Bakers fined for not working homosexual "wedding" continue fighting for their freedoms

[Pop23]

For now is right...

Poll: Seven in 10 support LGBT nondiscrimination laws

But your perceived likely direction is all wrong.

Well then they should threaten and blackmail...er...I mean contact their representatives in Congress because even if 10 of 10 Americans wanted to let aberrant sex behaviors parade around as a "class" of people specially protected ( you know, above normal harassment laws that protect everyone anyway ), it still isn't the Law until Congress ratifies new language to the Civil Rights Act.

Pick up those batons, gossip columns, hire those private investigators.....er...I mean phones and pens and start getting a hold of your representatives.. "Law" by force of a minority using surreptitious means is also known as fascism. We do democracy in this country.

Here's the part of this whole discussion I find extremely interesting.

I point out that there is no objective test that can prove any single being is homosexual.

They counter with, "well, what about religion"

So, if religion is a delusion (how many times have we heard that from these folks), and it can't be objectively tested, then how do they defend homosexuality as anything more than a simply delusion.

Perplexing.

Homosexuality is not a delusion it's a sexual orientation. Some have an orientation towards religion, some against. The test is, if one is male, who do you get down on your knees for, God or Dick, or both?

Your porblem is choice? Who who fuck and who you pray to can both be choices but who you pray to mostly is choice, who you fuck mostly is not.

And both can be a delusion.

I can provide an objective test to prove a black is a black. A female is a female, a senior is a senior or a disabled person is disabled.

Can you provide an objective test for sexuality?

Can you provide an objective test that someone is really religious?

Not the issue until you answer my question, is it.

However I think about it , it is protected under the Bill of rights of the constitution.

Where's you test, or sexualities inclussion in the Bill of Rights. I'll take either.

 

[Crixus]

Doctors would be free to only treat people of their own religion. You can't separate people by vocation. "Well bakers can discriminate but doctors can't". Why? If they are the same religion and a doctor doesn't want to treat someone that is Hindu, or Atheist, how exactly do you justify one getting to pick and choose and not another.

This is not hard to understand at all. Matter of fact, we learned this in public school in third grade social studies. It go's like this,


I got a business, I make widgets. A guy comes a d buys my widgets because they are good and come at a good price. So I do a decent business making and selling widjits, until I find that customer A is using my widgets for evil, or what I consider evil. I refuse to sell any more widgets to customer A. So, what does a confidant customer A do ? A right thinking adult tells me to take the widgets and shove off because he found a supplier of widgets just as good and a dollar cheaper. Word gets out and widget consumers shop at the other widget place.


But today, The weak minded turds sue, their way in. In the end they end up getting widgets some place else and except for a blerb on talk radio they get ignored into insignificance.

However, your analogy fails in this way. If you sell widgets to customer A and find out he's using the widgets for evil, every PA law in the U.S. allows you to stop selling to Customer A. Know why? Because doing evil is not a protected class.....look at any PA law to see.

However, if YOUR definition of "evil" is "they are evil because of their religion"..."they are evil because of their race"..."they are evil because of their gender"..."they are evil because of their sexual orientation"(in some states)....then you cannot discriminate against them based on their religion, their race, their gender, their sexual orientation. Because......you accepted, when you got your business license, that you would abide by that state's business laws.

It worked perfectly because I got you to do exactly what I wanted. Fuck religeion. It's people like you who make an issue where there should be none. Want a wedding cake for a gay narrage? Go where they make them. That simple. Matter of fact, black women have learned their lesson well, the acted on it and prospered from it and they never made the news doing it.

 

[Seawytch]

For now is right...

Poll: Seven in 10 support LGBT nondiscrimination laws

But your perceived likely direction is all wrong.

Well then they should threaten and blackmail...er...I mean contact their representatives in Congress because even if 10 of 10 Americans wanted to let aberrant sex behaviors parade around as a "class" of people specially protected ( you know, above normal harassment laws that protect everyone anyway ), it still isn't the Law until Congress ratifies new language to the Civil Rights Act.

Pick up those batons, gossip columns, hire those private investigators.....er...I mean phones and pens and start getting a hold of your representatives.. "Law" by force of a minority using surreptitious means is also known as fascism. We do democracy in this country.

Here's the part of this whole discussion I find extremely interesting.

I point out that there is no objective test that can prove any single being is homosexual.

They counter with, "well, what about religion"

So, if religion is a delusion (how many times have we heard that from these folks), and it can't be objectively tested, then how do they defend homosexuality as anything more than a simply delusion.

Perplexing.

Who said religion is a delusion?......Besides you?

Religions are very real...but how can you prove you really believe that religion? What if you are faking it like so very many do?

Have you been on the religion thread?

It's not really a matter of religion at all. It's just how it is. It's about what's natural and what's not. We are animals when it comes down to it and we have animal urges that if you look at them are pretty naturel. Homosexuality go's against the laws of nature. That's why there is a naturel aversion to homosexuality.

List of mammals displaying homosexual behavior - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Seawytch]

Well then they should threaten and blackmail...er...I mean contact their representatives in Congress because even if 10 of 10 Americans wanted to let aberrant sex behaviors parade around as a "class" of people specially protected ( you know, above normal harassment laws that protect everyone anyway ), it still isn't the Law until Congress ratifies new language to the Civil Rights Act.

Pick up those batons, gossip columns, hire those private investigators.....er...I mean phones and pens and start getting a hold of your representatives.. "Law" by force of a minority using surreptitious means is also known as fascism. We do democracy in this country.

Here's the part of this whole discussion I find extremely interesting.

I point out that there is no objective test that can prove any single being is homosexual.

They counter with, "well, what about religion"

So, if religion is a delusion (how many times have we heard that from these folks), and it can't be objectively tested, then how do they defend homosexuality as anything more than a simply delusion.

Perplexing.

Homosexuality is not a delusion it's a sexual orientation. Some have an orientation towards religion, some against. The test is, if one is male, who do you get down on your knees for, God or Dick, or both?

Your porblem is choice? Who who fuck and who you pray to can both be choices but who you pray to mostly is choice, who you fuck mostly is not.

And both can be a delusion.

I can provide an objective test to prove a black is a black. A female is a female, a senior is a senior or a disabled person is disabled.

Can you provide an objective test for sexuality?

Can you provide an objective test that someone is really religious?

Not the issue until you answer my question, is it.

However I think about it , it is protected under the Bill of rights of the constitution.

Where's you test, or sexualities inclussion in the Bill of Rights. I'll take either.

It's not the Bill of Rights that requires gays serve the bigoted Christian it's Title II of the Civil Rights Act.

 

[Crixus]

Well then they should threaten and blackmail...er...I mean contact their representatives in Congress because even if 10 of 10 Americans wanted to let aberrant sex behaviors parade around as a "class" of people specially protected ( you know, above normal harassment laws that protect everyone anyway ), it still isn't the Law until Congress ratifies new language to the Civil Rights Act.

Pick up those batons, gossip columns, hire those private investigators.....er...I mean phones and pens and start getting a hold of your representatives.. "Law" by force of a minority using surreptitious means is also known as fascism. We do democracy in this country.

Here's the part of this whole discussion I find extremely interesting.

I point out that there is no objective test that can prove any single being is homosexual.

They counter with, "well, what about religion"

So, if religion is a delusion (how many times have we heard that from these folks), and it can't be objectively tested, then how do they defend homosexuality as anything more than a simply delusion.

Perplexing.

Who said religion is a delusion?......Besides you?

Religions are very real...but how can you prove you really believe that religion? What if you are faking it like so very many do?

Have you been on the religion thread?

It's not really a matter of religion at all. It's just how it is. It's about what's natural and what's not. We are animals when it comes down to it and we have animal urges that if you look at them are pretty naturel. Homosexuality go's against the laws of nature. That's why there is a naturel aversion to homosexuality.

List of mammals displaying homosexual behavior - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You and I can do Darwin and all that in the bull ring. All Darwin writings in all his books, we will keep it to what's avaliable to you on the 10% off rack at Barnes and Noble so you can play. That said, going by your assertion that homosexuality is perfectly normal then why diddnt the Lesions just kill the baker and all his staff and take the cake ? I mean all animals do it, he'll they wouldn't have to go that far how about some ritualized combat ? Or the gay people could have just snuk in and stole it. All alternatives would have been acceptable to you because you can find a list of animals that do it. There are two directives among all animals and they are way down in the "reptile braine". Those directives are, survive and propagate the species. Broken animals have what some call a suicide gene. When they are borne they reuse to eat and they die because they know they are broken. Happens with reptiles allot, frequently with puppies and kittens as well as a imams that tend to have litters, but I digress. The rags are wrong for forcing their will on other people.let consumers decided if it's bad or not.

 

[Crixus]

Here's the part of this whole discussion I find extremely interesting.

I point out that there is no objective test that can prove any single being is homosexual.

They counter with, "well, what about religion"

So, if religion is a delusion (how many times have we heard that from these folks), and it can't be objectively tested, then how do they defend homosexuality as anything more than a simply delusion.

Perplexing.

Homosexuality is not a delusion it's a sexual orientation. Some have an orientation towards religion, some against. The test is, if one is male, who do you get down on your knees for, God or Dick, or both?

Your porblem is choice? Who who fuck and who you pray to can both be choices but who you pray to mostly is choice, who you fuck mostly is not.

And both can be a delusion.

I can provide an objective test to prove a black is a black. A female is a female, a senior is a senior or a disabled person is disabled.

Can you provide an objective test for sexuality?

Can you provide an objective test that someone is really religious?

Not the issue until you answer my question, is it.

However I think about it , it is protected under the Bill of rights of the constitution.

Where's you test, or sexualities inclussion in the Bill of Rights. I'll take either.

It's not the Bill of Rights that requires gays serve the bigoted Christian it's Title II of the Civil Rights Act.

Oh, and gas don't have to serve christians. Most adult gay folks just want to get on with their lives. They have more important things to deal with then some retard who won't make a cake.

 

[SmokeALib]

Homosexuality is not a delusion it's a sexual orientation. Some have an orientation towards religion, some against. The test is, if one is male, who do you get down on your knees for, God or Dick, or both?

Your porblem is choice? Who who fuck and who you pray to can both be choices but who you pray to mostly is choice, who you fuck mostly is not.

And both can be a delusion.

I can provide an objective test to prove a black is a black. A female is a female, a senior is a senior or a disabled person is disabled.

Can you provide an objective test for sexuality?

Can you provide an objective test that someone is really religious?

Not the issue until you answer my question, is it.

However I think about it , it is protected under the Bill of rights of the constitution.

Where's you test, or sexualities inclussion in the Bill of Rights. I'll take either.

It's not the Bill of Rights that requires gays serve the bigoted Christian it's Title II of the Civil Rights Act.

Oh, and gas don't have to serve christians. Most adult gay folks just want to get on with their lives. They have more important things to deal with then some retard who won't make a cake.

I highly doubt they have more important things to attend to...just as any other lib.

 

[Pop23]

Here's the part of this whole discussion I find extremely interesting.

I point out that there is no objective test that can prove any single being is homosexual.

They counter with, "well, what about religion"

So, if religion is a delusion (how many times have we heard that from these folks), and it can't be objectively tested, then how do they defend homosexuality as anything more than a simply delusion.

Perplexing.

Homosexuality is not a delusion it's a sexual orientation. Some have an orientation towards religion, some against. The test is, if one is male, who do you get down on your knees for, God or Dick, or both?

Your porblem is choice? Who who fuck and who you pray to can both be choices but who you pray to mostly is choice, who you fuck mostly is not.

And both can be a delusion.

I can provide an objective test to prove a black is a black. A female is a female, a senior is a senior or a disabled person is disabled.

Can you provide an objective test for sexuality?

Can you provide an objective test that someone is really religious?

Not the issue until you answer my question, is it.

However I think about it , it is protected under the Bill of rights of the constitution.

Where's you test, or sexualities inclussion in the Bill of Rights. I'll take either.

It's not the Bill of Rights that requires gays serve the bigoted Christian it's Title II of the Civil Rights Act.

The perplexing aspect is that, other then those freedoms afforded under the bill of rights, all others in Title II of the civil rights act, except sexual orientation, can be objectively tested.

Perplexing, don't you think?

 

[Pop23]

Well then they should threaten and blackmail...er...I mean contact their representatives in Congress because even if 10 of 10 Americans wanted to let aberrant sex behaviors parade around as a "class" of people specially protected ( you know, above normal harassment laws that protect everyone anyway ), it still isn't the Law until Congress ratifies new language to the Civil Rights Act.

Pick up those batons, gossip columns, hire those private investigators.....er...I mean phones and pens and start getting a hold of your representatives.. "Law" by force of a minority using surreptitious means is also known as fascism. We do democracy in this country.

Here's the part of this whole discussion I find extremely interesting.

I point out that there is no objective test that can prove any single being is homosexual.

They counter with, "well, what about religion"

So, if religion is a delusion (how many times have we heard that from these folks), and it can't be objectively tested, then how do they defend homosexuality as anything more than a simply delusion.

Perplexing.

Who said religion is a delusion?......Besides you?

Religions are very real...but how can you prove you really believe that religion? What if you are faking it like so very many do?

Have you been on the religion thread?

It's not really a matter of religion at all. It's just how it is. It's about what's natural and what's not. We are animals when it comes down to it and we have animal urges that if you look at them are pretty naturel. Homosexuality go's against the laws of nature. That's why there is a naturel aversion to homosexuality.

List of mammals displaying homosexual behavior - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Oh, then all behavior that mammals display are protected rights?

Do I have your argument correct?

 

[Frank'sRules]

Here's the part of this whole discussion I find extremely interesting.

I point out that there is no objective test that can prove any single being is homosexual.

They counter with, "well, what about religion"

So, if religion is a delusion (how many times have we heard that from these folks), and it can't be objectively tested, then how do they defend homosexuality as anything more than a simply delusion.

Perplexing.

Who said religion is a delusion?......Besides you?

Religions are very real...but how can you prove you really believe that religion? What if you are faking it like so very many do?

Have you been on the religion thread?

It's not really a matter of religion at all. It's just how it is. It's about what's natural and what's not. We are animals when it comes down to it and we have animal urges that if you look at them are pretty naturel. Homosexuality go's against the laws of nature. That's why there is a naturel aversion to homosexuality.

List of mammals displaying homosexual behavior - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Oh, then all behavior that mammals display are protected rights?

Do I have your argument correct?

Obviously not. That would be an argument against homosexuality is always a choice when it actually only sometimes a choice. Nature doesn't mind gay creatures, you do.

 

[Frank'sRules]

Homosexuality is not a delusion it's a sexual orientation. Some have an orientation towards religion, some against. The test is, if one is male, who do you get down on your knees for, God or Dick, or both?

Your porblem is choice? Who who fuck and who you pray to can both be choices but who you pray to mostly is choice, who you fuck mostly is not.

And both can be a delusion.

I can provide an objective test to prove a black is a black. A female is a female, a senior is a senior or a disabled person is disabled.

Can you provide an objective test for sexuality?

Can you provide an objective test that someone is really religious?

Not the issue until you answer my question, is it.

However I think about it , it is protected under the Bill of rights of the constitution.

Where's you test, or sexualities inclussion in the Bill of Rights. I'll take either.

It's not the Bill of Rights that requires gays serve the bigoted Christian it's Title II of the Civil Rights Act.

The perplexing aspect is that, other then those freedoms afforded under the bill of rights, all others in Title II of the civil rights act, except sexual orientation, can be objectively tested.

Perplexing, don't you think?

An objective test for religion? Never seen one. And don't try objective tests for race or gender, those won't take you very far either.

You can try it on me though, what's my religion, using an objective test?

 

[Crixus]

And both can be a delusion.

I can provide an objective test to prove a black is a black. A female is a female, a senior is a senior or a disabled person is disabled.

Can you provide an objective test for sexuality?

Can you provide an objective test that someone is really religious?

Not the issue until you answer my question, is it.

However I think about it , it is protected under the Bill of rights of the constitution.

Where's you test, or sexualities inclussion in the Bill of Rights. I'll take either.

It's not the Bill of Rights that requires gays serve the bigoted Christian it's Title II of the Civil Rights Act.

Oh, and gas don't have to serve christians. Most adult gay folks just want to get on with their lives. They have more important things to deal with then some retard who won't make a cake.

I highly doubt they have more important things to attend to...just as any other lib.

Gay, straight, conservative,liberal, black white, we all gotta live. Shirt like this is nothing more then red meat jinned up to get the base out and loud. Nothing but a distraction.

 

[Crixus]

Who said religion is a delusion?......Besides you?

Religions are very real...but how can you prove you really believe that religion? What if you are faking it like so very many do?

Have you been on the religion thread?

It's not really a matter of religion at all. It's just how it is. It's about what's natural and what's not. We are animals when it comes down to it and we have animal urges that if you look at them are pretty naturel. Homosexuality go's against the laws of nature. That's why there is a naturel aversion to homosexuality.

List of mammals displaying homosexual behavior - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Oh, then all behavior that mammals display are protected rights?

Do I have your argument correct?

Obviously not. That would be an argument against homosexuality is always a choice when it actually only sometimes a choice. Nature doesn't mind gay creatures, you do.

Nature doesn't mind anything because it only exists. Things in nature (other then people) are unable to give a shirt because they are animals not people. Lay off the Disney dude it makes you come off as stupid and weak.

 

[Crixus]

Here's the part of this whole discussion I find extremely interesting.

I point out that there is no objective test that can prove any single being is homosexual.

They counter with, "well, what about religion"

So, if religion is a delusion (how many times have we heard that from these folks), and it can't be objectively tested, then how do they defend homosexuality as anything more than a simply delusion.

Perplexing.

Who said religion is a delusion?......Besides you?

Religions are very real...but how can you prove you really believe that religion? What if you are faking it like so very many do?

Have you been on the religion thread?

It's not really a matter of religion at all. It's just how it is. It's about what's natural and what's not. We are animals when it comes down to it and we have animal urges that if you look at them are pretty naturel. Homosexuality go's against the laws of nature. That's why there is a naturel aversion to homosexuality.

List of mammals displaying homosexual behavior - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Oh, then all behavior that mammals display are protected rights?

Do I have your argument correct?

It would be nice if you did. I,could think of a whole bunch of issues I would like to settle using the laws of nature.

 

[Seawytch]

Here's the part of this whole discussion I find extremely interesting.

I point out that there is no objective test that can prove any single being is homosexual.

They counter with, "well, what about religion"

So, if religion is a delusion (how many times have we heard that from these folks), and it can't be objectively tested, then how do they defend homosexuality as anything more than a simply delusion.

Perplexing.

Who said religion is a delusion?......Besides you?

Religions are very real...but how can you prove you really believe that religion? What if you are faking it like so very many do?

Have you been on the religion thread?

It's not really a matter of religion at all. It's just how it is. It's about what's natural and what's not. We are animals when it comes down to it and we have animal urges that if you look at them are pretty naturel. Homosexuality go's against the laws of nature. That's why there is a naturel aversion to homosexuality.

List of mammals displaying homosexual behavior - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You and I can do Darwin and all that in the bull ring. All Darwin writings in all his books, we will keep it to what's avaliable to you on the 10% off rack at Barnes and Noble so you can play. That said, going by your assertion that homosexuality is perfectly normal then why diddnt the Lesions just kill the baker and all his staff and take the cake ? I mean all animals do it, he'll they wouldn't have to go that far how about some ritualized combat ? Or the gay people could have just snuk in and stole it. All alternatives would have been acceptable to you because you can find a list of animals that do it. There are two directives among all animals and they are way down in the "reptile braine". Those directives are, survive and propagate the species. Broken animals have what some call a suicide gene. When they are borne they reuse to eat and they die because they know they are broken. Happens with reptiles allot, frequently with puppies and kittens as well as a imams that tend to have litters, but I digress. The rags are wrong for forcing their will on other people.let consumers decided if it's bad or not.

How bi of you. On one hand you say "it ain't nachrul" then, when show it is perfectly natural, you say "dogs eat cat shit".

Come on, get it together. What's your argument "it ain't natural" or "so what if it's found in nature"?

 

[Crixus]

Who said religion is a delusion?......Besides you?

Religions are very real...but how can you prove you really believe that religion? What if you are faking it like so very many do?

Have you been on the religion thread?

It's not really a matter of religion at all. It's just how it is. It's about what's natural and what's not. We are animals when it comes down to it and we have animal urges that if you look at them are pretty naturel. Homosexuality go's against the laws of nature. That's why there is a naturel aversion to homosexuality.

List of mammals displaying homosexual behavior - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You and I can do Darwin and all that in the bull ring. All Darwin writings in all his books, we will keep it to what's avaliable to you on the 10% off rack at Barnes and Noble so you can play. That said, going by your assertion that homosexuality is perfectly normal then why diddnt the Lesions just kill the baker and all his staff and take the cake ? I mean all animals do it, he'll they wouldn't have to go that far how about some ritualized combat ? Or the gay people could have just snuk in and stole it. All alternatives would have been acceptable to you because you can find a list of animals that do it. There are two directives among all animals and they are way down in the "reptile braine". Those directives are, survive and propagate the species. Broken animals have what some call a suicide gene. When they are borne they reuse to eat and they die because they know they are broken. Happens with reptiles allot, frequently with puppies and kittens as well as a imams that tend to have litters, but I digress. The rags are wrong for forcing their will on other people.let consumers decided if it's bad or not.

How bi of you. On one hand you say "it ain't nachrul" then, when show it is perfectly natural, you say "dogs eat cat shit".

Come on, get it together. What's your argument "it ain't natural" or "so what if it's found in nature"?

So by your definition if they beat the bakers down and drilled him in the ass or even killed them you would be cool with that because your beloved great apes do that. By your logic, it's okay to kill and eat our children when times are hard because animals do it? Now to the homosexuality of those sit eating dogs you mentioned, by your logic you are fine with rape because dogs express domanance over their competitors beating their asses and dry humping the butt of the loser? Sorry there dude, homosexuality acts are done in nature first and for most because animals can't control them selves, and as an act of dominance over their kindaily not love. Homosexuality is not natural, or it is in that it keeps the weak and defective members of the species out of the gene pool. So I guess you are also,saying that gay humans are also inferior humans? When you want to get ino Darwin thoughts on the matter ?

 

[Seawytch]

Have you been on the religion thread?

It's not really a matter of religion at all. It's just how it is. It's about what's natural and what's not. We are animals when it comes down to it and we have animal urges that if you look at them are pretty naturel. Homosexuality go's against the laws of nature. That's why there is a naturel aversion to homosexuality.

List of mammals displaying homosexual behavior - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You and I can do Darwin and all that in the bull ring. All Darwin writings in all his books, we will keep it to what's avaliable to you on the 10% off rack at Barnes and Noble so you can play. That said, going by your assertion that homosexuality is perfectly normal then why diddnt the Lesions just kill the baker and all his staff and take the cake ? I mean all animals do it, he'll they wouldn't have to go that far how about some ritualized combat ? Or the gay people could have just snuk in and stole it. All alternatives would have been acceptable to you because you can find a list of animals that do it. There are two directives among all animals and they are way down in the "reptile braine". Those directives are, survive and propagate the species. Broken animals have what some call a suicide gene. When they are borne they reuse to eat and they die because they know they are broken. Happens with reptiles allot, frequently with puppies and kittens as well as a imams that tend to have litters, but I digress. The rags are wrong for forcing their will on other people.let consumers decided if it's bad or not.

How bi of you. On one hand you say "it ain't nachrul" then, when show it is perfectly natural, you say "dogs eat cat shit".

Come on, get it together. What's your argument "it ain't natural" or "so what if it's found in nature"?

So by your definition if they beat the bakers down and drilled him in the ass or even killed them you would be cool with that because your beloved great apes do that. By your logic, it's okay to kill and eat our children when times are hard because animals do it? Now to the homosexuality of those sit eating dogs you mentioned, by your logic you are fine with rape because dogs express domanance over their competitors beating their asses and dry humping the butt of the loser? Sorry there dude, homosexuality acts are done in nature first and for most because animals can't control them selves, and as an act of dominance over their kindaily not love. Homosexuality is not natural, or it is in that it keeps the weak and defective members of the species out of the gene pool. So I guess you are also,saying that gay humans are also inferior humans? When you want to get ino Darwin thoughts on the matter ?

Humans are animals. Some animals, including humans, are gay. This is natural and has existed since the beginning of time in all human races and in a lot of animal species. Some, like the human animal, mate for life. There are even very reasonable theories as to why some species have "the gays", including humans.

The evolutionary puzzle of homosexuality - BBC News

 

[Pop23]

And both can be a delusion.

I can provide an objective test to prove a black is a black. A female is a female, a senior is a senior or a disabled person is disabled.

Can you provide an objective test for sexuality?

Can you provide an objective test that someone is really religious?

Not the issue until you answer my question, is it.

However I think about it , it is protected under the Bill of rights of the constitution.

Where's you test, or sexualities inclussion in the Bill of Rights. I'll take either.

It's not the Bill of Rights that requires gays serve the bigoted Christian it's Title II of the Civil Rights Act.

The perplexing aspect is that, other then those freedoms afforded under the bill of rights, all others in Title II of the civil rights act, except sexual orientation, can be objectively tested.

Perplexing, don't you think?

An objective test for religion? Never seen one. And don't try objective tests for race or gender, those won't take you very far either.

You can try it on me though, what's my religion, using an objective test?

I see your deflecting from the issue at hand.

You really think there are no objective tests for race or gender?

A black man claiming to be white can be subjected to a number of objective tests, as can a female claiming to be a male.

If a man, not sexually oriented toward other men, claimed to be gay. What objective test could be applied to prove we wasn't?

Perplexing.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

There are no gay animals. There are animals that exhibit gay behavior when deprived of a suitable mate, but they are not gay.

 

[Pop23]

Who said religion is a delusion?......Besides you?

Religions are very real...but how can you prove you really believe that religion? What if you are faking it like so very many do?

Have you been on the religion thread?

It's not really a matter of religion at all. It's just how it is. It's about what's natural and what's not. We are animals when it comes down to it and we have animal urges that if you look at them are pretty naturel. Homosexuality go's against the laws of nature. That's why there is a naturel aversion to homosexuality.

List of mammals displaying homosexual behavior - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Oh, then all behavior that mammals display are protected rights?

Do I have your argument correct?

Obviously not. That would be an argument against homosexuality is always a choice when it actually only sometimes a choice. Nature doesn't mind gay creatures, you do.

You do realize that delusion is not just a Homo sapien issue, Right?