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

[Wake]

Reading the thread's title, it doesn't make much sense. It's as thought-provoking and respectful as saying "Leftwingers, of whom I'm one, let the abortion shit go."

I think we can respect people and their unique values and beliefs without making them feel like crap for having them.

 

[Seawytch]

There is no end in sight to their hatred...it's good news for the Dems. For those of us who wish there were two Parties...not so great.

The GOP, just like churches, will adapt or die.

Yeah, you've been "predicting" your fantasy for years. And all that has happened is the GOP has dominated the political landscape. 60% of the entire nation is run by a GOP governor. 232 seats in the House are filled by a GOP Congressman. And you don't even want to get started on conservative mayors, county auditors, judges, city council members, etc. who occupy positions thanks to the record 2010 mid-term ass-kicking (it was a bloodbath).



Now tell us for the 132,000th time how the GOP is "dead". The reality is, the GOP is stronger than ever because the Tea Party is weeding out liberal RINO's and replacing them with great leaders like Rand Paul.

They will. It's a fact you can't deny. If the GOP doesn't get more "big tent" than they are now, they will die off as a party.

Just like churches will have to become more gay friendly if they want to survive.

 

[koshergrl]

Er, no, they won't.

BTW, every church I've ever belonged to is plenty "gay friendly". Gays are perfectly welcome to attend services.

But of course, you don't mean "gay friendly". You mean "reject the Word and embrace homos who trumpet their sexual preference from the pews".

Not gonna happen.

And the church, worldwide, is growing exponentially.

 

[candycorn]

WTF do guns have to do with church, rightard?? Just how fucking crazy are you?

Bwahahahah!!!! I illustrated your ignorance and you have NO intelligent response!!!!

Guns have nothing to do with church. But you ignorantly claimed that "state laws can't be forced on churches" because of "separation of church and state". I merely pointed out how you Dumbocrats never obey the law - as the 2nd Amendment guarantees me the right to keep and bear arms, yet you a Dumbocrats keep trying to ban guns. So since you don't respect the 2nd Amendment, why would you respect the 1st Amdendment (and you know this too - you just realize you got bent over and you had no intelligent response so all you could do is post "what do guns have to do with churches" in a desperate attempt to change the subject).

I freaking love making you my bitch fauny...

The Supreme Court made you their bitch.

DOMA gone forever. Prop 8 gone forever.

Gay people marrying now all over the place. Lawsuits being filed in states, PA and TX...

How does it feel to lose, fuck face?

Nice!

 

[Seawytch]

Er, no, they won't.

BTW, every church I've ever belonged to is plenty "gay friendly". Gays are perfectly welcome to attend services.

But of course, you don't mean "gay friendly". You mean "reject the Word and embrace homos who trumpet their sexual preference from the pews".

Not gonna happen.

And the church, worldwide, is growing exponentially.

It's happening already.

http://www.episcopalcafe.com/lead/congregations/churches_becoming_more_gayfrie.html

 

[Katzndogz]

Er, no, they won't.

BTW, every church I've ever belonged to is plenty "gay friendly". Gays are perfectly welcome to attend services.

But of course, you don't mean "gay friendly". You mean "reject the Word and embrace homos who trumpet their sexual preference from the pews".

Not gonna happen.

And the church, worldwide, is growing exponentially.

In the United States churches are losing membership. The more gay friendly they become the more members they will lose. The only churches growing are the evangelicals. The rest are changing so much they are merely hollow social clubs. Both the Presbyterians and the Episocopalians have split on the issue.

If a church has to become gay friendly to survive, maybe it shouldn't survive at all. A church shouldn't agree with you but challenge you to be a better person not give instructions on having an orgasm from a same sex partner.

Christians were always intended to be few and the way difficult.

 

[Katzndogz]

Hey, look who's gay. Rottie's a flaming fag.

Hey [MENTION=20112]bodecea[/MENTION] and [MENTION=24452]Seawytch[/MENTION] - just curious if you saw this post? This is a fellow Dumbocrat showing her "tolerance" for someone different from her.

"Flaming fag" - how accepting by this Dumbocrat. But I'm sure you'll attempt to defend this hateful homophobic rhetoric (and probably attempt to demonize conservatives in the process).

I don't know why you keep going on about tolerance from the left.

WHERE do you get the idea that we would be tolerant of YOU?

There are those who still expect that someone who wants tolerance should be prepared to extend tolerance. This is wrong. Neither should tolerate the other. Don't tolerate perverts and degenerates. It makes the tolerant person be just as perverted and degenerate.

 

[JakeStarkey]

No true American tolerates the hypocritical perverts and degenerates from the far reactionary right.

 

[Seawytch]

Er, no, they won't.



BTW, every church I've ever belonged to is plenty "gay friendly". Gays are perfectly welcome to attend services.



But of course, you don't mean "gay friendly". You mean "reject the Word and embrace homos who trumpet their sexual preference from the pews".



Not gonna happen.



And the church, worldwide, is growing exponentially.

In the United States churches are losing membership. The more gay friendly they become the more members they will lose. The only churches growing are the evangelicals. The rest are changing so much they are merely hollow social clubs. Both the Presbyterians and the Episocopalians have split on the issue.



If a church has to become gay friendly to survive, maybe it shouldn't survive at all. A church shouldn't agree with you but challenge you to be a better person not give instructions on having an orgasm from a same sex partner.



Christians were always intended to be few and the way difficult.

You have it exactly backward.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Er, no, they won't.

BTW, every church I've ever belonged to is plenty "gay friendly". Gays are perfectly welcome to attend services.

But of course, you don't mean "gay friendly". You mean "reject the Word and embrace homos who trumpet their sexual preference from the pews".

Not gonna happen.

And the church, worldwide, is growing exponentially.

And?

14th Amendment jurisprudence concerning equal protection rights pertains to public sector entities only, not private organizations such as churches.

You and other rightists remain at liberty to practice your faith of hate and ignorance.

 

[P@triot]

Hey, look who's gay. Rottie's a flaming fag.

Hey [MENTION=20112]bodecea[/MENTION] and [MENTION=24452]Seawytch[/MENTION] - just curious if you saw this post? This is a fellow Dumbocrat showing her "tolerance" for someone different from her.

"Flaming fag" - how accepting by this Dumbocrat. But I'm sure you'll attempt to defend this hateful homophobic rhetoric (and probably attempt to demonize conservatives in the process).

What's wrong with being gay, Rottie?

Did I call this one or what? If a conservative said "flaming fag", people like bodecea would have a fuck'n aneurysm. But a Dumbocrat says the same thing and it's "endearing".

 

[P@triot]

You really are the dumbest idiot on the planet. "ALL cases" include cases which challenge the Constitution. Marbury vs Madison is but one example where the Supreme Court ruled on the power of judicial review.

You're lack of reading comprehension is painfully obvious...

First of all, the U.S. Constitution is the highest law in the land. If the law was "open to interpretation" it would be impossible to obey as each person would "interpret" it differently. You've already admitted, cum-guzzler, that lower laws like the speed limit, rape, and murder are not open to "interpretation" - yet you're so ignorant you want to make the argument that higher laws are?

Second, another illustration of your lack of reading comprehension is that I specifically addressed Bodecea and SeaWytch in my challenge. I did not offer the challenge to the entire board. So even if someone had actually provided you with information that made you correct for the first time in your miserable life as parasite-draining burden on the U.S., I still would not be required to leave USMB to keep my word, cum-guzzler.

Holyfuckingshit!!

So your out is that your offer [on a public forum] was only to select participants???

Obviously cum-guzzler Fauny fancies himself a lady. It's also obvious why she can't understand the Constitution since she can't understand a simple post on USMB. You must really love my dick Fauny, because you go out of your way to have me bend you over in front of everyone on USMB every day

Why don't you just get the words, "flaming fag," tattooed across your forehead, since you like advertising that so much?

Yeah.... I don't need an "out" since I literally bent you over and made you my bitch on USMB (something you apparently like being a cum-guzzler who keeps coming back for more ). I was right. You were wrong. I've proven that about a dozen times now. Why could you not highlight the section in blue as requested? Because you were wrong. Why do you leave out previous parts of your posts after I respond with facts that expose your ignorance? Because you were wrong. Why do you have no response for the fact that you don't believe lower laws (such as speed limits) are not "open to interpretation" while ignorantly claiming that the highest law in the land is "open to interpretation"? Because you were wrong. Why do you have no response for the fact that a law which is "open to interpretation" cannot be obeyed - and hence the reason a law has never, and will never, be "open to interpretation"? Because you were wrong.

Fauny, sweetie, I have literally given you the most comprehensive beat down here in USMB history. This post here is yet another beat down - you can't provide a reasonable, intelligent response to even one of the questions in the paragraph above. I didn't need an "out" - I was right all along. I merely posted the fact that I specifically made that challenge to BD & SW simply to humiliate you further by illustrating just how severe your lack of reading comprehension is (which explains why you're incapable of understanding the Constitution).

 

[P@triot]

Holyfuckingshit!!

So your out is that your offer [on a public forum] was only to select participants???

So it's your position that people on public forums can't have direct conversations with each other and that any challenge/bet/etc. they make between them is automatically inclusive of everyone who has an account on that public forum? So when you made a $10 bet with SniperFire and lost (as usual), that means you owed everyone with a USMB account $10? Really sweetie?

Talk about "holyfuckingshit"

 

[TemplarKormac]

WTF do guns have to do with church, rightard?? Just how fucking crazy are you?

Bwahahahah!!!! I illustrated your ignorance and you have NO intelligent response!!!!

Guns have nothing to do with church. But you ignorantly claimed that "state laws can't be forced on churches" because of "separation of church and state". I merely pointed out how you Dumbocrats never obey the law - as the 2nd Amendment guarantees me the right to keep and bear arms, yet you a Dumbocrats keep trying to ban guns. So since you don't respect the 2nd Amendment, why would you respect the 1st Amdendment (and you know this too - you just realize you got bent over and you had no intelligent response so all you could do is post "what do guns have to do with churches" in a desperate attempt to change the subject).

I freaking love making you my bitch fauny...

The Supreme Court made you their bitch.

DOMA gone forever. Prop 8 gone forever.

Gay people marrying now all over the place. Lawsuits being filed in states, PA and TX...

How does it feel to lose, fuck face?

Gee, we'll be asking you that same question in 2014 and 2016. How's it feel to know you're going to lose, fuckface? Fuckface? Really? Are we in the 1st Grade or something?

Ugh... and you wonder why people don't support gay marriage? I don't make a habit of using such vulgar language, but I do believe Obama made people like you his "bitch", over and over and over as he shifted his positions on gay marriage to get himself elected. You don't realize how he used you for his own gain and took advantage of the gay community.

So gullible people like you are.

 

[thanatos144]

The GOP, just like churches, will adapt or die.

Yeah, you've been "predicting" your fantasy for years. And all that has happened is the GOP has dominated the political landscape. 60% of the entire nation is run by a GOP governor. 232 seats in the House are filled by a GOP Congressman. And you don't even want to get started on conservative mayors, county auditors, judges, city council members, etc. who occupy positions thanks to the record 2010 mid-term ass-kicking (it was a bloodbath).



Now tell us for the 132,000th time how the GOP is "dead". The reality is, the GOP is stronger than ever because the Tea Party is weeding out liberal RINO's and replacing them with great leaders like Rand Paul.

Just like churches will have to become more gay friendly if they want to survive.

The true agenda a war on faith

tapatalk post

 

[thanatos144]

I am pretty sure the supreme court didn't rule on the defence of marriage act.

tapatalk post

 

[P@triot]

Hey, look who's gay. Rottie's a flaming fag.

Hey [MENTION=20112]bodecea[/MENTION] and [MENTION=24452]Seawytch[/MENTION] - just curious if you saw this post? This is a fellow Dumbocrat showing her "tolerance" for someone different from her.

"Flaming fag" - how accepting by this Dumbocrat. But I'm sure you'll attempt to defend this hateful homophobic rhetoric (and probably attempt to demonize conservatives in the process).

I don't know why you keep going on about tolerance from the left.

WHERE do you get the idea that we would be tolerant of YOU?

Apparently you're so ignorant, you can't even comprehend sarcasm. Believe me [MENTION=34247]sfcalifornia[/MENTION], I know you racist, homophobic, anti-Constitutional, useful-idiot Dumbocrat bigots are not tolerant of anything. It's why you throw yourselves on the floor like children when you don't get your way...

 

[LogikAndReazon]

Leftist extremists, let the homosexual shit go....

 

[P@triot]

WTF do guns have to do with church, rightard?? Just how fucking crazy are you?

Bwahahahah!!!! I illustrated your ignorance and you have NO intelligent response!!!!

Guns have nothing to do with church. But you ignorantly claimed that "state laws can't be forced on churches" because of "separation of church and state". I merely pointed out how you Dumbocrats never obey the law - as the 2nd Amendment guarantees me the right to keep and bear arms, yet you a Dumbocrats keep trying to ban guns. So since you don't respect the 2nd Amendment, why would you respect the 1st Amdendment (and you know this too - you just realize you got bent over and you had no intelligent response so all you could do is post "what do guns have to do with churches" in a desperate attempt to change the subject).

I freaking love making you my bitch fauny...

The Supreme Court made you their bitch.

DOMA gone forever. Prop 8 gone forever.

Gay people marrying now all over the place. Lawsuits being filed in states, PA and TX...

How does it feel to lose, fuck face?

"Prop 8 gone forever"?!?!? Really?!?!?

Clearly [MENTION=34247]sfcalifornia[/MENTION] is yet another angry homo who believes that if they wish something were true, it actually makes it true (like SeaWytch who has predicted the Republican party was "dead" for 6 years now and all they do is keep winning more and more)...

"The 5-4 decision avoids, for now, a sweeping conclusion on whether same-sex marriage is a constitutional "equal protection" right that would apply to all states."

Supreme Court dismisses California's Proposition 8 appeal - CNN.com

 

[P@triot]