Rightwingers, of whom I'm one, let the gay shit go

[bodecea]

I tolerate Gay people. But I will not sacrifice my base morals for the sake of a minute few. I see them as a sinful aberration of mankind. Call me a fundamentalist, but a man never sells his soul for want. This is why I disabused from the Republican Party. Too many people willing to sacrifice their core beliefs for a bit of social acceptance. If that alienates me from the mainstream, then so be it! I am a man of strength, not of cowardice. I fight for what I believe, and no man, woman or politician will deter me from doing so.
I'll be damned before I give up the essence of who I am. If gay folks want tolerance, they should stop begging for it and start practicing it.

But you lie. You know exactly what I am talking about.

You lie to yourselves all the time. Believing you are superior because of your "tolerance" and "harmony." Believing that people should practice your brand of thinking is quite delusional. You want tolerance but never practice it, and when someone finally gets fed up with your crap, you call them out on it. You people are evil and misplaced in this world, toying with people's emotions as you do.

"You people"?

 

[FJO]

I'll make it simple for Republucans

Convince working Americans that you care about their problems and they will vote for you......just like they used to

And what would it take to match the success of the Democratic Party, that spent billions in order to relieve poverty with absolutely NO visible results?

Spend on schools in inner cities, where the cost is already so high that the same amounts spent in Korea of Finland would produce a veritable army of geniuses, while it only produces pimps, drug dealers, whores and fatherless kids, and abortions, and drive by shootings and murder and racist hatred and rap and hip-hop vulgar profanity?

The Republican Party of Abraham Lincoln freed the slaves.

The Democrat Party of Obama wants to keep them slaves. Sadly, succeeding.

Simple solution for Republicans on poverty. Find them jobs like you are always telling them to get. Find a way to funnel jobs to impoverished areas, a way for poor people to qualify for good jobs

Let them know that they owe their jobs to Republucan policies and they will vote Republucan forever

Right now, all you offer are threats and ridicule

Of course, the Republicans just have to do what Democrats did: Democratic party funneled jobs to impoverished areas, like downtown Detroit, Washington, D.C. and Chicago. That stopped the drive by shootings, the killings, the whoring, the pimping and drug dealings, as we all know.

What did Democrats ever do for impoverished WHITE areas? Except for Ku Klux Klan Grand Wizard Robert Byrd in West Virginia, precious little.

Being slaves of the Democratic Party for the next 200 years (according to LBJ) in plain view of absolutely no visible results is sure sign of mental instability, that can not be cured, except by accelerated abortions in critical areas.

When it comes to ridicule, I must hand it to Democrats. They ridicule, demean, excoriate, demonize and besmirch all blacks, women and gays who happen to have the courage to profess a political view that is not Democrat.

 

[rightwinger]

I'll make it simple for Republucans

Convince working Americans that you care about their problems and they will vote for you......just like they used to

And what would it take to match the success of the Democratic Party, that spent billions in order to relieve poverty with absolutely NO visible results?

Spend on schools in inner cities, where the cost is already so high that the same amounts spent in Korea of Finland would produce a veritable army of geniuses, while it only produces pimps, drug dealers, whores and fatherless kids, and abortions, and drive by shootings and murder and racist hatred and rap and hip-hop vulgar profanity?

The Republican Party of Abraham Lincoln freed the slaves.

The Democrat Party of Obama wants to keep them slaves. Sadly, succeeding.

Republucans have substituted a war on poverty with a war on poor people

 

[LadyGunSlinger]

Republicans would hold the Senate now if only they could avoid stupid statements on social issues. Legitimate rape, pregnancy from rape is gods will, self deportation, second amendment remedies......the list goes on and on

Democrats lay the the bait and Republucans go for it every time

Avoid the social issues......they are killing you

wow you really want to be a right winger.....guess its anger becuase we both know the left is wrong

All those opinions turn off the moderate voter. When the only voice of moderation is coming from the left.....that is their only choice

Anti poverty rhetoric of blacks don't want jobs......they want free stuff
Hispanics are all lazy and illegals
Women who use birth control or get abortions are sluts
Gays are degenerates

All these views chase away key voting blocks. Even worse, young people hear it and say......that is not the opinions I want to affiliate with

Conservatives are not interested in buying, bribing, saying politically correct shit, agreeing to hand over their values just to win. We get you librul Zombies will do anything and say anything to obtain power. Some things aren't worth it.. most importantly, "A man or a woman's word." That will mean nothing to the left as value, principle, honor are words that are sneered at by the Zombie cult.. so worry about yourselves. If and when we need the advice of a far left kook, we'll knock on your forehead.

 

[FJO]

But you lie. You know exactly what I am talking about.

You lie to yourselves all the time. Believing you are superior because of your "tolerance" and "harmony." Believing that people should practice your brand of thinking is quite delusional. You want tolerance but never practice it, and when someone finally gets fed up with your crap, you call them out on it. You people are evil and misplaced in this world, toying with people's emotions as you do.

"You people"?

TemplarKormac must feel absolutely horrible for using the expression "you people".

Since he was addressing Liberals/Democrats, the word 'people' was obviously far too kind and rating his audience far above what they deserve to be called.

He - clearly - should have said "You animals" or "You beasts" or "You carrots" or "You worms" or some such.

 

[LadyGunSlinger]

The "will of the people" was overruled by 9 "arrogant lifetime judges" in 1965 too.

oopsie...

Homosexuality is not a race..it's a behavior. Regardless, if and when those same 9 (may have different names) RULE AND DEMAND their opinion to become national law over something you believe in, and the people have by a majority voted TWICE as you believed- overturn that, you'll be the first one crying over it. It doesn't matter what decision they made or what the issue was- IT WAS WRONG of them to overturn the will of the majority. Lastly, marriage is not a right..

Interracial marriage is a "behavior" by that definition. It isn't a race.

The whole purpose of the SCOTUS is to interpret the laws and find them Constitutional or not. They found interracial marriage, divorced remarriages and the marriages of convicted murderers to be a fundamental right. You do realize that rights need not be expressly enumerated in the Constitution, don't you?

The Loving case was a case based upon RACE which ended all RACE BASED restrictions on marriage. I know you're trying to equate the homosexual lobby and movement to the Great Civil Rights movement but that's an insult to the African American community in my opinion. The color of one's skin is not a behavior. My first grader understands that.

 

[blackhawk]

Check your christian morality bullshit at the door and LEARN to pick your fights. Gays are a minute voting block but they DO have the support of many others.
Losing elections over trivial bullshit that only affects a few people while the debt and everything else spirals out of control makes no sense.

Lets focus on the things that matter to everyone and stop picking fights that alienate us over small things.

Sin is sin for believers so stop bitching about what Sally does with her tongue when Johnny is no better off when he envies the Harley in his neighbors garage.
If they want to partake in the hell aka marriage give it to them. It's a piece of fucking paper ultimately.

Gay marriage has never been is not now and never will be a major issue with me.

 

[daveman]

Check your christian morality bullshit at the door and LEARN to pick your fights. Gays are a minute voting block but they DO have the support of many others.
Losing elections over trivial bullshit that only affects a few people while the debt and everything else spirals out of control makes no sense.

Lets focus on the things that matter to everyone and stop picking fights that alienate us over small things.

Sin is sin for believers so stop bitching about what Sally does with her tongue when Johnny is no better off when he envies the Harley in his neighbors garage.
If they want to partake in the hell aka marriage give it to them. It's a piece of fucking paper ultimately.

Gay marriage is inevitable. It's simply going to happen -- not everywhere at first, but ultimately it will be the law in all states.

Yes, gays are sinners. So am I. So are you. So are everybody. And no sin is worse in God's eyes than any other. I'd rather see a gay couple stay committed and monogamous than straight people sleep around.

Now here comes the part where Dave dictates the True Conservative Position:

The Federal government doesn't belong in the marriage business. Remove all tax incentives (or better yet, make them apply equally to all tax payers) and just have city hall or the county court clerk record who's married to whom, in either civil ceremonies or a church wedding. As long as the couple is of legal age in their jurisdiction, or has permission from their parents to do so, they can get married.

That's the solution that treats everyone equally under the law -- which is a tenet of conservatism.

Wanna marry your dog? No. That's stupid and sick. Seek help. Wanna sue a church to make them marry you if they refuse? No. You're just being a bitter attention whore. Cut it out and go find another church who will.


For the record, I'm a Christian. My sister-in-law has a permanent relationship with her partner, and they're a great couple. My SIL is also a Christian, and she's a very good stepmom to her partner's kids, and the kids love her a lot.

Any questions?

Outside of the god crap I cant disagree with this post. The overall outcome is something I agree with.

Now government isnt going to get out of the marriage business so its a silly point to make.

Then you support treating people differently.

 

[Katzndogz]

Businesses are punished for violating Public Accommodation laws, that's all. Don't like it, repeal all the laws so that I don't have to "deal" with religious crazies in my business. Federal law says I have to though.

That's the way it should be. There is no reason on earth why you should have to deal with religious crazies. You should be able to eject someone from your business if all they are doing is wearing a cross necklace.

I agree...but it's against Federal Law to do it...just like it is against the law in 13 states and the District of Columbia not to "deal" with "the gheys". You've got to change the laws, but in order to not appear homophobic, you need to start with the CRA and ADA. Best of luck.

No you don't. Businesses just have to be better at the way they practice their business. There is no religious or even moral prohibition against providing services to the disabled. You never answered my question. If I must provide my service to gays and lesbians, how did I win their lawsuit against me? How is my photographer acquaintance getting away with not providing photography services to same sex weddings? Behavior is already starting to change to adjust to gay demands. Slowly, but will pick up steam as businesses share experiences.

 

[R.C. Christian]

Only a punk would change his moral convictions to help the party get votes.

 

[LadyGunSlinger]

But you lie. You know exactly what I am talking about.

You lie to yourselves all the time. Believing you are superior because of your "tolerance" and "harmony." Believing that people should practice your brand of thinking is quite delusional. You want tolerance but never practice it, and when someone finally gets fed up with your crap, you call them out on it. You people are evil and misplaced in this world, toying with people's emotions as you do.

"You people"?

OMG.. Get the fuck over it.. you know exactly what he meant.. You libruls are offended by your own toenails. What a joke.

 

[daveman]

Make me a sammich!

What kind?

Obedience!
I like that!

An obedience sammich?

 

[Seawytch]

Homosexuality is not a race..it's a behavior. Regardless, if and when those same 9 (may have different names) RULE AND DEMAND their opinion to become national law over something you believe in, and the people have by a majority voted TWICE as you believed- overturn that, you'll be the first one crying over it. It doesn't matter what decision they made or what the issue was- IT WAS WRONG of them to overturn the will of the majority. Lastly, marriage is not a right..

Interracial marriage is a "behavior" by that definition. It isn't a race.

The whole purpose of the SCOTUS is to interpret the laws and find them Constitutional or not. They found interracial marriage, divorced remarriages and the marriages of convicted murderers to be a fundamental right. You do realize that rights need not be expressly enumerated in the Constitution, don't you?

The Loving case was a case based upon RACE which ended all RACE BASED restrictions on marriage. I know you're trying to equate the homosexual lobby and movement to the Great Civil Rights movement but that's an insult to the African American community in my opinion. The color of one's skin is not a behavior. My first grader understands that.

The case was based on discrimination because of race. Discrimination is still discrimination. Being gay is no more a "behavior" than being attracted to someone of another race. Acting on those attractions is the "behavior", not the attractions themselves.

Comparing discrimination to discrimination isn't an insult to anyone. No one is comparing race to sexual orientation. What is compared and comparable is the discriminatin'.

(even down to some of the same language)

Same-sex or “inter-racial” marriage? Take the quiz.

Here's a gem from the George Supreme Court:

"…moral or social equality between the different races…does not in fact exist, and never can. The God of nature made it otherwise, and no human law can produce it, and no human tribunal can enforce it. There are gradations and classes throughout the universe. From the tallest archangel in Heaven, down to the meanest reptile on earth, moral and social inequalities exist, and must continue to exist throughout all eternity.”

 

[Seawytch]

That's the way it should be. There is no reason on earth why you should have to deal with religious crazies. You should be able to eject someone from your business if all they are doing is wearing a cross necklace.

I agree...but it's against Federal Law to do it...just like it is against the law in 13 states and the District of Columbia not to "deal" with "the gheys". You've got to change the laws, but in order to not appear homophobic, you need to start with the CRA and ADA. Best of luck.

No you don't. Businesses just have to be better at the way they practice their business. There is no religious or even moral prohibition against providing services to the disabled. You never answered my question. If I must provide my service to gays and lesbians, how did I win their lawsuit against me? How is my photographer acquaintance getting away with not providing photography services to same sex weddings? Behavior is already starting to change to adjust to gay demands. Slowly, but will pick up steam as businesses share experiences.

I don't know the particulars of your case. Care to share? Did you use some other "excuse" as the basis of your discrimination?

 

[LadyGunSlinger]

Interracial marriage is a "behavior" by that definition. It isn't a race.

The whole purpose of the SCOTUS is to interpret the laws and find them Constitutional or not. They found interracial marriage, divorced remarriages and the marriages of convicted murderers to be a fundamental right. You do realize that rights need not be expressly enumerated in the Constitution, don't you?

The Loving case was a case based upon RACE which ended all RACE BASED restrictions on marriage. I know you're trying to equate the homosexual lobby and movement to the Great Civil Rights movement but that's an insult to the African American community in my opinion. The color of one's skin is not a behavior. My first grader understands that.

The case was based on discrimination because of race. Discrimination is still discrimination. Being gay is no more a "behavior" than being attracted to someone of another race. Acting on those attractions is the "behavior", not the attractions themselves.

Comparing discrimination to discrimination isn't an insult to anyone. No one is comparing race to sexual orientation. What is compared and comparable is the discriminatin'.

(even down to some of the same language)

Same-sex or “inter-racial” marriage? Take the quiz.

Here's a gem from the George Supreme Court:

"…moral or social equality between the different races…does not in fact exist, and never can. The God of nature made it otherwise, and no human law can produce it, and no human tribunal can enforce it. There are gradations and classes throughout the universe. From the tallest archangel in Heaven, down to the meanest reptile on earth, moral and social inequalities exist, and must continue to exist throughout all eternity.”

I don't even care to argue this point to be honest because I don't have an issue with gay couples receiving equal benefits etc.. I take issue with the gay lobby using the court system to force feed the majority what a minority of people DEMAND. The day you prove homosexuality is a race, come back and talk to me about SCOTUS overturning the will of the people.

 

[Seawytch]

The Loving case was a case based upon RACE which ended all RACE BASED restrictions on marriage. I know you're trying to equate the homosexual lobby and movement to the Great Civil Rights movement but that's an insult to the African American community in my opinion. The color of one's skin is not a behavior. My first grader understands that.

The case was based on discrimination because of race. Discrimination is still discrimination. Being gay is no more a "behavior" than being attracted to someone of another race. Acting on those attractions is the "behavior", not the attractions themselves.

Comparing discrimination to discrimination isn't an insult to anyone. No one is comparing race to sexual orientation. What is compared and comparable is the discriminatin'.

(even down to some of the same language)

Same-sex or “inter-racial” marriage? Take the quiz.

Here's a gem from the George Supreme Court:

"…moral or social equality between the different races…does not in fact exist, and never can. The God of nature made it otherwise, and no human law can produce it, and no human tribunal can enforce it. There are gradations and classes throughout the universe. From the tallest archangel in Heaven, down to the meanest reptile on earth, moral and social inequalities exist, and must continue to exist throughout all eternity.”

I don't even care to argue this point to be honest because I don't have an issue with gay couples receiving equal benefits etc.. I take issue with the gay lobby using the court system to force feed the majority what a minority of people DEMAND. The day you prove homosexuality is a race, come back and talk to me about SCOTUS overturning the will of the people.

You mean like they did with the Heller decision?

 

[daveman]

Yep. Who wears the strap on? jkjk.

My experience shows that the people who hate gays the most, have a strong fear that maybe, just maybe, they might could be gay as well. Thereby showing that the hatred passed on to gays is in fact hatred for themselves and what they might be. Weird. Gay isn't catching and can't be passed on to others by contact.

Amateur psychoanalysis is always so accurate.

But to watch you right wingers attack each other is priceless. Keep up the good work.

Kinda blows your guys' insistence that we all walk in lockstep out of the water, don't it?

And dave, a hippie poet, a gay person and you live in KY. Nice diverse family you have there. If you live up a holler and mine coal, you could be a Democrat.

My parents are staunch Democrats, as are my in-laws.

And we all get along wonderfully.

 

[daveman]

Gay marriage is inevitable. It's simply going to happen -- not everywhere at first, but ultimately it will be the law in all states.

Yes, gays are sinners. So am I. So are you. So are everybody. And no sin is worse in God's eyes than any other. I'd rather see a gay couple stay committed and monogamous than straight people sleep around.

Now here comes the part where Dave dictates the True Conservative Position:

The Federal government doesn't belong in the marriage business. Remove all tax incentives (or better yet, make them apply equally to all tax payers) and just have city hall or the county court clerk record who's married to whom, in either civil ceremonies or a church wedding. As long as the couple is of legal age in their jurisdiction, or has permission from their parents to do so, they can get married.

That's the solution that treats everyone equally under the law -- which is a tenet of conservatism.

Wanna marry your dog? No. That's stupid and sick. Seek help. Wanna sue a church to make them marry you if they refuse? No. You're just being a bitter attention whore. Cut it out and go find another church who will.


For the record, I'm a Christian. My sister-in-law has a permanent relationship with her partner, and they're a great couple. My SIL is also a Christian, and she's a very good stepmom to her partner's kids, and the kids love her a lot.

Any questions?

Yep. Who wears the strap on? jkjk.

My experience shows that the people who hate gays the most, have a strong fear that maybe, just maybe, they might could be gay as well. Thereby showing that the hatred passed on to gays is in fact hatred for themselves and what they might be. Weird. Gay isn't catching and can't be passed on to others by contact.

But to watch you right wingers attack each other is priceless. Keep up the good work.

And dave, a hippie poet, a gay person and you live in KY. Nice diverse family you have there. If you live up a holler and mine coal, you could be a Democrat.

guess your not up to speed, this was about prop 8 in California not KY....

He's talking about my sister-in-law...who's from KY, but lives in MO now.

 

[rightwinger]

And what would it take to match the success of the Democratic Party, that spent billions in order to relieve poverty with absolutely NO visible results?

Spend on schools in inner cities, where the cost is already so high that the same amounts spent in Korea of Finland would produce a veritable army of geniuses, while it only produces pimps, drug dealers, whores and fatherless kids, and abortions, and drive by shootings and murder and racist hatred and rap and hip-hop vulgar profanity?

The Republican Party of Abraham Lincoln freed the slaves.

The Democrat Party of Obama wants to keep them slaves. Sadly, succeeding.

Simple solution for Republicans on poverty. Find them jobs like you are always telling them to get. Find a way to funnel jobs to impoverished areas, a way for poor people to qualify for good jobs

Let them know that they owe their jobs to Republucan policies and they will vote Republucan forever

Right now, all you offer are threats and ridicule

Of course, the Republicans just have to do what Democrats did: Democratic party funneled jobs to impoverished areas, like downtown Detroit, Washington, D.C. and Chicago. That stopped the drive by shootings, the killings, the whoring, the pimping and drug dealings, as we all know.

What did Democrats ever do for impoverished WHITE areas? Except for Ku Klux Klan Grand Wizard Robert Byrd in West Virginia, precious little.

Being slaves of the Democratic Party for the next 200 years (according to LBJ) in plain view of absolutely no visible results is sure sign of mental instability, that can not be cured, except by accelerated abortions in critical areas.

When it comes to ridicule, I must hand it to Democrats. They ridicule, demean, excoriate, demonize and besmirch all blacks, women and gays who happen to have the courage to profess a political view that is not Democrat.

Who said anything about white or black?

Poverty is still poverty and Republicans offer nothing but ridicule. People want jobs that they can support their families on and all Republucans are offering is tax cuts for the wealthy

 

[Seawytch]

Socrates said it...nothing new under the sun...

In 1871, Representative Andrew King (D-Missouri) was the first politician in Congress to propose a constitutional amendment to make interracial marriage illegal nation-wide. King proposed this amendment because he feared that the Fourteenth Amendment, ratified in 1868 to give equal civil rights to the emancipated ex-slaves (the Freedmen) as part of the process of Reconstruction, would render laws against interracial marriage unconstitutional.

In December 1912 and January 1913, Representative Seaborn Roddenbery (D-Georgia) again introduced a proposal in the United States House of Representatives to insert a prohibition of miscegenation into the US Constitution and thus create a nation-wide ban on interracial marriage.

Mr. Roddenberry’s proposed amendment, in December 1912, stated, ”Intermarriage between Negroes or persons of color and Caucasians . . . is forever prohibited.” He took this action, he said, because some states were permitting marriages that were ”abhorrent and repugnant,” and he aimed to ”exterminate now this debasing, ultrademoralizing, un-American and inhuman leprosy.”​

Attempts to Amend the Constitution