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.
Racism is completely antithetical to Christianity. It doesn't matter if they try to use the Bible to justify their racism… It is very easy to disprove, and anyone who knows God knows that God does not care about skin color or a person's physical appearance…God cares about our heart.
Homosexuality, on the other hand is clearly unbiblical. So to try to equate racists with Christians who believe homosexuality is a sin shows a profound lack of understanding, or ignorance.
Racist don't think so. They have bible verses too.
And he [God] made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place,
You shall not intermarry with them, giving your daughters to their sons or taking their daughters for your sons,
As for your male and female slaves whom you may have: you may buy male and female slaves from among the nations that are around you.
Christians who aren't anti gay don't think the bible supports anti gay bigotry.
And, as always, you have to look at who's cherrypicking and taking things out of context, and who isn't. Usually a pretty good clue as to who's full of shit.
I agree, these so called Christian bakers are taking the bible out of context, cherrypicking and are full of shit...but do they have a right to "religious freedom" we did not give to segregationists?
Clearly, I need to dumb this down even further for you.
I don't give a fat rat's ass what you think the Bible does and doesn't support, since we both know YOU don't actually give a shit what the Bible says unless you think it's a "Gotcha!" moment.
Is that clear enough?
No one is asking you for your seal of approval on whether or not their religious beliefs are "correct". Nowhere in the law does it say, "Freedom of religion . . . as long as Seabytch says it's okay".
Go bother someone else with your cake orders, and learn to like yourself so that you don't have to try to sue other people into pretending to do so.
Boy are you missing the point (Which is not at all surprising) and not keeping up with the conversation.
Why should anti gay bigots be given religious exemption from laws that we don't give racist bigots?
it's still a snowball.until there is one. do one, you got to do the next. it's how the snowball rule works.and look at her. where did she come from? Again, the ride left the station. If we keep introducing shit as a society, eventually we will end up in hell.it isn't up to me, it seems it's up to the courts now. seems our courts wish to rule over us. I trust no human. I have always believed that society takes care of its own, and then entered the courts with leftist pieces of shit that think everything is ok today. yeah I worry about it.
You would have to come up with sitting Justices that are so far Left that they would make Ginsberg look like George Wallace.
Clue, that doesn't exist.
Millions of things get introduced into society all the time, only those that gather political capital, in some meaningful extent, stick.
The chances on this sticking is less than slim and none, it is none and none.
Your snowball is at the bottom of the hill, and that happens as well.
What is moronic is the idea that you must allow pedophiles to marry.No I do not agree. The law is the objective truth to the extent to which it reflects a consensus about values and social norms. I maintain that your statement- that there is no basis for denying a pedophile to marry a child since we allow same sex marriage is ridiculous, and bizarre by ant measure.I understood exactly what you said. You said- and I am paraphrasing - that because we allow same sex marriage, there is not logical, or rational, reason to prohibit a pedophile from marrying a child. It is pretty much the same thing as claiming that same sex marriage will lead to pedophile marriage. I explained why that is stupid, ignorant and dangerous but you seem to be living in an alternative reality where there is no distinction between individual, subjective reality, and the objective truth encoded in our laws that most people agree on that provides the framework for a rational and stable society.
Hold on a minute. You don't believe that all laws are rooted in objective truth, do you? You can't actually believe that, but the reason I ask is because the way you worded your last sentence almost makes it sound like you are equating those two. So to be clear, please answer this question… Do man-made laws constitute objective truth, yes or no?
And I see what the problem is here. You are looking at this from a purely practical standpoint. And I am looking at it from a more philosophical standpoint. When you look at it that way, what I said was not ridiculous at all. It is absolutely true that if something is purely subjective, then there is no right answer, no particular opinion can be more right than any other. Do you disagree with that?
By definition, anything that "reflects a consensus" is not an objective truth, moron. Try to wrap both of your functioning brain cells around the meaning of "objective truth", because you're out in Lala-Land right now.
it's still a snowball.until there is one. do one, you got to do the next. it's how the snowball rule works.and look at her. where did she come from? Again, the ride left the station. If we keep introducing shit as a society, eventually we will end up in hell.You would have to come up with sitting Justices that are so far Left that they would make Ginsberg look like George Wallace.
Clue, that doesn't exist.
Millions of things get introduced into society all the time, only those that gather political capital, in some meaningful extent, stick.
The chances on this sticking is less than slim and none, it is none and none.
Your snowball is at the bottom of the hill, and that happens as well.
today it is, doesn't mean in a year it isn't. again, pandora's box is fking wide open in this thread.it's still a snowball.until there is one. do one, you got to do the next. it's how the snowball rule works.and look at her. where did she come from? Again, the ride left the station. If we keep introducing shit as a society, eventually we will end up in hell.
Millions of things get introduced into society all the time, only those that gather political capital, in some meaningful extent, stick.
The chances on this sticking is less than slim and none, it is none and none.
Your snowball is at the bottom of the hill, and that happens as well.
It's a snowball, in August Bro
What is moronic is the idea that you must allow pedophiles to marry.No I do not agree. The law is the objective truth to the extent to which it reflects a consensus about values and social norms. I maintain that your statement- that there is no basis for denying a pedophile to marry a child since we allow same sex marriage is ridiculous, and bizarre by ant measure.I understood exactly what you said. You said- and I am paraphrasing - that because we allow same sex marriage, there is not logical, or rational, reason to prohibit a pedophile from marrying a child. It is pretty much the same thing as claiming that same sex marriage will lead to pedophile marriage. I explained why that is stupid, ignorant and dangerous but you seem to be living in an alternative reality where there is no distinction between individual, subjective reality, and the objective truth encoded in our laws that most people agree on that provides the framework for a rational and stable society.
Hold on a minute. You don't believe that all laws are rooted in objective truth, do you? You can't actually believe that, but the reason I ask is because the way you worded your last sentence almost makes it sound like you are equating those two. So to be clear, please answer this question… Do man-made laws constitute objective truth, yes or no?
And I see what the problem is here. You are looking at this from a purely practical standpoint. And I am looking at it from a more philosophical standpoint. When you look at it that way, what I said was not ridiculous at all. It is absolutely true that if something is purely subjective, then there is no right answer, no particular opinion can be more right than any other. Do you disagree with that?
By definition, anything that "reflects a consensus" is not an objective truth, moron. Try to wrap both of your functioning brain cells around the meaning of "objective truth", because you're out in Lala-Land right now.
No, what's moronic is the idea that we have the same short-term memory problems you leftists do, and haven't watched all the other times in the past you've used incrementalism to force something onto society which would have been unthinkable a decade previously. We're onto you assholes, and we don't trust you as far as we could spit into a windstorm.
again, my point.What is moronic is the idea that you must allow pedophiles to marry.No I do not agree. The law is the objective truth to the extent to which it reflects a consensus about values and social norms. I maintain that your statement- that there is no basis for denying a pedophile to marry a child since we allow same sex marriage is ridiculous, and bizarre by ant measure.Hold on a minute. You don't believe that all laws are rooted in objective truth, do you? You can't actually believe that, but the reason I ask is because the way you worded your last sentence almost makes it sound like you are equating those two. So to be clear, please answer this question… Do man-made laws constitute objective truth, yes or no?
And I see what the problem is here. You are looking at this from a purely practical standpoint. And I am looking at it from a more philosophical standpoint. When you look at it that way, what I said was not ridiculous at all. It is absolutely true that if something is purely subjective, then there is no right answer, no particular opinion can be more right than any other. Do you disagree with that?
By definition, anything that "reflects a consensus" is not an objective truth, moron. Try to wrap both of your functioning brain cells around the meaning of "objective truth", because you're out in Lala-Land right now.
No, what's moronic is the idea that we have the same short-term memory problems you leftists do, and haven't watched all the other times in the past you've used incrementalism to force something onto society which would have been unthinkable a decade previously. We're onto you assholes, and we don't trust you as far as we could spit into a windstorm.
Have you noticed that NOW there are fewer and fewer of them against Polygamy?
Why?
Racist don't think so. They have bible verses too.
And he [God] made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place,
You shall not intermarry with them, giving your daughters to their sons or taking their daughters for your sons,
As for your male and female slaves whom you may have: you may buy male and female slaves from among the nations that are around you.
Christians who aren't anti gay don't think the bible supports anti gay bigotry.
And, as always, you have to look at who's cherrypicking and taking things out of context, and who isn't. Usually a pretty good clue as to who's full of shit.
I agree, these so called Christian bakers are taking the bible out of context, cherrypicking and are full of shit...but do they have a right to "religious freedom" we did not give to segregationists?
Clearly, I need to dumb this down even further for you.
I don't give a fat rat's ass what you think the Bible does and doesn't support, since we both know YOU don't actually give a shit what the Bible says unless you think it's a "Gotcha!" moment.
Is that clear enough?
No one is asking you for your seal of approval on whether or not their religious beliefs are "correct". Nowhere in the law does it say, "Freedom of religion . . . as long as Seabytch says it's okay".
Go bother someone else with your cake orders, and learn to like yourself so that you don't have to try to sue other people into pretending to do so.
Boy are you missing the point (Which is not at all surprising) and not keeping up with the conversation.
Why should anti gay bigots be given religious exemption from laws that we don't give racist bigots?
When did I ever say that should be the case? I haven't, so I'll thank you not to demand explanations from me of positions I've never taken.
Maybe YOU should keep up with the conversation, and stop trying to hold people responsible for other people's words . . . or worse, for the words you WISH they would say, because you want to argue against THEM, and not their actual statements.
again, my point.What is moronic is the idea that you must allow pedophiles to marry.No I do not agree. The law is the objective truth to the extent to which it reflects a consensus about values and social norms. I maintain that your statement- that there is no basis for denying a pedophile to marry a child since we allow same sex marriage is ridiculous, and bizarre by ant measure.
By definition, anything that "reflects a consensus" is not an objective truth, moron. Try to wrap both of your functioning brain cells around the meaning of "objective truth", because you're out in Lala-Land right now.
No, what's moronic is the idea that we have the same short-term memory problems you leftists do, and haven't watched all the other times in the past you've used incrementalism to force something onto society which would have been unthinkable a decade previously. We're onto you assholes, and we don't trust you as far as we could spit into a windstorm.
Have you noticed that NOW there are fewer and fewer of them against Polygamy?
Why?
doesn't mean there isn't a path. again, me thinks you forget the people to which we are talking about. but that's ok. the lean has started and the bricks are falling. And society seems to have forgot to care.again, my point.What is moronic is the idea that you must allow pedophiles to marry.By definition, anything that "reflects a consensus" is not an objective truth, moron. Try to wrap both of your functioning brain cells around the meaning of "objective truth", because you're out in Lala-Land right now.
No, what's moronic is the idea that we have the same short-term memory problems you leftists do, and haven't watched all the other times in the past you've used incrementalism to force something onto society which would have been unthinkable a decade previously. We're onto you assholes, and we don't trust you as far as we could spit into a windstorm.
Have you noticed that NOW there are fewer and fewer of them against Polygamy?
Why?
Yes, and at this rate, in 2.2 million years, you might get there
doesn't mean there isn't a path. again, me thinks you forget the people to which we are talking about. but that's ok. the lean has started and the bricks are falling.again, my point.What is moronic is the idea that you must allow pedophiles to marry.
No, what's moronic is the idea that we have the same short-term memory problems you leftists do, and haven't watched all the other times in the past you've used incrementalism to force something onto society which would have been unthinkable a decade previously. We're onto you assholes, and we don't trust you as far as we could spit into a windstorm.
Have you noticed that NOW there are fewer and fewer of them against Polygamy?
Why?
Yes, and at this rate, in 2.2 million years, you might get there
And, as always, you have to look at who's cherrypicking and taking things out of context, and who isn't. Usually a pretty good clue as to who's full of shit.
I agree, these so called Christian bakers are taking the bible out of context, cherrypicking and are full of shit...but do they have a right to "religious freedom" we did not give to segregationists?
Clearly, I need to dumb this down even further for you.
I don't give a fat rat's ass what you think the Bible does and doesn't support, since we both know YOU don't actually give a shit what the Bible says unless you think it's a "Gotcha!" moment.
Is that clear enough?
No one is asking you for your seal of approval on whether or not their religious beliefs are "correct". Nowhere in the law does it say, "Freedom of religion . . . as long as Seabytch says it's okay".
Go bother someone else with your cake orders, and learn to like yourself so that you don't have to try to sue other people into pretending to do so.
Boy are you missing the point (Which is not at all surprising) and not keeping up with the conversation.
Why should anti gay bigots be given religious exemption from laws that we don't give racist bigots?
When did I ever say that should be the case? I haven't, so I'll thank you not to demand explanations from me of positions I've never taken.
Maybe YOU should keep up with the conversation, and stop trying to hold people responsible for other people's words . . . or worse, for the words you WISH they would say, because you want to argue against THEM, and not their actual statements.
If you're following the conversation as you claim, then you know that's exactly what your "friends" here are arguing.
I agree, these so called Christian bakers are taking the bible out of context, cherrypicking and are full of shit...but do they have a right to "religious freedom" we did not give to segregationists?
Clearly, I need to dumb this down even further for you.
I don't give a fat rat's ass what you think the Bible does and doesn't support, since we both know YOU don't actually give a shit what the Bible says unless you think it's a "Gotcha!" moment.
Is that clear enough?
No one is asking you for your seal of approval on whether or not their religious beliefs are "correct". Nowhere in the law does it say, "Freedom of religion . . . as long as Seabytch says it's okay".
Go bother someone else with your cake orders, and learn to like yourself so that you don't have to try to sue other people into pretending to do so.
Boy are you missing the point (Which is not at all surprising) and not keeping up with the conversation.
Why should anti gay bigots be given religious exemption from laws that we don't give racist bigots?
When did I ever say that should be the case? I haven't, so I'll thank you not to demand explanations from me of positions I've never taken.
Maybe YOU should keep up with the conversation, and stop trying to hold people responsible for other people's words . . . or worse, for the words you WISH they would say, because you want to argue against THEM, and not their actual statements.
If you're following the conversation as you claim, then you know that's exactly what your "friends" here are arguing.
If you're thinking as you pretend, then you know I'm not responsible for anyone but myself, Chuckles.
I’ve got no problem with people trying to end all Public Accommodation laws. That is, at least, a consistent position. They don’t DO anything to end all PA laws, but are consistent.
I do have a problem with people only challenging the laws that protect gays.
I agree, they will self implode once the people realize exactly what has happened to a once noble institution. That will happen long before pedophilia ever comes into the picture, and it WILL NOT BE PRETTY!
As I warned years ago. They ought to be careful what they ask for cuz they just might get it.
CLEAR WARNING SIGNS that their ideology is one completely embracing pedophilia in every member of their rank.
People can google "gay pride parade" using "images". Or weren't you aware of that mdk?
Ever supported one? Ever marched in one? Ever brought your kids to one? Then with foreknowledge of what they graphically-depict hoping kids will be watching, you too (reader) are a confirmed child sex offender.
Try those acts on any other day just outside the schoolyard fence at recess and set a stopwatch to see how fast the cops will arrest you.
People can google "gay pride parade" using "images". Or weren't you aware of that mdk?
Ever supported one? Ever marched in one? Ever brought your kids to one? Then with foreknowledge of what they graphically-depict hoping kids will be watching, you too (reader) are a confirmed child sex offender.
Try those acts on any other day just outside the schoolyard fence at recess and set a stopwatch to see how fast the cops will arrest you.
You don’t have to explain your madness to me, Sil. You think every member of the LGBT community embraces pedophilia. Besides being a mentally ill fanatic, now you’re trying to allude that I am a child sex offender.
