cathy can say whatever the hell he wants to. This is America.
> Just because I oppose someone does not mean I believe they are intolerant.
> Your arguments are so weak you can not even tell us WHAT YOU THINK.
> I do have family members that are gay.
> "so I can only guess" BINGO.
> You need to grow up.
> 
> 
> 
> What is it that you dis-agree with then, otherwise when it comes to Mr.Cathy and his opinion ? Do tell...
> 
> Then we can tell whether you feel he is intolerant or not according to your opinion.... (checkmate)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You can tell whether I feel he is intolerant or not *BY WHAT I SAY*.
> I do not believe he is intolerant of gay folks. He hires them.
> You are one arrogant prick for telling others what they believe because you are having such a hard time telling us WHAT YOU BELIEVE.
Click to expand...

Tell us first, as you came here to badger and curse about the place, otherwise no one went looking for you to ask your opinion, now lets here it since you insist on being here and commenting like you do.. B )

He may hire them of course, because discrimination is illegal in this nation, but that don't change his personal beliefs in life, nor does it change his protocal on how he expects his employee's to carry themselves while working for him and his organization, so being gay and working at Chic-Fil-A is not a problem at all, just like it hasn't been anywhere else in America for quite sometime now, but I garantee you that you cannot or will not bring your sexuality into the workplace or else you will be fired immedaitely, and this goes for straights, gay and/or any other that goes against company policy in life.

Being gay is a personal private issue, and it is not compatible with the workplace or public space, because it is a sexual issue or choice that should remain private and between the people who are involved in such a thing, just like it is for straights for whom it has been forever when it comes to that which I have listed above as well.


----------



## Gadawg73

beagle9 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> What is it that you dis-agree with then, otherwise when it comes to Mr.Cathy and his opinion ? Do tell...
> 
> Then we can tell whether you feel he is intolerant or not according to your opinion.... (checkmate)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can tell whether I feel he is intolerant or not *BY WHAT I SAY*.
> I do not believe he is intolerant of gay folks. He hires them.
> You are one arrogant prick for telling others what they believe because you are having such a hard time telling us WHAT YOU BELIEVE.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Tell us first, as you came here to badger and curse about the place, otherwise no one went looking for you to ask your opinion, now lets here it since you insist on being here and commenting like you do.. B )
> 
> He may hire them of course, because discrimination is illegal in this nation, but that don't change his personal beliefs in life, nor does it change his protocal on how he expects his employee's to carry themselves while working for him and his organization, so being gay and working at Chic-Fil-A is not a problem at all, just like it hasn't been anywhere else in America for quite sometime now, but I garantee you that you cannot or will not bring your sexuality into the workplace or else you will be fired immedaitely, and this goes for straights, gay and/or any other that goes against company policy in life.
> 
> Being gay is a personal private issue, and it is not compatible with the workplace or public space, because it is a sexual issue or choice that should remain private and between the people who are involved in such a thing, just like it is for straights for whom it has been forever when it comes to that which I have listed above as well.
Click to expand...


So a man should not bring his wife to any business event because that is a personal issue.
"Let me inbtroduce me to my wife" is a personal issue? You are beyond stupid with your remarks. If a gay woman brings her partner to a business event and introduces her as "my partner" that should not be allowed?
Give it up man. If us red necks in Georgia can figure that this is A NON ISSUE, then you sure can.
Gay this and that is a NON ISSUE. Cathy can say and do as he wants but he is an old fogey and most of the franchise owners could CARE LESS about gay folk.
And I also have a family member that OWNS 2 franchises. NO WHERE in any of the requirements is there any of the goobly gook you speak of in the contract for owning a Chik Fil A. 
Chicken sammiches-gay marriage. There IS NO connection. It is a business.


----------



## beagle9

Gadawg73 said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Get ready for your health insurance company telling you what you can and can not do.
> Called Wellness Programs and Humana does it now.
> Fat? Lose weight or we drop you or raise the group premiums that you are on a ton.
> Smoke? Quit or we drop you period.
> Do not participate in our nutrition program? Your ass is fired.
> Free market and I am for it. Will lead us away from dependency on group health care plans and government mandates.
> 
> 
> 
> Yep, this is the new way around Obamacare for them I guess, otherwise the loop holes looked for..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No loopholes. The insurance companies are the death panels NOW. I own 3 companies and pay enough in premiums per year as what most people make in a year.
> Wellness Programs is the best option. Why should I have to pay for people to be fat, smoke and eat unhealthy foods?
Click to expand...

When Hitler was attempting to create the perfect race (blonde haired blue eyes, certain height and weight as just some parts of it), he probably would have been making the case that you are making as well in life back then, so where are you heading with all of this maybe ? Is America seeking the perfect race now, and soon the over powering enforcements will be created or rampt up big time in order to someday do so? I mean if we stay on the path that we are on in all of this now, will this result in the same roads he went down eventually ? What ever happened to a soldier lighting up a ciggarett to smoke, once he had gone through a serious battle, and then on to victory afterwards ? Many of these world war two veterans lived very long lives after that war when they came back home, so how is this all such a terrible problem now in America I wonder ? Is it because people have to much time on their hands, and so they are abusing themselves, by not cleansing the body through proper work eithic as it were, so the body is quickly disentigrating right beneath their noses all because of, thus becoming a heavy burden upon the healthcare industry due to the rapid speed up of this disentigrating problem, in which is entrenched in our modern day society now ? What ever happened to thou shalt work by the sweat of ones brow, in order to earn ones keep?  Sweating rids the body of poisons and fat that is stored and/or is prone to build up on a body that is being lazy (nothing to do) and is being abused, but are we to blame the person or the economy and/or conditions for which we all now live in this nation for our traggic health situation we have in America now ?

I agree that many should re-consider and learn from their mistakes in life quickly, and we should all look to going after corporations who willingly do things to us that are poisonous and dangerous unto us, and that is found in their products (otherwise we should only be demanding that they take out the bad ingriedients in which they have put in for profits sake galore, and stop them from farming in dangerous ways for profits sake galore), and we should do this through proper regulatory actions, but not to try and stop a product altogether if we can take that product back to it's less harmful state in which it once was in. We could even suggest that a product be re-invented if we have the new safer formulas and recipes found in new creations and studies of said products, and then help the CEO's and manufacturers to change their lines, and then manufacture the new product with government incentives and even subsidies if need be. We should do this in order to help it all along maybe, but to just try and shut stuff down or kill the private sector by being hostile to it in a very big way all of a sudden, is defintely not the answer moving foward as I see it, and it hasn't been the answer as I see it with this administration. Off topic, but just sayin...


----------



## beagle9

Gadawg73 said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You can tell whether I feel he is intolerant or not *BY WHAT I SAY*.
> I do not believe he is intolerant of gay folks. He hires them.
> You are one arrogant prick for telling others what they believe because you are having such a hard time telling us WHAT YOU BELIEVE.
> 
> 
> 
> Tell us first, as you came here to badger and curse about the place, otherwise no one went looking for you to ask your opinion, now lets here it since you insist on being here and commenting like you do.. B )
> 
> He may hire them of course, because discrimination is illegal in this nation, but that don't change his personal beliefs in life, nor does it change his protocal on how he expects his employee's to carry themselves while working for him and his organization, so being gay and working at Chic-Fil-A is not a problem at all, just like it hasn't been anywhere else in America for quite sometime now, but I garantee you that you cannot or will not bring your sexuality into the workplace or else you will be fired immedaitely, and this goes for straights, gay and/or any other that goes against company policy in life.
> 
> Being gay is a personal private issue, and it is not compatible with the workplace or public space, because it is a sexual issue or choice that should remain private and between the people who are involved in such a thing, just like it is for straights for whom it has been forever when it comes to that which I have listed above as well.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So a man should not bring his wife to any business event because that is a personal issue.
> "Let me inbtroduce me to my wife" is a personal issue? You are beyond stupid with your remarks. If a gay woman brings her partner to a business event and introduces her as "my partner" that should not be allowed?
> Give it up man. If us red necks in Georgia can figure that this is A NON ISSUE, then you sure can.
> Gay this and that is a NON ISSUE. Cathy can say and do as he wants but he is an old fogey and most of the franchise owners could CARE LESS about gay folk.
> And I also have a family member that OWNS 2 franchises. NO WHERE in any of the requirements is there any of the goobly gook you speak of in the contract for owning a Chik Fil A.
> Chicken sammiches-gay marriage. There IS NO connection. It is a business.
Click to expand...


Why does it have to be a woman and a woman or a man and a man as being married in the situation, I mean why is this sooooo important to this community now ? It goes against the grain and they know it, but they keep pushing the issue so hard against the grain, but why ? It will only bring more trouble their way, because America isn't ready for them to be married and flaunting that in front of the children for whom are still being taught by a majority that it is not the way it is supposed to be in life. Why all the trouble in which to be looked for constantly by this group I wonder ? Are they being led by the devil or something ?


----------



## Gadawg73

beagle9 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yep, this is the new way around Obamacare for them I guess, otherwise the loop holes looked for..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No loopholes. The insurance companies are the death panels NOW. I own 3 companies and pay enough in premiums per year as what most people make in a year.
> Wellness Programs is the best option. Why should I have to pay for people to be fat, smoke and eat unhealthy foods?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> When Hitler was attempting to create the perfect race (blonde haired blue eyes, certain height and weight as just some parts of it), he probably would have been making the case that you are making as well in life back then, so where are you heading with all of this maybe ? Is America seeking the perfect race now, and soon the over powering enforcements will be created or rampt up big time in order to someday do so? I mean if we stay on the path that we are on in all of this now, will this result in the same roads he went down eventually ? What ever happened to a soldier lighting up a ciggarett to smoke, once he had gone through a serious battle, and then on to victory afterwards ? Many of these world war two veterans lived very long lives after that war when they came back home, so how is this all such a terrible problem now in America I wonder ? Is it because people have to much time on their hands, and so they are abusing themselves, by not cleansing the body through proper work eithic as it were, so the body is quickly disentigrating right beneath their noses all because of, thus becoming a heavy burden upon the healthcare industry due to the rapid speed up of this disentigrating problem, in which is entrenched in our modern day society now ? What ever happened to thou shalt work by the sweat of ones brow, in order to earn ones keep?  Sweating rids the body of poisons and fat that is stored and/or is prone to build up on a body that is being lazy (nothing to do) and is being abused, but are we to blame the person or the economy and/or conditions for which we all now live in this nation for our traggic health situation we have in America now ?
> 
> I agree that many should re-consider and learn from their mistakes in life quickly, and we should all look to going after corporations who willingly do things to us that are poisonous and dangerous unto us, and that is found in their products (otherwise we should only be demanding that they take out the bad ingriedients in which they have put in for profits sake galore, and stop them from farming in dangerous ways for profits sake galore), and we should do this through proper regulatory actions, but not to try and stop a product altogether if we can take that product back to it's less harmful state in which it once was in. We could even suggest that a product be re-invented if we have the new safer formulas and recipes found in new creations and studies of said products, and then help the CEO's and manufacturers to change their lines, and then manufacture the new product with government incentives and even subsidies if need be. We should do this in order to help it all along maybe, but to just try and shut stuff down or kill the private sector by being hostile to it in a very big way all of a sudden, is defintely not the answer moving foward as I see it, and it hasn't been the answer as I see it with this administration. Off topic, but just sayin...
Click to expand...


You are an idiot.


----------



## Gadawg73

beagle9 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Tell us first, as you came here to badger and curse about the place, otherwise no one went looking for you to ask your opinion, now lets here it since you insist on being here and commenting like you do.. B )
> 
> He may hire them of course, because discrimination is illegal in this nation, but that don't change his personal beliefs in life, nor does it change his protocal on how he expects his employee's to carry themselves while working for him and his organization, so being gay and working at Chic-Fil-A is not a problem at all, just like it hasn't been anywhere else in America for quite sometime now, but I garantee you that you cannot or will not bring your sexuality into the workplace or else you will be fired immedaitely, and this goes for straights, gay and/or any other that goes against company policy in life.
> 
> Being gay is a personal private issue, and it is not compatible with the workplace or public space, because it is a sexual issue or choice that should remain private and between the people who are involved in such a thing, just like it is for straights for whom it has been forever when it comes to that which I have listed above as well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So a man should not bring his wife to any business event because that is a personal issue.
> "Let me inbtroduce me to my wife" is a personal issue? You are beyond stupid with your remarks. If a gay woman brings her partner to a business event and introduces her as "my partner" that should not be allowed?
> Give it up man. If us red necks in Georgia can figure that this is A NON ISSUE, then you sure can.
> Gay this and that is a NON ISSUE. Cathy can say and do as he wants but he is an old fogey and most of the franchise owners could CARE LESS about gay folk.
> And I also have a family member that OWNS 2 franchises. NO WHERE in any of the requirements is there any of the goobly gook you speak of in the contract for owning a Chik Fil A.
> Chicken sammiches-gay marriage. There IS NO connection. It is a business.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why does it have to be a woman and a woman or a man and a man as being married in the situation, I mean why is this sooooo important to this community now ? It goes against the grain and they know it, but they keep pushing the issue so hard against the grain, but why ? It will only bring more trouble their way, because America isn't ready for them to be married and flaunting that in front of the children for whom are still being taught by a majority that it is not the way it is supposed to be in life. Why all the trouble in which to be looked for constantly by this group I wonder ? Are they being led by the devil or something ?
Click to expand...


*The gays *are screaming that they believe Cathy is intolerant because Cathy disagrees with the opinions of gays on gay marriage.
*YOU* are screaming that you believe I am intolerant because I disagree with the opinions of Cathy on gay marriage.

You and the gays *ARE DOING EXACTLY THE SAME THING*


----------



## beagle9

Gadawg73 said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> No loopholes. The insurance companies are the death panels NOW. I own 3 companies and pay enough in premiums per year as what most people make in a year.
> Wellness Programs is the best option. Why should I have to pay for people to be fat, smoke and eat unhealthy foods?
> 
> 
> 
> When Hitler was attempting to create the perfect race (blonde haired blue eyes, certain height and weight as just some parts of it), he probably would have been making the case that you are making as well in life back then, so where are you heading with all of this maybe ? Is America seeking the perfect race now, and soon the over powering enforcements will be created or rampt up big time in order to someday do so? I mean if we stay on the path that we are on in all of this now, will this result in the same roads he went down eventually ? What ever happened to a soldier lighting up a ciggarett to smoke, once he had gone through a serious battle, and then on to victory afterwards ? Many of these world war two veterans lived very long lives after that war when they came back home, so how is this all such a terrible problem now in America I wonder ? Is it because people have to much time on their hands, and so they are abusing themselves, by not cleansing the body through proper work eithic as it were, so the body is quickly disentigrating right beneath their noses all because of, thus becoming a heavy burden upon the healthcare industry due to the rapid speed up of this disentigrating problem, in which is entrenched in our modern day society now ? What ever happened to thou shalt work by the sweat of ones brow, in order to earn ones keep?  Sweating rids the body of poisons and fat that is stored and/or is prone to build up on a body that is being lazy (nothing to do) and is being abused, but are we to blame the person or the economy and/or conditions for which we all now live in this nation for our traggic health situation we have in America now ?
> 
> I agree that many should re-consider and learn from their mistakes in life quickly, and we should all look to going after corporations who willingly do things to us that are poisonous and dangerous unto us, and that is found in their products (otherwise we should only be demanding that they take out the bad ingriedients in which they have put in for profits sake galore, and stop them from farming in dangerous ways for profits sake galore), and we should do this through proper regulatory actions, but not to try and stop a product altogether if we can take that product back to it's less harmful state in which it once was in. We could even suggest that a product be re-invented if we have the new safer formulas and recipes found in new creations and studies of said products, and then help the CEO's and manufacturers to change their lines, and then manufacture the new product with government incentives and even subsidies if need be. We should do this in order to help it all along maybe, but to just try and shut stuff down or kill the private sector by being hostile to it in a very big way all of a sudden, is defintely not the answer moving foward as I see it, and it hasn't been the answer as I see it with this administration. Off topic, but just sayin...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are an idiot.
Click to expand...

I can be an idiot in some things, at least I will admit that, unlike others here....LOL

I think I make some valid points in all my mayhem though.. No one is perfect so always remember that, and you will do just fine in life..


----------



## beagle9

Gadawg73 said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> So a man should not bring his wife to any business event because that is a personal issue.
> "Let me inbtroduce me to my wife" is a personal issue? You are beyond stupid with your remarks. If a gay woman brings her partner to a business event and introduces her as "my partner" that should not be allowed?
> Give it up man. If us red necks in Georgia can figure that this is A NON ISSUE, then you sure can.
> Gay this and that is a NON ISSUE. Cathy can say and do as he wants but he is an old fogey and most of the franchise owners could CARE LESS about gay folk.
> And I also have a family member that OWNS 2 franchises. NO WHERE in any of the requirements is there any of the goobly gook you speak of in the contract for owning a Chik Fil A.
> Chicken sammiches-gay marriage. There IS NO connection. It is a business.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why does it have to be a woman and a woman or a man and a man as being married in the situation, I mean why is this sooooo important to this community now ? It goes against the grain and they know it, but they keep pushing the issue so hard against the grain, but why ? It will only bring more trouble their way, because America isn't ready for them to be married and flaunting that in front of the children for whom are still being taught by a majority that it is not the way it is supposed to be in life. Why all the trouble in which to be looked for constantly by this group I wonder ? Are they being led by the devil or something ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> *The gays *are screaming that they believe Cathy is intolerant because Cathy disagrees with the opinions of gays on gay marriage.
> *YOU* are screaming that you believe I am intolerant because I disagree with the opinions of Cathy on gay marriage.
> 
> You and the gays *ARE DOING EXACTLY THE SAME THING*
Click to expand...

No you and the gays are doing the same thing, but you are blaming me for doing what the gays are doing while hiding yours ? I'm confused now.. This has become just one big intolerable mess after another...LOL


----------



## Gadawg73

beagle9 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why does it have to be a woman and a woman or a man and a man as being married in the situation, I mean why is this sooooo important to this community now ? It goes against the grain and they know it, but they keep pushing the issue so hard against the grain, but why ? It will only bring more trouble their way, because America isn't ready for them to be married and flaunting that in front of the children for whom are still being taught by a majority that it is not the way it is supposed to be in life. Why all the trouble in which to be looked for constantly by this group I wonder ? Are they being led by the devil or something ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *The gays *are screaming that they believe Cathy is intolerant because Cathy disagrees with the opinions of gays on gay marriage.
> *YOU* are screaming that you believe I am intolerant because I disagree with the opinions of Cathy on gay marriage.
> 
> You and the gays *ARE DOING EXACTLY THE SAME THING*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No you and the gays are doing the same thing, but you are blaming me for doing what the gays are doing while hiding yours ? I'm confused now.. This has become just one big intolerable mess after another...LOL
Click to expand...


Nope, I said from the start that this was a bad idea for the gays on this one and that what this amounts to is free speech and CAthy has every right to say what he wants to.
You and the gays said exactly the same thing.
They said they believed Cathy was intolerant because Cathy disagrees with the gays opinion on gay marriage.
You said you believed I was intolerant because I disagree with CAthy's opinion on gay marriage.
Same thing. You and the gays think alike on this one beagle.
Both of you are wrong, narrow minded on this one.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Tell us first, as you came here to badger and curse about the place, otherwise no one went looking for you to ask your opinion, now lets here it since you insist on being here and commenting like you do.. B )
> 
> He may hire them of course, because discrimination is illegal in this nation, but that don't change his personal beliefs in life, nor does it change his protocal on how he expects his employee's to carry themselves while working for him and his organization, so being gay and working at Chic-Fil-A is not a problem at all, just like it hasn't been anywhere else in America for quite sometime now, but I garantee you that you cannot or will not bring your sexuality into the workplace or else you will be fired immedaitely, and this goes for straights, gay and/or any other that goes against company policy in life.
> 
> Being gay is a personal private issue, and it is not compatible with the workplace or public space, because it is a sexual issue or choice that should remain private and between the people who are involved in such a thing, just like it is for straights for whom it has been forever when it comes to that which I have listed above as well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So a man should not bring his wife to any business event because that is a personal issue.
> "Let me inbtroduce me to my wife" is a personal issue? You are beyond stupid with your remarks. If a gay woman brings her partner to a business event and introduces her as "my partner" that should not be allowed?
> Give it up man. If us red necks in Georgia can figure that this is A NON ISSUE, then you sure can.
> Gay this and that is a NON ISSUE. Cathy can say and do as he wants but he is an old fogey and most of the franchise owners could CARE LESS about gay folk.
> And I also have a family member that OWNS 2 franchises. NO WHERE in any of the requirements is there any of the goobly gook you speak of in the contract for owning a Chik Fil A.
> Chicken sammiches-gay marriage. There IS NO connection. It is a business.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Why does it have to be a woman and a woman or a man and a man as being married in the situation, I mean why is this sooooo important to this community now ? It goes against the grain and they know it, but they keep pushing the issue so hard against the grain, but why ? It will only bring more trouble their way, because America isn't ready for them to be married and flaunting that in front of the children for whom are still being taught by a majority that it is not the way it is supposed to be in life. Why all the trouble in which to be looked for constantly by this group I wonder ? Are they being led by the devil or something ?
Click to expand...


The US isn't ready for gay marriage?
Six states (CT, IA, MA, NH, NY, and VT) plus Washington, D.C. already have the freedom to marry for same-sex couples. In 2012, the legislatures in MD, NJ, and WA passed freedom to marry bills that have not yet taken effect. In NJ, work is underway to override the governor's veto, while in MD and WA, ballot measures to block the freedom to marry must be defeated on the November ballot. 

MD, NM, and RI explicitly respect out-of-state marriages of same-sex couples, while nine states now offer broad protections short of marriage. DE, HI, IL, NJ, and RI allow civil union, while CA, OR, NV, and WA offer broad domestic partnership. Four other states (CO, ME, MD, WI) have more limited domestic partnership. 

With these advances, a record number of Americans live in states that recognize relationships between same-sex couples: 

Over 16% of the U.S. population lives in a state that either has the freedom to marry or honors out-of-state marriages of same-sex couples.
Over 35% of the U.S. population lives in a state with either marriage or a broad legal status such as civil union or domestic partnership.
Over 42% of the U.S. population lives in a state that provides some form of protections for gay couples.


----------



## beagle9

Gadawg73 said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *The gays *are screaming that they believe Cathy is intolerant because Cathy disagrees with the opinions of gays on gay marriage.
> *YOU* are screaming that you believe I am intolerant because I disagree with the opinions of Cathy on gay marriage.
> 
> You and the gays *ARE DOING EXACTLY THE SAME THING*
> 
> 
> 
> No you and the gays are doing the same thing, but you are blaming me for doing what the gays are doing while hiding yours ? I'm confused now.. This has become just one big intolerable mess after another...LOL
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Nope, I said from the start that this was a bad idea for the gays on this one and that what this amounts to is free speech and CAthy has every right to say what he wants to.
> You and the gays said exactly the same thing.
> They said they believed Cathy was intolerant because Cathy disagrees with the gays opinion on gay marriage.
> You said you believed I was intolerant because I disagree with CAthy's opinion on gay marriage.
> Same thing. You and the gays think alike on this one beagle.
> Both of you are wrong, narrow minded on this one.
Click to expand...

You were doing so good and then there you went and done it again. 

Ok, so now why do I have to be wrong and *narrow* minded to ? Why can't I just be wrong with you ? Big Grin   B )


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> So a man should not bring his wife to any business event because that is a personal issue.
> "Let me inbtroduce me to my wife" is a personal issue? You are beyond stupid with your remarks. If a gay woman brings her partner to a business event and introduces her as "my partner" that should not be allowed?
> Give it up man. If us red necks in Georgia can figure that this is A NON ISSUE, then you sure can.
> Gay this and that is a NON ISSUE. Cathy can say and do as he wants but he is an old fogey and most of the franchise owners could CARE LESS about gay folk.
> And I also have a family member that OWNS 2 franchises. NO WHERE in any of the requirements is there any of the goobly gook you speak of in the contract for owning a Chik Fil A.
> Chicken sammiches-gay marriage. There IS NO connection. It is a business.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why does it have to be a woman and a woman or a man and a man as being married in the situation, I mean why is this sooooo important to this community now ? It goes against the grain and they know it, but they keep pushing the issue so hard against the grain, but why ? It will only bring more trouble their way, because America isn't ready for them to be married and flaunting that in front of the children for whom are still being taught by a majority that it is not the way it is supposed to be in life. Why all the trouble in which to be looked for constantly by this group I wonder ? Are they being led by the devil or something ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The US isn't ready for gay marriage?
> Six states (CT, IA, MA, NH, NY, and VT) plus Washington, D.C. already have the freedom to marry for same-sex couples. In 2012, the legislatures in MD, NJ, and WA passed freedom to marry bills that have not yet taken effect. In NJ, work is underway to override the governor's veto, while in MD and WA, ballot measures to block the freedom to marry must be defeated on the November ballot.
> 
> MD, NM, and RI explicitly respect out-of-state marriages of same-sex couples, while nine states now offer broad protections short of marriage. DE, HI, IL, NJ, and RI allow civil union, while CA, OR, NV, and WA offer broad domestic partnership. Four other states (CO, ME, MD, WI) have more limited domestic partnership.
> 
> With these advances, a record number of Americans live in states that recognize relationships between same-sex couples:
> 
> Over 16% of the U.S. population lives in a state that either has the freedom to marry or honors out-of-state marriages of same-sex couples.
> Over 35% of the U.S. population lives in a state with either marriage or a broad legal status such as civil union or domestic partnership.
> Over 42% of the U.S. population lives in a state that provides some form of protections for gay couples.
Click to expand...

Sadly, the way this is all being done these days within many of these issues, is by subverting the will of the American people who are in the moral majority, and this by way of government oppression now against them, where as what these various heavily controversal diverse elements are now doing at every turn when they get the chance, is going against those who are in the moral majority in this nation, in order to try and bring them to their knees finally on many of the issues. They are issues that have been controversal for America when it comes to these types of things for a long long time now, where as within this moral majority, they think that they still have a voice as a moral majority in this nation when clearly they don't.  By using the easily influenced government and rogue biased left leaning activist judges & activist groups, who then influence these judges to rule against the moral majority, and next by way of a left leaning biased media that makes the impression that the people are all on board with this stuff when they are not, is clearly how it is all being done these days as a strategy.  This is being done when we clearly see that the people who are in a moral majority are not on board with all of this stuff at all, yet on and on it all goes until the nations polarized bitter end I guess.

People are going to seperate and become even more polarized in this nation as one group forces itself onto another by way of government backing and oppression against them, even though they may be in the majority and unified on an issue, it doesn't matter about that anymore these days, and sadly the federal government has championed this type of forcing action into it's causes and/or top priority's these days, as it is all being done for votes as we clearly see now, and it realizes not that it is seperating the nation and polarizing it, not bringing it together as they think it all is in the end.

The only thing that can be hoped for now by many who are opposed to these things, is that their time is almost past now, so they won't be around to see what this nation is going to be like in the near future for their grandchildren and then their grandchildren if it last that long. The preview is very disturbing now for many, as they wonder where it had all gone wrong in this nation anymore, but then again they now know why as the mystery has now been revealed to them, and to their understanding.


----------



## Gadawg73

beagle9 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> No you and the gays are doing the same thing, but you are blaming me for doing what the gays are doing while hiding yours ? I'm confused now.. This has become just one big intolerable mess after another...LOL
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nope, I said from the start that this was a bad idea for the gays on this one and that what this amounts to is free speech and CAthy has every right to say what he wants to.
> You and the gays said exactly the same thing.
> They said they believed Cathy was intolerant because Cathy disagrees with the gays opinion on gay marriage.
> You said you believed I was intolerant because I disagree with CAthy's opinion on gay marriage.
> Same thing. You and the gays think alike on this one beagle.
> Both of you are wrong, narrow minded on this one.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You were doing so good and then there you went and done it again.
> 
> Ok, so now why do I have to be wrong and *narrow* minded to ? Why can't I just be wrong with you ? Big Grin   B )
Click to expand...


"went and done it again" 
You must also be from Georgia.


----------



## beagle9

Gadawg73 said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nope, I said from the start that this was a bad idea for the gays on this one and that what this amounts to is free speech and CAthy has every right to say what he wants to.
> You and the gays said exactly the same thing.
> They said they believed Cathy was intolerant because Cathy disagrees with the gays opinion on gay marriage.
> You said you believed I was intolerant because I disagree with CAthy's opinion on gay marriage.
> Same thing. You and the gays think alike on this one beagle.
> Both of you are wrong, narrow minded on this one.
> 
> 
> 
> You were doing so good and then there you went and done it again.
> 
> Ok, so now why do I have to be wrong and *narrow* minded to ? Why can't I just be wrong with you ? Big Grin   B )
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "went and done it again"
> You must also be from Georgia.
Click to expand...

I am...Savannah actually..


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Why does it have to be a woman and a woman or a man and a man as being married in the situation, I mean why is this sooooo important to this community now ? It goes against the grain and they know it, but they keep pushing the issue so hard against the grain, but why ? It will only bring more trouble their way, because America isn't ready for them to be married and flaunting that in front of the children for whom are still being taught by a majority that it is not the way it is supposed to be in life. Why all the trouble in which to be looked for constantly by this group I wonder ? Are they being led by the devil or something ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The US isn't ready for gay marriage?
> Six states (CT, IA, MA, NH, NY, and VT) plus Washington, D.C. already have the freedom to marry for same-sex couples. In 2012, the legislatures in MD, NJ, and WA passed freedom to marry bills that have not yet taken effect. In NJ, work is underway to override the governor's veto, while in MD and WA, ballot measures to block the freedom to marry must be defeated on the November ballot.
> 
> MD, NM, and RI explicitly respect out-of-state marriages of same-sex couples, while nine states now offer broad protections short of marriage. DE, HI, IL, NJ, and RI allow civil union, while CA, OR, NV, and WA offer broad domestic partnership. Four other states (CO, ME, MD, WI) have more limited domestic partnership.
> 
> With these advances, a record number of Americans live in states that recognize relationships between same-sex couples:
> 
> Over 16% of the U.S. population lives in a state that either has the freedom to marry or honors out-of-state marriages of same-sex couples.
> Over 35% of the U.S. population lives in a state with either marriage or a broad legal status such as civil union or domestic partnership.
> Over 42% of the U.S. population lives in a state that provides some form of protections for gay couples.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Sadly, the way this is all being done these days within many of these issues, is by subverting the will of the American people who are in the moral majority, and this by way of government oppression now against them, where as what these various heavily controversal diverse elements are now doing at every turn when they get the chance, is going against those who are in the moral majority in this nation, in order to try and bring them to their knees finally on many of the issues. They are issues that have been controversal for America when it comes to these types of things for a long long time now, where as within this moral majority, they think that they still have a voice as a moral majority in this nation when clearly they don't.  By using the easily influenced government and rogue biased left leaning activist judges & activist groups, who then influence these judges to rule against the moral majority, and next by way of a left leaning biased media that makes the impression that the people are all on board with this stuff when they are not, is clearly how it is all being done these days as a strategy.  This is being done when we clearly see that the people who are in a moral majority are not on board with all of this stuff at all, yet on and on it all goes until the nations polarized bitter end I guess.
> 
> People are going to seperate and become even more polarized in this nation as one group forces itself onto another by way of government backing and oppression against them, even though they may be in the majority and unified on an issue, it doesn't matter about that anymore these days, and sadly the federal government has championed this type of forcing action into it's causes and/or top priority's these days, as it is all being done for votes as we clearly see now, and it realizes not that it is seperating the nation and polarizing it, not bringing it together as they think it all is in the end.
> 
> The only thing that can be hoped for now by many who are opposed to these things, is that their time is almost past now, so they won't be around to see what this nation is going to be like in the near future for their grandchildren and then their grandchildren if it last that long. The preview is very disturbing now for many, as they wonder where it had all gone wrong in this nation anymore, but then again they now know why as the mystery has now been revealed to them, and to their understanding.
Click to expand...


The majority doesn't get to choose how the minority live their lives, that's just not how America works. If you don't like that the slaves have been freed, then just try not to think about it. There's nothing you can do about it anyways, so why worry?


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> The US isn't ready for gay marriage?
> Six states (CT, IA, MA, NH, NY, and VT) plus Washington, D.C. already have the freedom to marry for same-sex couples. In 2012, the legislatures in MD, NJ, and WA passed freedom to marry bills that have not yet taken effect. In NJ, work is underway to override the governor's veto, while in MD and WA, ballot measures to block the freedom to marry must be defeated on the November ballot.
> 
> MD, NM, and RI explicitly respect out-of-state marriages of same-sex couples, while nine states now offer broad protections short of marriage. DE, HI, IL, NJ, and RI allow civil union, while CA, OR, NV, and WA offer broad domestic partnership. Four other states (CO, ME, MD, WI) have more limited domestic partnership.
> 
> With these advances, a record number of Americans live in states that recognize relationships between same-sex couples:
> 
> Over 16% of the U.S. population lives in a state that either has the freedom to marry or honors out-of-state marriages of same-sex couples.
> Over 35% of the U.S. population lives in a state with either marriage or a broad legal status such as civil union or domestic partnership.
> Over 42% of the U.S. population lives in a state that provides some form of protections for gay couples.
> 
> 
> 
> Sadly, the way this is all being done these days within many of these issues, is by subverting the will of the American people who are in the moral majority, and this by way of government oppression now against them, where as what these various heavily controversal diverse elements are now doing at every turn when they get the chance, is going against those who are in the moral majority in this nation, in order to try and bring them to their knees finally on many of the issues. They are issues that have been controversal for America when it comes to these types of things for a long long time now, where as within this moral majority, they think that they still have a voice as a moral majority in this nation when clearly they don't.  By using the easily influenced government and rogue biased left leaning activist judges & activist groups, who then influence these judges to rule against the moral majority, and next by way of a left leaning biased media that makes the impression that the people are all on board with this stuff when they are not, is clearly how it is all being done these days as a strategy.  This is being done when we clearly see that the people who are in a moral majority are not on board with all of this stuff at all, yet on and on it all goes until the nations polarized bitter end I guess.
> 
> People are going to seperate and become even more polarized in this nation as one group forces itself onto another by way of government backing and oppression against them, even though they may be in the majority and unified on an issue, it doesn't matter about that anymore these days, and sadly the federal government has championed this type of forcing action into it's causes and/or top priority's these days, as it is all being done for votes as we clearly see now, and it realizes not that it is seperating the nation and polarizing it, not bringing it together as they think it all is in the end.
> 
> The only thing that can be hoped for now by many who are opposed to these things, is that their time is almost past now, so they won't be around to see what this nation is going to be like in the near future for their grandchildren and then their grandchildren if it last that long. The preview is very disturbing now for many, as they wonder where it had all gone wrong in this nation anymore, but then again they now know why as the mystery has now been revealed to them, and to their understanding.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The majority doesn't get to choose how the minority live their lives, that's just not how America works. If you don't like that the slaves have been freed, then just try not to think about it. There's nothing you can do about it anyways, so why worry?
Click to expand...

And again the black struggle is invoked for empowerment upon the one side of the argument, even though it doesn't really apply...Sheesh.

I am estatic that slavery was abolished in the nation, as it was not right to enslave a human being, unless that human being was a danger to others or him and/or herself, in which it still remains so with criminals/prisoners in the nation that fill the prisons right now to date. The race card is always played in many issues, even though that card does not apply.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sadly, the way this is all being done these days within many of these issues, is by subverting the will of the American people who are in the moral majority, and this by way of government oppression now against them, where as what these various heavily controversal diverse elements are now doing at every turn when they get the chance, is going against those who are in the moral majority in this nation, in order to try and bring them to their knees finally on many of the issues. They are issues that have been controversal for America when it comes to these types of things for a long long time now, where as within this moral majority, they think that they still have a voice as a moral majority in this nation when clearly they don't.  By using the easily influenced government and rogue biased left leaning activist judges & activist groups, who then influence these judges to rule against the moral majority, and next by way of a left leaning biased media that makes the impression that the people are all on board with this stuff when they are not, is clearly how it is all being done these days as a strategy.  This is being done when we clearly see that the people who are in a moral majority are not on board with all of this stuff at all, yet on and on it all goes until the nations polarized bitter end I guess.
> 
> People are going to seperate and become even more polarized in this nation as one group forces itself onto another by way of government backing and oppression against them, even though they may be in the majority and unified on an issue, it doesn't matter about that anymore these days, and sadly the federal government has championed this type of forcing action into it's causes and/or top priority's these days, as it is all being done for votes as we clearly see now, and it realizes not that it is seperating the nation and polarizing it, not bringing it together as they think it all is in the end.
> 
> The only thing that can be hoped for now by many who are opposed to these things, is that their time is almost past now, so they won't be around to see what this nation is going to be like in the near future for their grandchildren and then their grandchildren if it last that long. The preview is very disturbing now for many, as they wonder where it had all gone wrong in this nation anymore, but then again they now know why as the mystery has now been revealed to them, and to their understanding.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The majority doesn't get to choose how the minority live their lives, that's just not how America works. If you don't like that the slaves have been freed, then just try not to think about it. There's nothing you can do about it anyways, so why worry?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And again the black struggle is invoked for empowerment upon the one side of the argument, even though it doesn't really apply...Sheesh.
> 
> I am estatic that slavery was abolished in the nation, as it was not right to enslave a human being, unless that human being was a danger to others or him and/or herself, in which it still remains so with criminals/prisoners in the nation that fill the prisons right now to date. The race card is always played in many issues, even though that card does not apply.
Click to expand...


Explain why the black struggle isn't similar to the gay struggle. Both are looking for acceptance as a full human being.
Like I said, the majority doesn't get to tell the minority how to live in the US. The courts are making that clearer every day. 
Anyways, just like with blacks, there will always be hard core haters no matter which way society goes. Is that similar?


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> Explain why the black struggle isn't similar to the gay struggle. Both are looking for acceptance as a full human being.
> Like I said, the majority doesn't get to tell the minority how to live in the US. The courts are making that clearer every day. Anyways, just like with blacks, there will always be hard core haters no matter which way society goes. Is that similar?



Two totally different set of issues altogether and you know it, but it has to be linked or there will be no power or empowerment of one by adoption of as it's equal somehow of the other, and so if they are not linked it has become the fear of the ones adopting the black struggle as their own now, that they will fail if cannot make this connection stick. 

This has been a learned thing in society by groups, and especially once they saw or realized the empowerment of the blacks by the government and the courts upon their issue within the nation, where as they (other groups) figure that it could be done in the same way for them if could convince the government & the courts that the their issues are exactly the same issues by coupling them together, when they are not the same at all. Now we are learning that there is a huge problem that has since taken place, of the government trying to pick winners and losers based upon the criteria in which it decided that it should use or go by when supporting or empowering groups over another, because it uses a broad brush that allows some or in some cases many who are in and amongst these groups, to then abuse others outside the group with almost impunity while operating from within these groups, where as the abusers then have the government backing and support while doing so very shockingly enough, thus (the slippery slope syndrone is now revealed), in all of these things.

Should all minority's now, get to tell the majority how to live their lives, and this by government intervention or the courts, even if the majority are living peaceful Christian lives, yet they are lives or lifestyles in which certain minorities detest and do hate? Then wildly enough these haters wish to use the courts and the government to overpower them somehow, and this because their numbers against the majority are weak, but if the feds and the courts get behind them WOW. This has become a major problem in America these days, where as formed or allied groups are chipping away at the majoirty and their American dreams in this nation, and making the majority captives to their will even though they are in the minority while doing this.

Yes, ok just like say within the black group you mention, there will always be hard core haters or vengence seekers in that group, just like with the gay's where as there will be the same, oh wait a minute, well maybe not because the two issues and struggles are not the same are they ? 

What is the same however in this nation now or has become more unified together, is the sinners or haters that are now out to destroy the christians at every turn they take, yet they need the ignorance of government to back them and to see them through it all.

Now this struggle amongst the groups, is as old as this world is, so what comes next I wonder in it all ?


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Explain why the black struggle isn't similar to the gay struggle. Both are looking for acceptance as a full human being.
> Like I said, the majority doesn't get to tell the minority how to live in the US. The courts are making that clearer every day. Anyways, just like with blacks, there will always be hard core haters no matter which way society goes. Is that similar?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Two totally different set of issues altogether and you know it, but it has to be linked or there will be no power or empowerment of one by adoption of as it's equal somehow of the other, and so if they are not linked it has become the fear of the ones adopting the black struggle as their own now, that they will fail if cannot make this connection stick.
> 
> This has been a learned thing in society by groups, and especially once they saw or realized the empowerment of the blacks by the government and the courts upon their issue within the nation, where as they (other groups) figure that it could be done in the same way for them if could convince the government & the courts that the their issues are exactly the same issues by coupling them together, when they are not the same at all. Now we are learning that there is a huge problem that has since taken place, of the government trying to pick winners and losers based upon the criteria in which it decided that it should use or go by when supporting or empowering groups over another, because it uses a broad brush that allows some or in some cases many who are in and amongst these groups, to then abuse others outside the group with almost impunity while operating from within these groups, where as the abusers then have the government backing and support while doing so very shockingly enough, thus (the slippery slope syndrone is now revealed), in all of these things.
> 
> Should all minority's now, get to tell the majority how to live their lives, and this by government intervention or the courts, even if the majority are living peaceful Christian lives, yet they are lives or lifestyles in which certain minorities detest and do hate? Then wildly enough these haters wish to use the courts and the government to overpower them somehow, and this because their numbers against the majority are weak, but if the feds and the courts get behind them WOW. This has become a major problem in America these days, where as formed or allied groups are chipping away at the majoirty and their American dreams in this nation, and making the majority captives to their will even though they are in the minority while doing this.
> 
> Yes, ok just like say within the black group you mention, there will always be hard core haters or vengence seekers in that group, just like with the gay's where as there will be the same, oh wait a minute, well maybe not because the two issues and struggles are not the same are they ?
> 
> What is the same however in this nation now or has become more unified together, is the sinners or haters that are now out to destroy the christians at every turn they take, yet they need the ignorance of government to back them and to see them through it all.
> 
> Now this struggle amongst the groups, is as old as this world is, so what comes next I wonder in it all ?
Click to expand...


For you it's a question of who gets to tell whom how to live, when in reality it's about making everyone EQUAL. If you have something, you can't deny it to others just because you don't like them, it has to be available equally to everyone. You can't stand up and say "only meals with meat can be called breakfast, lunch and supper" because you don't agree with vegetarians. The US doesn't work that way. maybe you should move to Iran? They hate gays too and pass laws against them. You'd love it there.

PS You still didn't explain WHY the black struggle and the gay struggle don't have things in common. You're only defense was "Two totally different set of issues altogether and you know it,". No I don't know. In fact, I know quite the opposite.


----------



## Gadawg73

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> The US isn't ready for gay marriage?
> Six states (CT, IA, MA, NH, NY, and VT) plus Washington, D.C. already have the freedom to marry for same-sex couples. In 2012, the legislatures in MD, NJ, and WA passed freedom to marry bills that have not yet taken effect. In NJ, work is underway to override the governor's veto, while in MD and WA, ballot measures to block the freedom to marry must be defeated on the November ballot.
> 
> MD, NM, and RI explicitly respect out-of-state marriages of same-sex couples, while nine states now offer broad protections short of marriage. DE, HI, IL, NJ, and RI allow civil union, while CA, OR, NV, and WA offer broad domestic partnership. Four other states (CO, ME, MD, WI) have more limited domestic partnership.
> 
> With these advances, a record number of Americans live in states that recognize relationships between same-sex couples:
> 
> Over 16% of the U.S. population lives in a state that either has the freedom to marry or honors out-of-state marriages of same-sex couples.
> Over 35% of the U.S. population lives in a state with either marriage or a broad legal status such as civil union or domestic partnership.
> Over 42% of the U.S. population lives in a state that provides some form of protections for gay couples.
> 
> 
> 
> Sadly, the way this is all being done these days within many of these issues, is by subverting the will of the American people who are in the moral majority, and this by way of government oppression now against them, where as what these various heavily controversal diverse elements are now doing at every turn when they get the chance, is going against those who are in the moral majority in this nation, in order to try and bring them to their knees finally on many of the issues. They are issues that have been controversal for America when it comes to these types of things for a long long time now, where as within this moral majority, they think that they still have a voice as a moral majority in this nation when clearly they don't.  By using the easily influenced government and rogue biased left leaning activist judges & activist groups, who then influence these judges to rule against the moral majority, and next by way of a left leaning biased media that makes the impression that the people are all on board with this stuff when they are not, is clearly how it is all being done these days as a strategy.  This is being done when we clearly see that the people who are in a moral majority are not on board with all of this stuff at all, yet on and on it all goes until the nations polarized bitter end I guess.
> 
> People are going to seperate and become even more polarized in this nation as one group forces itself onto another by way of government backing and oppression against them, even though they may be in the majority and unified on an issue, it doesn't matter about that anymore these days, and sadly the federal government has championed this type of forcing action into it's causes and/or top priority's these days, as it is all being done for votes as we clearly see now, and it realizes not that it is seperating the nation and polarizing it, not bringing it together as they think it all is in the end.
> 
> The only thing that can be hoped for now by many who are opposed to these things, is that their time is almost past now, so they won't be around to see what this nation is going to be like in the near future for their grandchildren and then their grandchildren if it last that long. The preview is very disturbing now for many, as they wonder where it had all gone wrong in this nation anymore, but then again they now know why as the mystery has now been revealed to them, and to their understanding.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The majority doesn't get to choose how the minority live their lives, that's just not how America works. If you don't like that the slaves have been freed, then just try not to think about it. There's nothing you can do about it anyways, so why worry?
Click to expand...


Amazes me how many fools believe we are a majority, mob rule, country.
The Constitution protects the rights OF THE INDIVIDUAL, THE MINORITY.
We are a nation OF LAWS, not of majority rule and the various and changing like the wind religgous views of men.
The Founders specifically set it up that way because they knew full well how religion, the Christian religion at that time, FUCKS GOVERNMENTS UP ALL OVER EUROPE, and wanted to ban thgm from doing so here.
Smart fellows they were.


----------



## Gadawg73

The days of allowing religous opinions to make gay folk 2nd class citizens are over.


----------



## Againsheila

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> The majority doesn't get to choose how the minority live their lives, that's just not how America works. If you don't like that the slaves have been freed, then just try not to think about it. There's nothing you can do about it anyways, so why worry?
> 
> 
> 
> And again the black struggle is invoked for empowerment upon the one side of the argument, even though it doesn't really apply...Sheesh.
> 
> I am estatic that slavery was abolished in the nation, as it was not right to enslave a human being, unless that human being was a danger to others or him and/or herself, in which it still remains so with criminals/prisoners in the nation that fill the prisons right now to date. The race card is always played in many issues, even though that card does not apply.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Explain why the black struggle isn't similar to the gay struggle. Both are looking for acceptance as a full human being.
> Like I said, the majority doesn't get to tell the minority how to live in the US. The courts are making that clearer every day.
> Anyways, just like with blacks, there will always be hard core haters no matter which way society goes. Is that similar?
Click to expand...


If you have to ask the question, you will NEVER understand the answer.  Keep on comparing gays to blacks and no one will ever take you seriously.


----------



## beagle9

Gadawg73 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sadly, the way this is all being done these days within many of these issues, is by subverting the will of the American people who are in the moral majority, and this by way of government oppression now against them, where as what these various heavily controversal diverse elements are now doing at every turn when they get the chance, is going against those who are in the moral majority in this nation, in order to try and bring them to their knees finally on many of the issues. They are issues that have been controversal for America when it comes to these types of things for a long long time now, where as within this moral majority, they think that they still have a voice as a moral majority in this nation when clearly they don't.  By using the easily influenced government and rogue biased left leaning activist judges & activist groups, who then influence these judges to rule against the moral majority, and next by way of a left leaning biased media that makes the impression that the people are all on board with this stuff when they are not, is clearly how it is all being done these days as a strategy.  This is being done when we clearly see that the people who are in a moral majority are not on board with all of this stuff at all, yet on and on it all goes until the nations polarized bitter end I guess.
> 
> People are going to seperate and become even more polarized in this nation as one group forces itself onto another by way of government backing and oppression against them, even though they may be in the majority and unified on an issue, it doesn't matter about that anymore these days, and sadly the federal government has championed this type of forcing action into it's causes and/or top priority's these days, as it is all being done for votes as we clearly see now, and it realizes not that it is seperating the nation and polarizing it, not bringing it together as they think it all is in the end.
> 
> The only thing that can be hoped for now by many who are opposed to these things, is that their time is almost past now, so they won't be around to see what this nation is going to be like in the near future for their grandchildren and then their grandchildren if it last that long. The preview is very disturbing now for many, as they wonder where it had all gone wrong in this nation anymore, but then again they now know why as the mystery has now been revealed to them, and to their understanding.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The majority doesn't get to choose how the minority live their lives, that's just not how America works. If you don't like that the slaves have been freed, then just try not to think about it. There's nothing you can do about it anyways, so why worry?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Amazes me how many fools believe we are a majority, mob rule, country.
> The Constitution protects the rights OF THE INDIVIDUAL, THE MINORITY.
> We are a nation OF LAWS, not of majority rule and the various and changing like the wind religgous views of men.
> The Founders specifically set it up that way because they knew full well how religion, the Christian religion at that time, FUCKS GOVERNMENTS UP ALL OVER EUROPE, and wanted to ban thgm from doing so here.
> Smart fellows they were.
Click to expand...

You speak of a majority as being a mob or a criminal element and/or a massive group who wants what is bad for their country, and this instead of what is good for their country, along with what is good for their children to be raised in according to that good.

There are many examples of a few now trying to subvert the will of the people in this nation who are in the good majority, and they have figured out how to do so by way of infiltration into the government, court system/law and justice system in this nation, then they use these systems to oppress with and to dictate with against the good majority who are not a threat to this nation, and are not a criminal element in this nation, and never was a threat or hurt to this nation for many many years in it's developement of or it's modernization of. Now they (the good citizens) have been made a threat now by an administration and it's leftist ilk infiltrators, who want not equal rights anylonger as according to these few who weild great power now, but instead want dominance over. 

This is the only way they think they can win in all of this culture war, because they refuse to assimilate/co-exist or respect others lifestyles as American, that are lived in a moral and decent respectful way in this nation as it were. If you don't believe me, then just take a look around to see what is happening in all of this, and you will then realize the truth.


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Explain why the black struggle isn't similar to the gay struggle. Both are looking for acceptance as a full human being.
> Like I said, the majority doesn't get to tell the minority how to live in the US. The courts are making that clearer every day. Anyways, just like with blacks, there will always be hard core haters no matter which way society goes. Is that similar?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Two totally different set of issues altogether and you know it, but it has to be linked or there will be no power or empowerment of one by adoption of as it's equal somehow of the other, and so if they are not linked it has become the fear of the ones adopting the black struggle as their own now, that they will fail if cannot make this connection stick.
> 
> This has been a learned thing in society by groups, and especially once they saw or realized the empowerment of the blacks by the government and the courts upon their issue within the nation, where as they (other groups) figure that it could be done in the same way for them if could convince the government & the courts that the their issues are exactly the same issues by coupling them together, when they are not the same at all. Now we are learning that there is a huge problem that has since taken place, of the government trying to pick winners and losers based upon the criteria in which it decided that it should use or go by when supporting or empowering groups over another, because it uses a broad brush that allows some or in some cases many who are in and amongst these groups, to then abuse others outside the group with almost impunity while operating from within these groups, where as the abusers then have the government backing and support while doing so very shockingly enough, thus (the slippery slope syndrone is now revealed), in all of these things.
> 
> Should all minority's now, get to tell the majority how to live their lives, and this by government intervention or the courts, even if the majority are living peaceful Christian lives, yet they are lives or lifestyles in which certain minorities detest and do hate? Then wildly enough these haters wish to use the courts and the government to overpower them somehow, and this because their numbers against the majority are weak, but if the feds and the courts get behind them WOW. This has become a major problem in America these days, where as formed or allied groups are chipping away at the majoirty and their American dreams in this nation, and making the majority captives to their will even though they are in the minority while doing this.
> 
> Yes, ok just like say within the black group you mention, there will always be hard core haters or vengence seekers in that group, just like with the gay's where as there will be the same, oh wait a minute, well maybe not because the two issues and struggles are not the same are they ?
> 
> What is the same however in this nation now or has become more unified together, is the sinners or haters that are now out to destroy the christians at every turn they take, yet they need the ignorance of government to back them and to see them through it all.
> 
> Now this struggle amongst the groups, is as old as this world is, so what comes next I wonder in it all ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> For you it's a question of who gets to tell whom how to live, when in reality it's about making everyone EQUAL. If you have something, you can't deny it to others just because you don't like them, it has to be available equally to everyone. You can't stand up and say "only meals with meat can be called breakfast, lunch and supper" because you don't agree with vegetarians. The US doesn't work that way. maybe you should move to Iran? They hate gays too and pass laws against them. You'd love it there.
> 
> PS You still didn't explain WHY the black struggle and the gay struggle don't have things in common. You're only defense was "Two totally different set of issues altogether and you know it,". No I don't know. In fact, I know quite the opposite.
Click to expand...


So if I have a lawn mower, and my next door neighbor doesn't, and he is a minority on top of that, then according to you I am supposed to share that lawn mower with him, and this regardless of him not proving that he will take care of the lawn mower or even sharing in the expense of the repairs if it breaks either? You see how your ideology on life is flawed here badly ? Next the government stops by and says to me, don't you have a lawn mower ? Yes I do, then I am ordering you to help your neighbor next door to cut his grass with it, and then the government says to me that if you do this, we might let you keep that lawn mower, but if you don't, then we will be by to take it and give it to him.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> For you it's a question of who gets to tell whom how to live, when in reality it's about making everyone EQUAL. If you have something, you can't deny it to others just because you don't like them, it has to be available equally to everyone. You can't stand up and say "only meals with meat can be called breakfast, lunch and supper" because you don't agree with vegetarians. The US doesn't work that way. maybe you should move to Iran? They hate gays too and pass laws against them. You'd love it there.
> 
> PS You still didn't explain WHY the black struggle and the gay struggle don't have things in common. You're only defense was "Two totally different set of issues altogether and you know it,". No I don't know. In fact, I know quite the opposite.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So if I have a lawn mower, and my next door neighbor doesn't, and he is a minority on top of that, then according to you I am supposed to share that lawn mower with him, and this regardless of him not proving that he will take care of the lawn mower or even sharing in the expense of the repairs if it breaks either? You see how your ideology on life is flawed here badly ? Next the government stops by and says to me, don't you have a lawn mower ? Yes I do, then I am ordering you to help your neighbor next door to cut his grass with it, and then the government says to me that if you do this, we might let you keep that lawn mower, but if you don't, then we will be by to take it and give it to him.
Click to expand...


I was talking about rights. If you have a right, it has to be everyone's right, not just yours, and you can't deny them the same right you enjoy just because you don't like anal sex.

PS You still didn't explain WHY the black struggle and the gay struggle don't have things in common. You're only defense was "Two totally different set of issues altogether and you know it,". No I don't know. In fact, I know quite the opposite.


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> I was talking about rights. If you have a right, it has to be everyone's right, not just yours,



I have a right to own my own lawnmower in America, and to cut my own grass with it in America, so should another have a right to use my lawn mower as well if he so chooses, in order to cut his own grass with to ? The government & people like you would eventually make the case for this type of thing these days, so where does it all end, in some sort of utopic fantasy land dreamed up ? Where is the incentives for people to repspect each others individual morally founded rights anymore ? Where is the incentive for people to do better in life anymore ? All the incentives are being taken away by people like you along with an out of touch federal government and court system, that is taking peoples rights away, instead of protecting the moral majority rights as it once did and should always do.



ima said:


> You can't deny them the same right you enjoy just because you don't like anal sex.



So this is what it is all about eh? You think I don't want to allow George to say to Billy in private, "Billy I am sorry, but not tonight says George, because I have diaria".? 

What George and Billy do in private is their own business, just don't bring it out or flaunt it in front of my kids, because it is not your right to do this against my right for you not to.

All rights in which people want to have in their cultures or lives are not equal, unless the people decide as a united people in a good majority that they are. How do you think that we have gotten this far in America over the last 200 years ? Not by what is going on today that's for sure. I mean look at the nation because of all of this that you speak right now, it is polarized beyond belief, and it is only going to get worse I think.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> I was talking about rights. If you have a right, it has to be everyone's right, not just yours,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have a right to own my own lawnmower in America, and to cut my own grass with it in America, so should another have a right to use my lawn mower as well if he so chooses, in order to cut his own grass with to ? The government & people like you would eventually make the case for this type of thing these days, so where does it all end, in some sort of utopic fantasy land dreamed up ? Where is the incentives for people to repspect each others individual morally founded rights anymore ? Where is the incentive for people to do better in life anymore ? All the incentives are being taken away by people like you along with an out of touch federal government and court system, that is taking peoples rights away, instead of protecting the moral majority rights as it once did and should always do.
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> You can't deny them the same right you enjoy just because you don't like anal sex.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So this is what it is all about eh? You think I don't want to allow George to say to Billy in private, "Billy I am sorry, but not tonight says George, because I have diaria".?
> 
> What George and Billy do in private is their own business, just don't bring it out or flaunt it in front of my kids, because it is not your right to do this against my right for you not to.
> 
> All rights in which people want to have in their cultures or lives are not equal, unless the people decide as a united people in a good majority that they are. How do you think that we have gotten this far in America over the last 200 years ? Not by what is going on today that's for sure. I mean look at the nation because of all of this that you speak right now, it is polarized beyond belief, and it is only going to get worse I think.
Click to expand...


He doesn't have a right to come and steal your lawnmower, lol. But he'll have the same right as you do to cut his own grass with his own lawnmower, just like you do.

So you get to flaunt your homo-hating lifestyle in front of my kids and nobody complains because I can explain to them what's going on and why people hate gays. You'd rather sweep the whole thing under the carpet.


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> So you get to flaunt your homo-hating lifestyle in front of my kids and nobody complains, because I can explain to them what's going on and why people hate gays. You'd rather sweep the whole thing under the carpet.



No you are wrong, you are the one complaining, and this is why you attacked me on this article over Mr.Cathy and Chic-Fil-A's freedom of expression to speak what it believes when he was asked about an opinion, and this upon his religious beliefs held under that specific roof in America, when it comes to gay's being married or getting married. 

I do explain to my kids about the birds and the bee's found in the Godly version of what is normal and right, so I ain't sweeping nothing under the rug or carpet on my end, just like you ain't either you say, but remember what I said "whom so ever teaches the Lord's little ones to sin, it would be best for him to tie a talent around his neck, and to sink himself to the bottom of the sea". It's really that simple really.. Actually I don't hate no one, and I am tolerant of gay's, but I don't have to say to them that they are right or wrong out in the street, and I don't have to say to them that I don't agree with them either out in the street, because I don't allow their lifestyle to intertwine with my lifestyle & space or vice-versa. The public space and everyone respecting each other in that space (upholding certain standards of decency) is essential to American unity, but what goes on in those gay pride parades is not what the ideals of decency is all about according to most in the nation, but to the gay's it is normal somehow ? I think they know it isn't normal, but they are guided by their lust and sin in that lust, in which blinds them to what is or was normal in their lives going way back. 

Just as long as they respect my views and space on such matters, we all get along just fine in life. This nation is big, and I don't see why there isn't enough space for people to live their own lives apart from those who want to live their lives in an opposite way. The only time this becomes a problem in America, is when people cross the lines, and try to actively push their lifestyles on or into anothers space when it is not accepted into that space (marriage is a sacred space held onto by religious beliefs). The don't ask don't tell was the right solution for the military in that space, but they weren't satisfied with that either, so away they go onward with Obama's help shockingly, but to what end I do wonder will it all continue to go in this nation now ?


----------



## Gadawg73

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> So you get to flaunt your homo-hating lifestyle in front of my kids and nobody complains, because I can explain to them what's going on and why people hate gays. You'd rather sweep the whole thing under the carpet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No you are wrong, you are the one complaining, and this is why you attacked me on this article over Mr.Cathy and Chic-Fil-A's freedom of expression to speak what it believes when he was asked about an opinion, and this upon his religious beliefs held under that specific roof in America, when it comes to gay's being married or getting married.
> 
> I do explain to my kids about the birds and the bee's found in the Godly version of what is normal and right, so I ain't sweeping nothing under the rug or carpet on my end, just like you ain't either you say, but remember what I said "whom so ever teaches the Lord's little ones to sin, it would be best for him to tie a talent around his neck, and to sink himself to the bottom of the sea". It's really that simple really.. Actually I don't hate no one, and I am tolerant of gay's, but I don't have to say to them that they are right or wrong out in the street, and I don't have to say to them that I don't agree with them either out in the street, because I don't allow their lifestyle to intertwine with my lifestyle & space or vice-versa. The public space and everyone respecting each other in that space (upholding certain standards of decency) is essential to American unity, but what goes on in those gay pride parades is not what the ideals of decency is all about according to most in the nation, but to the gay's it is normal somehow ? I think they know it isn't normal, but they are guided by their lust and sin in that lust, in which blinds them to what is or was normal in their lives going way back.
> 
> Just as long as they respect my views and space on such matters, we all get along just fine in life. This nation is big, and I don't see why there isn't enough space for people to live their own lives apart from those who want to live their lives in an opposite way. The only time this becomes a problem in America, is when people cross the lines, and try to actively push their lifestyles on or into anothers space when it is not accepted into that space (marriage is a sacred space held onto by religious beliefs). The don't ask don't tell was the right solution for the military in that space, but they weren't satisfied with that either, so away they go onward with Obama's help shockingly, but to what end I do wonder will it all continue to go in this nation now ?
Click to expand...


You still have not explained how gay marriage affects your religous beliefs. How does them getting married infinge on your rights *IN ANY WAY?*
You claim this nation is big enough for everyone. If you really mean it you would not be opposed to allowing them to get married. 
You can still be against it totally and be respected. 
I am against many things but do not want to force GOVERNMENT to stop it just because I do not like it.
Talk is cheap so which is it?


----------



## beagle9

Gadawg73 said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> So you get to flaunt your homo-hating lifestyle in front of my kids and nobody complains, because I can explain to them what's going on and why people hate gays. You'd rather sweep the whole thing under the carpet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No you are wrong, you are the one complaining, and this is why you attacked me on this article over Mr.Cathy and Chic-Fil-A's freedom of expression to speak what it believes when he was asked about an opinion, and this upon his religious beliefs held under that specific roof in America, when it comes to gay's being married or getting married.
> 
> I do explain to my kids about the birds and the bee's found in the Godly version of what is normal and right, so I ain't sweeping nothing under the rug or carpet on my end, just like you ain't either you say, but remember what I said "whom so ever teaches the Lord's little ones to sin, it would be best for him to tie a talent around his neck, and to sink himself to the bottom of the sea". It's really that simple really.. Actually I don't hate no one, and I am tolerant of gay's, but I don't have to say to them that they are right or wrong out in the street, and I don't have to say to them that I don't agree with them either out in the street, because I don't allow their lifestyle to intertwine with my lifestyle & space or vice-versa. The public space and everyone respecting each other in that space (upholding certain standards of decency) is essential to American unity, but what goes on in those gay pride parades is not what the ideals of decency is all about according to most in the nation, but to the gay's it is normal somehow ? I think they know it isn't normal, but they are guided by their lust and sin in that lust, in which blinds them to what is or was normal in their lives going way back.
> 
> Just as long as they respect my views and space on such matters, we all get along just fine in life. This nation is big, and I don't see why there isn't enough space for people to live their own lives apart from those who want to live their lives in an opposite way. The only time this becomes a problem in America, is when people cross the lines, and try to actively push their lifestyles on or into anothers space when it is not accepted into that space (marriage is a sacred space held onto by religious beliefs). The don't ask don't tell was the right solution for the military in that space, but they weren't satisfied with that either, so away they go onward with Obama's help shockingly, but to what end I do wonder will it all continue to go in this nation now ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You still have not explained how gay marriage affects your religous beliefs. How does them getting married infinge on your rights *IN ANY WAY?*
> You claim this nation is big enough for everyone. If you really mean it you would not be opposed to allowing them to get married.
> You can still be against it totally and be respected.
> I am against many things but do not want to force GOVERNMENT to stop it just because I do not like it.Talk is cheap so which is it?
Click to expand...


You shouldn't want government to enforce it either, and this against a moral majority whom does not like it in their space in which they have carved out in it all, and laid claim to as an American Christian style family who would see it as abnormal within their space, but that is what is being done in this nation against many peoples long held beliefs inwhich are the opposite of these things, where as the government is forcing people into allowing certain things now by way of the courts and peer pressure from forces who are few but concentrated thus dominating the issues in these ways, even if those things are way against what the people would allow in freedom there of, it is being forced on them anyway. 

Why can't the government just stay out of it, and only enforce the rule of law against anyone who abuses another when breaking the law or commiting an act of abuse against another, in which constitutes breaking the law only ? This should be the only business of the government that it has a stake in within this nation as it has been charged with, among managing it's military and handling properly it's business affairs, and to not be involving itself in fine cutural tuning or toying with areas that it doesn't have a clue on and/or about when it does so, because it makes everything worse when it does these types of things these days, just as it is now doing more and more everyday it seems, and getting it wrong more and more these days it seems. Just look at the nation and the troubles we are having now, but are being swept aside for political correctness that has run amuck, and out of control in this nation now.


----------



## Gadawg73

beagle9 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> No you are wrong, you are the one complaining, and this is why you attacked me on this article over Mr.Cathy and Chic-Fil-A's freedom of expression to speak what it believes when he was asked about an opinion, and this upon his religious beliefs held under that specific roof in America, when it comes to gay's being married or getting married.
> 
> I do explain to my kids about the birds and the bee's found in the Godly version of what is normal and right, so I ain't sweeping nothing under the rug or carpet on my end, just like you ain't either you say, but remember what I said "whom so ever teaches the Lord's little ones to sin, it would be best for him to tie a talent around his neck, and to sink himself to the bottom of the sea". It's really that simple really.. Actually I don't hate no one, and I am tolerant of gay's, but I don't have to say to them that they are right or wrong out in the street, and I don't have to say to them that I don't agree with them either out in the street, because I don't allow their lifestyle to intertwine with my lifestyle & space or vice-versa. The public space and everyone respecting each other in that space (upholding certain standards of decency) is essential to American unity, but what goes on in those gay pride parades is not what the ideals of decency is all about according to most in the nation, but to the gay's it is normal somehow ? I think they know it isn't normal, but they are guided by their lust and sin in that lust, in which blinds them to what is or was normal in their lives going way back.
> 
> Just as long as they respect my views and space on such matters, we all get along just fine in life. This nation is big, and I don't see why there isn't enough space for people to live their own lives apart from those who want to live their lives in an opposite way. The only time this becomes a problem in America, is when people cross the lines, and try to actively push their lifestyles on or into anothers space when it is not accepted into that space (marriage is a sacred space held onto by religious beliefs). The don't ask don't tell was the right solution for the military in that space, but they weren't satisfied with that either, so away they go onward with Obama's help shockingly, but to what end I do wonder will it all continue to go in this nation now ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You still have not explained how gay marriage affects your religous beliefs. How does them getting married infinge on your rights *IN ANY WAY?*
> You claim this nation is big enough for everyone. If you really mean it you would not be opposed to allowing them to get married.
> You can still be against it totally and be respected.
> I am against many things but do not want to force GOVERNMENT to stop it just because I do not like it.Talk is cheap so which is it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You shouldn't want government to enforce it either, and this against a moral majority whom does not like it in their space in which they have carved out in it all, and laid claim to as an American Christian style family who would see it as abnormal within their space, but that is what is being done in this nation against many peoples long held beliefs inwhich are the opposite of these things, where as the government is forcing people into allowing certain things now by way of the courts and peer pressure from forces who are few but concentrated thus dominating the issues in these ways, even if those things are way against what the people would allow in freedom there of, it is being forced on them anyway.
> 
> Why can't the government just stay out of it, and only enforce the rule of law against anyone who abuses another when breaking the law or commiting an act of abuse against another, in which constitutes breaking the law only ? This should be the only business of the government that it has a stake in within this nation as it has been charged with, among managing it's military and handling properly it's business affairs, and to not be involving itself in fine cutural tuning or toying with areas that it doesn't have a clue on and/or about when it does so, because it makes everything worse when it does these types of things these days, just as it is now doing more and more everyday it seems, and getting it wrong more and more these days it seems. Just look at the nation and the troubles we are having now, but are being swept aside for political correctness that has run amuck, and out of control in this nation now.
Click to expand...


What the moral majority wants does not mean a damn thing.
And who decides who is moral and who isn't.
You, I, *GOVERNMENT?*
Allowing gay marriage does not have jack shit to do with any troubles anyone has.
Get real. Quit telling you are a live and let live guy.
We know better so quit shitting us. You want to ban others from doing something that you admit has nothing whatsoever to do with your life and has no affect on you. 
You are a big government closet liberal.


----------



## idb

Eat a hamburger...that'll show those damn homos!!!
In fact, eat two, just to reinforce how strongly you feel about this.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> So you get to flaunt your homo-hating lifestyle in front of my kids and nobody complains, because I can explain to them what's going on and why people hate gays. You'd rather sweep the whole thing under the carpet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No you are wrong, you are the one complaining, and this is why you attacked me on this article over Mr.Cathy and Chic-Fil-A's freedom of expression to speak what it believes when he was asked about an opinion, and this upon his religious beliefs held under that specific roof in America, when it comes to gay's being married or getting married.
> 
> I do explain to my kids about the birds and the bee's found in the Godly version of what is normal and right, so I ain't sweeping nothing under the rug or carpet on my end, just like you ain't either you say, but remember what I said "whom so ever teaches the Lord's little ones to sin, it would be best for him to tie a talent around his neck, and to sink himself to the bottom of the sea". It's really that simple really.. Actually I don't hate no one, and I am tolerant of gay's, but I don't have to say to them that they are right or wrong out in the street, and I don't have to say to them that I don't agree with them either out in the street, because I don't allow their lifestyle to intertwine with my lifestyle & space or vice-versa. The public space and everyone respecting each other in that space (upholding certain standards of decency) is essential to American unity, but what goes on in those gay pride parades is not what the ideals of decency is all about according to most in the nation, but to the gay's it is normal somehow ? I think they know it isn't normal, but they are guided by their lust and sin in that lust, in which blinds them to what is or was normal in their lives going way back.
> 
> Just as long as they respect my views and space on such matters, we all get along just fine in life. This nation is big, and I don't see why there isn't enough space for people to live their own lives apart from those who want to live their lives in an opposite way. The only time this becomes a problem in America, is when people cross the lines, and try to actively push their lifestyles on or into anothers space when it is not accepted into that space (marriage is a sacred space held onto by religious beliefs). The don't ask don't tell was the right solution for the military in that space, but they weren't satisfied with that either, so away they go onward with Obama's help shockingly, but to what end I do wonder will it all continue to go in this nation now ?
Click to expand...


"whom so ever teaches the Lord's little ones to sin, it would be best for him to tie a talent around his neck, and to sink himself to the bottom of the sea". If that's a quote from the bibble, then it's just some random quote that some guy wrote 1500 years ago or so, that's just the writer's own opinion since he can't know what an invisible being would want since no one's ever seen it. Anyways, who made your invisible guy the arbiter of morals?

Tell us, are you against civil unions as well? Because a lot of homo-haters don't even want gays to have the financial benefits from being wed that heteros enjoy.


----------



## beagle9

Gadawg73 said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You still have not explained how gay marriage affects your religous beliefs. How does them getting married infinge on your rights *IN ANY WAY?*
> You claim this nation is big enough for everyone. If you really mean it you would not be opposed to allowing them to get married.
> You can still be against it totally and be respected.
> I am against many things but do not want to force GOVERNMENT to stop it just because I do not like it.Talk is cheap so which is it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You shouldn't want government to enforce it either, and this against a moral majority whom does not like it in their space in which they have carved out in it all, and laid claim to as an American Christian style family who would see it as abnormal within their space, but that is what is being done in this nation against many peoples long held beliefs inwhich are the opposite of these things, where as the government is forcing people into allowing certain things now by way of the courts and peer pressure from forces who are few but concentrated thus dominating the issues in these ways, even if those things are way against what the people would allow in freedom there of, it is being forced on them anyway.
> 
> Why can't the government just stay out of it, and only enforce the rule of law against anyone who abuses another when breaking the law or commiting an act of abuse against another, in which constitutes breaking the law only ? This should be the only business of the government that it has a stake in within this nation as it has been charged with, among managing it's military and handling properly it's business affairs, and to not be involving itself in fine cutural tuning or toying with areas that it doesn't have a clue on and/or about when it does so, because it makes everything worse when it does these types of things these days, just as it is now doing more and more everyday it seems, and getting it wrong more and more these days it seems. Just look at the nation and the troubles we are having now, but are being swept aside for political correctness that has run amuck, and out of control in this nation now.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What the moral majority wants does not mean a damn thing.
> And who decides who is moral and who isn't.
> You, I, *GOVERNMENT?*
> Allowing gay marriage does not have jack shit to do with any troubles anyone has.
> Get real. Quit telling you are a live and let live guy.
> We know better so quit shitting us. You want to ban others from doing something that you admit has nothing whatsoever to do with your life and has no affect on you.
> You are a big government closet liberal.
Click to expand...

Tell me what you think decency and morals are and/or do represent in this nation, and should they be taught in this nation, and if you agree that they should be taught, then by whom should they be taught by ? I mean some one has to be in charge and teaching the flock right ?  Next tell me what the "opposite" of morals are in this nation (the bad part of our society, and this as according to many in opinion of), and how that "opposite" shouldn't be taught in this nation. Give me some examples of both if you will, as it apears that your moral compass just might be a little off or even broken just a little bit maybe, but I could be wrong.

Then I will attend your class on morals and decency next if you want me to. I'll have to bring my bible though, because that will be my text book on any such subject, as it is the only one I know and do carry with me in life. 

What books guide and/or have guided you in life ? Do tell...


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> So you get to flaunt your homo-hating lifestyle in front of my kids and nobody complains, because I can explain to them what's going on and why people hate gays. You'd rather sweep the whole thing under the carpet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No you are wrong, you are the one complaining, and this is why you attacked me on this article over Mr.Cathy and Chic-Fil-A's freedom of expression to speak what it believes when he was asked about an opinion, and this upon his religious beliefs held under that specific roof in America, when it comes to gay's being married or getting married.
> 
> I do explain to my kids about the birds and the bee's found in the Godly version of what is normal and right, so I ain't sweeping nothing under the rug or carpet on my end, just like you ain't either you say, but remember what I said "whom so ever teaches the Lord's little ones to sin, it would be best for him to tie a talent around his neck, and to sink himself to the bottom of the sea". It's really that simple really.. Actually I don't hate no one, and I am tolerant of gay's, but I don't have to say to them that they are right or wrong out in the street, and I don't have to say to them that I don't agree with them either out in the street, because I don't allow their lifestyle to intertwine with my lifestyle & space or vice-versa. The public space and everyone respecting each other in that space (upholding certain standards of decency) is essential to American unity, but what goes on in those gay pride parades is not what the ideals of decency is all about according to most in the nation, but to the gay's it is normal somehow ? I think they know it isn't normal, but they are guided by their lust and sin in that lust, in which blinds them to what is or was normal in their lives going way back.
> 
> Just as long as they respect my views and space on such matters, we all get along just fine in life. This nation is big, and I don't see why there isn't enough space for people to live their own lives apart from those who want to live their lives in an opposite way. The only time this becomes a problem in America, is when people cross the lines, and try to actively push their lifestyles on or into anothers space when it is not accepted into that space (marriage is a sacred space held onto by religious beliefs). The don't ask don't tell was the right solution for the military in that space, but they weren't satisfied with that either, so away they go onward with Obama's help shockingly, but to what end I do wonder will it all continue to go in this nation now ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> "whom so ever teaches the Lord's little ones to sin, it would be best for him to tie a talent around his neck, and to sink himself to the bottom of the sea". If that's a quote from the bibble, then it's just some random quote that some guy wrote 1500 years ago or so, that's just the writer's own opinion since he can't know what an invisible being would want since no one's ever seen it. Anyways, who made your invisible guy the arbiter of morals?
> 
> Tell us, are you against civil unions as well? Because a lot of homo-haters don't even want gays to have the financial benefits from being wed that heteros enjoy.
Click to expand...

What exactly does a civil union entail or mean, and why do people need that in their lives again ? Is it for legal purposes mainly, where as say if two people are living together or not, and one dies maybe or something, then the other person can legally represent or be a claimant in a will or claimant of anothers personal belongings (home, car or property) and such excetra excetra if it is left to that surviving partner in life legally in such a union ?

I can understand and go along with this, if it is in the case of two people living together or not, in which could also include friends from afar, caretakers of the elderly and so on and so forth,  if choose this between those who are of two in number, having sound mind and are of sound body in the agreement process when therefore it is all agreed upon, in that a person is chosen for this legal union or uniting by another for said purposes in life, which is in order to leave one not destitue in a case of sudden death or departure in life excetra excetra.  A civil union could be for many to legally sign up for and/or do for legal purposes, so I would agree with this exisiting among people who want such a thing as this between them in life.. Nothing wrong with that I don't see.

Example:  My aunt may want to leave me her home, because I have lived with her for years taking care of her in a wheel chair, but the rest of the family says over their dead body will I get it, then we could create between us a civil union or agreement of such, where as I could get it legally and garantee her wishes that I would recieve it through such a civil union that we may have gotten for legal purposes right ?


----------



## Gadawg73

beagle9 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You shouldn't want government to enforce it either, and this against a moral majority whom does not like it in their space in which they have carved out in it all, and laid claim to as an American Christian style family who would see it as abnormal within their space, but that is what is being done in this nation against many peoples long held beliefs inwhich are the opposite of these things, where as the government is forcing people into allowing certain things now by way of the courts and peer pressure from forces who are few but concentrated thus dominating the issues in these ways, even if those things are way against what the people would allow in freedom there of, it is being forced on them anyway.
> 
> Why can't the government just stay out of it, and only enforce the rule of law against anyone who abuses another when breaking the law or commiting an act of abuse against another, in which constitutes breaking the law only ? This should be the only business of the government that it has a stake in within this nation as it has been charged with, among managing it's military and handling properly it's business affairs, and to not be involving itself in fine cutural tuning or toying with areas that it doesn't have a clue on and/or about when it does so, because it makes everything worse when it does these types of things these days, just as it is now doing more and more everyday it seems, and getting it wrong more and more these days it seems. Just look at the nation and the troubles we are having now, but are being swept aside for political correctness that has run amuck, and out of control in this nation now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What the moral majority wants does not mean a damn thing.
> And who decides who is moral and who isn't.
> You, I, *GOVERNMENT?*
> Allowing gay marriage does not have jack shit to do with any troubles anyone has.
> Get real. Quit telling you are a live and let live guy.
> We know better so quit shitting us. You want to ban others from doing something that you admit has nothing whatsoever to do with your life and has no affect on you.
> You are a big government closet liberal.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Tell me what you think decency and morals are and/or do represent in this nation, and should they be taught in this nation, and if you agree that they should be taught, then by whom should they be taught by ? I mean some one has to be in charge and teaching the flock right ?  Next tell me what the "opposite" of morals are in this nation (the bad part of our society, and this as according to many in opinion of), and how that "opposite" shouldn't be taught in this nation. Give me some examples of both if you will, as it apears that your moral compass just might be a little off or even broken just a little bit maybe, but I could be wrong.
> 
> Then I will attend your class on morals and decency next if you want me to. I'll have to bring my bible though, because that will be my text book on any such subject, as it is the only one I know and do carry with me in life.
> 
> What books guide and/or have guided you in life ? Do tell...
Click to expand...


It is decent and moral to love thy neighbor.
Jesus said so.
And it was translated almost 300 times in the Bible and is the most repeated phrase in The Bible.
Christians govern themselves accordingly. 
Either you do so or you don't. 
No fence sitting.


----------



## Too Tall

Ravi said:


> The Gadfly said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Luissa said:
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly what? Where did Ravi state she wanted their first amendment rights taken away?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> She quite clearly sides with those who would abridge Mr. Cathey's First Amendment rights by intimidation, Lulu, and that is quite the same thing. I might point out that simply voicing support for traditional marriage is quite some distance from advocating (much less practicing) "intolerance" of homosexuals, a point lost among those liberals who attempted to create a tempest in a teapot, and got thoroughly rebuked for their effort (even by some of their own, I note). It is more than a little hypocritical to demand "tolerance" when one refuses to extend it to even the mere expression of a contrary point of view.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Ah, it's okay for him to have an opinion but it isn't okay for me to have an opinion.
> 
> Priceless.
Click to expand...


He has an opinion, you merely call him and those that share his opinion names, i.e. "intolerant."


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> No you are wrong, you are the one complaining, and this is why you attacked me on this article over Mr.Cathy and Chic-Fil-A's freedom of expression to speak what it believes when he was asked about an opinion, and this upon his religious beliefs held under that specific roof in America, when it comes to gay's being married or getting married.
> 
> I do explain to my kids about the birds and the bee's found in the Godly version of what is normal and right, so I ain't sweeping nothing under the rug or carpet on my end, just like you ain't either you say, but remember what I said "whom so ever teaches the Lord's little ones to sin, it would be best for him to tie a talent around his neck, and to sink himself to the bottom of the sea". It's really that simple really.. Actually I don't hate no one, and I am tolerant of gay's, but I don't have to say to them that they are right or wrong out in the street, and I don't have to say to them that I don't agree with them either out in the street, because I don't allow their lifestyle to intertwine with my lifestyle & space or vice-versa. The public space and everyone respecting each other in that space (upholding certain standards of decency) is essential to American unity, but what goes on in those gay pride parades is not what the ideals of decency is all about according to most in the nation, but to the gay's it is normal somehow ? I think they know it isn't normal, but they are guided by their lust and sin in that lust, in which blinds them to what is or was normal in their lives going way back.
> 
> Just as long as they respect my views and space on such matters, we all get along just fine in life. This nation is big, and I don't see why there isn't enough space for people to live their own lives apart from those who want to live their lives in an opposite way. The only time this becomes a problem in America, is when people cross the lines, and try to actively push their lifestyles on or into anothers space when it is not accepted into that space (marriage is a sacred space held onto by religious beliefs). The don't ask don't tell was the right solution for the military in that space, but they weren't satisfied with that either, so away they go onward with Obama's help shockingly, but to what end I do wonder will it all continue to go in this nation now ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "whom so ever teaches the Lord's little ones to sin, it would be best for him to tie a talent around his neck, and to sink himself to the bottom of the sea". If that's a quote from the bibble, then it's just some random quote that some guy wrote 1500 years ago or so, that's just the writer's own opinion since he can't know what an invisible being would want since no one's ever seen it. Anyways, who made your invisible guy the arbiter of morals?
> 
> Tell us, are you against civil unions as well? Because a lot of homo-haters don't even want gays to have the financial benefits from being wed that heteros enjoy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What exactly does a civil union entail or mean, and why do people need that in their lives again ? Is it for legal purposes mainly, where as say if two people are living together or not, and one dies maybe or something, then the other person can legally represent or be a claimant in a will or claimant of anothers personal belongings (home, car or property) and such excetra excetra if it is left to that surviving partner in life legally in such a union ?
> 
> I can understand and go along with this, if it is in the case of two people living together or not, in which could also include friends from afar, caretakers of the elderly and so on and so forth,  if choose this between those who are of two in number, having sound mind and are of sound body in the agreement process when therefore it is all agreed upon, in that a person is chosen for this legal union or uniting by another for said purposes in life, which is in order to leave one not destitue in a case of sudden death or departure in life excetra excetra.  A civil union could be for many to legally sign up for and/or do for legal purposes, so I would agree with this exisiting among people who want such a thing as this between them in life.. Nothing wrong with that I don't see.
> 
> Example:  My aunt may want to leave me her home, because I have lived with her for years taking care of her in a wheel chair, but the rest of the family says over their dead body will I get it, then we could create between us a civil union or agreement of such, where as I could get it legally and garantee her wishes that I would recieve it through such a civil union that we may have gotten for legal purposes right ?
Click to expand...

If it's all about the money and not about a loving relationship like it seems to be in this case, you and your aunt could sign a contract hereby you help her and then get her house (a little greedy, aren't we?), otherwise she could use something called a will. Getting wed is about love and sharing, not about how much money you'll secure (although no one told my brother's 2 ex-wives about that apparently, lol.)
But there are not only marital benefits that you can't get through a contract, but also social recognition of being accepted as married, which fortunately, more states are moving towards. 

So, how many times have you told your aunt that it's ok for her to leave you her house?


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> "whom so ever teaches the Lord's little ones to sin, it would be best for him to tie a talent around his neck, and to sink himself to the bottom of the sea". If that's a quote from the bibble, then it's just some random quote that some guy wrote 1500 years ago or so, that's just the writer's own opinion since he can't know what an invisible being would want since no one's ever seen it. Anyways, who made your invisible guy the arbiter of morals?
> 
> Tell us, are you against civil unions as well? Because a lot of homo-haters don't even want gays to have the financial benefits from being wed that heteros enjoy.
> 
> 
> 
> What exactly does a civil union entail or mean, and why do people need that in their lives again ? Is it for legal purposes mainly, where as say if two people are living together or not, and one dies maybe or something, then the other person can legally represent or be a claimant in a will or claimant of anothers personal belongings (home, car or property) and such excetra excetra if it is left to that surviving partner in life legally in such a union ?
> 
> I can understand and go along with this, if it is in the case of two people living together or not, in which could also include friends from afar, caretakers of the elderly and so on and so forth,  if choose this between those who are of two in number, having sound mind and are of sound body in the agreement process when therefore it is all agreed upon, in that a person is chosen for this legal union or uniting by another for said purposes in life, which is in order to leave one not destitue in a case of sudden death or departure in life excetra excetra.  A civil union could be for many to legally sign up for and/or do for legal purposes, so I would agree with this exisiting among people who want such a thing as this between them in life.. Nothing wrong with that I don't see.
> 
> Example:  My aunt may want to leave me her home, because I have lived with her for years taking care of her in a wheel chair, but the rest of the family says over their dead body will I get it, then we could create between us a civil union or agreement of such, where as I could get it legally and garantee her wishes that I would recieve it through such a civil union that we may have gotten for legal purposes right ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If it's all about the money and not about a loving relationship like it seems to be in this case, you and your aunt could sign a contract hereby you help her and then get her house (a little greedy, aren't we?), otherwise she could use something called a will. Getting wed is about love and sharing, not about how much money you'll secure (although no one told my brother's 2 ex-wives about that apparently, lol.)
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> But there are not only marital benefits that you can't get through a contract, but also social recognition of being accepted as married, which fortunately, more states are moving towards.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Social recognition eh, by being accepted as being married eh, and this will do what for the gay's finally by what you had written above ? Would this finally give them the right to flaunt their lifestyles openly as a married couple anywhere they choose in the nation afterwards? Will it legally be therefore going against the rights of millions of others who oppose, and for which would oppose such a thing always as would be taught by them unto their children ?
> 
> Will they flaunt it in front of those who believe that the practicing of such a thing, and/or the choice made in such a thing as is being gay (((in which many do see as strictly being sin))), continue to be their next move or agenda, which is to flaunt their lifestyle out from under this torn vail now, as to make others suffer or become uncomfortable when they do this in their site and/or against their beliefs ?
> 
> Now they whom do oppose, do they not teach their children that it is a sin as based upon their beliefs in which is OK by them to teach in this away to their children ? Yes they do.. The people/parents as best that they can ((teach)) their little ones that it shouldnot be practiced by them in their lives, because it is sin according to what they have always believed and have been taught themselves, and that it would destroy them eventually if they do mess around with it, just as it has done against so many in the past that are on record in such sin in which it did eventually destroy them, and this is for those who had decided that it was OK for them to do this sort of sin, even when the facts didnot make it so once reviewed or is now able to be looked back upon.
> 
> Hmmmm, that's odd, where as you responded to me, but my message board never alerted me that you had responded to me again..wow
> 
> For the record I was using the aunt senario as an example, wherefore my aunt doesn't even live anywhere near to me, like try on the other side of the nation actually, or might as well say on the other side of the planet. I love her and my uncle, but don't get to ever see them other than post cards and some phone calls here and there. Oh and she rents instead of owns, not sorry bout that.. You wish you could call it like you think you know it, but you are off by thousands of miles on this one, as well as being off on your opinion in relation to what I had wrote. Just sayin..
Click to expand...


----------



## Too Tall

HomeInspect said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> HomeInspect said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you don't know who Rahm is, why are you even commenting in this thread?  This entire issue is *about one guy's opinion, and the hypocrsy of the left*, wanting to take down his business for it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It makes no sense what you say, so this guy's the official mouthpiece of the whole left?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> No, he is an example of the hypcrisy, as is the mayor of DC, San Fran, and Boston. Three more examples you might want to read about. Do you think these four mayors would even peep, if Chick Fil A was a Muslim owned business ?
Click to expand...


Peep, hardly.  They would offer them tax incentives and loans to build in their city.


----------



## Too Tall

Gadawg73 said:


> Being obese is a sin yet how many call them sinners?



Is that the 11th Commandment?  Thou shalt not be fat!


----------



## beagle9

Too Tall said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Being obese is a sin yet how many call them sinners?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is that the 11th Commandment?  Thou shalt not be fat!
Click to expand...

Well if the sin of glutney, is coulpled with the act of being lazy, and they are precisely woven together in the right situations, then the consequences of becoming fat is a result of sinning by over eating tooo much, and being lazy in these very ways on top of all that. 

Sin consequences can be directly related to or indirectly related to sinfulness and irresponsibility that  has run amuck in these days societies.


----------



## Too Tall

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Would be nice if these holy rollers were for heterosexual marriage where over 50% fail. Instead of volunteering to do something about that they stick their heads in the sand and have to find someone to persecute.
> The gay boogeyman.
> Same with gays in the military, used to be with gays teaching in the schools and before that gays were imprisoned.
> Allowing gays to marry will affect no one. What we have is a bunch of mother hen busy bodies "Ethel, did you know Seth and Barbara's daughter is a lesbian"  "Heavens no Elvira, tell me how you think they do it"
> Running clinics at their churches on how to lose weight, quit smoking, stay married and a dozen other things would be a start for the holy rollers.
> But they will not do that as the cash would slow down in the plate.
> GO AFTER THE GAYS!! It brings cash to the church!!!
> 
> 
> 
> Go after the gay's, it brings cash to the church ???? Kidding me right ? You comment on things you have actually no clue what so ever about, but man you try and make it sound so good when you do.. Ever thought about being a car salesman, because I think you might have missed your calling in life.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The Vatican is heavily anti-gay and they rake in billions...
Click to expand...


They sure are.



> Catholic Charities is a network of charities whose aim is "to provide service to people in need, to advocate for justice in social structures, and to call the entire church and other people of good will to do the same."[5] It is one of the largest charities in the United States.[6] Catholic Charities traces its origin to an orphanage founded in 1727 in New Orleans, Louisiana by the French Ursuline Sisters.[7]
> 
> Catholic Charities, USA (CCUSA), with headquarters in Alexandria, Virginia, was founded in 1910 as the National Conference of Catholic Charities. In 2010, Catholic Charities' centennial year,[8] more than 1,700 agencies, institutions and organizations composed the Catholic Charities network - including individual organizations of the dioceses, such as the Archdiocese of Chicago. About $2 billion of its budget now comes from the Faith-Based Initiatives Office of the federal government. Nearly 90 cents of every dollar donated to Catholic Charities agencies goes directly to programs and services.[9] In 2008, Catholic Charities agencies served over 8 million individuals.
> 
> *Together, with the local, diocesan-associated Catholic Charities, it is the second largest social service provider in the United States, surpassed only by the federal government*



Wiki


----------



## Too Tall

beagle9 said:


> Too Tall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Being obese is a sin yet how many call them sinners?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is that the 11th Commandment?  Thou shalt not be fat!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Well if the sin of glutney, is coulpled with the act of being lazy, and they are precisely woven together in the right situations, then the consequences of becoming fat is a result of sinning by over eating tooo much, and being lazy in these very ways on top of all that.
> 
> Sin consequences can be directly related to or indirectly related to sinfulness and irresponsibility that  has run amuck in these days societies.
Click to expand...


Good answer.  I was merely smarting off and we are all sinners and there is only one way to be forgiven our sins.  You and I know what it is. God be with you.


----------



## Gadawg73

Too Tall said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Being obese is a sin yet how many call them sinners?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is that the 11th Commandment?  Thou shalt not be fat!
Click to expand...


No, the 11th Commandment is Thou shall not admit adultery.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> What exactly does a civil union entail or mean, and why do people need that in their lives again ? Is it for legal purposes mainly, where as say if two people are living together or not, and one dies maybe or something, then the other person can legally represent or be a claimant in a will or claimant of anothers personal belongings (home, car or property) and such excetra excetra if it is left to that surviving partner in life legally in such a union ?
> 
> I can understand and go along with this, if it is in the case of two people living together or not, in which could also include friends from afar, caretakers of the elderly and so on and so forth,  if choose this between those who are of two in number, having sound mind and are of sound body in the agreement process when therefore it is all agreed upon, in that a person is chosen for this legal union or uniting by another for said purposes in life, which is in order to leave one not destitue in a case of sudden death or departure in life excetra excetra.  A civil union could be for many to legally sign up for and/or do for legal purposes, so I would agree with this exisiting among people who want such a thing as this between them in life.. Nothing wrong with that I don't see.
> 
> Example:  My aunt may want to leave me her home, because I have lived with her for years taking care of her in a wheel chair, but the rest of the family says over their dead body will I get it, then we could create between us a civil union or agreement of such, where as I could get it legally and garantee her wishes that I would recieve it through such a civil union that we may have gotten for legal purposes right ?
> 
> 
> 
> If it's all about the money and not about a loving relationship like it seems to be in this case, you and your aunt could sign a contract hereby you help her and then get her house (a little greedy, aren't we?), otherwise she could use something called a will. Getting wed is about love and sharing, not about how much money you'll secure (although no one told my brother's 2 ex-wives about that apparently, lol.)
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> But there are not only marital benefits that you can't get through a contract, but also social recognition of being accepted as married, which fortunately, more states are moving towards.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Social recognition eh, by being accepted as being married eh, and this will do what for the gay's finally by what you had written above ? Would this finally give them the right to flaunt their lifestyles openly as a married couple anywhere they choose in the nation afterwards? Will it legally be therefore going against the rights of millions of others who oppose, and for which would oppose such a thing always as would be taught by them unto their children ?
> 
> Will they flaunt it in front of those who believe that the practicing of such a thing, and/or the choice made in such a thing as is being gay (((in which many do see as strictly being sin))), continue to be their next move or agenda, which is to flaunt their lifestyle out from under this torn vail now, as to make others suffer or become uncomfortable when they do this in their site and/or against their beliefs ?
> 
> Now they whom do oppose, do they not teach their children that it is a sin as based upon their beliefs in which is OK by them to teach in this away to their children ? Yes they do.. The people/parents as best that they can ((teach)) their little ones that it shouldnot be practiced by them in their lives, because it is sin according to what they have always believed and have been taught themselves, and that it would destroy them eventually if they do mess around with it, just as it has done against so many in the past that are on record in such sin in which it did eventually destroy them, and this is for those who had decided that it was OK for them to do this sort of sin, even when the facts didnot make it so once reviewed or is now able to be looked back upon.
> 
> Hmmmm, that's odd, where as you responded to me, but my message board never alerted me that you had responded to me again..wow
> 
> For the record I was using the aunt senario as an example, wherefore my aunt doesn't even live anywhere near to me, like try on the other side of the nation actually, or might as well say on the other side of the planet. I love her and my uncle, but don't get to ever see them other than post cards and some phone calls here and there. Oh and she rents instead of owns, not sorry bout that.. You wish you could call it like you think you know it, but you are off by thousands of miles on this one, as well as being off on your opinion in relation to what I had wrote. Just sayin..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's what I've been saying all along, this isn't even about gay marriage, you just hate homos and will try to block anything they do. And you call yourself a Christian? Jesus was all about forgiveness and acceptance, among other nice qualities. I seriously doubt that IF he existed as said, that he be such a homo hater and basher like people like you are. You're delusional buddy.
> 
> I was just responding to YOUR story, which is probably true, thou doth protest wayyyy too much.
Click to expand...


----------



## ima

Too Tall said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Go after the gay's, it brings cash to the church ???? Kidding me right ? You comment on things you have actually no clue what so ever about, but man you try and make it sound so good when you do.. Ever thought about being a car salesman, because I think you might have missed your calling in life.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Vatican is heavily anti-gay and they rake in billions...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> They sure are.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Catholic Charities is a network of charities whose aim is "to provide service to people in need, to advocate for justice in social structures, and to call the entire church and other people of good will to do the same."[5] It is one of the largest charities in the United States.[6] Catholic Charities traces its origin to an orphanage founded in 1727 in New Orleans, Louisiana by the French Ursuline Sisters.[7]
> 
> Catholic Charities, USA (CCUSA), with headquarters in Alexandria, Virginia, was founded in 1910 as the National Conference of Catholic Charities. In 2010, Catholic Charities' centennial year,[8] more than 1,700 agencies, institutions and organizations composed the Catholic Charities network - including individual organizations of the dioceses, such as the Archdiocese of Chicago. About $2 billion of its budget now comes from the Faith-Based Initiatives Office of the federal government. Nearly 90 cents of every dollar donated to Catholic Charities agencies goes directly to programs and services.[9] In 2008, Catholic Charities agencies served over 8 million individuals.
> 
> *Together, with the local, diocesan-associated Catholic Charities, it is the second largest social service provider in the United States, surpassed only by the federal government*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wiki
Click to expand...


So you're not disputing my claim that they are extremely anti-gay? 
Also, do you think it a tiny wee bit hypocritical that a serious number of priests are pedophiles?
Btw, they use their charitable projects to push their homo hating agenda, as well as their women-as-second-class-citizen agenda by banning contraception... one of the main means of women around the world to climb out of the poverty of having too many children at a too early age.


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> If it's all about the money and not about a loving relationship like it seems to be in this case, you and your aunt could sign a contract hereby you help her and then get her house (a little greedy, aren't we?), otherwise she could use something called a will. Getting wed is about love and sharing, not about how much money you'll secure (although no one told my brother's 2 ex-wives about that apparently, lol.)
> 
> 
> 
> Social recognition eh, by being accepted as being married eh, and this will do what for the gay's finally by what you had written above ? Would this finally give them the right to flaunt their lifestyles openly as a married couple anywhere they choose in the nation afterwards? Will it legally be therefore going against the rights of millions of others who oppose, and for which would oppose such a thing always as would be taught by them unto their children ?
> 
> Will they flaunt it in front of those who believe that the practicing of such a thing, and/or the choice made in such a thing as is being gay (((in which many do see as strictly being sin))), continue to be their next move or agenda, which is to flaunt their lifestyle out from under this torn vail now, as to make others suffer or become uncomfortable when they do this in their site and/or against their beliefs ?
> 
> Now they whom do oppose, do they not teach their children that it is a sin as based upon their beliefs in which is OK by them to teach in this away to their children ? Yes they do.. The people/parents as best that they can ((teach)) their little ones that it shouldnot be practiced by them in their lives, because it is sin according to what they have always believed and have been taught themselves, and that it would destroy them eventually if they do mess around with it, just as it has done against so many in the past that are on record in such sin in which it did eventually destroy them, and this is for those who had decided that it was OK for them to do this sort of sin, even when the facts didnot make it so once reviewed or is now able to be looked back upon.
> 
> Hmmmm, that's odd, where as you responded to me, but my message board never alerted me that you had responded to me again..wow
> 
> For the record I was using the aunt senario as an example, wherefore my aunt doesn't even live anywhere near to me, like try on the other side of the nation actually, or might as well say on the other side of the planet. I love her and my uncle, but don't get to ever see them other than post cards and some phone calls here and there. Oh and she rents instead of owns, not sorry bout that.. You wish you could call it like you think you know it, but you are off by thousands of miles on this one, as well as being off on your opinion in relation to what I had wrote. Just sayin..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's what I've been saying all along, this isn't even about gay marriage, you just hate homos and will try to block anything they do. And you call yourself a Christian? Jesus was all about forgiveness and acceptance, among other nice qualities. I seriously doubt that IF he existed as said, that he be such a homo hater and basher like people like you are. You're delusional buddy.
> 
> I was just responding to YOUR story, which is probably true, thou doth protest wayyyy too much.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No one hates homo's, it's just that people have had bad experiences with some of these things in the past, where as they (certain ones) want it there way against other peoples religion, cultures and ways in this nation, and if they don't get their way against another or even against many, then they cry fowel or discrimination in the situation.
> 
> People just want to be left alone to live their lives in a Godly manor, in which don't include gay's walking around in front of their children as married, when they are teaching their children that such a thing is not normal and/or is sin. The gay's are never going to stop people from seperating themselves from them, and that is just the cold hard facts of these matters found in life. People whom have family members who have went down this road, yes they have to deal with that in life of course, but they also expect the rest of the nation whom may disagree, to then deal with it also in the way that they want them to, and not by what is dictated to them by their own held beliefs instead.
> 
> This nation is getting more and more about people wanting to do all sorts of things in life, in which others don't tend to agree with and rightly so, but in the spirit of compassion, empothy, humbleness and kindness, it is then expected that the people should accept these things now, as based upon these human traits that are found in all human beings, and in fact in many ways it is being done in these ways when people give a little in respect to a person and/or as a human being when they get caught up in these things, but it still don't change what people believe in, and what they teach their children to believe in, so it will always be a tough sell to get everyone on board the acceptance train and you know it.
> 
> You can rant and rave on me all you want, but what I speak is the truth and you know it...
Click to expand...


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> Too Tall said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> The Vatican is heavily anti-gay and they rake in billions...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They sure are.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Catholic Charities is a network of charities whose aim is "to provide service to people in need, to advocate for justice in social structures, and to call the entire church and other people of good will to do the same."[5] It is one of the largest charities in the United States.[6] Catholic Charities traces its origin to an orphanage founded in 1727 in New Orleans, Louisiana by the French Ursuline Sisters.[7]
> 
> Catholic Charities, USA (CCUSA), with headquarters in Alexandria, Virginia, was founded in 1910 as the National Conference of Catholic Charities. In 2010, Catholic Charities' centennial year,[8] more than 1,700 agencies, institutions and organizations composed the Catholic Charities network - including individual organizations of the dioceses, such as the Archdiocese of Chicago. About $2 billion of its budget now comes from the Faith-Based Initiatives Office of the federal government. Nearly 90 cents of every dollar donated to Catholic Charities agencies goes directly to programs and services.[9] In 2008, Catholic Charities agencies served over 8 million individuals.
> 
> *Together, with the local, diocesan-associated Catholic Charities, it is the second largest social service provider in the United States, surpassed only by the federal government*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Wiki
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So you're not disputing my claim that they are extremely anti-gay?
> Also, do you think it a tiny wee bit hypocritical that a serious number of priests are pedophiles?
> Btw, they use their charitable projects to push their homo hating agenda, as well as their women-as-second-class-citizen agenda by banning contraception... one of the main means of women around the world to climb out of the poverty of having too many children at a too early age.
Click to expand...

What other people do in which is by many also considered sin, and even crimes all depending, they will be held accountable for.  These are seperate sins or issues that are found in their lives, so one issue at a time here, then we can discuss the other sins that are found in people that are doing things that are not agreed upon just as well. The mixing of these things are a strategy that everyone see's through in life, so try another strategy if you will, because these strategies are getting old, and are seen right through these days I think.


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> Btw, they use their charitable projects to push their homo hating agenda,



And the gay's use the civil rights to push their gay agenda, so they for whom you accuse are equal in these things right ?


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's what I've been saying all along, this isn't even about gay marriage, you just hate homos and will try to block anything they do. And you call yourself a Christian? Jesus was all about forgiveness and acceptance, among other nice qualities. I seriously doubt that IF he existed as said, that he be such a homo hater and basher like people like you are. You're delusional buddy.
> 
> I was just responding to YOUR story, which is probably true, thou doth protest wayyyy too much.
> 
> 
> 
> No one hates homo's, it's just that people have had bad experiences with some of these things in the past, where as they (certain ones) want it there way against other peoples religion, cultures and ways in this nation, and if they don't get their way against another or even against many, then they cry fowel or discrimination in the situation.
> 
> People just want to be left alone to live their lives in a Godly manor, in which don't include gay's walking around in front of their children as married, when they are teaching their children that such a thing is not normal and/or is sin. The gay's are never going to stop people from seperating themselves from them, and that is just the cold hard facts of these matters found in life. People whom have family members who have went down this road, yes they have to deal with that in life of course, but they also expect the rest of the nation whom may disagree, to then deal with it also in the way that they want them to, and not by what is dictated to them by their own held beliefs instead.
> 
> This nation is getting more and more about people wanting to do all sorts of things in life, in which others don't tend to agree with and rightly so, but in the spirit of compassion, empothy, humbleness and kindness, it is then expected that the people should accept these things now, as based upon these human traits that are found in all human beings, and in fact in many ways it is being done in these ways when people give a little in respect to a person and/or as a human being when they get caught up in these things, but it still don't change what people believe in, and what they teach their children to believe in, so it will always be a tough sell to get everyone on board the acceptance train and you know it.
> 
> You can rant and rave on me all you want, but what I speak is the truth and you know it...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I know you speak the truth as you see it. That's all.
> 
> Ok, so how do you know when 2 guys walk down the street that they're married? You don't.
> You also didn't address my contention that Jesus would not have been a gay basher (I personally think that IF he existed, he might have been gay, but that's another story).
> A godly manner? Well, since gays exist, god must have made them in his image as well?
> And I agree that there will always be people like you who want to "separate" themselves from gays, as there as about 1000 different hate groups in the US, because we have freedom of speech. So you can hate gays openly like you do, but you can't be openly gay? Man, your kids are going to be really messed up!
Click to expand...


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Btw, they use their charitable projects to push their homo hating agenda,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And the gay's use the civil rights to push their gay agenda, so they for whom you accuse are equal in these things right ?
Click to expand...


As long as you agree that the Vatican uses its power and money to push its homo hating agenda we're good (and its women as second class citizens agenda as well, among others).

I think that using a civil rights charter or laws to gain equality in certain areas is righteous. Notice how the Vatican doesn't make it a matter of civil rights to squash gays, because what they do is actually against civil rights.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Too Tall said:
> 
> 
> 
> They sure are.
> 
> 
> 
> Wiki
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So you're not disputing my claim that they are extremely anti-gay?
> Also, do you think it a tiny wee bit hypocritical that a serious number of priests are pedophiles?
> Btw, they use their charitable projects to push their homo hating agenda, as well as their women-as-second-class-citizen agenda by banning contraception... one of the main means of women around the world to climb out of the poverty of having too many children at a too early age.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What other people do in which is by many also considered sin, and even crimes all depending, they will be held accountable for.  These are seperate sins or issues that are found in their lives, so one issue at a time here, then we can discuss the other sins that are found in people that are doing things that are not agreed upon just as well. The mixing of these things are a strategy that everyone see's through in life, so try another strategy if you will, because these strategies are getting old, and are seen right through these days I think.
Click to expand...


It's called practice what you preach, the pedophile priests should learn that one. Anyways, you're using the old Muslim excuse: it's not the religion that makes the Jihadists, they're another separate matter, when we all know that the religion IS about Jihad. Just like the catholic priesthood and their supposed "vow" of celebacy, which is really about gays and other sexual deviants who don't like women anyways.
When a son is the family "heard the calling", well, it meant he realized he was gay and went to live with the other gays in a monastery away from society otherwise they could be killed for being gay.


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> So you're not disputing my claim that they are extremely anti-gay?
> Also, do you think it a tiny wee bit hypocritical that a serious number of priests are pedophiles?
> Btw, they use their charitable projects to push their homo hating agenda, as well as their women-as-second-class-citizen agenda by banning contraception... one of the main means of women around the world to climb out of the poverty of having too many children at a too early age.
> 
> 
> 
> What other people do in which is by many also considered sin, and even crimes all depending, they will be held accountable for.  These are seperate sins or issues that are found in their lives, so one issue at a time here, then we can discuss the other sins that are found in people that are doing things that are not agreed upon just as well. The mixing of these things are a strategy that everyone see's through in life, so try another strategy if you will, because these strategies are getting old, and are seen right through these days I think.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's called practice what you preach, the pedophile priests should learn that one. Anyways, you're using the old Muslim excuse: it's not the religion that makes the Jihadists, they're another separate matter, when we all know that the religion IS about Jihad. Just like the catholic priesthood and their supposed "vow" of celebacy, which is really about gays and other sexual deviants who don't like women anyways.
> When a son is the family "heard the calling", well, it meant he realized he was gay and went to live with the other gays in a monastery away from society otherwise they could be killed for being gay.
Click to expand...

You sure are making the good catholics in that group, hate you right about now I bet... LOL 

The bad ones are just hiding from you, because you may speak the truth against them (the bad ones that is)...


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> No one hates homo's, it's just that people have had bad experiences with some of these things in the past, where as they (certain ones) want it there way against other peoples religion, cultures and ways in this nation, and if they don't get their way against another or even against many, then they cry fowel or discrimination in the situation.
> 
> People just want to be left alone to live their lives in a Godly manor, in which don't include gay's walking around in front of their children as married, when they are teaching their children that such a thing is not normal and/or is sin. The gay's are never going to stop people from seperating themselves from them, and that is just the cold hard facts of these matters found in life. People whom have family members who have went down this road, yes they have to deal with that in life of course, but they also expect the rest of the nation whom may disagree, to then deal with it also in the way that they want them to, and not by what is dictated to them by their own held beliefs instead.
> 
> This nation is getting more and more about people wanting to do all sorts of things in life, in which others don't tend to agree with and rightly so, but in the spirit of compassion, empothy, humbleness and kindness, it is then expected that the people should accept these things now, as based upon these human traits that are found in all human beings, and in fact in many ways it is being done in these ways when people give a little in respect to a person and/or as a human being when they get caught up in these things, but it still don't change what people believe in, and what they teach their children to believe in, so it will always be a tough sell to get everyone on board the acceptance train and you know it.
> 
> You can rant and rave on me all you want, but what I speak is the truth and you know it...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I know you speak the truth as you see it. That's all.
> 
> Ok, so how do you know when 2 guys walk down the street that they're married? You don't.
> You also didn't address my contention that Jesus would not have been a gay basher (I personally think that IF he existed, he might have been gay, but that's another story).
> A godly manner? Well, since gays exist, god must have made them in his image as well?
> And I agree that there will always be people like you who want to "separate" themselves from gays, as there as about 1000 different hate groups in the US, because we have freedom of speech. So you can hate gays openly like you do, but you can't be openly gay? Man, your kids are going to be really messed up!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Hmmm lets see now, if one is wearing a ring ok, and they are walking, running, stopping and hugging and kissing ok, then what, this only tells me that they are just two joggers out for a morning jog in front of the children playing in the park, and this after a law was passed in which they can be gay and married in the state ? So wow you got me on this one, because that one would be such a hard one to figure out ya know. I believe a three year old could figure that one out... sheesh!
Click to expand...


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> Hmmm lets see now, if one is wearing a ring ok, and they are walking, running, stopping and hugging and kissing ok, then what, this only tells me that they are just two joggers out for a morning jog in front of the children playing in the park, and this after a law was passed in which they can be gay and married in the state ? So wow you got me on this one, because that one would be such a hard one to figure out ya know. I believe a three year old could figure that one out... sheesh!



First of all, gays rarely if ever hug and kiss in public, there's way too much threat that a gang of homo-haters will attack them.

Second, I think it's seriously doubtful that a 3 year old looks for a ring on 2 guys fingers to try to figure out if they're 2 gay guys or it's just to hetero friends out for a jog. Please try to anchor your arguments in reality, I hate talking with delusional people.

So, if man is made in god's image, is god partially gay?


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> First of all, gays rarely if ever hug and kiss in public, there's way too much threat that a gang of homo-haters will attack them.





Is it just that really or is it that they also know that what they do is odd and not mainstream by most peoples standards kept, so they (most of them maybe) just don't push the issue while out in the public ? However, if become married and legal under such a recognized binding contract, how far will it all begin to progress after that line is crossed in the sand by them, and this is of course what many do fear and/or do wonder about ? Is America truly ready for that answer yet, many of the gay's undoubtedly think so, but the poles may show differently as according to a majority still. Problem is these days, is that it matters not what the people think or want anymore as a community and a nation, but what the courts and judges are pushing on them by way of forcing the issues against what the majority may think otherwise in their wantings or opinions there of.  




ima said:


> Second, I think it's seriously doubtful that a 3 year old looks for a ring on 2 guys fingers to try to figure out if they're 2 gay guys or it's just to hetero friends out for a jog. Please try to anchor your arguments in reality, *I hate talking with delusional people.*



If that three year old see's two guy's kissing on that jog, it matters not about the rest of the indicators, because the kid is fixing to ask a question, and how that question will be answered, will depend upon the parents and their beliefs in which that child belongs to.  Now if the parents say that what just happened is wrong to the child, then how will anyone change that answer or say that it was wrong by telling the kid that answer ? Delusional eh? Do you really think that I am the delusional one here ? I think that I am anchored in reality, but that bugs you badly for some reason.



ima said:


> So, if man is made in god's image, is god partially gay?



Image has nothing to do with a man's actions or his choices made in life, didn't you learn this yet when dealing with the civil rights issues upon trying to invoke that issue as the gay issue as well ? Black people are also created by God, just as everyother color was in this nation or world the same, but it is the personal choices that are made by each and everyone of us upon our given free will, that either draws us closer to God or takes us farther away from God.


----------



## Gadawg73

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> First of all, gays rarely if ever hug and kiss in public, there's way too much threat that a gang of homo-haters will attack them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is it just that really or is it that they also know that what they do is odd and not mainstream by most peoples standards kept, so they (most of them maybe) just don't push the issue while out in the public ? However, if become married and legal under such a recognized binding contract, how far will it all begin to progress after that line is crossed in the sand by them, and this is of course what many do fear and/or do wonder about ? Is America truly ready for that answer yet, many of the gay's undoubtedly think so, but the poles may show differently as according to a majority still. Problem is these days, is that it matters not what the people think or want anymore as a community and a nation, but what the courts and judges are pushing on them by way of forcing the issues against what the majority may think otherwise in their wantings or opinions there of.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Second, I think it's seriously doubtful that a 3 year old looks for a ring on 2 guys fingers to try to figure out if they're 2 gay guys or it's just to hetero friends out for a jog. Please try to anchor your arguments in reality, *I hate talking with delusional people.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If that three year old see's two guy's kissing on that jog, it matters not about the rest of the indicators, because the kid is fixing to ask a question, and how that question will be answered, will depend upon the parents and their beliefs in which that child belongs to.  Now if the parents say that what just happened is wrong to the child, then how will anyone change that answer or say that it was wrong by telling the kid that answer ? Delusional eh? Do you really think that I am the delusional one here ? I think that I am anchored in reality, but that bugs you badly for some reason.
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> So, if man is made in god's image, is god partially gay?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Image has nothing to do with a man's actions or his choices made in life, didn't you learn this yet when dealing with the civil rights issues upon trying to invoke that issue as the gay issue as well ? Black people are also created by God, just as everyother color was in this nation or world the same, but it is the personal choices that are made by each and everyone of us upon our given free will, that either draws us closer to God or takes us farther away from God.
Click to expand...


Tell us about when you chose your sexual orientation.
How long did you consider the same sex?


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> First of all, gays rarely if ever hug and kiss in public, there's way too much threat that a gang of homo-haters will attack them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is it just that really or is it that they also know that what they do is odd and not mainstream by most peoples standards kept, so they (most of them maybe) just don't push the issue while out in the public ? However, if become married and legal under such a recognized binding contract, how far will it all begin to progress after that line is crossed in the sand by them, and this is of course what many do fear and/or do wonder about ? Is America truly ready for that answer yet, many of the gay's undoubtedly think so, but the poles may show differently as according to a majority still. Problem is these days, is that it matters not what the people think or want anymore as a community and a nation, but what the courts and judges are pushing on them by way of forcing the issues against what the majority may think otherwise in their wantings or opinions there of.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Second, I think it's seriously doubtful that a 3 year old looks for a ring on 2 guys fingers to try to figure out if they're 2 gay guys or it's just to hetero friends out for a jog. Please try to anchor your arguments in reality, *I hate talking with delusional people.*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> If that three year old see's two guy's kissing on that jog, it matters not about the rest of the indicators, because the kid is fixing to ask a question, and how that question will be answered, will depend upon the parents and their beliefs in which that child belongs to.  Now if the parents say that what just happened is wrong to the child, then how will anyone change that answer or say that it was wrong by telling the kid that answer ? Delusional eh? Do you really think that I am the delusional one here ? I think that I am anchored in reality, but that bugs you badly for some reason.
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> So, if man is made in god's image, is god partially gay?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Image has nothing to do with a man's actions or his choices made in life, didn't you learn this yet when dealing with the civil rights issues upon trying to invoke that issue as the gay issue as well ? Black people are also created by God, just as everyother color was in this nation or world the same, but it is the personal choices that are made by each and everyone of us upon our given free will, that either draws us closer to God or takes us farther away from God.
Click to expand...

C'mon man, 2 gays out jogging and kissing?  You ARE delusional.
Even heteros don't jog and kiss. Kissing in public just isn't happening from anyone any more. 
I mean, like, where do you live? In a fucking gay village? Because unless you go looking for gays kissing on the street (is that it?), I'm not seeing that happen anywhere.

PS Jesus had dark skin, so your hero wasn't even a caucasian. Did you know?


----------



## beagle9

Gadawg73 said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> First of all, gays rarely if ever hug and kiss in public, there's way too much threat that a gang of homo-haters will attack them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is it just that really or is it that they also know that what they do is odd and not mainstream by most peoples standards kept, so they (most of them maybe) just don't push the issue while out in the public ? However, if become married and legal under such a recognized binding contract, how far will it all begin to progress after that line is crossed in the sand by them, and this is of course what many do fear and/or do wonder about ? Is America truly ready for that answer yet, many of the gay's undoubtedly think so, but the poles may show differently as according to a majority still. Problem is these days, is that it matters not what the people think or want anymore as a community and a nation, but what the courts and judges are pushing on them by way of forcing the issues against what the majority may think otherwise in their wantings or opinions there of.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If that three year old see's two guy's kissing on that jog, it matters not about the rest of the indicators, because the kid is fixing to ask a question, and how that question will be answered, will depend upon the parents and their beliefs in which that child belongs to.  Now if the parents say that what just happened is wrong to the child, then how will anyone change that answer or say that it was wrong by telling the kid that answer ? Delusional eh? Do you really think that I am the delusional one here ? I think that I am anchored in reality, but that bugs you badly for some reason.
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> So, if man is made in god's image, is god partially gay?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Image has nothing to do with a man's actions or his choices made in life, didn't you learn this yet when dealing with the civil rights issues upon trying to invoke that issue as the gay issue as well ? Black people are also created by God, just as everyother color was in this nation or world the same, but it is the personal choices that are made by each and everyone of us upon our given free will, that either draws us closer to God or takes us farther away from God.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Tell us about when you chose your sexual orientation.
> How long did you consider the same sex?
Click to expand...

What kind of question is that ?


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> First of all, gays rarely if ever hug and kiss in public, there's way too much threat that a gang of homo-haters will attack them.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Is it just that really or is it that they also know that what they do is odd and not mainstream by most peoples standards kept, so they (most of them maybe) just don't push the issue while out in the public ? However, if become married and legal under such a recognized binding contract, how far will it all begin to progress after that line is crossed in the sand by them, and this is of course what many do fear and/or do wonder about ? Is America truly ready for that answer yet, many of the gay's undoubtedly think so, but the poles may show differently as according to a majority still. Problem is these days, is that it matters not what the people think or want anymore as a community and a nation, but what the courts and judges are pushing on them by way of forcing the issues against what the majority may think otherwise in their wantings or opinions there of.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If that three year old see's two guy's kissing on that jog, it matters not about the rest of the indicators, because the kid is fixing to ask a question, and how that question will be answered, will depend upon the parents and their beliefs in which that child belongs to.  Now if the parents say that what just happened is wrong to the child, then how will anyone change that answer or say that it was wrong by telling the kid that answer ? Delusional eh? Do you really think that I am the delusional one here ? I think that I am anchored in reality, but that bugs you badly for some reason.
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> So, if man is made in god's image, is god partially gay?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Image has nothing to do with a man's actions or his choices made in life, didn't you learn this yet when dealing with the civil rights issues upon trying to invoke that issue as the gay issue as well ? Black people are also created by God, just as everyother color was in this nation or world the same, but it is the personal choices that are made by each and everyone of us upon our given free will, that either draws us closer to God or takes us farther away from God.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> C'mon man, 2 gays out jogging and kissing?  You ARE delusional.
> Even heteros don't jog and kiss. Kissing in public just isn't happening from anyone any more.
> I mean, like, where do you live? In a fucking gay village? Because unless you go looking for gays kissing on the street (is that it?), I'm not seeing that happen anywhere.
> 
> PS Jesus had dark skin, so your hero wasn't even a caucasian. Did you know?
Click to expand...

Are you saying that if they were married, that it shouldn't or wouldn't happen anywhere afterwards ? See this is the garantee's that people want, but are not getting or would be able to trust anyway, so they would rather not take any chances on this getting married stuff is my opinion.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is it just that really or is it that they also know that what they do is odd and not mainstream by most peoples standards kept, so they (most of them maybe) just don't push the issue while out in the public ? However, if become married and legal under such a recognized binding contract, how far will it all begin to progress after that line is crossed in the sand by them, and this is of course what many do fear and/or do wonder about ? Is America truly ready for that answer yet, many of the gay's undoubtedly think so, but the poles may show differently as according to a majority still. Problem is these days, is that it matters not what the people think or want anymore as a community and a nation, but what the courts and judges are pushing on them by way of forcing the issues against what the majority may think otherwise in their wantings or opinions there of.
> If that three year old see's two guy's kissing on that jog, it matters not about the rest of the indicators, because the kid is fixing to ask a question, and how that question will be answered, will depend upon the parents and their beliefs in which that child belongs to.  Now if the parents say that what just happened is wrong to the child, then how will anyone change that answer or say that it was wrong by telling the kid that answer ? Delusional eh? Do you really think that I am the delusional one here ? I think that I am anchored in reality, but that bugs you badly for some reason.
> 
> Image has nothing to do with a man's actions or his choices made in life, didn't you learn this yet when dealing with the civil rights issues upon trying to invoke that issue as the gay issue as well ? Black people are also created by God, just as everyother color was in this nation or world the same, but it is the personal choices that are made by each and everyone of us upon our given free will, that either draws us closer to God or takes us farther away from God.
> 
> 
> 
> C'mon man, 2 gays out jogging and kissing?  You ARE delusional.
> Even heteros don't jog and kiss. Kissing in public just isn't happening from anyone any more.
> I mean, like, where do you live? In a fucking gay village? Because unless you go looking for gays kissing on the street (is that it?), I'm not seeing that happen anywhere.
> 
> PS Jesus had dark skin, so your hero wasn't even a caucasian. Did you know?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Are you saying that if they were married, that it shouldn't or wouldn't happen anywhere afterwards ? See this is the garantee's that people want, but are not getting or would be able to trust anyway, so they would rather not take any chances on this getting married stuff is my opinion.
Click to expand...

Explain to me what being married has to do with 2 people of any kind kissing in public? I don't see anyone going at it in public, does that means that nobody that I encounter is married? 
Also explain why your own homophobia to closet gays should be what is upheld over the rights of gay people to be considered equal. All humans are equal. ALL. Get it?


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> C'mon man, 2 gays out jogging and kissing?  You ARE delusional.
> Even heteros don't jog and kiss. Kissing in public just isn't happening from anyone any more.
> I mean, like, where do you live? In a fucking gay village? Because unless you go looking for gays kissing on the street (is that it?), I'm not seeing that happen anywhere.
> 
> PS Jesus had dark skin, so your hero wasn't even a caucasian. Did you know?
> 
> 
> 
> Are you saying that if they were married, that it shouldn't or wouldn't happen anywhere afterwards ? See this is the garantee's that people want, but are not getting or would be able to trust anyway, so they would rather not take any chances on this getting married stuff is my opinion.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Explain to me what being married has to do with 2 people of any kind kissing in public? I don't see anyone going at it in public, does that means that nobody that I encounter is married?
> Also explain why your own homophobia to closet gays should be what is upheld over the rights of gay people to be considered equal. All humans are equal. ALL. Get it?
Click to expand...


We are getting into areas of opinion that can only be answered or decided by the majority vote or upon the majority of opinions in America, whether to accept or not accept these things in which are being proposed, so you are right that I cannot and shouldn't speak for or against those who are for these types of issues by my lonesome, because I am not the athority on such opinions as would be given by all upon these social issues outside of or short of a vote being taken. 

The question is this, why is it that a vote on these matters is so restricted or feared by those who engage upon these sorts of social issues in life, to be either opposed or being for them?  Instead these issues have to be held up or protected by the government in which said issues have been placed upon by the few who need this protection by the government, because the majority may see or want otherwise on such social issues to lean their way instead, but the government tries to refuse Americans a vote on these types of issues in reagrds to.  If these types of social issues are so right, then why does the issues need such protections against the majority who would see these social issues as otherwise wrong for them in the nation or when otherwise they are opposed to ?

I say to clear it all up, then let the people truly decide these issues by vote there of in each state, in which is what happened in California, but then was attacked by those who didnot like the way that the vote came out in that state, but no matter the people in each state should always decide the social issues within their states, and the federal government decide the rest on the matters of the economy and the security in this entire nation. 

Sexual status should always be a private matter between the people in this nation, and then legal matters between people should be another according to the government imho.

Legal and private sexual matters are two different things, and should always be kept that away, unless abuse brings sexual matters into the legal relm.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you saying that if they were married, that it shouldn't or wouldn't happen anywhere afterwards ? See this is the garantee's that people want, but are not getting or would be able to trust anyway, so they would rather not take any chances on this getting married stuff is my opinion.
> 
> 
> 
> Explain to me what being married has to do with 2 people of any kind kissing in public? I don't see anyone going at it in public, does that means that nobody that I encounter is married?
> Also explain why your own homophobia to closet gays should be what is upheld over the rights of gay people to be considered equal. All humans are equal. ALL. Get it?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> We are getting into areas of opinion that can only be answered or decided by the majority vote or upon the majority of opinions in America, whether to accept or not accept these things in which are being proposed, so you are right that I cannot and shouldn't speak for or against those who are for these types of issues by my lonesome, because I am not the athority on such opinions as would be given by all upon these social issues outside of or short of a vote being taken.
> 
> The question is this, why is it that a vote on these matters is so restricted or feared by those who engage upon these sorts of social issues in life, to be either opposed or being for them?  Instead these issues have to be held up or protected by the government in which said issues have been placed upon by the few who need this protection by the government, because the majority may see or want otherwise on such social issues to lean their way instead, but the government tries to refuse Americans a vote on these types of issues in reagrds to.  If these types of social issues are so right, then why does the issues need such protections against the majority who would see these social issues as otherwise wrong for them in the nation otherwise when opposed to ?
> 
> I say to clear it all up, then let the people truly decide these issues by vote there of in each state, in which is what happened in California, but then was attacked by those who didnot like the way that they vote came out in that state, but no matter the people in each state should always decide the social issues within their states, and the federal government decide the rest on the matters of the economy and the security in this nation.
> 
> Sexual status should always be a private matter between the people in this nation, and then legal matters between people should be another according to the government imho.
> 
> Legal and private sexual matters are two different things, and should always be kept that away, unless abuse brings sexual matters into the legal relm.
Click to expand...


You can no more deny gay people equal status to all other humans by a majority vote, than you can vote to have the earth declared flat. There are no grounds of any kind that makes some humans not worth as much as others. We are all equal. You can't go around declaring yourself above some people, that's absurd. Get a grip buddy.


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Explain to me what being married has to do with 2 people of any kind kissing in public? I don't see anyone going at it in public, does that means that nobody that I encounter is married?
> Also explain why your own homophobia to closet gays should be what is upheld over the rights of gay people to be considered equal. All humans are equal. ALL. Get it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> We are getting into areas of opinion that can only be answered or decided by the majority vote or upon the majority of opinions in America, whether to accept or not accept these things in which are being proposed, so you are right that I cannot and shouldn't speak for or against those who are for these types of issues by my lonesome, because I am not the athority on such opinions as would be given by all upon these social issues outside of or short of a vote being taken.
> 
> The question is this, why is it that a vote on these matters is so restricted or feared by those who engage upon these sorts of social issues in life, to be either opposed or being for them?  Instead these issues have to be held up or protected by the government in which said issues have been placed upon by the few who need this protection by the government, because the majority may see or want otherwise on such social issues to lean their way instead, but the government tries to refuse Americans a vote on these types of issues in reagrds to.  If these types of social issues are so right, then why does the issues need such protections against the majority who would see these social issues as otherwise wrong for them in the nation otherwise when opposed to ?
> 
> I say to clear it all up, then let the people truly decide these issues by vote there of in each state, in which is what happened in California, but then was attacked by those who didnot like the way that they vote came out in that state, but no matter the people in each state should always decide the social issues within their states, and the federal government decide the rest on the matters of the economy and the security in this nation.
> 
> Sexual status should always be a private matter between the people in this nation, and then legal matters between people should be another according to the government imho.
> 
> Legal and private sexual matters are two different things, and should always be kept that away, unless abuse brings sexual matters into the legal relm.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You can no more deny gay people equal status to all other humans by a majority vote, than you can vote to have the earth declared flat. There are no grounds of any kind that makes some humans not worth as much as others. We are all equal. You can't go around declaring yourself above some people, that's absurd. Get a grip buddy.
Click to expand...

Not what is being said here, but you love to twist and turn something into what you want it to be don't you ? Awe man, and if I didn't respond, what would it apear to others that you imply that me as a person said or didn't say ?

This is the slickness of the left or whatever you claim to be or represent.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> We are getting into areas of opinion that can only be answered or decided by the majority vote or upon the majority of opinions in America, whether to accept or not accept these things in which are being proposed, so you are right that I cannot and shouldn't speak for or against those who are for these types of issues by my lonesome, because I am not the athority on such opinions as would be given by all upon these social issues outside of or short of a vote being taken.
> 
> The question is this, why is it that a vote on these matters is so restricted or feared by those who engage upon these sorts of social issues in life, to be either opposed or being for them?  Instead these issues have to be held up or protected by the government in which said issues have been placed upon by the few who need this protection by the government, because the majority may see or want otherwise on such social issues to lean their way instead, but the government tries to refuse Americans a vote on these types of issues in reagrds to.  If these types of social issues are so right, then why does the issues need such protections against the majority who would see these social issues as otherwise wrong for them in the nation otherwise when opposed to ?
> 
> I say to clear it all up, then let the people truly decide these issues by vote there of in each state, in which is what happened in California, but then was attacked by those who didnot like the way that they vote came out in that state, but no matter the people in each state should always decide the social issues within their states, and the federal government decide the rest on the matters of the economy and the security in this nation.
> 
> Sexual status should always be a private matter between the people in this nation, and then legal matters between people should be another according to the government imho.
> 
> Legal and private sexual matters are two different things, and should always be kept that away, unless abuse brings sexual matters into the legal relm.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You can no more deny gay people equal status to all other humans by a majority vote, than you can vote to have the earth declared flat. There are no grounds of any kind that makes some humans not worth as much as others. We are all equal. You can't go around declaring yourself above some people, that's absurd. Get a grip buddy.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not what is being said here, but you love to twist and turn something into what you want it to be don't you ? Awe man, and if I didn't respond, what would it apear to others that you imply that me as a person said or didn't say ?
> 
> This is the slickness of the left or whatever you claim to be or represent.
Click to expand...


Are you not presuming that gay love isn't as good as hetero love and isn't worthy of the word marriage, which should be reserved for heteros? And that heteros like you should get to decide if gays can get married or not. That makes you someone who doesn't think ALL humans are equal. Am I not right? Because otherwise, please correct me.


----------



## Gadawg73

beagle9 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Is it just that really or is it that they also know that what they do is odd and not mainstream by most peoples standards kept, so they (most of them maybe) just don't push the issue while out in the public ? However, if become married and legal under such a recognized binding contract, how far will it all begin to progress after that line is crossed in the sand by them, and this is of course what many do fear and/or do wonder about ? Is America truly ready for that answer yet, many of the gay's undoubtedly think so, but the poles may show differently as according to a majority still. Problem is these days, is that it matters not what the people think or want anymore as a community and a nation, but what the courts and judges are pushing on them by way of forcing the issues against what the majority may think otherwise in their wantings or opinions there of.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If that three year old see's two guy's kissing on that jog, it matters not about the rest of the indicators, because the kid is fixing to ask a question, and how that question will be answered, will depend upon the parents and their beliefs in which that child belongs to.  Now if the parents say that what just happened is wrong to the child, then how will anyone change that answer or say that it was wrong by telling the kid that answer ? Delusional eh? Do you really think that I am the delusional one here ? I think that I am anchored in reality, but that bugs you badly for some reason.
> 
> 
> 
> Image has nothing to do with a man's actions or his choices made in life, didn't you learn this yet when dealing with the civil rights issues upon trying to invoke that issue as the gay issue as well ? Black people are also created by God, just as everyother color was in this nation or world the same, but it is the personal choices that are made by each and everyone of us upon our given free will, that either draws us closer to God or takes us farther away from God.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tell us about when you chose your sexual orientation.
> How long did you consider the same sex?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> What kind of question is that ?
Click to expand...


You keep claiming it is a choice.


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> You can no more deny gay people equal status to all other humans by a majority vote, than you can vote to have the earth declared flat. There are no grounds of any kind that makes some humans not worth as much as others. We are all equal. You can't go around declaring yourself above some people, that's absurd. Get a grip buddy.
> 
> 
> 
> Not what is being said here, but you love to twist and turn something into what you want it to be don't you ? Awe man, and if I didn't respond, what would it apear to others that you imply that me as a person said or didn't say ?
> 
> This is the slickness of the left or whatever you claim to be or represent.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Are you not presuming that gay love isn't as good as hetero love and isn't worthy of the word marriage, which should be reserved for heteros? And that heteros like you should get to decide if gays can get married or not. That makes you someone who doesn't think ALL humans are equal. Am I not right? Because otherwise, please correct me.
Click to expand...

No I am not saying anything of the sort, because I don't get into the mechanics of any situation involving private or what should be private matters between people and their sex lives, but what people are saying upon the marriage issue or even in their privacy issues as pertaining to these issues I think, is that if they believe that sin in specific areas of life shouldn't involve their areas in life, and that they are wanting their rights to their areas protected equally from what they deem as sinfulness trying to overtake their areas in life, so then there are lines drawn in the sand by all of them, and as long as those lines aren't crossed and are respected, then there is no problem, but as soon as they are crossed, then there is a problem. 

Marriage is accepted by most if not 99.9% of the population as being between one man and one woman I think, and therefore these people in that percentage range are teaching their children these things as well. Then comes confusion into the door, screaming from the roof tops that what is being taught is wrong and therefore should be changed, but will it be accepted by the majority, or will the government step in to force the issue against the majority who see it all otherwise ?

Where does it all go from here I wonder ? Will it get better or will it get worse ya think ? Who knows anymore really, because the nation seems to be shrinking instead of growing in space when it comes to lifestyles, cultures and things of this nature growing more and more, in which before had always had plenty of space for these things to co-exist, but yet not trample upon each other all at the same time.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not what is being said here, but you love to twist and turn something into what you want it to be don't you ? Awe man, and if I didn't respond, what would it apear to others that you imply that me as a person said or didn't say ?
> 
> This is the slickness of the left or whatever you claim to be or represent.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you not presuming that gay love isn't as good as hetero love and isn't worthy of the word marriage, which should be reserved for heteros? And that heteros like you should get to decide if gays can get married or not. That makes you someone who doesn't think ALL humans are equal. Am I not right? Because otherwise, please correct me.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No I am not saying anything of the sort, because I don't get into the mechanics of any situation involving private or what should be private matters between people and their sex lives, but what people are saying upon the marriage issue or even in their privacy issues as pertaining to these issues I think, is that if they believe that sin in specific areas of life shouldn't involve their areas in life, and that they are wanting their rights to their areas protected equally from what they deem as sinfulness trying to overtake their areas in life, so then there are lines drawn in the sand by all of them, and as long as those lines aren't crossed and are respected, then there is no problem, but as soon as they are crossed, then there is a problem.
> 
> Marriage is accepted by most if not 99.9% of the population as being between one man and one woman I think, and therefore these people in that percentage range are teaching their children these things as well. Then comes confusion into the door, screaming from the roof tops that what is being taught is wrong and therefore should be changed, but will it be accepted by the majority, or will the government step in to force the issue against the majority who see it all otherwise ?
> 
> Where does it all go from here I wonder ? Will it get better or will it get worse ya think ? Who knows anymore really, because the nation seems to be shrinking instead of growing in space when it comes to lifestyles, cultures and things of this nature growing more and more, in which before had always had plenty of space for these things to co-exist, but yet not trample upon each other all at the same time.
Click to expand...


From wiki:
A June 6 CNN/ORC International poll showed that a majority of Americans support same-sex marriage being legalized at 54%, while 42% are opposed.
A May 22 NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll showed that 54% of Americans would support a law in their state making same-sex marriage legal, with 40% opposed.
A May 1720 ABC News/Washington Post poll showed that 53% believe same-sex marriage should be legal, with only 39% opposed, a low-water mark for opposition in any national poll so far.

Public opinion of same-sex marriage in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You're actually in the MINORITY! So get over it dude. Where is it going from here? Probably to the Supremes who will undoubtedly declare gays and heteros equal. Because they are.

You know something? I think it's offensive for you to be openly bigoted in front of my children, and the majority agrees with me. Does that count in your world?


----------



## Gadawg73

Most of the rednecks I know in Georgia do not care if gays get married.
They may not agree with it at all but we mind our own business.


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you not presuming that gay love isn't as good as hetero love and isn't worthy of the word marriage, which should be reserved for heteros? And that heteros like you should get to decide if gays can get married or not. That makes you someone who doesn't think ALL humans are equal. Am I not right? Because otherwise, please correct me.
> 
> 
> 
> No I am not saying anything of the sort, because I don't get into the mechanics of any situation involving private or what should be private matters between people and their sex lives, but what people are saying upon the marriage issue or even in their privacy issues as pertaining to these issues I think, is that if they believe that sin in specific areas of life shouldn't involve their areas in life, and that they are wanting their rights to their areas protected equally from what they deem as sinfulness trying to overtake their areas in life, so then there are lines drawn in the sand by all of them, and as long as those lines aren't crossed and are respected, then there is no problem, but as soon as they are crossed, then there is a problem.
> 
> Marriage is accepted by most if not 99.9% of the population as being between one man and one woman I think, and therefore these people in that percentage range are teaching their children these things as well. Then comes confusion into the door, screaming from the roof tops that what is being taught is wrong and therefore should be changed, but will it be accepted by the majority, or will the government step in to force the issue against the majority who see it all otherwise ?
> 
> Where does it all go from here I wonder ? Will it get better or will it get worse ya think ? Who knows anymore really, because the nation seems to be shrinking instead of growing in space when it comes to lifestyles, cultures and things of this nature growing more and more, in which before had always had plenty of space for these things to co-exist, but yet not trample upon each other all at the same time.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> From wiki:
> A June 6 CNN/ORC International poll showed that a majority of Americans support same-sex marriage being legalized at 54%, while 42% are opposed.
> A May 22 NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll showed that 54% of Americans would support a law in their state making same-sex marriage legal, with 40% opposed.
> A May 17&#8211;20 ABC News/Washington Post poll showed that 53% believe same-sex marriage should be legal, with only 39% opposed, a low-water mark for opposition in any national poll so far.
> 
> Public opinion of same-sex marriage in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> You're actually in the MINORITY! So get over it dude. Where is it going from here? Probably to the Supremes who will undoubtedly declare gays and heteros equal. Because they are.
> 
> You know something? I think it's offensive for you to be openly bigoted in front of my children, and the majority agrees with me. Does that count in your world?
Click to expand...

You can run and tell about these polls all you want (or) even try and use them all you want, but they are not accurate and never will be accurate, just as the Chic-Fil-A appreciation day for example proved, in which was created because of the controversy over the anti-gay marriage opinion by it's CEO, where as it suddenly side swamped the minority whom thought that they had long ago and once and for all wrapped this thing up nice and neatly in a quite little box, but then wham reality strikes in which no poll would have ever gotten this right, because a huge amount of an always quite majority or people whom don't do polls, and for whom are also among many that don't get involved much, felt the direct need all of a sudden to get involved, because another one of their sacred institutions was once again under attack by the radical left in this nation.

This blew away the few in this nation, who always are shouting as loud as they can from the roof top's and 24-7, because they are in a true minority, where as it just blew (their minds), because they couldnot believe that this had happened or rather where on earth did it all of a sudden come from(?) thus giving proof that these polls mean nothing when you finally try and pinch off the jugler vien of the quite majority who sleeps much of the time as a sleeping giant does, and then they finally reacted thus showing that these polls mean nothing and are skewed always once the sleeping giant awakens to check in.

Like I said before, but you don't care to worry about or listen to much, that if you choose to teach your children to sin, then it would be best that you place a talent around your neck according to the Bible, and sink yourself to the bottom of the ocean. This is my beliefs also in life within these words that are spoken either as a parable or as a metophor, so why don't you be a responsible parent, and do the right thing in life for them finally, in which is to teach them what is right instead of what is wrong in life finally ?


----------



## beagle9

Gadawg73 said:


> Most of the rednecks I know in Georgia do not care if gays get married.
> They may not agree with it at all but we mind our own business.


Thats all good and dandy if it works that away, but are they minding their own business (or) why do they want to stop free speech or render a majorities opinions, culture, langauge, ideologies, religion as useless in America now, and this in order to then make way for their own lifestyles over and above others maybe ? Otherwise if people disagree with them, will there be push back, and many people think that there will be, just as it has been and always will be I guess. I can't control the masses, and I don't want to try to, so I just live within my means and deal with the cards that are delt to me in life, and if a better hand comes then so be it, but I won't sell out to the devil for that better hand to come, but many will now a days, and they have sadly enough done this in the beating of a single heartbeat (that fast).


----------



## Gadawg73

beagle9 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Most of the rednecks I know in Georgia do not care if gays get married.
> They may not agree with it at all but we mind our own business.
> 
> 
> 
> Thats all good and dandy if it works that away, but are they minding their own business (or) why do they want to stop free speech or render a majorities opinions, culture, langauge, ideologies, religion as useless in America now, and this in order to then make way for their own lifestyles over and above others maybe ? Otherwise if people disagree with them, will there be push back, and many people think that there will be, just as it has been and always will be I guess. I can't control the masses, and I don't want to try to, so I just live within my means and deal with the cards that are delt to me in life, and if a better hand comes then so be it, but I won't sell out to the devil for that better hand to come, but many will now a days, and they have sadly enough done this in the beating of a single heartbeat (that fast).
Click to expand...


Majority opinion means nothing in America in interpreting THE LAW.
We are a republic and are governed by The Constitution.
The Constitution was written to prevent majority rule. The Declaration of Independence was a declaration that there were limitations upon majority rule.
*DUE PROCESS OF LAW* has nothing to do with majority rule and protects all from majority rule.
Right to trial by jury CAN NOT be taken away by majority rule. 
Your majority rule is bully mob rule. Works well in a theocracy which you support.
We prefer freedom and The Constitution this way.
But they do it your way in Iran. Delta is ready when you are!


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> No I am not saying anything of the sort, because I don't get into the mechanics of any situation involving private or what should be private matters between people and their sex lives, but what people are saying upon the marriage issue or even in their privacy issues as pertaining to these issues I think, is that if they believe that sin in specific areas of life shouldn't involve their areas in life, and that they are wanting their rights to their areas protected equally from what they deem as sinfulness trying to overtake their areas in life, so then there are lines drawn in the sand by all of them, and as long as those lines aren't crossed and are respected, then there is no problem, but as soon as they are crossed, then there is a problem.
> 
> Marriage is accepted by most if not 99.9% of the population as being between one man and one woman I think, and therefore these people in that percentage range are teaching their children these things as well. Then comes confusion into the door, screaming from the roof tops that what is being taught is wrong and therefore should be changed, but will it be accepted by the majority, or will the government step in to force the issue against the majority who see it all otherwise ?
> 
> Where does it all go from here I wonder ? Will it get better or will it get worse ya think ? Who knows anymore really, because the nation seems to be shrinking instead of growing in space when it comes to lifestyles, cultures and things of this nature growing more and more, in which before had always had plenty of space for these things to co-exist, but yet not trample upon each other all at the same time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From wiki:
> A June 6 CNN/ORC International poll showed that a majority of Americans support same-sex marriage being legalized at 54%, while 42% are opposed.
> A May 22 NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll showed that 54% of Americans would support a law in their state making same-sex marriage legal, with 40% opposed.
> A May 17&#8211;20 ABC News/Washington Post poll showed that 53% believe same-sex marriage should be legal, with only 39% opposed, a low-water mark for opposition in any national poll so far.
> 
> Public opinion of same-sex marriage in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> You're actually in the MINORITY! So get over it dude. Where is it going from here? Probably to the Supremes who will undoubtedly declare gays and heteros equal. Because they are.
> 
> You know something? I think it's offensive for you to be openly bigoted in front of my children, and the majority agrees with me. Does that count in your world?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> You can run and tell about these polls all you want (or) even try and use them all you want, but they are not accurate and never will be accurate, just as the Chic-Fil-A appreciation day for example proved, in which was created because of the controversy over the anti-gay marriage opinion by it's CEO, where as it suddenly side swamped the minority whom thought that they had long ago and once and for all wrapped this thing up nice and neatly in a quite little box, but then wham reality strikes in which no poll would have ever gotten this right, because a huge amount of an always quite majority or people whom don't do polls, and for whom are also among many that don't get involved much, felt the direct need all of a sudden to get involved, because another one of their sacred institutions was once again under attack by the radical left in this nation.
> 
> This blew away the few in this nation, who always are shouting as loud as they can from the roof top's and 24-7, because they are in a true minority, where as it just blew (their minds), because they couldnot believe that this had happened or rather where on earth did it all of a sudden come from(?) thus giving proof that these polls mean nothing when you finally try and pinch off the jugler vien of the quite majority who sleeps much of the time as a sleeping giant does, and then they finally reacted thus showing that these polls mean nothing and are skewed always once the sleeping giant awakens to check in.
> 
> Like I said before, but you don't care to worry about or listen to much, that if you choose to teach your children to sin, then it would be best that you place a talent around your neck according to the Bible, and sink yourself to the bottom of the ocean. This is my beliefs also in life within these words that are spoken either as a parable or as a metophor, so why don't you be a responsible parent, and do the right thing in life for them finally, in which is to teach them what is right instead of what is wrong in life finally ?
Click to expand...


Sorry buddy, but homo haters like you are actually IN THE MINORITY!
And nobody TEACHES anyone to be gay, they just are. Shows how little you know about the subject.
I am teaching my children what is right and was is wrong, and wrong is being a bigot like you who doesn't think ALL humans are equal. You have also not put forward why gays are inferior to heteros and that YOU should get to decide how they live their lives. Anyways, your children will grow up and realize what a hateful, small minded person you are. And I sure hope that at least one of them is gay.


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> From wiki:
> A June 6 CNN/ORC International poll showed that a majority of Americans support same-sex marriage being legalized at 54%, while 42% are opposed.
> A May 22 NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll showed that 54% of Americans would support a law in their state making same-sex marriage legal, with 40% opposed.
> A May 17&#8211;20 ABC News/Washington Post poll showed that 53% believe same-sex marriage should be legal, with only 39% opposed, a low-water mark for opposition in any national poll so far.
> 
> Public opinion of same-sex marriage in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> You're actually in the MINORITY! So get over it dude. Where is it going from here? Probably to the Supremes who will undoubtedly declare gays and heteros equal. Because they are.
> 
> You know something? I think it's offensive for you to be openly bigoted in front of my children, and the majority agrees with me. Does that count in your world?
> 
> 
> 
> You can run and tell about these polls all you want (or) even try and use them all you want, but they are not accurate and never will be accurate, just as the Chic-Fil-A appreciation day for example proved, in which was created because of the controversy over the anti-gay marriage opinion by it's CEO, where as it suddenly side swamped the minority whom thought that they had long ago and once and for all wrapped this thing up nice and neatly in a quite little box, but then wham reality strikes in which no poll would have ever gotten this right, because a huge amount of an always quite majority or people whom don't do polls, and for whom are also among many that don't get involved much, felt the direct need all of a sudden to get involved, because another one of their sacred institutions was once again under attack by the radical left in this nation.
> 
> This blew away the few in this nation, who always are shouting as loud as they can from the roof top's and 24-7, because they are in a true minority, where as it just blew (their minds), because they couldnot believe that this had happened or rather where on earth did it all of a sudden come from(?) thus giving proof that these polls mean nothing when you finally try and pinch off the jugler vien of the quite majority who sleeps much of the time as a sleeping giant does, and then they finally reacted thus showing that these polls mean nothing and are skewed always once the sleeping giant awakens to check in.
> 
> Like I said before, but you don't care to worry about or listen to much, that if you choose to teach your children to sin, then it would be best that you place a talent around your neck according to the Bible, and sink yourself to the bottom of the ocean. This is my beliefs also in life within these words that are spoken either as a parable or as a metophor, so why don't you be a responsible parent, and do the right thing in life for them finally, in which is to teach them what is right instead of what is wrong in life finally ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sorry buddy, but homo haters like you are actually IN THE MINORITY!
> And nobody TEACHES anyone to be gay, they just are. Shows how little you know about the subject.
> I am teaching my children what is right and was is wrong, and wrong is being a bigot like you who doesn't think ALL humans are equal. You have also not put forward why gays are inferior to heteros and that YOU should get to decide how they live their lives. Anyways, your children will grow up and realize what a hateful, small minded person you are. And I sure hope that at least one of them is gay.
Click to expand...

And who is actually being hateful here again ?

It's amazing how someone like you cannot see your own hatefullness, ignorance and agressiveness found also in what you believe in life, in which is also being forced into another by your beliefs, even when you are in the minority against the majority on an issue, you still try and spin it to suit your selfish ends, and this even if it destroy's your family, life and this nation because of, you are still willing to do so at any cost. The man spoke his opinion when asked, and thousands showed up to support that opinion, so if you can't handle that, then I don't know what to say to you anymore really.


----------



## beagle9

Gadawg73 said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Most of the rednecks I know in Georgia do not care if gays get married.
> They may not agree with it at all but we mind our own business.
> 
> 
> 
> Thats all good and dandy if it works that away, but are they minding their own business (or) why do they want to stop free speech or render a majorities opinions, culture, langauge, ideologies, religion as useless in America now, and this in order to then make way for their own lifestyles over and above others maybe ? Otherwise if people disagree with them, will there be push back, and many people think that there will be, just as it has been and always will be I guess. I can't control the masses, and I don't want to try to, so I just live within my means and deal with the cards that are delt to me in life, and if a better hand comes then so be it, but I won't sell out to the devil for that better hand to come, but many will now a days, and they have sadly enough done this in the beating of a single heartbeat (that fast).
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Majority opinion means nothing in America in interpreting THE LAW.
> We are a republic and are governed by The Constitution.
> The Constitution was written to prevent majority rule. The Declaration of Independence was a declaration that there were limitations upon majority rule.
> *DUE PROCESS OF LAW* has nothing to do with majority rule and protects all from majority rule.
> Right to trial by jury CAN NOT be taken away by majority rule.
> Your majority rule is bully mob rule. Works well in a theocracy which you support.
> We prefer freedom and The Constitution this way.
> But they do it your way in Iran. Delta is ready when you are!
Click to expand...

How do you think that *laws* in this nation came to be ? It was because either a huge amount of stats began to build up over fewer stats as pertaining to an important issue, thus prompting red flags to be seen where there is a problem. Then those who are in the house of representitives, usually get together and take a vote in order to pass a new law if nessesary, thus overriding by majority vote the few who didnot want the new law passed during the session. The good majority always overrides the minority vote in the house if it is the case, so how do you feel that minorities should get their way against a good majority in the house when voting, if that majority is right on an issue and the minority vote is wrong on an issue ? Just because somehow a bad judge sides with a minority on an issue found in a case, in which they were wrong on, it is that you think that the majority should just let the ruling stand or rather should they contest it to the highest courts, even getting signatures by the thousands to present to the court, along with other evidence showing that what the few or the minority want on some issues, is not what the majority wants on some issues, and therefore the court should highly consider in fairness the majority postion and the minority's position, and then rule upon the evidence and opinions as would be presented by all sides in a case in order to make it's final decision.

The destruction of our constitution is what has been going on in this nation, where as the minority has been getting it's way against the majority upon many issues that it shouldnot have, where as the majority was railroaded by bad judges on many issues, and they (the majority) just gave up because they never felt that it would actually ever affect them directly in their lives, so they just gave in at the time, instead of standing up for what was right as they should have. Many mistakes have been made over time, but the nation is waking up again, and it's about time I think that it did.


----------



## Gadawg73

beagle9 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thats all good and dandy if it works that away, but are they minding their own business (or) why do they want to stop free speech or render a majorities opinions, culture, langauge, ideologies, religion as useless in America now, and this in order to then make way for their own lifestyles over and above others maybe ? Otherwise if people disagree with them, will there be push back, and many people think that there will be, just as it has been and always will be I guess. I can't control the masses, and I don't want to try to, so I just live within my means and deal with the cards that are delt to me in life, and if a better hand comes then so be it, but I won't sell out to the devil for that better hand to come, but many will now a days, and they have sadly enough done this in the beating of a single heartbeat (that fast).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Majority opinion means nothing in America in interpreting THE LAW.
> We are a republic and are governed by The Constitution.
> The Constitution was written to prevent majority rule. The Declaration of Independence was a declaration that there were limitations upon majority rule.
> *DUE PROCESS OF LAW* has nothing to do with majority rule and protects all from majority rule.
> Right to trial by jury CAN NOT be taken away by majority rule.
> Your majority rule is bully mob rule. Works well in a theocracy which you support.
> We prefer freedom and The Constitution this way.
> But they do it your way in Iran. Delta is ready when you are!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How do you think that *laws* in this nation came to be ? It was because either a huge amount of stats began to build up over fewer stats as pertaining to an important issue, thus prompting red flags to be seen where there is a problem. Then those who are in the house of representitives, usually get together and take a vote in order to pass a new law if nessesary, thus overriding by majority vote the few who didnot want the new law passed during the session. The good majority always overrides the minority vote in the house if it is the case, so how do you feel that minorities should get their way against a good majority in the house when voting, if that majority is right on an issue and the minority vote is wrong on an issue ? Just because somehow a bad judge sides with a minority on an issue found in a case, in which they were wrong on, it is that you think that the majority should just let the ruling stand or rather should they contest it to the highest courts, even getting signatures by the thousands to present to the court, along with other evidence showing that what the few or the minority want on some issues, is not what the majority wants on some issues, and therefore the court should highly consider in fairness the majority postion and the minority's position, and then rule upon the evidence and opinions as would be presented by all sides in a case in order to make it's final decision.
> 
> The destruction of our constitution is what has been going on in this nation, where as the minority has been getting it's way against the majority upon many issues that it shouldnot have, where as the majority was railroaded by bad judges on many issues, and they (the majority) just gave up because they never felt that it would actually ever affect them directly in their lives, so they just gave in at the time, instead of standing up for what was right as they should have. Many mistakes have been made over time, but the nation is waking up again, and it's about time I think that it did.
Click to expand...


The judiciary can rule ANY LAW unconstitutional at any time.
The enumeration of powers.
The majority CAN NEVER exercise any majority rule laws without being subject TO THE BILL OF RIGHTS.
Respectfully, you are brainwashed and know nothing about US history and the Constitution.
The powers of the majority in government ARE LIMITED.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thats all good and dandy if it works that away, but are they minding their own business (or) why do they want to stop free speech or render a majorities opinions, culture, langauge, ideologies, religion as useless in America now, and this in order to then make way for their own lifestyles over and above others maybe ? Otherwise if people disagree with them, will there be push back, and many people think that there will be, just as it has been and always will be I guess. I can't control the masses, and I don't want to try to, so I just live within my means and deal with the cards that are delt to me in life, and if a better hand comes then so be it, but I won't sell out to the devil for that better hand to come, but many will now a days, and they have sadly enough done this in the beating of a single heartbeat (that fast).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Majority opinion means nothing in America in interpreting THE LAW.
> We are a republic and are governed by The Constitution.
> The Constitution was written to prevent majority rule. The Declaration of Independence was a declaration that there were limitations upon majority rule.
> *DUE PROCESS OF LAW* has nothing to do with majority rule and protects all from majority rule.
> Right to trial by jury CAN NOT be taken away by majority rule.
> Your majority rule is bully mob rule. Works well in a theocracy which you support.
> We prefer freedom and The Constitution this way.
> But they do it your way in Iran. Delta is ready when you are!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> How do you think that *laws* in this nation came to be ? It was because either a huge amount of stats began to build up over fewer stats as pertaining to an important issue, thus prompting red flags to be seen where there is a problem. Then those who are in the house of representitives, usually get together and take a vote in order to pass a new law if nessesary, thus overriding by majority vote the few who didnot want the new law passed during the session. The good majority always overrides the minority vote in the house if it is the case, so how do you feel that minorities should get their way against a good majority in the house when voting, if that majority is right on an issue and the minority vote is wrong on an issue ? Just because somehow a bad judge sides with a minority on an issue found in a case, in which they were wrong on, it is that you think that the majority should just let the ruling stand or rather should they contest it to the highest courts, even getting signatures by the thousands to present to the court, along with other evidence showing that what the few or the minority want on some issues, is not what the majority wants on some issues, and therefore the court should highly consider in fairness the majority postion and the minority's position, and then rule upon the evidence and opinions as would be presented by all sides in a case in order to make it's final decision.
> 
> The destruction of our constitution is what has been going on in this nation, where as the minority has been getting it's way against the majority upon many issues that it shouldnot have, where as the majority was railroaded by bad judges on many issues, and they (the majority) just gave up because they never felt that it would actually ever affect them directly in their lives, so they just gave in at the time, instead of standing up for what was right as they should have. Many mistakes have been made over time, but the nation is waking up again, and it's about time I think that it did.
Click to expand...


So now our laws were first enacted because they analized statistics? 
Bro, are you make this shit up as you go along? 

Btw, isn't our constitution SUPPOSED to protect minorities against the oppression of the majority?


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You can run and tell about these polls all you want (or) even try and use them all you want, but they are not accurate and never will be accurate, just as the Chic-Fil-A appreciation day for example proved, in which was created because of the controversy over the anti-gay marriage opinion by it's CEO, where as it suddenly side swamped the minority whom thought that they had long ago and once and for all wrapped this thing up nice and neatly in a quite little box, but then wham reality strikes in which no poll would have ever gotten this right, because a huge amount of an always quite majority or people whom don't do polls, and for whom are also among many that don't get involved much, felt the direct need all of a sudden to get involved, because another one of their sacred institutions was once again under attack by the radical left in this nation.
> 
> This blew away the few in this nation, who always are shouting as loud as they can from the roof top's and 24-7, because they are in a true minority, where as it just blew (their minds), because they couldnot believe that this had happened or rather where on earth did it all of a sudden come from(?) thus giving proof that these polls mean nothing when you finally try and pinch off the jugler vien of the quite majority who sleeps much of the time as a sleeping giant does, and then they finally reacted thus showing that these polls mean nothing and are skewed always once the sleeping giant awakens to check in.
> 
> Like I said before, but you don't care to worry about or listen to much, that if you choose to teach your children to sin, then it would be best that you place a talent around your neck according to the Bible, and sink yourself to the bottom of the ocean. This is my beliefs also in life within these words that are spoken either as a parable or as a metophor, so why don't you be a responsible parent, and do the right thing in life for them finally, in which is to teach them what is right instead of what is wrong in life finally ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry buddy, but homo haters like you are actually IN THE MINORITY!
> And nobody TEACHES anyone to be gay, they just are. Shows how little you know about the subject.
> I am teaching my children what is right and was is wrong, and wrong is being a bigot like you who doesn't think ALL humans are equal. You have also not put forward why gays are inferior to heteros and that YOU should get to decide how they live their lives. Anyways, your children will grow up and realize what a hateful, small minded person you are. And I sure hope that at least one of them is gay.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> And who is actually being hateful here again ?
> 
> It's amazing *how someone like you cannot see your own hatefullness, ignorance and agressiveness found also in what you believe in life*, in which is also being forced into another by your beliefs, even when you are in the minority against the majority on an issue, you still try and spin it to suit your selfish ends, and this even if it destroy's your family, life and this nation because of, you are still willing to do so at any cost. The man spoke his opinion when asked, and thousands showed up to support that opinion, so if you can't handle that, then I don't know what to say to you anymore really.
Click to expand...


Says the guy who's hateful, ignorant and aggressively hating gays by wanting laws to block their attempts at equality. 

You keep saying that I'm in the minority, so you're saying that CNN, NBC, ABC, The Wall Street Journal and the Washington Post are all full of shit and that you know better than they do? 

I always stand by Cathy's right to say what he wants, but he obviously has to stand by what he says, which I think, he has. And he made a ton of money doing it. It's the American Way!

And what's killing the family in America is marriage, since half of them end in divorce.


----------



## beagle9

Gadawg73 said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Majority opinion means nothing in America in interpreting THE LAW.
> We are a republic and are governed by The Constitution.
> The Constitution was written to prevent majority rule. The Declaration of Independence was a declaration that there were limitations upon majority rule.
> *DUE PROCESS OF LAW* has nothing to do with majority rule and protects all from majority rule.
> Right to trial by jury CAN NOT be taken away by majority rule.
> Your majority rule is bully mob rule. Works well in a theocracy which you support.
> We prefer freedom and The Constitution this way.
> But they do it your way in Iran. Delta is ready when you are!
> 
> 
> 
> How do you think that *laws* in this nation came to be ? It was because either a huge amount of stats began to build up over fewer stats as pertaining to an important issue, thus prompting red flags to be seen where there is a problem. Then those who are in the house of representitives, usually get together and take a vote in order to pass a new law if nessesary, thus overriding by majority vote the few who didnot want the new law passed during the session. The good majority always overrides the minority vote in the house if it is the case, so how do you feel that minorities should get their way against a good majority in the house when voting, if that majority is right on an issue and the minority vote is wrong on an issue ? Just because somehow a bad judge sides with a minority on an issue found in a case, in which they were wrong on, it is that you think that the majority should just let the ruling stand or rather should they contest it to the highest courts, even getting signatures by the thousands to present to the court, along with other evidence showing that what the few or the minority want on some issues, is not what the majority wants on some issues, and therefore the court should highly consider in fairness the majority postion and the minority's position, and then rule upon the evidence and opinions as would be presented by all sides in a case in order to make it's final decision.
> 
> The destruction of our constitution is what has been going on in this nation, where as the minority has been getting it's way against the majority upon many issues that it shouldnot have, where as the majority was railroaded by bad judges on many issues, and they (the majority) just gave up because they never felt that it would actually ever affect them directly in their lives, so they just gave in at the time, instead of standing up for what was right as they should have. Many mistakes have been made over time, but the nation is waking up again, and it's about time I think that it did.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The judiciary can rule ANY LAW unconstitutional at any time.
> The enumeration of powers.
> The majority CAN NEVER exercise any majority rule laws without being subject TO THE BILL OF RIGHTS.
> Respectfully, you are brainwashed and know nothing about US history and the Constitution.
> The powers of the majority in government ARE LIMITED.
Click to expand...

*Yes,* the power of the government over the people is limited and rightly so, and that is the way that it should be, but in many cases today, the government has overridden the people in a traggic and wrongful way, and this is why there is so much confusion & suttle anarchy growing in America today.


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> You keep saying that I'm in the minority, so you're saying that CNN, NBC, ABC, The Wall Street Journal and the Washington Post are all full of shit and that you know better than they do?



Not just me, but hundreds of thousands more just like me, except for or rather that they have been away and sleeping in a silent majority for to long now, oh and these media outlets that you quote, well they are pure liberal poison is what they are, where as the good majority in this nation get their news from other sources and rightly so these days.

You are in the minority I'm sure of it, but you are just living in denial is all..


----------



## Gadawg73

beagle9 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> How do you think that *laws* in this nation came to be ? It was because either a huge amount of stats began to build up over fewer stats as pertaining to an important issue, thus prompting red flags to be seen where there is a problem. Then those who are in the house of representitives, usually get together and take a vote in order to pass a new law if nessesary, thus overriding by majority vote the few who didnot want the new law passed during the session. The good majority always overrides the minority vote in the house if it is the case, so how do you feel that minorities should get their way against a good majority in the house when voting, if that majority is right on an issue and the minority vote is wrong on an issue ? Just because somehow a bad judge sides with a minority on an issue found in a case, in which they were wrong on, it is that you think that the majority should just let the ruling stand or rather should they contest it to the highest courts, even getting signatures by the thousands to present to the court, along with other evidence showing that what the few or the minority want on some issues, is not what the majority wants on some issues, and therefore the court should highly consider in fairness the majority postion and the minority's position, and then rule upon the evidence and opinions as would be presented by all sides in a case in order to make it's final decision.
> 
> The destruction of our constitution is what has been going on in this nation, where as the minority has been getting it's way against the majority upon many issues that it shouldnot have, where as the majority was railroaded by bad judges on many issues, and they (the majority) just gave up because they never felt that it would actually ever affect them directly in their lives, so they just gave in at the time, instead of standing up for what was right as they should have. Many mistakes have been made over time, but the nation is waking up again, and it's about time I think that it did.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The judiciary can rule ANY LAW unconstitutional at any time.
> The enumeration of powers.
> The majority CAN NEVER exercise any majority rule laws without being subject TO THE BILL OF RIGHTS.
> Respectfully, you are brainwashed and know nothing about US history and the Constitution.
> The powers of the majority in government ARE LIMITED.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *Yes,* the power of the government over the people is limited and rightly so, and that is the way that it should be, but in many cases today, the government has overridden the people in a traggic and wrongful way, and this is why there is so much confusion & suttle anarchy growing in America today.
Click to expand...


Majority MOB RULE is what people are "overriden" with and you are a #1 supporter of that. You claim YOURSELF that the majority should get what they want.
THE LAW, THE CONSTITUTION, THE BILL OF RIGHTS protects us from the likes of you that want to use the power of government to force your majority mob rule dictates on the minorities.
And gay folk are your target.
True freedom is when you seek to protect the rights of everyone, ESPECIALLY those YOU may despise the most.
You seem like a decent guy. I hope that you are not teaching your kids this crap you come up with.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> You keep saying that I'm in the minority, so you're saying that CNN, NBC, ABC, The Wall Street Journal and the Washington Post are all full of shit and that you know better than they do?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not just me, but hundreds of thousands more just like me, except for or rather that they have been away and sleeping in a silent majority for to long now, oh and these media outlets that you quote, well they are pure liberal poison is what they are, where as the good majority in this nation get their news from other sources and rightly so these days.
> 
> You are in the minority I'm sure of it, but you are just living in denial is all..
Click to expand...

If you're so sure that I'M the one who's in the minority, maybe you can back up your statement with some facts? Or is all you have just stinky air out your poo hole?


----------



## beagle9

Gadawg73 said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The judiciary can rule ANY LAW unconstitutional at any time.
> The enumeration of powers.
> The majority CAN NEVER exercise any majority rule laws without being subject TO THE BILL OF RIGHTS.
> Respectfully, you are brainwashed and know nothing about US history and the Constitution.
> The powers of the majority in government ARE LIMITED.
> 
> 
> 
> *Yes,* the power of the government over the people is limited and rightly so, and that is the way that it should be, but in many cases today, the government has overridden the people in a traggic and wrongful way, and this is why there is so much confusion & suttle anarchy growing in America today.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Majority MOB RULE is what people are "overriden" with and you are a #1 supporter of that. You claim YOURSELF that the majority should get what they want.
> THE LAW, THE CONSTITUTION, THE BILL OF RIGHTS protects us from the likes of you that want to use the power of government to force your majority mob rule dictates on the minorities.
> And gay folk are your target.
> True freedom is when you seek to protect the rights of everyone, ESPECIALLY those YOU may despise the most.
> You seem like a decent guy. I hope that you are not teaching your kids this crap you come up with.
Click to expand...

Twist and spin all you want here, but people know what I am about here within my opinions, and they know what you are about here in your opinions, so don't go fooling yourself that people are as stupid as you might think that they are when spinning like you do, because they aren't as stupid as you think that they are and never will be..

I am against government intrusion and unchecked power by government in this nation, especially in a lot of things, but in order for you and others in the minority on these issues, to get your way against the majority on these issues, and this against those whom are usually in a good majority on these issues, well you and your buddies use the government to overcome and/or oppress with ((in which it was not intended to be used in this way)). Then you try and say that others are using the government in this way, but it is a distraction, when they are not doing this at all, but are rather using the power of the vote found in a good majority, just as it should be used instead. Just sayin!


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> You keep saying that I'm in the minority, so you're saying that CNN, NBC, ABC, The Wall Street Journal and the Washington Post are all full of shit and that you know better than they do?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not just me, but hundreds of thousands more just like me, except for or rather that they have been away and sleeping in a silent majority for to long now, oh and these media outlets that you quote, well they are pure liberal poison is what they are, where as the good majority in this nation get their news from other sources and rightly so these days.
> 
> You are in the minority I'm sure of it, but you are just living in denial is all..
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> If you're so sure that I'M the one who's in the minority, maybe you can back up your statement with some facts? Or is all you have just stinky air out your poo hole?
Click to expand...



Prove that you are not in the minority...

My proof - The Chic-Fil-A day illustrated and/or said strongly otherwise, that that majority was against gay marriage and supported Mr. Cathy's position on this when spoken, and this when compared to the anti-supporters verses the supportors on those days in numbers there of.. How hard can it be to see the numbers found in these two sides that were out and about during the support and anti-support days ?


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not just me, but hundreds of thousands more just like me, except for or rather that they have been away and sleeping in a silent majority for to long now, oh and these media outlets that you quote, well they are pure liberal poison is what they are, where as the good majority in this nation get their news from other sources and rightly so these days.
> 
> You are in the minority I'm sure of it, but you are just living in denial is all..
> 
> 
> 
> If you're so sure that I'M the one who's in the minority, maybe you can back up your statement with some facts? Or is all you have just stinky air out your poo hole?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Prove that you are not in the minority...
> 
> My proof - The Chic-Fil-A day illustrated and/or said strongly otherwise, that that majority was against gay marriage and supported Mr. Cathy's position on this when spoken, and this when compared to the anti-supporters verses the supportors on those days in numbers there of.. How hard can it be to see the numbers found in these two sides that were out and about during the support and anti-support days ?
Click to expand...


So you're actually trying to take one isolated protest as proof of the whole country? Do you know what the term "intellectually dishonest" means? 
I backed up my statement with CNN, ABC, NBC, The Washington Post, The NY Times... You on the other hand, have just ONE isolated protest. Better luck next time. Please try again.


----------



## Gadawg73

beagle9 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> *Yes,* the power of the government over the people is limited and rightly so, and that is the way that it should be, but in many cases today, the government has overridden the people in a traggic and wrongful way, and this is why there is so much confusion & suttle anarchy growing in America today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Majority MOB RULE is what people are "overriden" with and you are a #1 supporter of that. You claim YOURSELF that the majority should get what they want.
> THE LAW, THE CONSTITUTION, THE BILL OF RIGHTS protects us from the likes of you that want to use the power of government to force your majority mob rule dictates on the minorities.
> And gay folk are your target.
> True freedom is when you seek to protect the rights of everyone, ESPECIALLY those YOU may despise the most.
> You seem like a decent guy. I hope that you are not teaching your kids this crap you come up with.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Twist and spin all you want here, but people know what I am about here within my opinions, and they know what you are about here in your opinions, so don't go fooling yourself that people are as stupid as you might think that they are when spinning like you do, because they aren't as stupid as you think that they are and never will be..
> 
> I am against government intrusion and unchecked power by government in this nation, especially in a lot of things, but in order for you and others in the minority on these issues, to get your way against the majority on these issues, and this against those whom are usually in a good majority on these issues, well you and your buddies use the government to overcome and/or oppress with ((in which it was not intended to be used in this way)). Then you try and say that others are using the government in this way, but it is a distraction, when they are not doing this at all, but are rather using the power of the vote found in a good majority, just as it should be used instead. Just sayin!
Click to expand...


You are the one that wants to oppress the minority.
And you are pissed that someone has called you out on it.
Get used to it.


----------



## beagle9

Gadawg73 said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Majority MOB RULE is what people are "overriden" with and you are a #1 supporter of that. You claim YOURSELF that the majority should get what they want.
> THE LAW, THE CONSTITUTION, THE BILL OF RIGHTS protects us from the likes of you that want to use the power of government to force your majority mob rule dictates on the minorities.
> And gay folk are your target.
> True freedom is when you seek to protect the rights of everyone, ESPECIALLY those YOU may despise the most.
> You seem like a decent guy. I hope that you are not teaching your kids this crap you come up with.
> 
> 
> 
> Twist and spin all you want here, but people know what I am about here within my opinions, and they know what you are about here in your opinions, so don't go fooling yourself that people are as stupid as you might think that they are when spinning like you do, because they aren't as stupid as you think that they are and never will be..
> 
> I am against government intrusion and unchecked power by government in this nation, especially in a lot of things, but in order for you and others in the minority on these issues, to get your way against the majority on these issues, and this against those whom are usually in a good majority on these issues, well you and your buddies use the government to overcome and/or oppress with ((in which it was not intended to be used in this way)). Then you try and say that others are using the government in this way, but it is a distraction, when they are not doing this at all, but are rather using the power of the vote found in a good majority, just as it should be used instead. Just sayin!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are the one that wants to oppress the minority.
> And you are pissed that someone has called you out on it.
> Get used to it.
Click to expand...

No, I just don't want the minority oppressing the majority as it has been doing by way of government usage, in which government was not intended for that, nor was it supposed to be used for that.

People now wanting to do things that the *good majority* find disrespectful and distasteful when it comes to their definition of marriage, as is also found in the eyes of God always, and for whom see's it as normal and sacred between one man and one woman found within the entire universe, and for whom see's it as sacred and holly between one man and one woman when join together in this way, *have now had enough *of the pandering by government in this nation towards groups whom go against the grain and against the good majority for whom have rights and a culture carved out into this nation and land as well, and their rights and culture are not to be violated or trounced on by the minority on certain issues that are brought forward by some and/or a few in this nation in challenge there of.  (Hang on let me take a bite of my chicken sandwich with extra pickels from Chic-Fil-A) ok I'm back.

They (the good majority) wish not for these things to now be around them and their children as found in the opposite there of (turned completely upside down), and so they have had enough of it all, and they want their rights and freedoms restored as it should be in America, especially for what is considered as the good majority, for whom think in these ways that they do against the minority whom think in the ways that they do on some of these issues that are in contrast to. Concerning those rights that were taken from them as a majority by a government who became out of control and pandering to groups for their votes only, has gone far enough, where as the government was pandering to those in a minority, whom then used the power of government to oppress the majority that did see it all as otherwise, but the majority fell to the pressures of those whom had somehow joined together with government to do these things under certain un-American umbrella's in which they had created, and for whom then used these government anti-majority umbrellas created, to get their way against the majority in this nation as it has done, where as by way of government supression upon the majority vote in which was wrong, is the way that they did this. 

It was as if the government due to it's greedyness of wanting it's own seperated power, was willing to do anything against the majority in this nation whom had given the government it's power originally, and yet now unfortunately, where as that very government took that power and turned it back against the majority when it (the government) began to think for itself, and would soon think that what it thought as independently operated in that power gained, would also be good for us now when used it on us, instead of what we thought was good for us as a majority in this nation instead. The majority vote should always be considered by our government voted in by us as a majority, to always consider the rights and plight of the majority on most issues because of, instead of this pandering as it did to gain power as seperated from the majority in which it was called upon or created to represent originally. 

What we have is a government that is out of control, and has been taken over by those in this nation, whom want what they want against a good majority as found in the United States Citizens on whole, and this no matter what that good majority thinks otherwise. It is wrong what has gone on and for what is going on, and Chic-Fil-A cast that light out into the open for all to see now. The  government will use this power as gained now, to cause more damage to America on other issues, and ultimately to take down America as a whole if not recognized finally that it now thinks and acts for itself, instead of being for the American people found in a good majority, just as it should be acting and operating for instead.


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you're so sure that I'M the one who's in the minority, maybe you can back up your statement with some facts? Or is all you have just stinky air out your poo hole?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Prove that you are not in the minority...
> 
> My proof - The Chic-Fil-A day illustrated and/or said strongly otherwise, that that majority was against gay marriage and supported Mr. Cathy's position on this when spoken, and this when compared to the anti-supporters verses the supportors on those days in numbers there of.. How hard can it be to see the numbers found in these two sides that were out and about during the support and anti-support days ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> So you're actually trying to take one isolated protest as proof of the whole country? Do you know what the term "intellectually dishonest" means?
> I backed up my statement with CNN, ABC, NBC, The Washington Post, The NY Times... You on the other hand, have just ONE isolated protest. Better luck next time. Please try again.
Click to expand...

When the results of that protest was indicative as it was of the whole country's thoughts on the matter, along with the inet social media afterwards to be included into it all as well, then *YES* I will use that kind of information or results any day as my proof of to you or anyone else on such a matter. Your sources are intelectually dishonest, and everyone knows their games now, where as they are one sided, and therefore are poisonous to America by the ways in which they have been operating under.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Prove that you are not in the minority...
> 
> My proof - The Chic-Fil-A day illustrated and/or said strongly otherwise, that that majority was against gay marriage and supported Mr. Cathy's position on this when spoken, and this when compared to the anti-supporters verses the supportors on those days in numbers there of.. How hard can it be to see the numbers found in these two sides that were out and about during the support and anti-support days ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So you're actually trying to take one isolated protest as proof of the whole country? Do you know what the term "intellectually dishonest" means?
> I backed up my statement with CNN, ABC, NBC, The Washington Post, The NY Times... You on the other hand, have just ONE isolated protest. Better luck next time. Please try again.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> When the results of that protest was indicative as it was of the whole country's thoughts on the matter, along with the inet social media afterwards to be included into it all as well, then *YES* I will use that kind of information or results any day as my proof of to you or anyone else on such a matter. Your sources are intelectually dishonest, and everyone knows their games now, where as they are one sided, and therefore are poisonous to America by the ways in which they have been operating under.
Click to expand...

Beag, you're so full of shit. Your strawman argument about being in the majority was proven wrong. Take it like a man or be a pussy about it doesn't matter, the facts say that you're wrong.


----------



## rdean

It only shows the power the Republican Party to hate gay people.  Hate is what they do best.


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> So you're actually trying to take one isolated protest as proof of the whole country? Do you know what the term "intellectually dishonest" means?
> I backed up my statement with CNN, ABC, NBC, The Washington Post, The NY Times... You on the other hand, have just ONE isolated protest. Better luck next time. Please try again.
> 
> 
> 
> When the results of that protest was indicative as it was of the whole country's thoughts on the matter, along with the inet social media afterwards to be included into it all as well, then *YES* I will use that kind of information or results any day as my proof of to you or anyone else on such a matter. Your sources are intelectually dishonest, and everyone knows their games now, where as they are one sided, and therefore are poisonous to America by the ways in which they have been operating under.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Beag, you're so full of shit. Your strawman argument about being in the majority was proven wrong. Take it like a man or be a pussy about it doesn't matter, the facts say that you're wrong.
Click to expand...

Now who is being intelectually dishonest or rather is following in lock step with a single group instead of listeing to what the majority has to say on the matter, not to leave out or make mention of your so called intelectually fowel mouth on top of that ?


----------



## beagle9

rdean said:


> It only shows the power the Republican Party to hate gay people.  Hate is what they do best.


Not hate, but rather a disagreement with or over certain subjects or issues in life, but man what it is to disagree with a few people today...One would think that the world came to an end in their world..WOW


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> When the results of that protest was indicative as it was of the whole country's thoughts on the matter, along with the inet social media afterwards to be included into it all as well, then *YES* I will use that kind of information or results any day as my proof of to you or anyone else on such a matter. Your sources are intelectually dishonest, and everyone knows their games now, where as they are one sided, and therefore are poisonous to America by the ways in which they have been operating under.
> 
> 
> 
> Beag, you're so full of shit. Your strawman argument about being in the majority was proven wrong. Take it like a man or be a pussy about it doesn't matter, the facts say that you're wrong.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Now who is being intelectually dishonest or rather is following in lock step with a single group instead of listeing to what the majority has to say on the matter, not to leave out or make mention of your so called intelectually fowel mouth on top of that ?
Click to expand...


Cmon buddy, you think that a CNN/ORC International poll , a NBC News/Wall Street Journal polland an ABC News/Washington Post poll are all wrong on purpose? That it's some kind of gay conspiracy? It's hard to argue with 
I actually at first assumed that you were right, that gay-haters were in the majority, then I looked it up. Turns out, you ARE wrong. Live with it. Better still, let's take a nation-wide vote.


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Beag, you're so full of shit. Your strawman argument about being in the majority was proven wrong. Take it like a man or be a pussy about it doesn't matter, the facts say that you're wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> Now who is being intelectually dishonest or rather is following in lock step with a single group instead of listeing to what the majority has to say on the matter, not to leave out or make mention of your so called intelectually fowel mouth on top of that ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Cmon buddy, you think that a CNN/ORC International poll , a NBC News/Wall Street Journal polland an ABC News/Washington Post poll are all wrong on purpose? That it's some kind of gay conspiracy? It's hard to argue with
> I actually at first assumed that you were right, that gay-haters were in the majority, then I looked it up. Turns out, you ARE wrong. Live with it. Better still, let's take a nation-wide vote.
Click to expand...



Still won't be able to tell ima, now if you were to place a Chic-Fil-A chicken sandwich on the table during the poll taking, then the silent majority will come pouring out with the coffee beans again, then you will once again be able to really smell the coffee brewing again in America on the issue. 

The problem with your outlets, is that they have nothing to offer when the poll is being taken or they are offering the wrong information or questions being asked within the poll taking when taken, and that is why the poll numbers are either fabricated or skewed afterwards (they have to be), LOL, because the majority in America doesn't live on this inet like some people do, but the majority loving Chicken eaters sure can mess things up a bit can't they? By (SURPRISING) the one side who thought they had the issue sewn up, so for those who opposed, well they are or have been still digging out from under that one. LOL 

Seriously now, when the polls are taken, they are usually wrong always in the ratio's depending on how the poll is taken, and who participates in it when it is taken, and what audience it therefore targets in the process when taken, but take the media out of it, and add a chicken chain, WOW.. 

It's easy to target an audience and then say that you have taken an honest and fair poll, but how so if the people didnot participate in the right areas or in the right ratios in order to give the poll an honest look at the ratio's that are involved ? We all know this game and it has already been proven over and over again that the polls are not to be lived by or believed as the tell all or know all to these issues, but people still use them regardless in hopes to give their side a bounce every once in a while. The gay's had every opporitunity to represent their side at the Fast food chain also, but it was a pathetic showing for them wasn't it ?  Hiding behind the polls is a tactic used also by media and the one sided poll numbers taken, so who follows polls really ? The chicken eaters don't...


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Now who is being intelectually dishonest or rather is following in lock step with a single group instead of listeing to what the majority has to say on the matter, not to leave out or make mention of your so called intelectually fowel mouth on top of that ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Cmon buddy, you think that a CNN/ORC International poll , a NBC News/Wall Street Journal polland an ABC News/Washington Post poll are all wrong on purpose? That it's some kind of gay conspiracy? It's hard to argue with
> I actually at first assumed that you were right, that gay-haters were in the majority, then I looked it up. Turns out, you ARE wrong. Live with it. Better still, let's take a nation-wide vote.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Still won't be able to tell ima, now if you were to place a Chic-Fil-A chicken sandwich on the table during the poll taking, then the silent majority will come pouring out with the coffee beans again, then you will once again be able to really smell the coffee brewing again in America on the issue.
> 
> The problem with your outlets, is that they have nothing to offer when the poll is being taken or they are offering the wrong information or questions being asked within the poll taking when taken, and that is why the poll numbers are either fabricated or skewed afterwards (they have to be), LOL, because the majority in America doesn't live on this inet like some people do, but the majority loving Chicken eaters sure can mess things up a bit can't they? By (SURPRISING) the one side who thought they had the issue sewn up, so for those who opposed, well they are or have been still digging out from under that one. LOL
> 
> Seriously now, when the polls are taken, they are usually wrong always in the ratio's depending on how the poll is taken, and who participates in it when it is taken, and what audience it therefore targets in the process when taken, but take the media out of it, and add a chicken chain, WOW..
> 
> It's easy to target an audience and then say that you have taken an honest and fair poll, but how so if the people didnot participate in the right areas or in the right ratios in order to give the poll an honest look at the ratio's that are involved ? We all know this game and it has already been proven over and over again that the polls are not to be lived by or believed as the tell all or know all to these issues, but people still use them regardless in hopes to give their side a bounce every once in a while. The gay's had every opporitunity to represent their side at the Fast food chain also, but it was a pathetic showing for them wasn't it ?  Hiding behind the polls is a tactic used also by media and the one sided poll numbers taken, so who follows polls really ? The chicken eaters don't...
Click to expand...


I'm a vegetarian because eating meat and ESPECIALLY factory farmed chicken like Chic-Filled-Ahole's is extremely bad for your health. So that chicken eaters are wrong about gay marriage is no surprise. Now go worship your invisible god who made gays so real christians like you would have someone to hate.
But even so, a lot of gays probably eat chicken. Or are you going to vote them out of eating chicken next?


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Cmon buddy, you think that a CNN/ORC International poll , a NBC News/Wall Street Journal polland an ABC News/Washington Post poll are all wrong on purpose? That it's some kind of gay conspiracy? It's hard to argue with
> I actually at first assumed that you were right, that gay-haters were in the majority, then I looked it up. Turns out, you ARE wrong. Live with it. Better still, let's take a nation-wide vote.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Still won't be able to tell ima, now if you were to place a Chic-Fil-A chicken sandwich on the table during the poll taking, then the silent majority will come pouring out with the coffee beans again, then you will once again be able to really smell the coffee brewing again in America on the issue.
> 
> The problem with your outlets, is that they have nothing to offer when the poll is being taken or they are offering the wrong information or questions being asked within the poll taking when taken, and that is why the poll numbers are either fabricated or skewed afterwards (they have to be), LOL, because the majority in America doesn't live on this inet like some people do, but the majority loving Chicken eaters sure can mess things up a bit can't they? By (SURPRISING) the one side who thought they had the issue sewn up, so for those who opposed, well they are or have been still digging out from under that one. LOL
> 
> Seriously now, when the polls are taken, they are usually wrong always in the ratio's depending on how the poll is taken, and who participates in it when it is taken, and what audience it therefore targets in the process when taken, but take the media out of it, and add a chicken chain, WOW..
> 
> It's easy to target an audience and then say that you have taken an honest and fair poll, but how so if the people didnot participate in the right areas or in the right ratios in order to give the poll an honest look at the ratio's that are involved ? We all know this game and it has already been proven over and over again that the polls are not to be lived by or believed as the tell all or know all to these issues, but people still use them regardless in hopes to give their side a bounce every once in a while. The gay's had every opporitunity to represent their side at the Fast food chain also, but it was a pathetic showing for them wasn't it ?  Hiding behind the polls is a tactic used also by media and the one sided poll numbers taken, so who follows polls really ? The chicken eaters don't...
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I'm a vegetarian because eating meat and ESPECIALLY factory farmed chicken like Chic-Filled-Ahole's is extremely bad for your health. So that chicken eaters are wrong about gay marriage is no surprise. Now go worship your invisible god who made gays so real christians like you would have someone to hate.
> But even so, a lot of gays probably eat chicken. Or are you going to vote them out of eating chicken next?
Click to expand...

Eating chicken is extremely bad for ones health eh, well that is very debatable also in life as you know. It all really depends on who you are asking on such a health issue, and how their health is on the issue when asking them, but it is known that there are far more risk to ones health found in other areas of life, especially when it comes to sex and the improper usage of it. 

I think I will take the chicken sandwich over some things in life that are chosen by various people anyday.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Still won't be able to tell ima, now if you were to place a Chic-Fil-A chicken sandwich on the table during the poll taking, then the silent majority will come pouring out with the coffee beans again, then you will once again be able to really smell the coffee brewing again in America on the issue.
> 
> The problem with your outlets, is that they have nothing to offer when the poll is being taken or they are offering the wrong information or questions being asked within the poll taking when taken, and that is why the poll numbers are either fabricated or skewed afterwards (they have to be), LOL, because the majority in America doesn't live on this inet like some people do, but the majority loving Chicken eaters sure can mess things up a bit can't they? By (SURPRISING) the one side who thought they had the issue sewn up, so for those who opposed, well they are or have been still digging out from under that one. LOL
> 
> Seriously now, when the polls are taken, they are usually wrong always in the ratio's depending on how the poll is taken, and who participates in it when it is taken, and what audience it therefore targets in the process when taken, but take the media out of it, and add a chicken chain, WOW..
> 
> It's easy to target an audience and then say that you have taken an honest and fair poll, but how so if the people didnot participate in the right areas or in the right ratios in order to give the poll an honest look at the ratio's that are involved ? We all know this game and it has already been proven over and over again that the polls are not to be lived by or believed as the tell all or know all to these issues, but people still use them regardless in hopes to give their side a bounce every once in a while. The gay's had every opporitunity to represent their side at the Fast food chain also, but it was a pathetic showing for them wasn't it ?  Hiding behind the polls is a tactic used also by media and the one sided poll numbers taken, so who follows polls really ? The chicken eaters don't...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm a vegetarian because eating meat and ESPECIALLY factory farmed chicken like Chic-Filled-Ahole's is extremely bad for your health. So that chicken eaters are wrong about gay marriage is no surprise. Now go worship your invisible god who made gays so real christians like you would have someone to hate.
> But even so, a lot of gays probably eat chicken. Or are you going to vote them out of eating chicken next?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Eating chicken is extremely bad for ones health eh, well that is very debatable also in life as you know. It all really depends on who you are asking on such a health issue, and how their health is on the issue when asking them, but it is known that there are far more risk to ones health found in other areas of life, especially when it comes to sex and the improper usage of it.
> 
> I think I will take the chicken sandwich over some things in life that are chosen by various people anyday.
Click to expand...


Just as long as now you know that the majority eat chicken and are ok with gay love and marriage. 

Just curious, do you often picture in your head 2 guys going at it in the sack?


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm a vegetarian because eating meat and ESPECIALLY factory farmed chicken like Chic-Filled-Ahole's is extremely bad for your health. So that chicken eaters are wrong about gay marriage is no surprise. Now go worship your invisible god who made gays so real christians like you would have someone to hate.
> But even so, a lot of gays probably eat chicken. Or are you going to vote them out of eating chicken next?
> 
> 
> 
> Eating chicken is extremely bad for ones health eh, well that is very debatable also in life as you know. It all really depends on who you are asking on such a health issue, and how their health is on the issue when asking them, but it is known that there are far more risk to ones health found in other areas of life, especially when it comes to sex and the improper usage of it.
> 
> I think I will take the chicken sandwich over some things in life that are chosen by various people anyday.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Just as long as now you know that the majority eat chicken and are ok with gay love and marriage.
> 
> Just curious, do you often picture in your head 2 guys going at it in the sack?
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but it apears that you are getting back to your weird side when you post, so I will choose to wait until you post something somewhat inteligent again before I respond, because undoubtedly you are running out of constructive things to say in this conversation, in which has been the case for the most part since we have been conversating in this thread. 

Come on now, I know you can do a little better than this, but then again, maybe not. (sigh)


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Eating chicken is extremely bad for ones health eh, well that is very debatable also in life as you know. It all really depends on who you are asking on such a health issue, and how their health is on the issue when asking them, but it is known that there are far more risk to ones health found in other areas of life, especially when it comes to sex and the improper usage of it.
> 
> I think I will take the chicken sandwich over some things in life that are chosen by various people anyday.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just as long as now you know that the majority eat chicken and are ok with gay love and marriage.
> 
> Just curious, do you often picture in your head 2 guys going at it in the sack?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I'm sorry, but it apears that you are getting back to your weird side when you post, so I will choose to wait until you post something somewhat inteligent again before I respond, because undoubtedly you are running out of constructive things to say in this conversation, in which has been the case for the most part since we have been conversating in this thread.
> 
> Come on now, I know you can do a little better than this, but then again, maybe not. (sigh)
Click to expand...


What's there to say? You're deluded into thinking that homo-haters are in the majority when clearly they are not. The tide has already turned. When you are over it, maybe we'll have things to discuss, like why you think that gays are inferior human beings? Does it give your own deflated self-image a boost by putting others down?


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just as long as now you know that the majority eat chicken and are ok with gay love and marriage.
> 
> Just curious, do you often picture in your head 2 guys going at it in the sack?
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sorry, but it apears that you are getting back to your weird side when you post, so I will choose to wait until you post something somewhat inteligent again before I respond, because undoubtedly you are running out of constructive things to say in this conversation, in which has been the case for the most part since we have been conversating in this thread.
> 
> Come on now, I know you can do a little better than this, but then again, maybe not. (sigh)
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What's there to say? You're deluded into thinking that homo-haters are in the majority when clearly they are not. The tide has already turned. When you are over it, maybe we'll have things to discuss, like why you think that gays are inferior human beings? Does it give your own deflated self-image a boost by putting others down?
Click to expand...

Arguing is not conversation, and this is what you want is an argument, but I am done arguing with you, especially when you try and insert words into someones mouth (attempted profiling) instead of awaiting for them to speak to what you then try and accuse them of saying before they even have said it, and this you do in order to try and paint someone into a picture that does not reflect the people or persons at all in which you are speaking with, but rather it suits you better if you can create this boogy man in which you look for in the shadows underneath their beds, when that is the last place anyone wants to be is under their beds, in their beds or around their beds, but you try and drag everyone into their beds in order to make some kind of points for them?  Very strange indeed !


----------



## Uncensored2008

I think I'll go to Chick-fil-A for dinner....


----------



## Gadawg73

When they had that Stand up for Straight Marriage Day at Chik Fil A day here the cars were lined up a half mile long and the customers were in the lawn at the mall eating it was so crowded.
And good for Chik Fil A.
Recently, a National Guard Unit returned from Afghanistan. 
There were no coupons honored that day for discounts on chicken sammiches so I guess all those family values citizens around here had no reason to go and honor those soldiers that day.
But they sure as hell stand up for "family values" when it is gay folk that are looked down on.
Chicken sammiches are far more important than soldiers and their families.
Amazing how stupid Americans have become. Madison Avenue marketing is bought hook, line and sinker.


----------



## beagle9

Gadawg73 said:


> When they had that Stand up for Straight Marriage Day at Chik Fil A day here the cars were lined up a half mile long and the customers were in the lawn at the mall eating it was so crowded.
> And good for Chik Fil A.
> Recently, a National Guard Unit returned from Afghanistan.
> There were no coupons honored that day for discounts on chicken sammiches so I guess all those family values citizens around here had no reason to go and honor those soldiers that day.
> But they sure as hell stand up for "family values" when it is gay folk that are looked down on.
> Chicken sammiches are far more important than soldiers and their families.
> Amazing how stupid Americans have become. Madison Avenue marketing is bought hook, line and sinker.




Hmmmm, not sure how you are trying to sew something together here really, but this is what goes on today in this nation, wherefore a person and/or a group attempts to sew just about anything/issue together now, and they will do this at any given time in space, while operating between the issues trying to sew them together for malicious reasons or for empowering reasons. They will do this in order to make a point with (or) to build a case for one issue by way of another, and this even if it means sewing issues together that are a million miles a part at any specific time and space in which they exist seperately in, or is found in relation to at any time or space in respect to the places that they are found in. 

Though seperate issues are attempted to be brought forward and/or do exist at any given time on any given subject, they always and/or should be looked at differently within the different time zones and spaces in which they do exist seperately in, and are not to be sewn together in these ways in order to create the notion that someone has purposely ignored an issue or does not recognize an issue, just because it wasn't joined in with another in which was attempted to be sewn together for malicious intent on the sewers part when attempted to do this sort of thing. 

Sewing together issues is an old tactic that is seen through by those who have now learned over the years of these tactics, in which is no different than the tactic found in example of, by using the black struggle and civil rights created for the blacks specificly in this nation, to be somehow sewn together with every Tom, Dick and Harry's issues now, because it wasn't created for them and their cause or any other cause except for the blacks only, where as the other issues are seperate and should always be looked at as seperate and dealt with as seperate, because they are seperate issues and should be looked at as such. Each issue in this nation is unique and has seperate circumstances involved, so lets just take these things one issue at a time. This way it holds down confusion over all the issues that are brought and are dealt with in this nation.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm sorry, but it apears that you are getting back to your weird side when you post, so I will choose to wait until you post something somewhat inteligent again before I respond, because undoubtedly you are running out of constructive things to say in this conversation, in which has been the case for the most part since we have been conversating in this thread.
> 
> Come on now, I know you can do a little better than this, but then again, maybe not. (sigh)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What's there to say? You're deluded into thinking that homo-haters are in the majority when clearly they are not. The tide has already turned. When you are over it, maybe we'll have things to discuss, like why you think that gays are inferior human beings? Does it give your own deflated self-image a boost by putting others down?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Arguing is not conversation, and this is what you want is an argument, but I am done arguing with you, especially when you try and insert words into someones mouth (attempted profiling) instead of awaiting for them to speak to what you then try and accuse them of saying before they even have said it, and this you do in order to try and paint someone into a picture that does not reflect the people or persons at all in which you are speaking with, but rather it suits you better if you can create this boogy man in which you look for in the shadows underneath their beds, when that is the last place anyone wants to be is under their beds, in their beds or around their beds, but you try and drag everyone into their beds in order to make some kind of points for them?  Very strange indeed !
Click to expand...


Answer my question: is it partly because you think that gays are inferior human beings that they shouldn't be allowed to use a specific English word (marriage) and that such a word should be exclusive to you and your kind?


----------



## ima

Uncensored2008 said:


> I think I'll go to Chick-fil-A for dinner....



Oh great. Now your family will have to put up with extra stinky farts and shit.


----------



## Uncensored2008

ima said:


> Answer my question: is it partly because you think that gays are inferior human beings that they shouldn't be allowed to use a specific English word (marriage) and that such a word should be exclusive to you and your kind?



When my youngest daughter was about 6, she put a bandaid on a cut I got working in the yard. After that she went around saying she was a doctor.

Only she wasn't a doctor. I didn't think that she is an inferior human being that  shouldn't be allowed to use a specific English word (doctor.) I'm just an adult and understand that words have meanings. She wasn't a doctor, and marriage is the joining of a man and a woman in a biological process that is fundamental to mammals. I realize that spoiled children seek to redefine reality to suit their desires, but that adults should not encourage this.


----------



## Uncensored2008

ima said:


> Oh great. Now your family will have to put up with extra stinky farts and shit.



You're rather stupid, aren't you?


----------



## Gadawg73

If my church wants to marry 2 gay folk and those that support big government and want big government to ban them from obtaining a marriage I oppose that on strict conservative principles.
No true conservative wants to give government the power to stop 2 LAW ABIDING gay folk from getting married.
Respectfully, I find it so absurd and silly that anyone would oppose gays getting married. It AFFECTS NO ONE. 
Oppose it, fine, but it is NONE of your business. 
I oppose married couples swapping wives so where are the so called Christians here that are a law banning that?
So silly, only a mother hen busy body People magazine reading fool opposes gay marriage.


----------



## Uncensored2008

Gadawg73 said:


> If my church wants to marry 2 gay folk and those that support big government and want big government to ban them from obtaining a marriage I oppose that on strict conservative principles.
> No true conservative wants to give government the power to stop 2 LAW ABIDING gay folk from getting married.
> Respectfully, I find it so absurd and silly that anyone would oppose gays getting married. It AFFECTS NO ONE.
> Oppose it, fine, but it is NONE of your business.
> I oppose married couples swapping wives so where are the so called Christians here that are a law banning that?
> So silly, only a mother hen busy body People magazine reading fool opposes gay marriage.



You don't have a church.

Not since that whole Guyana incident....


----------



## Gadawg73

Uncensored2008 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Answer my question: is it partly because you think that gays are inferior human beings that they shouldn't be allowed to use a specific English word (marriage) and that such a word should be exclusive to you and your kind?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When my youngest daughter was about 6, she put a bandaid on a cut I got working in the yard. After that she went around saying she was a doctor.
> 
> Only she wasn't a doctor. I didn't think that she is an inferior human being that  shouldn't be allowed to use a specific English word (doctor.) I'm just an adult and understand that words have meanings. She wasn't a doctor, and marriage is the joining of a man and a woman in a biological process that is fundamental to mammals. I realize that spoiled children seek to redefine reality to suit their desires, but that adults should not encourage this.
Click to expand...


Where is YOUR definition of marriage in the law? 
We are a NATION OF LAWS, not men and their various and changing like the wind religous beliefs.
All you are posting about marriage is your beliefs and other religous beliefs.
What you or I believe the definition is of marriage means nothing. THE LAW is what matters.
And there is NOTHING on that as far as banning gay folk.


----------



## Gadawg73

Uncensored2008 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> If my church wants to marry 2 gay folk and those that support big government and want big government to ban them from obtaining a marriage I oppose that on strict conservative principles.
> No true conservative wants to give government the power to stop 2 LAW ABIDING gay folk from getting married.
> Respectfully, I find it so absurd and silly that anyone would oppose gays getting married. It AFFECTS NO ONE.
> Oppose it, fine, but it is NONE of your business.
> I oppose married couples swapping wives so where are the so called Christians here that are a law banning that?
> So silly, only a mother hen busy body People magazine reading fool opposes gay marriage.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You don't have a church.
> 
> Not since that whole Guyana incident....
Click to expand...


You do not have an argument that has any credibility.
Only hot air.


----------



## Uncensored2008

Gadawg73 said:


> You do not have an argument that has any credibility.
> Only hot air.



Are you going to hold your breath until you turn blue?

Facts are not something you deal with, I realize. But marriage as an institution arose some 10 to 20,000 years ago as a the social animals we call "humans" became aware that the tribe or community is better served with nuclear family units. An incentive for males to remain with the female for the purpose of raising children resulted in stronger communities with children who were better trained and disciplined. 

So human societies, the world across, independently developed marriage as a means encouraging and often enforcing monogamy between mating pairs. 

Now I realize that you are but a spoiled child, that you want what you want because you want it - that no concept of anthropological rationality or societal structure is involved, which is why it's vital for the adults to stand up to you and tell you "no."


----------



## ima

Uncensored2008 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You do not have an argument that has any credibility.
> Only hot air.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you going to hold your breath until you turn blue?
> 
> Facts are not something you deal with, I realize. But marriage as an institution arose some 10 to 20,000 years ago as a the social animals we call "humans" became aware that the tribe or community is better served with nuclear family units. An incentive for males to remain with the female for the purpose of raising children resulted in stronger communities with children who were better trained and disciplined.
> 
> So human societies, the world across, independently developed marriage as a means encouraging and often enforcing monogamy between mating pairs.
> 
> Now I realize that you are but a spoiled child, that you want what you want because you want it - that no concept of anthropological rationality or societal structure is involved, which is why it's vital for the adults to stand up to you and tell you "no."
Click to expand...


So because back then they thought that the world was flat, you gonna stick with that as well? Do you not want societies to evolve, but rather be stuck in time thousands of years ago? In that case, stop using toilet paper, they had none back then.


----------



## Uncensored2008

ima said:


> So because back then they thought that the world was flat, you gonna stick with that as well? Do you not want societies to evolve, but rather be stuck in time thousands of years ago? In that case, stop using toilet paper, they had none back then.



No moron, marriage conveys an anthropological/evolutionary advantage to the species. Redefining it to appease a special interest is the epitome of the utter stupidity which defines political correctness.

Marriage is the societal union of a mating pair - regardless of whether they succeed in producing offspring.

"Homosexual marriage" is fucking stupidity - akin to "wet fire" or "wise ignorance." You seek to mold reality to your desires. You may be able to create a cadre who demand that black is white, but reality will not alter to your will.


----------



## ima

Uncensored2008 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> So because back then they thought that the world was flat, you gonna stick with that as well? Do you not want societies to evolve, but rather be stuck in time thousands of years ago? In that case, stop using toilet paper, they had none back then.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No moron, marriage conveys an anthropological/evolutionary advantage to the species. Redefining it to appease a special interest is the epitome of the utter stupidity which defines political correctness.
> 
> Marriage is the societal union of a mating pair - regardless of whether they succeed in producing offspring.
> 
> "Homosexual marriage" is fucking stupidity - akin to "wet fire" or "wise ignorance." You seek to mold reality to your desires. You may be able to create a cadre who demand that black is white, but reality will not alter to your will.
Click to expand...

Gays can and do have children. Half the marriages end in divorce. A lot of couples have children but don't marry. And a lot of people get married and don't have children. So marriage is pretty well irrelevant.
The reality is that the majority approves of gay marriage and soon the Supremes will as well. You're welcome to stay stuck in the past, it won't affect me or gay marriage.


----------



## Gadawg73

I worked a case a few years as I was appointed by the courts.
Double homicide where the dude also killed a small child while he was high on meth.
Convicted as he was guilty as they come. Death penalty.
But he was allowed to get married in prison.
And law abiding gay folk can't.
Some folk are bat shit cRazy. Now gay marriage is weird as far as I am concerned but WHO GIVES A SHIT?


----------



## Gadawg73

Uncensored2008 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> So because back then they thought that the world was flat, you gonna stick with that as well? Do you not want societies to evolve, but rather be stuck in time thousands of years ago? In that case, stop using toilet paper, they had none back then.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No moron, marriage conveys an anthropological/evolutionary advantage to the species. Redefining it to appease a special interest is the epitome of the utter stupidity which defines political correctness.
> 
> Marriage is the societal union of a mating pair - regardless of whether they succeed in producing offspring.
> 
> "Homosexual marriage" is fucking stupidity - akin to "wet fire" or "wise ignorance." You seek to mold reality to your desires. You may be able to create a cadre who demand that black is white, but reality will not alter to your will.
Click to expand...


So explain to us how allowing gay folk that happen to be born with an attraction and fall in love with folk of the same sex, representing about 3% of the population, HAS ANY EFFECT WHATSOEVER on anything to do with anthropology and evolution.
How does it interfere IN ANYWAY heterosexual marriage, reproduction, society, heterosexual advantages or disadvantages to the species?
Specifics please.


----------



## Gadawg73

ima said:


> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> So because back then they thought that the world was flat, you gonna stick with that as well? Do you not want societies to evolve, but rather be stuck in time thousands of years ago? In that case, stop using toilet paper, they had none back then.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No moron, marriage conveys an anthropological/evolutionary advantage to the species. Redefining it to appease a special interest is the epitome of the utter stupidity which defines political correctness.
> 
> Marriage is the societal union of a mating pair - regardless of whether they succeed in producing offspring.
> 
> "Homosexual marriage" is fucking stupidity - akin to "wet fire" or "wise ignorance." You seek to mold reality to your desires. You may be able to create a cadre who demand that black is white, but reality will not alter to your will.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Gays can and do have children. Half the marriages end in divorce. A lot of couples have children but don't marry. And a lot of people get married and don't have children. So marriage is pretty well irrelevant.
> The reality is that the majority approves of gay marriage and soon the Supremes will as well. You're welcome to stay stuck in the past, it won't affect me or gay marriage.
Click to expand...


Heterosexuals wrote the divorce laws in this country and they are written IN TOTALITY without ANY "anthroplogical, evolutionary" advantages in them anywhere.
Divorce laws are written on the basis that marriage is a legal contract SOLEY.
Child custody is a completely seperate legal argument and law.
If any domestic relations law had ANYTHING whatsoever to do with religous beliefs, "anthropoligical, evolutionary" whatever, divorce WOULD BE BANNED under the law.
Amazing how the religous right are about as ignorant as they come.
We have about run them out of the Republican Party here in Georgia. Working hard on it. We did a few years back with the Pat Robertson crusaders when we exposed their Georgia director was a convicted felon.
But he was agin gay marriage!
All they have left is to pick on gay folk getting married.
Waste of a true conservative's time.


----------



## Gadawg73

Uncensored2008 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You do not have an argument that has any credibility.
> Only hot air.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you going to hold your breath until you turn blue?
> 
> Facts are not something you deal with, I realize. But marriage as an institution arose some 10 to 20,000 years ago as a the social animals we call "humans" became aware that the tribe or community is better served with nuclear family units. An incentive for males to remain with the female for the purpose of raising children resulted in stronger communities with children who were better trained and disciplined.
> 
> So human societies, the world across, independently developed marriage as a means encouraging and often enforcing monogamy between mating pairs.
> 
> Now I realize that you are but a spoiled child, that you want what you want because you want it - that no concept of anthropological rationality or societal structure is involved, which is why it's vital for the adults to stand up to you and tell you "no."
Click to expand...


I am 58 years old Moe, was crossing the lines when you were on your mama's tit. 
If anyone is spoiled and a pampered baby it is you.
Can not stand it that your religous beliefs are violated by gay folk.
Hate is in you to be seen. You hate gay folks.
Has nothing whatsoever to with the institution of marriage. If it does then you must have a sorry as marriage yourself.


----------



## Uncensored2008

Gadawg73 said:


> So explain to us how allowing gay folk that happen to be born with an attraction and fall in love with folk of the same sex, representing about 3% of the population, HAS ANY EFFECT WHATSOEVER on anything to do with anthropology and evolution.



A reading comprehension course would do wonders for you.



> How does it interfere IN ANYWAY heterosexual marriage, reproduction, society, heterosexual advantages or disadvantages to the species?
> Specifics please.



It's tough for you to grasp what is written as you plug your ears and shout "LALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU."

Procreation is a biological reality - bummer that you don't like it.

To induce the male, who is not tied to the gestational process, to remain and care for the offspring, which greatly enhances the survival rate of the offspring, certain traits have evolved, including a predisposition toward the formation of families and clans. Further, tribes and societies found that there is a significant advantage to having males care for, feed, and protect their mates and offspring. Not only does this increase the survival rate, but also keeps the males from engaging in as many violent acts as a symbiotic recognition of mutual pacification protects the progeny of all who engage in such a pact.

"Homosexual Marriage"  is an oxymoron and utter fucktardation. Marriage benefits society by increasing the survival rate of children, breeding females, and reducing the damage caused by uncontrolled males.

Homosexuals pretending does nothing at all.


----------



## Gadawg73

Uncensored2008 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> So explain to us how allowing gay folk that happen to be born with an attraction and fall in love with folk of the same sex, representing about 3% of the population, HAS ANY EFFECT WHATSOEVER on anything to do with anthropology and evolution.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A reading comprehension course would do wonders for you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How does it interfere IN ANYWAY heterosexual marriage, reproduction, society, heterosexual advantages or disadvantages to the species?
> Specifics please.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> It's tough for you to grasp what is written as you plug your ears and shout "LALALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU."
> 
> Procreation is a biological reality - bummer that you don't like it.
> 
> To induce the male, who is not tied to the gestational process, to remain and care for the offspring, which greatly enhances the survival rate of the offspring, certain traits have evolved, including a predisposition toward the formation of families and clans. Further, tribes and societies found that there is a significant advantage to having males care for, feed, and protect their mates and offspring. Not only does this increase the survival rate, but also keeps the males from engaging in as many violent acts as a symbiotic recognition of mutual pacification protects the progeny of all who engage in such a pact.
> 
> "Homosexual Marriage"  is an oxymoron and utter fucktardation. Marriage benefits society by increasing the survival rate of children, breeding females, and reducing the damage caused by uncontrolled males.
> 
> Homosexuals pretending does nothing at all.
Click to expand...


Homosexual do not procreate.
How does allowing them to marry affect heterosexuals procreating?
"breeding females" DOES NOTHING for society.
Are you really that ignorant?
The family unit includes more than a "breeding female". And how many heterosexual families have NO children?
Under your theory they are inferior also.
Most "uncontrolled males" are heterosexual.
If a red neck heterosexual man like me with 4 grown kids can figure this out how come you are having such a hard time.
But back to the thread: Chik Fil A has backed off their stance and now refuses to fund any of those anti gay entities. They no longer give ANY $$$ to any of those groups as of today.
Chik Fil A just changed their value statement to now include "sexual orientation" in its promise to treat every person with respect.
And their charitable arm has refused to continue funding any organization that is opposed to gay marriage. 
You lose. Suck it up. I will shake your hand at the 50 yard line and say "good game". 
Been there, done that, the fans wore the T shirts.


----------



## beagle9

ima said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> What's there to say? You're deluded into thinking that homo-haters are in the majority when clearly they are not. The tide has already turned. When you are over it, maybe we'll have things to discuss, like why you think that gays are inferior human beings? Does it give your own deflated self-image a boost by putting others down?
> 
> 
> 
> Arguing is not conversation, and this is what you want is an argument, but I am done arguing with you, especially when you try and insert words into someones mouth (attempted profiling) instead of awaiting for them to speak to what you then try and accuse them of saying before they even have said it, and this you do in order to try and paint someone into a picture that does not reflect the people or persons at all in which you are speaking with, but rather it suits you better if you can create this boogy man in which you look for in the shadows underneath their beds, when that is the last place anyone wants to be is under their beds, in their beds or around their beds, but you try and drag everyone into their beds in order to make some kind of points for them?  Very strange indeed !
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Answer my question: is it partly because you think that gays are inferior human beings that they shouldn't be allowed to use a specific English word (marriage) and that such a word should be exclusive to you and your kind?
Click to expand...

No one can answer that except with a vote, but you won't allow that to happen if can help it, now will you and/or your buddies allow a little ole innocent vote ?

No one thinks that anyone is inferior, second class citizens or any of the other stuff that you try and suggest in which you accuse of, but only that there is a difference in lifestyle choices in life and peoples cultures as is lived, and then there is the seperation of lifestyle choices and sometimes cultures as is found in strong religious or even non-religious views, that will always exist between people who will always view things in the opposite of, and for whom many will always see marriage as being between one man and one woman in their religious and even non-religious views. They will not see it in any other way, nor shall it be for them in their lives to be found on the specific subject of marriage in their view in any other way.

Now if they who oppose gay marriage are given a continued say in the matter, then be ready for the outcome, because it just may be what you refuse to accept of their views, but you won't change them until you become the majority, and that may be a long long time still yet or it may never be the case in America, so who knows really.


----------



## Gadawg73

As posted earlier Chik Fil A blinked and did the right thing.
Just as I thought they would.
They NO LONGER are anti gay marriage.
Sorry all you suckers got conned.


----------



## Gadawg73

End of thread.
Another one bites the dust.
Another win for true conservatives. Less government means more freedom.


----------



## ima

beagle9 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Arguing is not conversation, and this is what you want is an argument, but I am done arguing with you, especially when you try and insert words into someones mouth (attempted profiling) instead of awaiting for them to speak to what you then try and accuse them of saying before they even have said it, and this you do in order to try and paint someone into a picture that does not reflect the people or persons at all in which you are speaking with, but rather it suits you better if you can create this boogy man in which you look for in the shadows underneath their beds, when that is the last place anyone wants to be is under their beds, in their beds or around their beds, but you try and drag everyone into their beds in order to make some kind of points for them?  Very strange indeed !
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Answer my question: is it partly because you think that gays are inferior human beings that they shouldn't be allowed to use a specific English word (marriage) and that such a word should be exclusive to you and your kind?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No one can answer that except with a vote, but you won't allow that to happen if can help it, now will you and/or your buddies allow a little ole innocent vote ?
> 
> No one thinks that anyone is inferior, second class citizens or any of the other stuff that you try and suggest in which you accuse of, but only that there is a difference in lifestyle choices in life and peoples cultures as is lived, and then there is the seperation of lifestyle choices and sometimes cultures as is found in strong religious or even non-religious views, that will always exist between people who will always view things in the opposite of, and for whom many will always see marriage as being between one man and one woman in their religious and even non-religious views. They will not see it in any other way, nor shall it be for them in their lives to be found on the specific subject of marriage in their view in any other way.
> 
> Now if they who oppose gay marriage are given a continued say in the matter, then be ready for the outcome, because it just may be what you refuse to accept of their views, but you won't change them until you become the majority, and that may be a long long time still yet or it may never be the case in America, so who knows really.
Click to expand...

Since I've already established that a majority of Americans are FOR gay marriage, I have no problem with a vote in that sense. But I do find it wrong to vote on not extending a right that I enjoy to people trying to enjoy that same right. I shouldn't have a vote on this (like in California) because I'm voting so that others don't enjoy what i enjoy, and that will always be wrong in the US, it should be decided by legal experts/judges whether this falls under the definition of human right, or whether it should be a human right... 

You should try opening your heart a little more to people who are different than you are. That's what Jesus did. Jus' sayin'.


----------



## Gadawg73

What a majority of Americans are for is moot. I am not for or against gay marriage. I am not for 2 mentally disabled people getting married BUT I OPPOSE GOVERNMENT getting involved.
Government has no business defining marriage between 2 consenting adults that are only marrying each other, are not bro and sis and do not violate any laws.
America is full of fucked up folks that are legally married.
But it is only gay folk that the religous crazies want to ban.
And they will lose, cry and take their ball and go home.
Milk weak.


----------



## Againsheila

I'm all for a deal, let gays get married on condition that they stop those stupid "gay pride" parades.


----------



## Luissa

Againsheila said:


> I'm all for a deal, let gays get married on condition that they stop those stupid "gay pride" parades.



Yeah, that sounds like America. 
If you don't like gay pride parades, don't go to them. If you don't like gay marriage don't become a lesbian. 
Hopefully they will soon be allowed to marry in Washington State.


----------



## Uncensored2008

Gadawg73 said:


> Homosexual do not procreate.



Gee, imagine the evolutionary implications of that.. Almost like natural selection, removing certain genes from the species...



> How does allowing them to marry affect heterosexuals procreating?



Try reading, idiot.



> "breeding females" DOES NOTHING for society.
> Are you really that ignorant?



Look, you're a child throwing a tantrum, you are not a rational adult. But yes, breeding females are vital to the survival of the species. If the species doesn't reproduce, then extinction is the result.

Look, you  want to drink cosmos with pink umbrellas, and will hold your breath until you turn blue if anyone questions you.

But evolution is a natural process and doesn't give a damn about how much Hollywood donates to the corrupt democrats. You can't buy legislators to change natural law to suit your desires.



> The family unit includes more than a "breeding female". And how many heterosexual families have NO children?



Yes, you can recite talking points, what you CAN'T do is think. Structure is served by society ENCOURAGING males to remain with breeding females. This is why every last society on Earth has independently established marriage, because it serves a purpose in the survival of the species. 

I know you don't give a damn about science or facts, you want what you want because you want it; but marriage developed to promote a stable and successful clan/tribe/society. 



> Under your theory they are inferior also.
> Most "uncontrolled males" are heterosexual.
> If a red neck heterosexual man like me with 4 grown kids can figure this out how come you are having such a hard time.



You're an idiot, attempting to apply your political agenda to biology.



> But back to the thread: Chik Fil A has backed off their stance and now refuses to fund any of those anti gay entities. They no longer give ANY $$$ to any of those groups as of today.
> Chik Fil A just changed their value statement to now include "sexual orientation" in its promise to treat every person with respect.



Who cares?

Biology isn't altered by political bullying.



> And their charitable arm has refused to continue funding any organization that is opposed to gay marriage.



That's not really what they said, but who cares?



> You lose. Suck it up. I will shake your hand at the 50 yard line and say "good game".
> Been there, done that, the fans wore the T shirts.



Reality isn't changed by political thuggary. You might well intimidate Chick-fil-A, but the anthropological and biological imperative for marriage isn't altered. You have that Stalinist mindset that if you force someone to act against their nature at the point of a bayonet, that you've changed nature. Stalin butchered 65 million people, yet human nature remained unchanged.


----------



## Againsheila

Luissa said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm all for a deal, let gays get married on condition that they stop those stupid "gay pride" parades.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, that sounds like America.
> If you don't like gay pride parades, don't go to them. If you don't like gay marriage don't become a lesbian.
> Hopefully they will soon be allowed to marry in Washington State.
Click to expand...


Even most homosexuals are ashamed of those gay pride parades....


----------



## ima

Againsheila said:


> Luissa said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm all for a deal, let gays get married on condition that they stop those stupid "gay pride" parades.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, that sounds like America.
> If you don't like gay pride parades, don't go to them. If you don't like gay marriage don't become a lesbian.
> Hopefully they will soon be allowed to marry in Washington State.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Even most homosexuals are ashamed of those gay pride parades....
Click to expand...


And Santa Claus is a pedophile. So what? We need laws for taste?


----------



## Gadawg73

Uncensored2008 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Homosexual do not procreate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gee, imagine the evolutionary implications of that.. Almost like natural selection, removing certain genes from the species...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How does allowing them to marry affect heterosexuals procreating?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Try reading, idiot.
> 
> 
> 
> Look, you're a child throwing a tantrum, you are not a rational adult. But yes, breeding females are vital to the survival of the species. If the species doesn't reproduce, then extinction is the result.
> 
> Look, you  want to drink cosmos with pink umbrellas, and will hold your breath until you turn blue if anyone questions you.
> 
> But evolution is a natural process and doesn't give a damn about how much Hollywood donates to the corrupt democrats. You can't buy legislators to change natural law to suit your desires.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, you can recite talking points, what you CAN'T do is think. Structure is served by society ENCOURAGING males to remain with breeding females. This is why every last society on Earth has independently established marriage, because it serves a purpose in the survival of the species.
> 
> I know you don't give a damn about science or facts, you want what you want because you want it; but marriage developed to promote a stable and successful clan/tribe/society.
> 
> 
> 
> You're an idiot, attempting to apply your political agenda to biology.
> 
> 
> 
> Who cares?
> 
> Biology isn't altered by political bullying.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And their charitable arm has refused to continue funding any organization that is opposed to gay marriage.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's not really what they said, but who cares?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You lose. Suck it up. I will shake your hand at the 50 yard line and say "good game".
> Been there, done that, the fans wore the T shirts.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Reality isn't changed by political thuggary. You might well intimidate Chick-fil-A, but the anthropological and biological imperative for marriage isn't altered. You have that Stalinist mindset that if you force someone to act against their nature at the point of a bayonet, that you've changed nature. Stalin butchered 65 million people, yet human nature remained unchanged.
Click to expand...


Spoiled brat children call names.
That would be you.
Explain how I or anyone could ever intimidate a multi billion dollar corporation.
I own 3 corporations Moe so how I could be "Stalinist" Been voting Republican before you were on your mama's tit. 
I contribute more $$$ to Republican candidates than you make in a decade.
Comparing me to Stalin.
You are the one ranting! 
You lose. Now go and cry.


----------



## Gadawg73

Againsheila said:


> Luissa said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm all for a deal, let gays get married on condition that they stop those stupid "gay pride" parades.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, that sounds like America.
> If you don't like gay pride parades, don't go to them. If you don't like gay marriage don't become a lesbian.
> Hopefully they will soon be allowed to marry in Washington State.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Even most homosexuals are ashamed of those gay pride parades....
Click to expand...


Never been to one and never will go to one.
Why go if they are so bad?


----------



## Gadawg73

Uncensored2008 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Homosexual do not procreate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gee, imagine the evolutionary implications of that.. Almost like natural selection, removing certain genes from the species...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How does allowing them to marry affect heterosexuals procreating?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Try reading, idiot.
> 
> 
> 
> Look, you're a child throwing a tantrum, you are not a rational adult. But yes, breeding females are vital to the survival of the species. If the species doesn't reproduce, then extinction is the result.
> 
> Look, you  want to drink cosmos with pink umbrellas, and will hold your breath until you turn blue if anyone questions you.
> 
> But evolution is a natural process and doesn't give a damn about how much Hollywood donates to the corrupt democrats. You can't buy legislators to change natural law to suit your desires.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, you can recite talking points, what you CAN'T do is think. Structure is served by society ENCOURAGING males to remain with breeding females. This is why every last society on Earth has independently established marriage, because it serves a purpose in the survival of the species.
> 
> I know you don't give a damn about science or facts, you want what you want because you want it; but marriage developed to promote a stable and successful clan/tribe/society.
> 
> 
> 
> You're an idiot, attempting to apply your political agenda to biology.
> 
> 
> 
> Who cares?
> 
> Biology isn't altered by political bullying.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And their charitable arm has refused to continue funding any organization that is opposed to gay marriage.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> That's not really what they said, but who cares?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You lose. Suck it up. I will shake your hand at the 50 yard line and say "good game".
> Been there, done that, the fans wore the T shirts.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Reality isn't changed by political thuggary. You might well intimidate Chick-fil-A, but the anthropological and biological imperative for marriage isn't altered. You have that Stalinist mindset that if you force someone to act against their nature at the point of a bayonet, that you've changed nature. Stalin butchered 65 million people, yet human nature remained unchanged.
Click to expand...


Do you really believe this shit you post? That allowing gays to marry will somehow affect the natural balance of the human race?
You claim it but no where do you offer ANY EVIDENCE of it.
In my world, where you would not last 10 seconds, PROOF is required.
All you have is hot air dog squeeze.


----------



## beagle9

Againsheila said:


> I'm all for a deal, let gays get married on condition that they stop those stupid "gay pride" parades.


Them getting married in what many people see as a violation of what the one man and one woman traditional religious concept of marriage in America is or means to most (imho) causes fear amongst the oppositional majority, who feel that it will embolden the gay's even farther in the extreme, and this because of what people see as is found in the examples of extremism that are illustrated in those wild parades in which they put on to display what ?  

I guess you are one who doesn't like the pride parades, and wonder if the parades accurately represent these mindsets and lifestyles in which are lived.

Is it also seen as a mockery to religious traditional marriage by you, and this in regards to it being a religious contract between a man and a woman, who then will go onto create children and become a family in the religious sense of what marriage is supposed to be for that family, in which is also supported in the Biblical sense to all whom still believe in this way? So when a man and a man or a woman and a woman attempt to use the holy matrimony as their contract in life as well, does it dilute or destroy the Christian meaning and old traditional meaning of marriage in the eyes of the majority in this nation, and if so should the majority get their way in keeping marriage sacred between a man and a woman by vote there of  ? 

It is a delema brought forward now, and it will always be a delema or a confusion for most, if a vote does not settle the issue once and for all during their lifetimes, and this as to be found within this time period that is lived by this generation, just as it should be settled up until another day comes, and/or a different generation takes over that may see it all otherwise.

That generation may be here now, but who knows if a vote is not taken over these matters, and is then honored when it is taken over these matters ?


----------



## Gadawg73

beagle9 said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm all for a deal, let gays get married on condition that they stop those stupid "gay pride" parades.
> 
> 
> 
> Them getting married in what many people see as a violation of what the one man and one woman traditional religious concept of marriage in America is or means to most (imho) causes fear amongst the oppositional majority, who feel that it will embolden the gay's even farther in the extreme, and this because of what people see as is found in the examples of extremism that are illustrated in those wild parades in which they put on to display what ?
> 
> I guess you are one who doesn't like the pride parades, and wonder if the parades accurately represent these mindsets and lifestyles in which are lived.
> 
> Is it also seen as a mockery to religious traditional marriage by you, and this in regards to it being a religious contract between a man and a woman, who then will go onto create children and become a family in the religious sense of what marriage is supposed to be for that family, in which is also supported in the Biblical sense to all whom still believe in this way? So when a man and a man or a woman and a woman attempt to use the holy matrimony as their contract in life as well, does it dilute or destroy the Christian meaning and old traditional meaning of marriage in the eyes of the majority in this nation, and if so should the majority get their way in keeping marriage sacred between a man and a woman by vote there of  ?
> 
> It is a delema brought forward now, and it will always be a delema or a confusion for most, if a vote does not settle the issue once and for all during their lifetimes, and this as to be found within this time period that is lived by this generation, just as it should be settled up until another day comes, and/or a different generation takes over that may see it all otherwise.
> 
> That generation may be here now, but who knows if a vote is not taken over these matters, and is then honored when it is taken over these matters ?
Click to expand...


The gay boogeyman has you skeered!
OH NO, the gay is going to infect you! 
Heavens to mergatroid, EXIT STAGE LEFT.
Son, you need an English course first and foremost.


----------



## bodecea

Againsheila said:


> I'm all for a deal, let gays get married on condition that they stop those stupid "gay pride" parades.



Why?   Do they bother you that much?


----------



## bodecea

Againsheila said:


> Luissa said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm all for a deal, let gays get married on condition that they stop those stupid "gay pride" parades.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah, that sounds like America.
> If you don't like gay pride parades, don't go to them. If you don't like gay marriage don't become a lesbian.
> Hopefully they will soon be allowed to marry in Washington State.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Even most homosexuals are ashamed of those gay pride parades....
Click to expand...


How many have YOU been to?


----------



## ima

Uncensored2008 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Homosexual do not procreate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gee, imagine the evolutionary implications of that.. Almost like natural selection, removing certain genes from the species...
Click to expand...


Sorry folks, but homosexuals reproduce all the time, the most famous being Melissa Ethridge, who got sperm from David Crosby and had a child.

And anyways, if you think that gays can't reproduce and that takes out the gay gene, why is there a gay gene to start with if they're not reproducing? 
So not only are you 2 wrong, but you're stupid as well.


----------



## Uncensored2008

Gadawg73 said:


> Do you really believe this shit you post? That allowing gays to marry will somehow affect the natural balance of the human race?



No idiot, Marriage reflects the reality of the human condition. You are throwing tantrums to demand that reality change to meet your desires.



> You claim it but no where do you offer ANY EVIDENCE of it.
> In my world, where you would not last 10 seconds, PROOF is required.
> All you have is hot air dog squeeze.



Son, you're a moron who can't follow elementary logic.


----------



## Uncensored2008

ima said:


> Sorry folks, but homosexuals reproduce all the time, the most famous being Melissa Ethridge, who got sperm from David Crosby and had a child.
> 
> And anyways, if you think that gays can't reproduce and that takes out the gay gene, why is there a gay gene to start with if they're not reproducing?
> So not only are you 2 wrong, but you're stupid as well.



So, in your alleged mind, artificial insemination is a product of natural selection...

ROFL


----------



## ima

Uncensored2008 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry folks, but homosexuals reproduce all the time, the most famous being Melissa Ethridge, who got sperm from David Crosby and had a child.
> 
> And anyways, if you think that gays can't reproduce and that takes out the gay gene, why is there a gay gene to start with if they're not reproducing?
> So not only are you 2 wrong, but you're stupid as well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, in your alleged mind, artificial insemination is a product of natural selection...
> 
> ROFL
Click to expand...


Natural selection is producing gays, even if gays couldn't reproduce. Sorry, you fail epically, please try again. 
And anyways, naturally selecting the male sperm donor goes on all the time, it's called dating! 

So do you have something against heteros using artificial insemination, or surrogates...? Or are you just a flaming homophobe?


----------



## Uncensored2008

ima said:


> Natural selection is producing gays, even if gays couldn't reproduce.



ROFL

You're really quite stupid, you know that?

Perhaps that's why you developed homosexual tendancies, to remove the stupidity inherent in your genetic structure from the species...



> Sorry, you fail epically, please try again.
> And anyways, naturally selecting the male sperm donor goes on all the time, it's called dating!
> 
> So do you have something against heteros using artificial insemination, or surrogates...? Or are you just a flaming homophobe?



You are a child who substitutes your wants for reality.


----------



## ima

Uncensored2008 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Natural selection is producing gays, even if gays couldn't reproduce.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROFL
> 
> You're really quite stupid, you know that?
> 
> Perhaps that's why you developed homosexual tendancies, to remove the stupidity inherent in your genetic structure from the species...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, you fail epically, please try again.
> And anyways, naturally selecting the male sperm donor goes on all the time, it's called dating!
> 
> So do you have something against heteros using artificial insemination, or surrogates...? Or are you just a flaming homophobe?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are a child who substitutes your wants for reality.
Click to expand...


Doh! I forgot, being gay is a choice.

So do you have something against heteros using artificial insemination, or surrogates...?


----------



## Uncensored2008

ima said:


> Doh! I forgot, being gay is a choice.



You are jaw-droppingly stupid, seriously.



> So do you have something against heteros using artificial insemination, or surrogates...?



Do you drool in public?


----------



## bodecea

Uncensored2008 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Natural selection is producing gays, even if gays couldn't reproduce.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROFL
> 
> You're really quite stupid, you know that?
> 
> Perhaps that's why you developed homosexual tendancies, to remove the stupidity inherent in your genetic structure from the species...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, you fail epically, please try again.
> And anyways, naturally selecting the male sperm donor goes on all the time, it's called dating!
> 
> So do you have something against heteros using artificial insemination, or surrogates...? Or are you just a flaming homophobe?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are a child who substitutes your wants for reality.
Click to expand...


What can we legally do remove you from the gene pool.....?  It's the right thing to do for the sake of the species.


----------



## Uncensored2008

bodecea said:


> What can we legally do remove you from the gene pool.....?  It's the right thing to do for the sake of the species.



You've already done humanity a huge favor by option out of the gene pool. The species is stronger for it.


----------



## bodecea

Uncensored2008 said:


> bodecea said:
> 
> 
> 
> What can we legally do remove you from the gene pool.....?  It's the right thing to do for the sake of the species.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You've already done humanity a huge favor by option out of the gene pool. The species is stronger for it.
Click to expand...


Oopsie...Uncensored is wrong again.


----------



## Gadawg73

Even the Southern Baptists state that homosexuality is same sex attraction and they are born with it. They call it "struggling with same sex attraction'.
Those of us that truly have been trained and educated thoroughly in The Bible always fall back on "Carry one another's burdens".
And it would be folks that judge and condemn that lay that burden.
Those that claim they are Christians follow that and that only on this subject. We have to also carry their load and fight for their rights. 
If we as Christians can not stand up for the full rights of homosexuals then we fall short of what The Bible teaches us to do.


----------



## Gadawg73

Uncensored2008 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Do you really believe this shit you post? That allowing gays to marry will somehow affect the natural balance of the human race?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No idiot, Marriage reflects the reality of the human condition. You are throwing tantrums to demand that reality change to meet your desires.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You claim it but no where do you offer ANY EVIDENCE of it.
> In my world, where you would not last 10 seconds, PROOF is required.
> All you have is hot air dog squeeze.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Son, you're a moron who can't follow elementary logic.
Click to expand...


Another rant of childish name calling because you HAVE NO PROOF of anything you post.
Tell us oh wise one how the reality of YOUR human condition changes if gays are allowed to be married.
I will wait until pigs fly for your answer. You have no evidence and you know it.
Not throwing any tantrums, gay marriage affects me in no way. I am 58 year old white straight male that practices conservatism by challenging big government advocates like yourself.
You are a closet liberal.


----------



## beagle9

Gadawg73 said:


> Even the Southern Baptists state that homosexuality is same sex attraction and they are born with it. They call it "struggling with same sex attraction'.
> Those of us that truly have been trained and educated thoroughly in The Bible always fall back on "Carry one another's burdens".
> And it would be folks that judge and condemn that lay that burden.
> Those that claim they are Christians follow that and that only on this subject. We have to also carry their load and fight for their rights.
> If we as Christians can not stand up for the full rights of homosexuals then we fall short of what The Bible teaches us to do.


Romans 2 verse 19 to 32...Let me know what you think of this area in the Bible, and what you think it means when read it either leading up to and/or beyond the area of mention... We can have a little study on it together if want to.. I am unsure exactly about what all it is saying within the context of this chapter there in, because it gets into the law and such as to be reckoned with in the chapter of Romans coupled with one being saved by his or her faith, and the understanding of that faith upon where it stands, and the law where it stands or has stood, and what it means to us in our daily lives now. 

I know that we are not living under the law or by the letter of the law, but instead we are saved by his sacrifice, and through his grace and his mercy through Christ Jesus amen, in which through our spirit he doth speak to us daily through our faith in him, wherefore about these things in which we wonder about and wrestle with daily, be it within our hearts and within our minds. Now does this give us the reasoning to accept somehow sin openly within and around us in our daily lives now, or to allow it openly in and around our families in their daily lives now (no it does not imho), and should we not teach that some things are then ok according to the word if they are ok, but others are not ok in accordance with sin as it is spoken of within these chapters as not being ok, and is rather sin or being sinful that leads to futher seperation between us and our Lord who hath saved us ? 

Where is it then that the lines are to be drawn in respect to it all I wonder ?

Should we be tasked with seperating ourselves always from sin as best that we can in our lives (all of us), but to do it by way of teaching in so that we not leave anyone behind if at all possible ?  Should we allow sin to consume us totally, wherefore we lose sight of God and our Lord altogether, because where we would therefore choose to go, it is not somewhere that anyone would want to go with us ?


----------



## Gadawg73

beagle9 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even the Southern Baptists state that homosexuality is same sex attraction and they are born with it. They call it "struggling with same sex attraction'.
> Those of us that truly have been trained and educated thoroughly in The Bible always fall back on "Carry one another's burdens".
> And it would be folks that judge and condemn that lay that burden.
> Those that claim they are Christians follow that and that only on this subject. We have to also carry their load and fight for their rights.
> If we as Christians can not stand up for the full rights of homosexuals then we fall short of what The Bible teaches us to do.
> 
> 
> 
> Romans 2 verse 19 to 32...Let me know what you think of this area in the Bible, and what you think it means when read it either leading up to and/or beyond the area of mention... We can have a little study on it together if want to.. I am unsure exactly about what all it is saying within the context of this chapter there in, because it gets into the law and such as to be reckoned with in the chapter of Romans coupled with one being saved by his or her faith, and the understanding of that faith upon where it stands, and the law where it stands or has stood, and what it means to us in our daily lives now.
> 
> I know that we are not living under the law or by the letter of the law, but instead we are saved by his sacrifice, and through his grace and his mercy through Christ Jesus amen, in which through our spirit he doth speak to us daily through our faith in him, wherefore about these things in which we wonder about and wrestle with daily, be it within our hearts and within our minds. Now does this give us the reasoning to accept somehow sin openly within and around us in our daily lives now, or to allow it openly in and around our families in their daily lives now (no it does not imho), and should we not teach that some things are then ok according to the word if they are ok, but others are not ok in accordance with sin as it is spoken of within these chapters as not being ok, and is rather sin or being sinful that leads to futher seperation between us and our Lord who hath saved us ?
> 
> Where is it then that the lines are to be drawn in respect to it all I wonder ?
> 
> Should we be tasked with seperating ourselves always from sin as best that we can in our lives (all of us), but to do it by way of teaching in so that we not leave anyone behind if at all possible ?  Should we allow sin to consume us totally, wherefore we lose sight of God and our Lord altogether, because where we would therefore choose to go, it is not somewhere that anyone would want to go with us ?
Click to expand...


Love thy neighbor and carry one anothers burden.
Your sin is your business and someone else's sin is none of your business.
It is your business to love thy neighbor and carry one another's burden.
If you truly are a Christian.


----------



## beagle9

Gadawg73 said:


> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even the Southern Baptists state that homosexuality is same sex attraction and they are born with it. They call it "struggling with same sex attraction'.
> Those of us that truly have been trained and educated thoroughly in The Bible always fall back on "Carry one another's burdens".
> And it would be folks that judge and condemn that lay that burden.
> Those that claim they are Christians follow that and that only on this subject. We have to also carry their load and fight for their rights.
> If we as Christians can not stand up for the full rights of homosexuals then we fall short of what The Bible teaches us to do.
> 
> 
> 
> Romans 2 verse 19 to 32...Let me know what you think of this area in the Bible, and what you think it means when read it either leading up to and/or beyond the area of mention... We can have a little study on it together if want to.. I am unsure exactly about what all it is saying within the context of this chapter there in, because it gets into the law and such as to be reckoned with in the chapter of Romans coupled with one being saved by his or her faith, and the understanding of that faith upon where it stands, and the law where it stands or has stood, and what it means to us in our daily lives now.
> 
> I know that we are not living under the law or by the letter of the law, but instead we are saved by his sacrifice, and through his grace and his mercy through Christ Jesus amen, in which through our spirit he doth speak to us daily through our faith in him, wherefore about these things in which we wonder about and wrestle with daily, be it within our hearts and within our minds. Now does this give us the reasoning to accept somehow sin openly within and around us in our daily lives now, or to allow it openly in and around our families in their daily lives now (no it does not imho), and should we not teach that some things are then ok according to the word if they are ok, but others are not ok in accordance with sin as it is spoken of within these chapters as not being ok, and is rather sin or being sinful that leads to futher seperation between us and our Lord who hath saved us ?
> 
> Where is it then that the lines are to be drawn in respect to it all I wonder ?
> 
> Should we be tasked with seperating ourselves always from sin as best that we can in our lives (all of us), but to do it by way of teaching in so that we not leave anyone behind if at all possible ?  Should we allow sin to consume us totally, wherefore we lose sight of God and our Lord altogether, because where we would therefore choose to go, it is not somewhere that anyone would want to go with us ?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Love thy neighbor and carry one anothers burden.
> Your sin is your business and someone else's sin is none of your business.
> It is your business to love thy neighbor and carry one another's burden.
> If you truly are a Christian.
Click to expand...

I agree, but when someone makes their sin your business be it directly or through your children, then it becomes ones business to adress that situation, wouldn't you agree ? If people could practice what you preach, we could have a more peaceful and more tranquil nation, but people can't seem to do this for some reason.


----------



## ima

Uncensored2008 said:


> ima said:
> 
> 
> 
> Doh! I forgot, being gay is a choice.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are jaw-droppingly stupid, seriously.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *So do you have something against heteros using artificial insemination, or surrogates...?*
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Do you drool in public?
Click to expand...


Why are you afraid of my question? 

And yes, sometimes.


----------



## Gadawg73

beagle9 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> beagle9 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Romans 2 verse 19 to 32...Let me know what you think of this area in the Bible, and what you think it means when read it either leading up to and/or beyond the area of mention... We can have a little study on it together if want to.. I am unsure exactly about what all it is saying within the context of this chapter there in, because it gets into the law and such as to be reckoned with in the chapter of Romans coupled with one being saved by his or her faith, and the understanding of that faith upon where it stands, and the law where it stands or has stood, and what it means to us in our daily lives now.
> 
> I know that we are not living under the law or by the letter of the law, but instead we are saved by his sacrifice, and through his grace and his mercy through Christ Jesus amen, in which through our spirit he doth speak to us daily through our faith in him, wherefore about these things in which we wonder about and wrestle with daily, be it within our hearts and within our minds. Now does this give us the reasoning to accept somehow sin openly within and around us in our daily lives now, or to allow it openly in and around our families in their daily lives now (no it does not imho), and should we not teach that some things are then ok according to the word if they are ok, but others are not ok in accordance with sin as it is spoken of within these chapters as not being ok, and is rather sin or being sinful that leads to futher seperation between us and our Lord who hath saved us ?
> 
> Where is it then that the lines are to be drawn in respect to it all I wonder ?
> 
> Should we be tasked with seperating ourselves always from sin as best that we can in our lives (all of us), but to do it by way of teaching in so that we not leave anyone behind if at all possible ?  Should we allow sin to consume us totally, wherefore we lose sight of God and our Lord altogether, because where we would therefore choose to go, it is not somewhere that anyone would want to go with us ?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Love thy neighbor and carry one anothers burden.
> Your sin is your business and someone else's sin is none of your business.
> It is your business to love thy neighbor and carry one another's burden.
> If you truly are a Christian.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> I agree, but when someone makes their sin your business be it directly or through your children, then it becomes ones business to adress that situation, wouldn't you agree ? If people could practice what you preach, we could have a more peaceful and more tranquil nation, but people can't seem to do this for some reason.
Click to expand...


No one forces you or your kids to be homosexual.
Same as no one forces you or your kids to smoke or be a drunk.
So you are also for banning tobacco and alcohol?
Sure, right, all you know is selective peresecution and the gay boogeyman heads your list.


----------



## ima

Gadawg73 said:


> No one forces you or your kids to be homosexual.
> Same as no one forces you or your kids to smoke or be a drunk.
> So you are also for banning tobacco and alcohol?
> Sure, right, all you know is selective peresecution and the gay boogeyman heads your list.



So being gay is a choice, like choosing to assfuck your wife or not?


----------



## Gadawg73

ima said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> No one forces you or your kids to be homosexual.
> Same as no one forces you or your kids to smoke or be a drunk.
> So you are also for banning tobacco and alcohol?
> Sure, right, all you know is selective peresecution and the gay boogeyman heads your list.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So being gay is a choice, like choosing to assfuck your wife or not?
Click to expand...


I have known many homosexuals that chose to get married, have children, live a lie and be unhappy. Some just lived with it.
Same sex attraction and love for someone is not a choice. It comes natural and I believe 100% of them are born that way. And I have no problem with and respect anyone be they whatever to choose who they are attracted to and fall in love.
The choice is inside them, the same sex attraction and love. They can not change that, turn it on and off, they are hard wired that way.
And although I find it unusual, strange, not the normal I know in my life, I have no problems with gay folks.
Used to. Same as black folk and others different than white straight southern type A male. Just the locker room culture I grew up and was in for over a decade.
But as I went out into the world working with law enforcement, police, doctors, lawyers, accountants, engineers and folks from all walks of life in my work I learned that we are all about the same.
And now I lead the fight for gay rights because I believe that if we can not fight for those that are different than us then what good is the freedom we enjoy?
And I have gays and lesbians in my extended family. I love them and respect them. They are good people. And my old loud mouth beer swillin, cussin southern drawlin self will be heard and I do not give a shit who cares.


----------



## Uncensored2008

Gadawg73 said:


> Even the Southern Baptists state that homosexuality is same sex attraction and they are born with it. They call it "struggling with same sex attraction'.
> Those of us that truly have been trained and educated thoroughly in The Bible always fall back on "Carry one another's burdens".



Again, if homosexuality is genetic, then it's pretty obvious that it's evolutions way of weeding out undesirable traits.

Yes, artificial means can thwart the natural selection process, but from an evolutionary standpoint, the implications are obvious,


----------



## ima

Is it ok for heteros to use IVF or a surrogate? Or is that bad for gays only?


----------



## Katzndogz

In hetero families who use IVF or a surrogate, the child still ends up with a mother and a father.   Not Heather has two Mommies.

However, IF gays can afford a surrogate and finds a willing surrogate, there is nothing immoral or illegal about them availing themselves of this avenue.   Treating the children of such families as ordinary children with an ordinary normal family is another issue.


----------



## Uncensored2008

Katzndogz said:


> In hetero families who use IVF or a surrogate, the child still ends up with a mother and a father.   Not Heather has two Mommies.
> 
> However, IF gays can afford a surrogate and finds a willing surrogate, there is nothing immoral or illegal about them availing themselves of this avenue.   Treating the children of such families as ordinary children with an ordinary normal family is another issue.



I would hope that the children would be treated as well as any children. 

While I do see homosexuality as an evolutionary tool nature uses to weed out certain genetic traits, I would hate to see anyone denied respect and kindness, especially children.


----------



## Katzndogz

Uncensored2008 said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> In hetero families who use IVF or a surrogate, the child still ends up with a mother and a father.   Not Heather has two Mommies.
> 
> However, IF gays can afford a surrogate and finds a willing surrogate, there is nothing immoral or illegal about them availing themselves of this avenue.   Treating the children of such families as ordinary children with an ordinary normal family is another issue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would hope that the children would be treated as well as any children.
> 
> While I do see homosexuality as an evolutionary tool nature uses to weed out certain genetic traits, I would hate to see anyone denied respect and kindness, especially children.
Click to expand...


One would imagine that homosexuality is an evolutionary tool used by nature to weed out certain genetic traits but history doesn't bear that out.  Homosexuality seems to be a naturally occurring anomaly that exists in all cultures and ethnicities at roughly the same percentage and has maintained this percentage throughout history.  

No one should be denied respect and kindness but no one should open the door to let this kind of abnormality into their own families to influence their own lives either.   It's how toxicity spreads.


----------



## Gadawg73

Uncensored2008 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even the Southern Baptists state that homosexuality is same sex attraction and they are born with it. They call it "struggling with same sex attraction'.
> Those of us that truly have been trained and educated thoroughly in The Bible always fall back on "Carry one another's burdens".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again, if homosexuality is genetic, then it's pretty obvious that it's evolutions way of weeding out undesirable traits.
> 
> Yes, artificial means can thwart the natural selection process, but from an evolutionary standpoint, the implications are obvious,
Click to expand...


How is any "weeding out undesirable traits" going on when homosexuals do quite well in all professional fields in the human race?
Sad that you believe that God weeds out certain humans when they have a gene in them that causes breast cancer, mental illness or translocational downs syndrome. 
Really not sad, more sick than anything else. 
You are comparing homosexuality to an illness.


----------



## Gadawg73

Katzndogz said:


> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> In hetero families who use IVF or a surrogate, the child still ends up with a mother and a father.   Not Heather has two Mommies.
> 
> However, IF gays can afford a surrogate and finds a willing surrogate, there is nothing immoral or illegal about them availing themselves of this avenue.   Treating the children of such families as ordinary children with an ordinary normal family is another issue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would hope that the children would be treated as well as any children.
> 
> While I do see homosexuality as an evolutionary tool nature uses to weed out certain genetic traits, I would hate to see anyone denied respect and kindness, especially children.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> One would imagine that homosexuality is an evolutionary tool used by nature to weed out certain genetic traits but history doesn't bear that out.  Homosexuality seems to be a naturally occurring anomaly that exists in all cultures and ethnicities at roughly the same percentage and has maintained this percentage throughout history.
> 
> No one should be denied respect and kindness but no one should open the door to let this kind of abnormality into their own families to influence their own lives either.   It's how toxicity spreads.
Click to expand...


What do you mean by "no one should open the door to let this kind of abnormailty into their own families to influence their own lives either"?
I have homosexuals in my family and their "abnormality" in no way has a negative affect in any way whatsoever on anyone.
All of us love and respect them and fight for their rights.
How has their "abnormality" affected their inclusion into the military?
Latest DOD study has founf open service has HAD NO AFFECT WHATSOEVER on anything.
Same with all of society.


----------



## Uncensored2008

Gadawg73 said:


> How is any "weeding out undesirable traits" going on when homosexuals do quite well in all professional fields in the human race?



So, you've actually been diagnosed as severely retarded, then?



> Sad that you believe that God weeds out certain humans when they have a gene in them that causes breast cancer, mental illness or translocational downs syndrome.



There is no god, you drooling baboon.  Cancer is an abnormality, a breakdown of function. But homosexuality you claim to be a genetic trait. If so, then clearly it is a process of natural selection, removing the homosexual from the breeding pool, and thus the gene pool.




> Really not sad, more sick than anything else.
> You are comparing homosexuality to an illness.



You're an idiot - seriously


----------



## Gadawg73

Uncensored2008 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> How is any "weeding out undesirable traits" going on when homosexuals do quite well in all professional fields in the human race?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So, you've actually been diagnosed as severely retarded, then?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sad that you believe that God weeds out certain humans when they have a gene in them that causes breast cancer, mental illness or translocational downs syndrome.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> There is no god, you drooling baboon.  Cancer is an abnormality, a breakdown of function. But homosexuality you claim to be a genetic trait. If so, then clearly it is a process of natural selection, removing the homosexual from the breeding pool, and thus the gene pool.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Really not sad, more sick than anything else.
> You are comparing homosexuality to an illness.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You're an idiot - seriously
Click to expand...


LOL, I have admitted here many, many times that I am educated far beyond my intelligence. Just part of the package deal I had. Threw in tutors also.
I had to pay for the MBA though but it was easier with the free undergraduate deal.
Breast cancer is passed on genetically in 20%+ of the cases.
The homosexual is NOT the one removed from the breeding pool you fool, it is the FAULTY GENE, that is removed from the breeding pool.
And that faulty gene will skip a few generations and then show up again.
Nature insists on the survival of the species and thus the gay gene is constantly being removed. It can lay dormant for many generations and then it is removed when a gay person is born.
If there is a gene that leads to homosexuality is recessive, and no one knows for sure and I do not know for sure, or if it is a combination of genes that all have to be there for a person to be homosexual, it is possible for those gay genes to survive, even if the manifestation of those genes has a negative effect on reproductive success. 
We don't know everything about many areas of natural selection with genetics but 2 things are for sure.
We can not rule out a genetic component.
You have little understanding of evolution, natural selection and genetics.


----------



## Uncensored2008

Gadawg73 said:


> LOL, I have admitted here many, many times that I am educated far beyond my intelligence. Just part of the package deal I had. Threw in tutors also.
> I had to pay for the MBA though but it was easier with the free undergraduate deal.



Well, my employer paid for my MBA, though I did pay for my own under grad education.



> Breast cancer is passed on genetically in 20%+ of the cases.



No sparky, a predisposition to breast cancer is genetic. The cancer itself is a systematic failure of the physiological process of cellular regeneration.



> The homosexual is NOT the one removed from the breeding pool you fool, it is the FAULTY GENE, that is removed from the breeding pool.



ROFL

The homosexual, in a natural process, will not breed, ergo the genes are omitted from the species.



> And that faulty gene will skip a few generations and then show up again.



As the cycle repeats, eventually the faulty gene fades away. IF there is a genetic component, that is.



> Nature insists on the survival of the species and thus the gay gene is constantly being removed. It can lay dormant for many generations and then it is removed when a gay person is born.
> If there is a gene that leads to homosexuality is recessive, and no one knows for sure and I do not know for sure,



No one knows, and you don't know, that there is a gene. Nurture vs. nature is far from resolved.

My guess is that there is a combination of both, a potential for homosexuality, coupled with emotional and psychological factors, thus explaining why the instance is rapidly increasing as social stigma is removed. IF this were actually genetic, the instance would decrease over time.



> or if it is a combination of genes that all have to be there for a person to be homosexual, it is possible for those gay genes to survive, even if the manifestation of those genes has a negative effect on reproductive success.
> We don't know everything about many areas of natural selection with genetics but 2 things are for sure.
> We can not rule out a genetic component.
> You have little understanding of evolution, natural selection and genetics.



ROFL

You demonstrate little understanding of anything other than your own religious bigotry.


----------



## Katzndogz

Gadawg73 said:


> Katzndogz said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I would hope that the children would be treated as well as any children.
> 
> While I do see homosexuality as an evolutionary tool nature uses to weed out certain genetic traits, I would hate to see anyone denied respect and kindness, especially children.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One would imagine that homosexuality is an evolutionary tool used by nature to weed out certain genetic traits but history doesn't bear that out.  Homosexuality seems to be a naturally occurring anomaly that exists in all cultures and ethnicities at roughly the same percentage and has maintained this percentage throughout history.
> 
> No one should be denied respect and kindness but no one should open the door to let this kind of abnormality into their own families to influence their own lives either.   It's how toxicity spreads.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> What do you mean by "no one should open the door to let this kind of abnormailty into their own families to influence their own lives either"?
> I have homosexuals in my family and their "abnormality" in no way has a negative affect in any way whatsoever on anyone.
> All of us love and respect them and fight for their rights.
> How has their "abnormality" affected their inclusion into the military?
> Latest DOD study has founf open service has HAD NO AFFECT WHATSOEVER on anything.
> Same with all of society.
Click to expand...


Historically you are wrong, even though your individual experience was positive.   Homosexuality has been part of the mainstream in many civilizations and cultures.   It was never passed on as beneficial to any other culture or civilization.   If it had been, homosexuality would have been considered normal since the time of the ancient Greeks.


----------



## Too Tall

Gadawg73 said:


> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even the Southern Baptists state that homosexuality is same sex attraction and they are born with it. They call it "struggling with same sex attraction'.
> Those of us that truly have been trained and educated thoroughly in The Bible always fall back on "Carry one another's burdens".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again, if homosexuality is genetic, then it's pretty obvious that it's evolutions way of weeding out undesirable traits.
> 
> Yes, artificial means can thwart the natural selection process, but from an evolutionary standpoint, the implications are obvious,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How is any "weeding out undesirable traits" going on when homosexuals do quite well in all professional fields in the human race?
> Sad that you believe that God weeds out certain humans when they have a gene in them that causes breast cancer, mental illness or translocational downs syndrome.
> Really not sad, more sick than anything else.
> You are comparing homosexuality to an illness.
Click to expand...


I suggest that homosexuals do quite well in some professional fields because they do not have the distraction or the expense of having and raising any children.  

We had three and adopted two more kids and we could have been incredibly wealthy if not for raising all of those little rug rats.

But the love I get from all of these kids couldn't be bought with all the money in the world, and I don't regret any of it.  

btw, I did OK as a professional engineer and I am straight.


----------



## Gadawg73

Uncensored2008 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> LOL, I have admitted here many, many times that I am educated far beyond my intelligence. Just part of the package deal I had. Threw in tutors also.
> I had to pay for the MBA though but it was easier with the free undergraduate deal.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well, my employer paid for my MBA, though I did pay for my own under grad education.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Breast cancer is passed on genetically in 20%+ of the cases.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No sparky, a predisposition to breast cancer is genetic. The cancer itself is a systematic failure of the physiological process of cellular regeneration.
> 
> 
> 
> ROFL
> 
> The homosexual, in a natural process, will not breed, ergo the genes are omitted from the species.
> 
> 
> 
> As the cycle repeats, eventually the faulty gene fades away. IF there is a genetic component, that is.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nature insists on the survival of the species and thus the gay gene is constantly being removed. It can lay dormant for many generations and then it is removed when a gay person is born.
> If there is a gene that leads to homosexuality is recessive, and no one knows for sure and I do not know for sure,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> No one knows, and you don't know, that there is a gene. Nurture vs. nature is far from resolved.
> 
> My guess is that there is a combination of both, a potential for homosexuality, coupled with emotional and psychological factors, thus explaining why the instance is rapidly increasing as social stigma is removed. IF this were actually genetic, the instance would decrease over time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> or if it is a combination of genes that all have to be there for a person to be homosexual, it is possible for those gay genes to survive, even if the manifestation of those genes has a negative effect on reproductive success.
> We don't know everything about many areas of natural selection with genetics but 2 things are for sure.
> We can not rule out a genetic component.
> You have little understanding of evolution, natural selection and genetics.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> ROFL
> 
> You demonstrate little understanding of anything other than your own religious bigotry.
Click to expand...


Religous bigotry?
You will not find anyone on this board more opposed to persecution of gays by religous kooks than me.
Homosexuals can breed all they want. Reproductive genes are not weeded out.
And where is your evidence that all faulty genes weed away?
Never said there was a gene but I believe there is a strong probability genetics are involved.
Same with the medical community.
Your religous bigotry claim is as bogus as the rest of your post.


----------



## Gadawg73

Too Tall said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Again, if homosexuality is genetic, then it's pretty obvious that it's evolutions way of weeding out undesirable traits.
> 
> Yes, artificial means can thwart the natural selection process, but from an evolutionary standpoint, the implications are obvious,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How is any "weeding out undesirable traits" going on when homosexuals do quite well in all professional fields in the human race?
> Sad that you believe that God weeds out certain humans when they have a gene in them that causes breast cancer, mental illness or translocational downs syndrome.
> Really not sad, more sick than anything else.
> You are comparing homosexuality to an illness.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I suggest that homosexuals do quite well in some professional fields because they do not have the distraction or the expense of having and raising any children.
> 
> We had three and adopted two more kids and we could have been incredibly wealthy if not for raising all of those little rug rats.
> 
> But the love I get from all of these kids couldn't be bought with all the money in the world, and I don't regret any of it.
> 
> btw, I did OK as a professional engineer and I am straight.
Click to expand...



Well, sort of agree and hard to argue with that as I have 3 kids!!
2 women across the street have 3 kids, she is a lawyer and her partner is a hospital administrator, or was one until she is raising the kids.
I never had kids UNTIL AFTER I finished college.
Homosexuals DID QUITE well BEFORE anyone at that age had any kids.
Your thesis is appreciated but is opinion only.
I know many gay couples with kids. But I do agree the accumulation of wealth is MUCH EASIER with no kids. Could not agree more!!
My last is a soph in Athens now, graduated 2 from there and even with the HOPE scholarship I am out 100K.
$$$ well spent!! Oh Athens, what a wonderful place, heaven on earth!


----------



## Againsheila

Gadawg73 said:


> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Even the Southern Baptists state that homosexuality is same sex attraction and they are born with it. They call it "struggling with same sex attraction'.
> Those of us that truly have been trained and educated thoroughly in The Bible always fall back on "Carry one another's burdens".
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again, if homosexuality is genetic, then it's pretty obvious that it's evolutions way of weeding out undesirable traits.
> 
> Yes, artificial means can thwart the natural selection process, but from an evolutionary standpoint, the implications are obvious,
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> How is any "weeding out undesirable traits" going on when homosexuals do quite well in all professional fields in the human race?
> Sad that you believe that God weeds out certain humans when they have a gene in them that causes breast cancer, mental illness or translocational downs syndrome.
> Really not sad, more sick than anything else.
> You are comparing homosexuality to an illness.
Click to expand...


Up until the 1970's it was considered a mental illness.  Do you really think that homosexuals are "normal"?  

Do you know that in the deaf culture they don't believe being deaf is a defect and when given the option of giving their deaf children the cochlear ear implant so they can hear they usually turn it down?  I learned that when I took ASL and it shocked me.  How can they do that the their children?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not "normal" either, but for entirely different reasons.


----------



## Uncensored2008

Gadawg73 said:


> Religous bigotry?
> You will not find anyone on this board more opposed to persecution of gays by religous kooks than me.



I won't find anyone more in favor of persecution of people for religious beliefs (other than Islam) than you, either.

I often suspect that the only reason you promote homosexuality is your rabid hatred of Christians.  Since many Christians oppose homosexuality, you support it to be against those you so desperately hate.



> Homosexuals can breed all they want. Reproductive genes are not weeded out.
> And where is your evidence that all faulty genes weed away?



Real homosexuals don't breed. Biological fact, sparky. 

Evidence?

How Does Human Reproduction Work ? ~ Health Guide



> Never said there was a gene but I believe there is a strong probability genetics are involved.



I suspect they are as well, in the same way genetics are involved in alcoholism. But one is not BORN an alcoholic, though there is an undeniable predisposition in some.



> Same with the medical community.
> Your religous bigotry claim is as bogus as the rest of your post.



Not at all, you are a raging bigot, with venomous hatred of religious people.


----------



## Uncensored2008

Againsheila said:


> Up until the 1970's it was considered a mental illness.  Do you really think that homosexuals are "normal"?



What is "normal?" 

Would we call someone who gambles "mentally ill?" It seems absurd to me to term someone "mentally ill" just because they have sex with people we don't approve of.



> Do you know that in the deaf culture they don't believe being deaf is a defect and when given the option of giving their deaf children the cochlear ear implant so they can hear they usually turn it down?  I learned that when I took ASL and it shocked me.  How can they do that the their children?
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I'm not "normal" either, but for entirely different reasons.



I have a deaf nephew who married a deaf woman. They had a hearing child. The child had a very hard time, and didn't speak until about 6, even at 14, his speech is not completely normal. The influence of the parents is a major part of forming the human psyche.


----------



## Gadawg73

Againsheila said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Again, if homosexuality is genetic, then it's pretty obvious that it's evolutions way of weeding out undesirable traits.
> 
> Yes, artificial means can thwart the natural selection process, but from an evolutionary standpoint, the implications are obvious,
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How is any "weeding out undesirable traits" going on when homosexuals do quite well in all professional fields in the human race?
> Sad that you believe that God weeds out certain humans when they have a gene in them that causes breast cancer, mental illness or translocational downs syndrome.
> Really not sad, more sick than anything else.
> You are comparing homosexuality to an illness.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Up until the 1970's it was considered a mental illness.  Do you really think that homosexuals are "normal"?
> 
> Do you know that in the deaf culture they don't believe being deaf is a defect and when given the option of giving their deaf children the cochlear ear implant so they can hear they usually turn it down?  I learned that when I took ASL and it shocked me.  How can they do that the their children?
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I'm not "normal" either, but for entirely different reasons.
Click to expand...


Until the 1970s blacks were 2nd class citizens here and told to sit in the back of the bus.
Not a mental illness, that is bunk and everyone knows that.
Of course gays are not normal TO US. And I believe gay marriage is weird, strange and off the wall.
Affects me in no way or anyone else in any way whatsoever. Except the busy body mother hen sissy mama's boys that are sheltered still by the mamas and have nothing else to do.
But to tjhem falling in love with someone of the same sex is normal TO THEM. 
So why not celebrate their love be it normal or not?
Does not affect me in any way. Who gives a shit about gay folk?


----------



## Gadawg73

Uncensored2008 said:


> Againsheila said:
> 
> 
> 
> Up until the 1970's it was considered a mental illness.  Do you really think that homosexuals are "normal"?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What is "normal?"
> 
> Would we call someone who gambles "mentally ill?" It seems absurd to me to term someone "mentally ill" just because they have sex with people we don't approve of.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Do you know that in the deaf culture they don't believe being deaf is a defect and when given the option of giving their deaf children the cochlear ear implant so they can hear they usually turn it down?  I learned that when I took ASL and it shocked me.  How can they do that the their children?
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I'm not "normal" either, but for entirely different reasons.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I have a deaf nephew who married a deaf woman. They had a hearing child. The child had a very hard time, and didn't speak until about 6, even at 14, his speech is not completely normal. The influence of the parents is a major part of forming the human psyche.
Click to expand...


Totally agree. Same page of the playbook. 
Good post.


----------



## Gadawg73

Uncensored2008 said:


> Gadawg73 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Religous bigotry?
> You will not find anyone on this board more opposed to persecution of gays by religous kooks than me.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I won't find anyone more in favor of persecution of people for religious beliefs (other than Islam) than you, either.
> 
> I often suspect that the only reason you promote homosexuality is your rabid hatred of Christians.  Since many Christians oppose homosexuality, you support it to be against those you so desperately hate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Homosexuals can breed all they want. Reproductive genes are not weeded out.
> And where is your evidence that all faulty genes weed away?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Real homosexuals don't breed. Biological fact, sparky.
> 
> Evidence?
> 
> How Does Human Reproduction Work ? ~ Health Guide
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Never said there was a gene but I believe there is a strong probability genetics are involved.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I suspect they are as well, in the same way genetics are involved in alcoholism. But one is not BORN an alcoholic, though there is an undeniable predisposition in some.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Same with the medical community.
> Your religous bigotry claim is as bogus as the rest of your post.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Not at all, you are a raging bigot, with venomous hatred of religious people.
Click to expand...


You do not even know the definition of a bigot. 
I, unlike you, hate no one. Hate is wrong. Sorry your parents taught you wrong. I pity you and the obvious hatred you have of them and the life they left you. You are in my prayers.
I treat everyone the same because I am at peace with myself and who I am.
You are a spoiled brat and either a scorned woman or a mama's boy. 
Which is it?


----------



## Gadawg73

What is "the promotion of homosexuality"? 
How does one promote what they are not and what other people do?


----------

