Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
There.
From 2004-2013...33% of the nation lives in states with marriage equality laws. It will only get worse for bigots. Spin all you want; you have time...just not any way of stopping progress.
Lot of spin there, you had to collect data from nine years to get such a result. Nice try. Even so, 67% live in states that deem marriage as between a man and a woman.
You see that trend?
Not for long. Most Americans are seeing gay marriage and deciding it is no big deal....live and let live
You should too
Lot of spin there, you had to collect data from nine years to get such a result. Nice try. Even so, 67% live in states that deem marriage as between a man and a woman.
You see that trend?
Not for long. Most Americans are seeing gay marriage and deciding it is no big deal....live and let live
You should too
It is no longer a big deal with kids. Some of em are born gay....some are born straight...some a mixture. Accepted as a part of life for the most part among those under 30.
Times....they be a changin'.
For the record, I don't think A&E should have suspended the guy.
It was well within their right but it isn't a decision I would have made.
Hey, Mac.....how is allowing bigotry to go unchecked going to somehow heal the wounds this country has?
There.
From 2004-2013...33% of the nation lives in states with marriage equality laws. It will only get worse for bigots. Spin all you want; you have time...just not any way of stopping progress.
Lot of spin there, you had to collect data from nine years to get such a result. Nice try. Even so, 67% live in states that deem marriage as between a man and a woman.
Spin? I showed you a graph. There is no spin there.
ONLY
COLD
HARD
FACTS
Oh, by the way, New Mexico has joined the enlightened....
New Mexico same-sex marriage ruling comes amid long wait, national trend | Fox News
Add another 2 million to people that can exercise their freedom (also...people you hate). You're on the wrong side of history which explains why you're so hateful...
YOU
ARE
ALL
ALONE
With only your hate to accompany you. That and, of course, what has become the stock and trade of the GOP...victimization. Poor little you. Save the crap about you becoming a libertarian....personal liberty is what you're attacking dumbass.
Lot of spin there, you had to collect data from nine years to get such a result. Nice try. Even so, 67% live in states that deem marriage as between a man and a woman.
You see that trend?
Not for long. Most Americans are seeing gay marriage and deciding it is no big deal....live and let live
You should too
Live and let live? Then why did you let Phil Robertson do the same? Why don't you let Christians do the same? A Christian expressing his views should be no big deal, but he live and let live, right?
No sir, not until you practice what you preach.
I know some of you watch Duck Dynasty and probably heard that Phil Robertson was suspended by A&E for his opinion on homosexuality. He had the gall to quote 1 Corinthians 6:9 and express himself openly about his opposition to gay marriage. Groups like GLAAD came out in support of the suspension. Don't you find it odd that people like Martin Bashir get a pass for their intolerance toward conservative women, but people like Phil Robertson are being targeted for their beliefs?
Should TV Networks silence religious speech for the political sensibilities of others? As most of you were aware, Chick-Fil-A came under similar scrutiny by gay rights organizations for its views on homosexuality last year. The response from the public was overwhelming, as the restaurant experienced booming profits from the ordeal. Suffice it to say, ratings for the show may experience similar results.
Should Phil Robertson be suspended for his comments in GQ? Or should he be allowed to express himself as he is allowed to by the the First Amendment? My personal opinion here is that no TV network should be allowed to censor a man for expressing his religious beliefs.
There have been many instances of people or businesses being targeted for their religious beliefs, all for being "intolerant." Isn't it strange that you can be allowed to be homosexual, but not a person of faith? The real intolerance here, is of those who cannot accept that others aren't forced to tolerate their way of life or their practices. If you are any freedom loving American; Democrat, Republican or Libertarian, you should be disturbed by this recent turn of events.
You see that trend?
Not for long. Most Americans are seeing gay marriage and deciding it is no big deal....live and let live
You should too
It is no longer a big deal with kids. Some of em are born gay....some are born straight...some a mixture. Accepted as a part of life for the most part among those under 30.
Times....they be a changin'.
I'm guessing TK was jilted by a woman who turned out to be Lez and is dedicated to taking it out on all homosexuals.
Lord knows he probably gets all the competition he can handle from other men...now he has to worry about a woman stealing his latest Copenhagen using soulmate
Hey, Mac.....how is allowing bigotry to go unchecked going to somehow heal the wounds this country has?
Thanks for asking, although your "unchecked" straw man is incorrect.
We can't heal anything, we can't fix anything, and we can't change hearts and minds until and unless we can communicate. Since I actually do want to heal and fix our problems, I have to be strong enough and confident enough in my positions to allow those who disagree with me to voice theirs.
Then that's our starting point. We keep lines of communication open and we do our best to change hearts and minds with consistency, reason and civility. Over time, many hearts and minds will be changed and hopefully an improved culture will take care of much of the rest. There will always be bigots, on both ends.
Granted, this is heavy lifting compared to simplistic punishment. But for those of us who are more interested in healing than in punitive control and advantage, the heavy lifting is the only way to do it.
.
I'll try to question one last time, because you're choosing not to answer: Do you think that punishing people for saying what they're thinking, or intimidating someone into not saying what they're thinking, is going to somehow heal the wounds this country has? And if so, how, precisely?
Full disclosure, I'm really not expecting a straight answer.
.
OK....you don't accept the obvious answer how about this
Does it heal the wounds? Yes, in a way
What it does is drive the bigots underground. Spouting their hate is no longer publicly acceptable. They still feel the same, but when they spout their bigotry it is made clear that it s not acceptable
Yes, I know.
So tell me how this helps heal wounds. Walk me through it.
.
[
You know, if gays reacted so violently to the actions of GLAAD, that means your movement isn't as peachy as you're claiming. You insult my intelligence by citing Fox News.
You think I'm hateful? Just examine what GLAAD did to Mr. Robertson. See what gay rights groups have done to Christians across the country who dared speak out for what they believed in. You want your tolerance, you speak out against hatred, vitriol, stereotypes while championing personal liberty; but here you are
A) Showing your intolerance of Christians
B) Voicing your hatred of Christians
C) Spewing invective and issuing pejoratives about Christians
D) Stereotyping Christians as bigots and racists
E) Begrudging them the personal liberty to express a religious opinion
F) Intimidating and bullying Christians who express their religious opinions
If I didn't know better, I'd say you are engaging in Alinskyist tactics to shame people of faith in to silence. How sickening.
I know some of you watch Duck Dynasty and probably heard that Phil Robertson was suspended by A&E for his opinion on homosexuality. He had the gall to quote 1 Corinthians 6:9 and express himself openly about his opposition to gay marriage. Groups like GLAAD came out in support of the suspension. Don't you find it odd that people like Martin Bashir get a pass for their intolerance toward conservative women, but people like Phil Robertson are being targeted for their beliefs?
Should TV Networks silence religious speech for the political sensibilities of others? As most of you were aware, Chick-Fil-A came under similar scrutiny by gay rights organizations for its views on homosexuality last year. The response from the public was overwhelming, as the restaurant experienced booming profits from the ordeal. Suffice it to say, ratings for the show may experience similar results.
Should Phil Robertson be suspended for his comments in GQ? Or should he be allowed to express himself as he is allowed to by the the First Amendment? My personal opinion here is that no TV network should be allowed to censor a man for expressing his religious beliefs.
There have been many instances of people or businesses being targeted for their religious beliefs, all for being "intolerant." Isn't it strange that you can be allowed to be homosexual, but not a person of faith? The real intolerance here, is of those who cannot accept that others aren't forced to tolerate their way of life or their practices. If you are any freedom loving American; Democrat, Republican or Libertarian, you should be disturbed by this recent turn of events.
No one's first amendment right to religion, speech or expression has been infringed by the Congress. You might consider the entire universe of intolerance and prejudice in the private sector, if you were honest, and not one example of one bigot you happen to adore.
The guy can still pray to any god he so chooses and say what he wants about other individuals or groups he pleases, as long as he understands that actions have consequences.
The abject hypocrisy of you and others faux rage is disingenuous and entirely partisan. But you have every right to express your opinion and others have the right to express our opinion that your actions are nothing more than ridiculous hyperbole.
I've been thinking hard about this over the past two days or so, and it occurred me that apparently none of those who are complaining that this guy got canned for his anti-gay remarks mysteriously said nothing when Alec Baldwin had a similar experience. Then it occurred to me why Alec Baldwin wasn't a concern for them. They didn't care that he got the same treatment because he didn't believe it "religiously".
Proving yet again that being saved requires one to lose all sense of the ironic.
OK....you don't accept the obvious answer how about this
Does it heal the wounds? Yes, in a way
What it does is drive the bigots underground. Spouting their hate is no longer publicly acceptable. They still feel the same, but when they spout their bigotry it is made clear that it s not acceptable
Yes, I know.
So tell me how this helps heal wounds. Walk me through it.
.
By making people who were formerly social outcasts welcome in society. Being gay used to mean you hid in the shadows, didn't let anyone know how you really were, pretended to be something you are not
Now it is the bigots who must hide in the shadows and not tell people how they really are
I kind of like it
Hey, Mac.....how is allowing bigotry to go unchecked going to somehow heal the wounds this country has?
I've been thinking hard about this over the past two days or so, and it occurred me that apparently none of those who are complaining that this guy got canned for his anti-gay remarks mysteriously said nothing when Alec Baldwin had a similar experience. Then it occurred to me why Alec Baldwin wasn't a concern for them. They didn't care that he got the same treatment because he didn't believe it "religiously".
Proving yet again that being saved requires one to lose all sense of the ironic.
He wasn't a concern simply because he a nutcase, his slurs the least of our concern, he has mental issues, orogenicman. I know a person with an anger management problem when I see one.
Yes, I know.
So tell me how this helps heal wounds. Walk me through it.
.
By making people who were formerly social outcasts welcome in society. Being gay used to mean you hid in the shadows, didn't let anyone know how you really were, pretended to be something you are not
Now it is the bigots who must hide in the shadows and not tell people how they really are
I kind of like it
Now, you are relegating people of faith to the shadows, dubbing them as the social outcasts; doing the exact same thing you've accused us of doing.
Now, it is you who must defend your intolerance and bigotry, not us.
I kind of like that. Enjoy the spotlight.
