Gay Bar Owner Shows Intolerance

[Buford]

Homos hijacked the word "gay" so their perversion could be more acceptable. They're doing the same thing here with "marriage". It never ends.

 

[Pho_King]

No more, no less than anyone else going for equal rights under the law.

But we get it....you think we're "uppity" and should keep quiet and know our place.

Nope. I could care less what you do sexually as long as it's legal. You can also define marriage how you want to. Allow me the same right. Is that fair?

Absolutely. I have made no move, nor will I ever make any move to legally restrict your civil right to marry another law-abiding, tax-paying, consenting adult citizen.

Have you done anything to overurn the proscriptions in many states against marrying within one's direct bloodline?

 

[g5000]

Civil rights are civil rights...whether it is based on skin color, religion, gender, nationality, or sexual orientation.

This fact seems to escape some so-called Americans.

You're beating a dead horse. Homo marriage has nothing to do with civil rights. There is no such thing.

Still waiting for someone to show me where the constitution states that we all have the *right* to marry any person we so desire.

Read Number 2

 

[MaxCha]

So? One bar in West Hollywood doesn't allow bachelorette parties until gays are allowed to marry? So if a black guy in Florida calls a white man "stupid", should we be worried about black people ruining the world?

Why don't intolerant conservatives just leave people alone? Seriously, the same basic uneducated/reactionary people continue racism, fought against civil rights in the 60's and women's rights a few decades before that. And every time general public acceptance is reached (eg civil rights by the 70's) they either keep their prejudice beliefs more of a secret or pretend they never were the fools they were and move on to something new that "really is wrong, this time!"

Call gay people whatever you want - homos, fags, sissies. Doesn't offend them as it's like calling you a white cracker. Not like theres anything wrong with it, nor anything you can do about it, so wheres the insult? Takes a lot more balls then you'll likely ever have to come out as gay in a world like it is today.

Why don't you continue believing being gay is wrong and not enter into a same sex relationship. No problem there. But don't force other people to do the same, and don't make up bullshit about how it existing somehow endangers the population. It doesn't, and there is not a single shred of evidence, nor will there ever be, that it does.

Again, leave people who have done nothing wrong to you or anybody else alone. Dehumanizing people is the reason nearly every atrocity this world has ever faced has happened.

 

[g5000]

Where on earth does the constitution promise that it's a right to marry the person you love, no matter who that person is?

Please see number 2.

Oh, I see.

It doesn't. Thank you.

You clamped your hands over your eyes when you read it, didn't you.

Thanks for demonstrating you haven't a clue what the Constitution contains or its meanings.

 

[Dick Tuck]

I would love to hear about a few of those businesses, so i can be sure not to patronize them. link, plz....

Knights of Columbus.....the local VFW post....and the Freemasons in the next town over. We've had gay friends denied their halls for wedding receptions...gay wedding receptions.

Not to worry. They went elsewhere without the whining we're hearing here.

Ahhh.....the worthlessness of anecdotes.....

You mean like the premise of this thread?

 

[g5000]

Nope. I could care less what you do sexually as long as it's legal. You can also define marriage how you want to. Allow me the same right. Is that fair?

Absolutely. I have made no move, nor will I ever make any move to legally restrict your civil right to marry another law-abiding, tax-paying, consenting adult citizen.

Have you done anything to overurn the proscriptions in many states against marrying within one's direct bloodline?

Your kind is so predictable, I made a list for you.

Please read number 1.

 

[Buford]

So? One bar in West Hollywood doesn't allow bachelorette parties until gays are allowed to marry? So if a black guy in Florida calls a white man "stupid", should we be worried about black people ruining the world?

Why don't intolerant conservatives just leave people alone? Seriously, the same basic uneducated/reactionary people continue racism, fought against civil rights in the 60's and women's rights a few decades before that. And every time general public acceptance is reached (eg civil rights by the 70's) they either keep their prejudice beliefs more of a secret or pretend they never were the fools they were and move on to something new that "really is wrong, this time!"

Call gay people whatever you want - homos, fags, sissies. Doesn't offend them as it's like calling you a white cracker. Not like theres anything wrong with it, nor anything you can do about it, so wheres the insult? Takes a lot more balls then you'll likely ever have to come out as gay in a world like it is today.

Why don't you continue believing being gay is wrong and not enter into a same sex relationship. No problem there. But don't force other people to do the same, and don't make up bullshit about how it existing somehow endangers the population. It doesn't, and there is not a single shred of evidence, nor will there ever be, that it does.

Again, leave people who have done nothing wrong to you or anybody else alone. Dehumanizing people is the reason nearly every atrocity this world has ever faced has happened.

You said a lot, but you missed the point. The point is a person who demands tolerance being intolerant. That's the point.

 

[Dick Tuck]

"Gays aren't seeking any attention." Let's just let that digest for a second.

No more, no less than anyone else going for equal rights under the law.

But we get it....you think we're "uppity" and should keep quiet and know our place.

Nope. I could care less what you do sexually as long as it's legal. You can also define marriage how you want to. Allow me the same right. Is that fair?

You can be as loonytunes fundie as you want, as long as you don't deny equal protection under law.

 

[Buford]

Knights of Columbus.....the local VFW post....and the Freemasons in the next town over. We've had gay friends denied their halls for wedding receptions...gay wedding receptions.

Not to worry. They went elsewhere without the whining we're hearing here.

Ahhh.....the worthlessness of anecdotes.....

You mean like the premise of this thread?

You don't like it when your being shown in a hypocritical light.

 

[g5000]

Have you done anything to overurn the proscriptions in many states against marrying within one's direct bloodline?

You never hear someone bring up incest and bestiality in a conversation about opposite sex marriage.

"A man and a woman getting married? OH. MY. GOD. What is to stop a man from marrying his dog!!?!"

But that's how stupid you guys sound.

 

[Buford]

No more, no less than anyone else going for equal rights under the law.

But we get it....you think we're "uppity" and should keep quiet and know our place.

Nope. I could care less what you do sexually as long as it's legal. You can also define marriage how you want to. Allow me the same right. Is that fair?

You can be as loonytunes fundie as you want, as long as you don't deny equal protection under law.

Oh my, yes. All those thousands of years and billions of people who lived during the history of our civilization on earth who believed marriage is a man and a woman were all bigots.

Yes, indeedy, we are the loonytunes fundies. Oh my, yes. You're quite an emotional little fellar, aren't you.

 

[koshergrl]

Please see number 2.

Oh, I see.

It doesn't. Thank you.

You clamped your hands over your eyes when you read it, didn't you.

Thanks for demonstrating you haven't a clue what the Constitution contains or its meanings.

You all are the ones who claim that we're "walking all over the constitution" when we refuse to re-define marriage, to include those who have opted out of participating in the original.....despite the fact that they're free to participate, if they so desire...

Then when asked "what part of the constitution guarantees the right to marry anyone you like?" you cry "LOGICAL FALLACY"!

It's pretty typical of the dishonesty and stupidity of progressives.

 

[koshergrl]

Nope. I could care less what you do sexually as long as it's legal. You can also define marriage how you want to. Allow me the same right. Is that fair?

You can be as loonytunes fundie as you want, as long as you don't deny equal protection under law.

Oh my, yes. All those thousands of years and billions of people who lived during the history of our civilization on earth who believed marriage is a man and a woman were all bigots.

Yes, indeedy, we are the loonytunes fundies. Oh my, yes. You're quite an emotional little fellar, aren't you.

I guess the majority of the population are fundies.

 

[del]

You can be as loonytunes fundie as you want, as long as you don't deny equal protection under law.

Oh my, yes. All those thousands of years and billions of people who lived during the history of our civilization on earth who believed marriage is a man and a woman were all bigots.

Yes, indeedy, we are the loonytunes fundies. Oh my, yes. You're quite an emotional little fellar, aren't you.

I guess the majority of the population are fundies.

no, the majority of the population is stupid.

oh, wait...

 

[MaxCha]

Please refrain from trying to align yourself with people who struggled against the very real human rights violations that sprung from racism.

You have the same rights as everybody else at this juncture in our nation's history. Quit pissing and moaning.

Civil rights are civil rights...whether it is based on skin color, religion, gender, nationality, or sexual orientation.

This fact seems to escape some so-called Americans.

You're beating a dead horse. Homo marriage has nothing to do with civil rights. There is no such thing.

Haha. and so do you think racists in the 60's thought civil rights had anything to do with the women's rights movement a few decades before? They'd say bullshit like you like "Don't try compare the struggle of a man and woman who are both white with a negro. White men and women are decent people, negros are not people at all."

The uneducated/ego protecting fools always think the new group looking for equality is nothing like the ones from before.

And your wording - "homo marriage" - thinly veils your clear disgust and dislike of gay people. You dislike a group of people, so is that not the very definition of prejudice?

Say whatever you want about "family-values" or "ass fucking is wrong" but I know for a fact you won't be using a shred of evidence to back up your claim. Every objective psychological association in the US agrees being gay is natural, unchangeable and harmless. all the evidence indicates the same.

So what your dad taught you about homos back on the farm when you were a kid holds no weight. Facts do, and that is where you and those who discriminate fall on their faces.

 

[Pho_King]

Absolutely. I have made no move, nor will I ever make any move to legally restrict your civil right to marry another law-abiding, tax-paying, consenting adult citizen.

Have you done anything to overurn the proscriptions in many states against marrying within one's direct bloodline?

Your kind is so predictable, I made a list for you.

Please read number 1.

Well that is fantastic, if totally irrelevant. I have said nothing about poofter marriage. I was responding to Bodefullofshits apparent belief that law-abiding, tax paying, consenting adults should all have the right to marry. A belief that is not really all-inclusive if she does not then believe proscriptions against biological brothers and sisters should be lifted. I have made no statement in favor of or against poofter marriage. Try to stay on topic.

 

[J.E.D]

You can be as loonytunes fundie as you want, as long as you don't deny equal protection under law.

Oh my, yes. All those thousands of years and billions of people who lived during the history of our civilization on earth who believed marriage is a man and a woman were all bigots.

Yes, indeedy, we are the loonytunes fundies. Oh my, yes. You're quite an emotional little fellar, aren't you.

I guess the majority of the population are fundies.

No, the minority are. You're a dinosaur. get with the times or stay behind. Your choice.

Public opinion of same-sex marriage in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Polls in 2012

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.[13]

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.[14][15]

A May 10 USA Today/Gallup Poll, taken one day after Barack Obama became the first sitting President to express support for same-sex marriage,[16] showed 51% of Americans agreed with the President's endorsement.[17] A May 8 Gallup Poll showed plurality support for same-sex marriage nationwide, with 50% in favor and 48% opposed.[18]

An April Pew Research Center poll showed support for same-sex marriage at 47%, while opposition fell to an all-time low of 43%.[19]

A March 7-10 ABC News/Washington Post poll found 52% of adults thought it should be legal for same-sex couples to get married, while 42% disagreed and 5% were unsure.[20]

A March survey by the Public Religion Research Institute found 52% of Americans supported allowing same-sex couples to marry, while 44% opposed.[21]

A February 29 - March 3 NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll found 49% of adults supported allowing same-sex couples to marry, while 40% opposed.[22]

 

[Pho_King]

Have you done anything to overurn the proscriptions in many states against marrying within one's direct bloodline?

You never hear someone bring up incest and bestiality in a conversation about opposite sex marriage.

"A man and a woman getting married? OH. MY. GOD. What is to stop a man from marrying his dog!!?!"

But that's how stupid you guys sound.

Talk about sounding stupid. You have now made two seperate posts bemoaning points I never made. But do carry on. Its like watching a mongoloid eat a hot pop tart. A bit sad, but endlessly amusing.

 

[g5000]

Oh, I see.

It doesn't. Thank you.

You clamped your hands over your eyes when you read it, didn't you.

Thanks for demonstrating you haven't a clue what the Constitution contains or its meanings.

You all are the ones who claim that we're "walking all over the constitution" when we refuse to re-define marriage, to include those who have opted out of participating in the original.....despite the fact that they're free to participate, if they so desire...

Then when asked "what part of the constitution guarantees the right to marry anyone you like?" you cry "LOGICAL FALLACY"!

It's pretty typical of the dishonesty and stupidity of progressives.

I will use small words. Just for you.

When a married couple files a married tax return, they do so because there is a law which allows them to do so. They could not possibly file a married tax return if there was no law which created the married tax return.

When two gay people get married, they are not allowed to file a married tax return. For some reason, it scares the living bejeesus out of people like you if they were to file a married tax return.

This means they do not have "equal protection of the laws".

Let's go to Section 1 of the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution. I know you are probably surprised there are more than 10 Amendments, but it is true! There are!

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

So once a law is created, everyone is protected by it. You cannot keep someone away from that protection without a good reason. You must have a rational reason for denying that protection to them.

"I hate fags" is not a rational reason to prevent two people from entering into a matrimonial contract and filing a joint tax return.

Are there any words that were too big for you to understand?