CENTER STAGE

[ChrisL]

What "special privileges" do gay people have that other people do not? Oh, that's right, none. They just want to be treated fairly and like anyone else. The law applies to EVERYONE.

Why are you so concerned with a gay person's sex life? It is retarded, really.

Where did I use the word "privileges"? Also the only persons sex life I concern myself with is mine and I don't push it in anyone's face and demand they accept me for my preferences.

Okay, rights and "protections" then. Tell me, what "special rights and protections" does a gay person have that you do not?

Well apparently not. Lol.

How about the right to redefine terms that have stood for hundreds of thousands of years and completely reorder society just because they say so. No measurable objective standards, just because they say it should be so. Like I said earlier, what could possibly go wrong when it only takes a group of people to demand we do something just because that's the way they want it, screw everyone else.

How so?

How so what? My words are not ambiguous.

How are they reordering society? This group of people only want to be treated like anyone else. Most of these people just go to work every day and come home and eat dinner and live their lives. They are not monsters. There is nothing to fear. They are just people. It just so happens, they are attracted to their same sex. They still have thoughts, feelings and emotions and lives like anyone else.

 

[Skylar]

This is CENTER STAGE where the rule of law prevails. We are a nation of laws, not of men (not of righties or lefties or whatever). As such, the United States Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land. People often disagree about the interpretation of the law and/or how it applies to a particular set of facts. When such a case or controversy exists, it is the duty of our courts to review and resolve the controversy. Some of us may not agree with some judicial decisions, but history has taught us that decisions based on error do not withstand the test of time and reason.

I would like to discuss the important issues of the day using the rule of law. Can you support your position based on the law and reason?

Let's start with the actual decision issued by a state agency in the case involving "Sweetcakes by Melissa". Rather than rely on media accounts or right wing or left wing hysteria, please read the decision yourself and think about it:

In the matter of Klein, dba Sweetcakes by Melissa

If you think the decision is based on legal error, where do you find the error? If the matter is appealed, what legal grounds or precedent will the reviewing court use to reverse the decision?

Nope. I think its bad policy. But I think its got a firm legal foundation. As the regulation of intrastate commerce is an implicit power of the States per the Constitution. Public Accommodation laws have been tested constitutionally and found to be valid. So in both the authority and the application, the Sweetcakes decision is on firm legal footing.

The idea that religious belief allows you to summarily ignore any PA law you don't like? That's built on a foundation of mud, legally speaking.

Wet mud.

 

[ChrisL]

I read the entire file. It did not change my mind except to say, in this case I believe the fine is too small. I hope other businesses learn from this experience and people will finally see that they are not better than others.

Fine? What fine?

The penalty of $135,000.

You mean the payoff for the thin skinned faghadist?

So? What is wrong if someone is "thin skinned." Like I told you, everyone is not the same. If we were all the same, life would be very boring.

 

[Jackson]

Just because it's small to YOU, a person who has not experienced being discriminated against and treated like crap, doesn't mean it is insignificant to another. Not everyone is the same.

Right, you've been discriminating against me and treating me like crap for the last several posts, I only let my temper get the best of me once and I apologize for that.

Why are you so willing to accept the word of gays and not anyone else.

I have to butt in here. She is not accepting the word of gays...she is following the law. Now if you want to talk about politics, religion in general, or baseball teams, we might have something in common. It isn't that she is enamoured with gays.

What is the law based on?

Civil Rights I would assume.

Could you be more specific, I know of no civil right that protects preferences. Well except the ones recently pulled out of thin air.

I already gave the example of blacks being treated so horribly that finally started to get better with the Civil Rights laws. The could not use the same bathrooms, drinking fountains as whites, but you know all that, Skin Heads today have a preference to whites and cannot stand blacks.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Right, you've been discriminating against me and treating me like crap for the last several posts, I only let my temper get the best of me once and I apologize for that.

Why are you so willing to accept the word of gays and not anyone else.

I have to butt in here. She is not accepting the word of gays...she is following the law. Now if you want to talk about politics, religion in general, or baseball teams, we might have something in common. It isn't that she is enamoured with gays.

What is the law based on?

Civil Rights I would assume.

Could you be more specific, I know of no civil right that protects preferences. Well except the ones recently pulled out of thin air.

It's not a preference. A person cannot control or help who he or she is sexually attracted to. You don't choose who you are attracted to. It just IS.

So if someone is attracted to children through no fault of their own you're just fine with that...
You show the depth of your sickness with every post.

 

[Jackson]

I have to butt in here. She is not accepting the word of gays...she is following the law. Now if you want to talk about politics, religion in general, or baseball teams, we might have something in common. It isn't that she is enamoured with gays.

What is the law based on?

Civil Rights I would assume.

Could you be more specific, I know of no civil right that protects preferences. Well except the ones recently pulled out of thin air.

It's not a preference. A person cannot control or help who he or she is sexually attracted to. You don't choose who you are attracted to. It just IS.

So if someone is attracted to children through no fault of their own you're just fine with that...
You show the depth of your sickness with every post.

Again we are talking abut laws. Crimes against children is against those standing laws just as the discrimination laws.

 

[OKTexas]

Keep talking your shit while not addressing what I actually said, carry on.

What I said is true. These arguments have been argued in court by bigots like you and have failed. You lose.

Tell me, what medical test is used to prove someone is naturally gay? Oh right, there isn't one, we're expected to grant them special rights and protections because they say so. No way that could ever go wrong.

You are going to carry this on, but I am about through. Some people may be naturally gay, I think. I have seen very young boys who seem to have feminine qualities. That is before they have a lick of sense about sexuality. What about "TOM BOYS " who turn out to be lesbians. Who knows...I really don't.

That's my point, no one really knows because there is no objective way to measure, yet you're all for granting them rights subjectively and telling everyone they have no choice but to accept it. That's no way to run a society.

Why shouldn't I want them to have equal rights? There is absolutely no reason why a taxpaying American citizen should not enjoy the same rights and privileges as any other taxpaying American citizen. Their sex lives are of no concern to me. It doesn't bother me because I am secure in my sexuality.

They already had the exact same rights of every other tax paying citizen of their gender. Their sex life is irrelevant until you want to give them something based on their sex life.

 

[Skylar]

What I said is true. These arguments have been argued in court by bigots like you and have failed. You lose.

Tell me, what medical test is used to prove someone is naturally gay? Oh right, there isn't one, we're expected to grant them special rights and protections because they say so. No way that could ever go wrong.

You are going to carry this on, but I am about through. Some people may be naturally gay, I think. I have seen very young boys who seem to have feminine qualities. That is before they have a lick of sense about sexuality. What about "TOM BOYS " who turn out to be lesbians. Who knows...I really don't.

That's my point, no one really knows because there is no objective way to measure, yet you're all for granting them rights subjectively and telling everyone they have no choice but to accept it. That's no way to run a society.

Why shouldn't I want them to have equal rights? There is absolutely no reason why a taxpaying American citizen should not enjoy the same rights and privileges as any other taxpaying American citizen. Their sex lives are of no concern to me. It doesn't bother me because I am secure in my sexuality.

They already had the exact same rights of every other tax paying citizen of their gender. Their sex life is irrelevant until you want to give them something based on their sex life.

They obviously didn't. Your argument is akin to claiming that interracial marriage laws were valid because they applied to both blacks and whites. THus, the law was applied 'equally'. The ban itself must meet constitutional muster.

And neither interracial marriage bans nor same sex marriage bans did.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

What is the law based on?

Civil Rights I would assume.

Could you be more specific, I know of no civil right that protects preferences. Well except the ones recently pulled out of thin air.

It's not a preference. A person cannot control or help who he or she is sexually attracted to. You don't choose who you are attracted to. It just IS.

So if someone is attracted to children through no fault of their own you're just fine with that...
You show the depth of your sickness with every post.

Again we are talking abut laws. Crimes against children is against those standing laws just as the discrimination laws.

But you're fine with discriminating against Christians.
You people are so twisted it's pathetic.

 

[OKTexas]

Right, you've been discriminating against me and treating me like crap for the last several posts, I only let my temper get the best of me once and I apologize for that.

Why are you so willing to accept the word of gays and not anyone else.

I have to butt in here. She is not accepting the word of gays...she is following the law. Now if you want to talk about politics, religion in general, or baseball teams, we might have something in common. It isn't that she is enamoured with gays.

What is the law based on?

Civil Rights I would assume.

Could you be more specific, I know of no civil right that protects preferences. Well except the ones recently pulled out of thin air.

It's not a preference. A person cannot control or help who he or she is sexually attracted to. You don't choose who you are attracted to. It just IS.

Really, then how did sooooooooooooooooo many gays have children the old fashioned way?

 

[ChrisL]

Civil Rights I would assume.

Could you be more specific, I know of no civil right that protects preferences. Well except the ones recently pulled out of thin air.

It's not a preference. A person cannot control or help who he or she is sexually attracted to. You don't choose who you are attracted to. It just IS.

So if someone is attracted to children through no fault of their own you're just fine with that...
You show the depth of your sickness with every post.

Again we are talking abut laws. Crimes against children is against those standing laws just as the discrimination laws.

But you're fine with discriminating against Christians.
You people are so twisted it's pathetic.

HOW are Christians being discriminated against?

 

[Skylar]

Civil Rights I would assume.

Could you be more specific, I know of no civil right that protects preferences. Well except the ones recently pulled out of thin air.

It's not a preference. A person cannot control or help who he or she is sexually attracted to. You don't choose who you are attracted to. It just IS.

So if someone is attracted to children through no fault of their own you're just fine with that...
You show the depth of your sickness with every post.

Again we are talking abut laws. Crimes against children is against those standing laws just as the discrimination laws.

But you're fine with discriminating against Christians.
You people are so twisted it's pathetic.

How is holding Christians to the same laws as everyone else 'discrimination'? I don't think that word means what you think it means.

 

[Jackson]

Civil Rights I would assume.

Could you be more specific, I know of no civil right that protects preferences. Well except the ones recently pulled out of thin air.

It's not a preference. A person cannot control or help who he or she is sexually attracted to. You don't choose who you are attracted to. It just IS.

So if someone is attracted to children through no fault of their own you're just fine with that...
You show the depth of your sickness with every post.

Again we are talking abut laws. Crimes against children is against those standing laws just as the discrimination laws.

But you're fine with discriminating against Christians.
You people are so twisted it's pathetic.

Huh?

 

[ChrisL]

I have to butt in here. She is not accepting the word of gays...she is following the law. Now if you want to talk about politics, religion in general, or baseball teams, we might have something in common. It isn't that she is enamoured with gays.

What is the law based on?

Civil Rights I would assume.

Could you be more specific, I know of no civil right that protects preferences. Well except the ones recently pulled out of thin air.

It's not a preference. A person cannot control or help who he or she is sexually attracted to. You don't choose who you are attracted to. It just IS.

Really, then how did sooooooooooooooooo many gays have children the old fashioned way?

Just because you go along with something doesn't mean you're "into" it. Ask any woman. Lol.

 

[ChrisL]

Could you be more specific, I know of no civil right that protects preferences. Well except the ones recently pulled out of thin air.

It's not a preference. A person cannot control or help who he or she is sexually attracted to. You don't choose who you are attracted to. It just IS.

So if someone is attracted to children through no fault of their own you're just fine with that...
You show the depth of your sickness with every post.

Again we are talking abut laws. Crimes against children is against those standing laws just as the discrimination laws.

But you're fine with discriminating against Christians.
You people are so twisted it's pathetic.

Huh?

Oh, they are trying to turn themselves into the victims here. It's hilarious, I think.

 

[ChrisL]

The Christians: If we can't treat other people like shit, then we are being oppressed, persecuted and discriminated against!

 

[Skylar]

The Christians: If we can't treat other people like shit, then we are being oppressed, persecuted and discriminated against!

That's quite literally their argument.

 

[Jackson]

Two sad puppies.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Could you be more specific, I know of no civil right that protects preferences. Well except the ones recently pulled out of thin air.

It's not a preference. A person cannot control or help who he or she is sexually attracted to. You don't choose who you are attracted to. It just IS.

So if someone is attracted to children through no fault of their own you're just fine with that...
You show the depth of your sickness with every post.

Again we are talking abut laws. Crimes against children is against those standing laws just as the discrimination laws.

But you're fine with discriminating against Christians.
You people are so twisted it's pathetic.

HOW are Christians being discriminated against?

You are forcing them to accept homosexual situations when they dont believe in them.
That you cant figure that out makes you a retard.

 

[ChrisL]

It's not a preference. A person cannot control or help who he or she is sexually attracted to. You don't choose who you are attracted to. It just IS.

So if someone is attracted to children through no fault of their own you're just fine with that...
You show the depth of your sickness with every post.

Again we are talking abut laws. Crimes against children is against those standing laws just as the discrimination laws.

But you're fine with discriminating against Christians.
You people are so twisted it's pathetic.

HOW are Christians being discriminated against?

You are forcing them to accept homosexual situations when they dont believe in them.
That you cant figure that out makes you a retard.

What homosexual situations are you forced to accept? If you are in the public accommodation business, then you serve the PUBLIC, which will probably include all kinds of "sinners" and people you don't like. If you cannot handle it, then don't open a business. Simple.