Same bullshit, different decade: What members of the gay rights movement could learn from history

[Bfgrn]

Let me put this into terms a liberal could understand:

Person A to Gay Couple A: "I can't cater your wedding, because of my religious beliefs."

Gay Couple A to Person A: Fine, we'll go somewhere else.

That is an example of how a gay couple could exercise tolerance in the face of perceived intolerance.

Person B to Gay Couple B: I can't cater your wedding because of my religious beliefs.

Gay Couple B to Person B: You're a bigot, and if you don't violate your beliefs to cater us, we'll sue you for everything you have. Our wedding is more important than your beliefs.

This is an example of how a gay couple would exercise intolerance in the face of perceived intolerance.

Starting to see the picture here? Only one set of ways and beliefs are acceptable here, the ones that involve outright capitulation.

Yea, I see the picture...as long as liberals and gays embrace the rights bigotry, discrimination and dehumanizing, the right will be quiet and just continue to spread their vile hatred, something that is as anti- Christian as it gets.

No, all they have to do is go elsewhere to someone who is happy catering to them. Is that so hard?
All you want to do is impose your beliefs on others. All we want to do is be left alone.

Yea, all they have to do is go elsewhere...where did we see and hear that before...

One itty-bitty little problem. Blacks couldn't go anywhere. Segregation was so widespread blacks had NOWHERE TO GO, as opposed to gays, who have plenty of options to choose from elsewhere and other places they could go. See the flaw in your logic? See what happens when you start comparing gay rights and race?

My God man, can't you see the flaw in your logic? Discrimination is wrong, regardless of how widespread or narrow.

Should we excuse a murderer because he only killed one person?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Brilliant summation.

Says...

No, we're defending THE RIGHT to discriminate.

Yup. Thanks for demonstrating again how stupid you are, and how against freedom liberals are.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Let me put this into terms a liberal could understand:

Person A to Gay Couple A: "I can't cater your wedding, because of my religious beliefs."

Gay Couple A to Person A: Fine, we'll go somewhere else.

That is an example of how a gay couple could exercise tolerance in the face of perceived intolerance.

Person B to Gay Couple B: I can't cater your wedding because of my religious beliefs.

Gay Couple B to Person B: You're a bigot, and if you don't violate your beliefs to cater us, we'll sue you for everything you have. Our wedding is more important than your beliefs.

This is an example of how a gay couple would exercise intolerance in the face of perceived intolerance.

Starting to see the picture here? Only one set of ways and beliefs are acceptable here, the ones that involve outright capitulation.

Yea, I see the picture...as long as liberals and gays embrace the rights bigotry, discrimination and dehumanizing, the right will be quiet and just continue to spread their vile hatred, something that is as anti- Christian as it gets.

No, all they have to do is go elsewhere to someone who is happy catering to them. Is that so hard?
All you want to do is impose your beliefs on others. All we want to do is be left alone.

Yea, all they have to do is go elsewhere...where did we see and hear that before...

One itty-bitty little problem. Blacks couldn't go anywhere. Segregation was so widespread blacks had NOWHERE TO GO, as opposed to gays, who have plenty of options to choose from elsewhere and other places they could go. See the flaw in your logic? See what happens when you start comparing gay rights and race?

My God man, can't you see the flaw in your logic? Discrimination is wrong, regardless of how widespread or narrow.

Should we excuse a murderer because he only killed one person?

"I think discrimination is wrong, and we should make it illegal to do anything I think is wrong!"

Being a liberal chowderhead is wrong on every level, but I still defend your right to do it.

 

[Bfgrn]

Yea, I see the picture...as long as liberals and gays embrace the rights bigotry, discrimination and dehumanizing, the right will be quiet and just continue to spread their vile hatred, something that is as anti- Christian as it gets.

No, all they have to do is go elsewhere to someone who is happy catering to them. Is that so hard?
All you want to do is impose your beliefs on others. All we want to do is be left alone.

Yea, all they have to do is go elsewhere...where did we see and hear that before...

One itty-bitty little problem. Blacks couldn't go anywhere. Segregation was so widespread blacks had NOWHERE TO GO, as opposed to gays, who have plenty of options to choose from elsewhere and other places they could go. See the flaw in your logic? See what happens when you start comparing gay rights and race?

My God man, can't you see the flaw in your logic? Discrimination is wrong, regardless of how widespread or narrow.

Should we excuse a murderer because he only killed one person?

"I think discrimination is wrong, and we should make it illegal to do anything I think is wrong!"

Being a liberal chowderhead is wrong on every level, but I still defend your right to do it.

Doubling down there pea brain?

 

[Bfgrn]

Brilliant summation.

Says...

No, we're defending THE RIGHT to discriminate.

Yup. Thanks for demonstrating again how stupid you are, and how against freedom liberals are.

Against freedom to discriminate...yea, we need to embrace the ignorant grunts in America...

 

[TemplarKormac]

yea, we need to embrace the ignorant grunts in America

And lets embrace the fact that you keep making my point, by referring to us as "ignorant grunts" you demonstrate your own intolerance of OUR beliefs, while accosting us for THOSE VERY SAME beliefs as "intolerant" or "discriminatory."

This is where you get off. You are not only intolerant, you are a hypocrite.

 

[candycorn]

yea, we need to embrace the ignorant grunts in America

And lets embrace the fact that you keep making my point, by referring to us as "ignorant grunts" you demonstrate your own intolerance of OUR beliefs, while accosting us for THOSE VERY SAME beliefs as "intolerant" or "discriminatory."

This is where you get off. You are not only intolerant, you are a hypocrite.

So if you believe the earth is flat despite the overwhelming evidence that it is not, you're to be taken seriously?

Your "beliefs" are rooted in sheer ignorance and total hypocrisy so embracing them would not be doing you any favors.

 

[rightwinger]

Which Poor are you talking about; the State's poor that get cell phones and big screen TVs after the bloated bureaucracy and union cronies have been paid out or the poor you meet directly in the street or read about around the world that are truly starving. Who should get that money first, according to Jesus?

Has no one informed the extreme right that they don't make small screen TV's anymore and that no one uses landlines either?

The poor got them newfangled microwave ovens and VCRs too

What else could they want from life?

My money is that Jesus will side with me on giving money to someone who needs food vs. a State funded TV and cell phone.

I can assure you that Jesus woud not side with you when it comes to helpig those who need help

Jesus would be very proud of a state that is concerned for its people

You are so sure that Jesus would not side with me if I chose to give directly to someone in need of food, water, shelter vs. the State? You are sure about that??

I have faith that Jesus would support any means that helps the poor.....Regardless of the source

 

[LeftofLeft]

Has no one informed the extreme right that they don't make small screen TV's anymore and that no one uses landlines either?

The poor got them newfangled microwave ovens and VCRs too

What else could they want from life?

My money is that Jesus will side with me on giving money to someone who needs food vs. a State funded TV and cell phone.

I can assure you that Jesus woud not side with you when it comes to helpig those who need help

Jesus would be very proud of a state that is concerned for its people

You are so sure that Jesus would not side with me if I chose to give directly to someone in need of food, water, shelter vs. the State? You are sure about that??

I have faith that Jesus would support any means that helps the poor.....Regardless of the source

Jesus was very clear to his followers to give to Caeser's what was Caesar's ( The State) and to help those in need directly and through his Church. He never says anything about the State being the priority in order to help others.

 

[NYcarbineer]

yea, we need to embrace the ignorant grunts in America

And lets embrace the fact that you keep making my point, by referring to us as "ignorant grunts" you demonstrate your own intolerance of OUR beliefs, while accosting us for THOSE VERY SAME beliefs as "intolerant" or "discriminatory."

This is where you get off. You are not only intolerant, you are a hypocrite.

You never told us what rights you're willing to tolerate, even though you might disagree with them.

Are you willing to tolerate a gay person having the right not to be discriminated against because they're gay?

 

[NYcarbineer]

yea, we need to embrace the ignorant grunts in America

And lets embrace the fact that you keep making my point, by referring to us as "ignorant grunts" you demonstrate your own intolerance of OUR beliefs, while accosting us for THOSE VERY SAME beliefs as "intolerant" or "discriminatory."

This is where you get off. You are not only intolerant, you are a hypocrite.

You will 'tolerate' a business firing, or not hiring, a person because that person is gay,

but you will not 'tolerate' that same gay person having a legal right not to be discriminated against in hiring.

All your ranting about 'tolerance' is merely your insistence that in order to be properly tolerant,

people must agree with you on what is tolerable or intolerable.

 

[rightwinger]

The poor got them newfangled microwave ovens and VCRs too

What else could they want from life?

My money is that Jesus will side with me on giving money to someone who needs food vs. a State funded TV and cell phone.

I can assure you that Jesus woud not side with you when it comes to helpig those who need help

Jesus would be very proud of a state that is concerned for its people

You are so sure that Jesus would not side with me if I chose to give directly to someone in need of food, water, shelter vs. the State? You are sure about that??

I have faith that Jesus would support any means that helps the poor.....Regardless of the source

Jesus was very clear to his followers to give to Caeser's what was Caesar's ( The State) and to help those in need directly and through his Church. He never says anything about the State being the priority in order to help others.

There you go

Give to Caesar what was Caesars

Guess what? Today we get to vote for Caesar. The common man selecting his own Caesars. Jesus would have loved that. The common man has also made it clear that he wants Caesar to help the poor

Jesus would have loved that too

 

[Derideo_Te]

Let me put this into terms TK might understand:

Doctor A in ER to Gay Couple A: "I can't treat your heart attack, because of my religious beliefs."

Gay Couple A to Doctor A: Fine, we'll drive to another ER much further away and hope that no one dies on the way.

That is an example of how TK wants a gay couple to tolerate religious intolerance.

Doctor B to Gay Couple B: I can't treat your heart attack because of my religious beliefs.

Gay Couple B to Doctor B: You're a bigot, and if you don't treat this heart attack you will risk losing your medical license when this is reported to the AMA. Saving lives (as you are trained to do) are more important than your religious beliefs.

This is an example of how a doctor would exercise religious intolerance in the face of serious life threatening medical emergency if TK was able to impose his perverted concept of "tolerance" on this nation.

Starting to see the picture here?

 

[Cecilie1200]

No, all they have to do is go elsewhere to someone who is happy catering to them. Is that so hard?
All you want to do is impose your beliefs on others. All we want to do is be left alone.

Yea, all they have to do is go elsewhere...where did we see and hear that before...

One itty-bitty little problem. Blacks couldn't go anywhere. Segregation was so widespread blacks had NOWHERE TO GO, as opposed to gays, who have plenty of options to choose from elsewhere and other places they could go. See the flaw in your logic? See what happens when you start comparing gay rights and race?

My God man, can't you see the flaw in your logic? Discrimination is wrong, regardless of how widespread or narrow.

Should we excuse a murderer because he only killed one person?

"I think discrimination is wrong, and we should make it illegal to do anything I think is wrong!"

Being a liberal chowderhead is wrong on every level, but I still defend your right to do it.

Doubling down there pea brain?

Even if I were vulnerable to peer pressure, you are not even vaguely my peer. So no, there's no way you're going to make me embrace censorship and elitist suppression, especially not to garner approval from the likes of you.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Brilliant summation.

Says...

No, we're defending THE RIGHT to discriminate.

Yup. Thanks for demonstrating again how stupid you are, and how against freedom liberals are.

Against freedom to discriminate...yea, we need to embrace the ignorant grunts in America...

If leftists understood English, they'd know that "tolerance" and "embracing" aren't the same thing.

 

[bodecea]

Let me put this into terms a liberal could understand:

Person A to Gay Couple A: "I can't cater your wedding, because of my religious beliefs."

Gay Couple A to Person A: Fine, we'll go somewhere else.

That is an example of how a gay couple could exercise tolerance in the face of perceived intolerance.

Person B to Gay Couple B: I can't cater your wedding because of my religious beliefs.

Gay Couple B to Person B: You're a bigot, and if you don't violate your beliefs to cater us, we'll sue you for everything you have. Our wedding is more important than your beliefs.

This is an example of how a gay couple would exercise intolerance in the face of perceived intolerance.

Starting to see the picture here? Only one set of ways and beliefs are acceptable here, the ones that involve outright capitulation.

Yea, I see the picture...as long as liberals and gays embrace the rights bigotry, discrimination and dehumanizing, the right will be quiet and just continue to spread their vile hatred, something that is as anti- Christian as it gets.

No, all they have to do is go elsewhere to someone who is happy catering to them. Is that so hard?
All you want to do is impose your beliefs on others. All we want to do is be left alone.

Yea, all they have to do is go elsewhere...where did we see and hear that before...

One itty-bitty little problem. Blacks couldn't go anywhere. Segregation was so widespread blacks had NOWHERE TO GO, as opposed to gays, who have plenty of options to choose from elsewhere and other places they could go. See the flaw in your logic? See what happens when you start comparing gay rights and race?

My God man, can't you see the flaw in your logic? Discrimination is wrong, regardless of how widespread or narrow.

Should we excuse a murderer because he only killed one person?

Blacks could go to black restaurants. They DID have them, you know. You really need to familiarize yourself with what the 40s, 50s, and 60s were like.....in real life.

 

[Cecilie1200]

yea, we need to embrace the ignorant grunts in America

And lets embrace the fact that you keep making my point, by referring to us as "ignorant grunts" you demonstrate your own intolerance of OUR beliefs, while accosting us for THOSE VERY SAME beliefs as "intolerant" or "discriminatory."

This is where you get off. You are not only intolerant, you are a hypocrite.

So if you believe the earth is flat despite the overwhelming evidence that it is not, you're to be taken seriously?

Your "beliefs" are rooted in sheer ignorance and total hypocrisy so embracing them would not be doing you any favors.

Ah, the liberal battle cry of, "We're taking your freedoms FOR YOUR OWN GOOD!" Right up there with "FOR THE CHILDREN!" on the paving stones to the road to Hell.

 

[The Rabbi]

Let me put this into terms a liberal could understand:

Person A to Gay Couple A: "I can't cater your wedding, because of my religious beliefs."

Gay Couple A to Person A: Fine, we'll go somewhere else.

That is an example of how a gay couple could exercise tolerance in the face of perceived intolerance.

Person B to Gay Couple B: I can't cater your wedding because of my religious beliefs.

Gay Couple B to Person B: You're a bigot, and if you don't violate your beliefs to cater us, we'll sue you for everything you have. Our wedding is more important than your beliefs.

This is an example of how a gay couple would exercise intolerance in the face of perceived intolerance.

Starting to see the picture here? Only one set of ways and beliefs are acceptable here, the ones that involve outright capitulation.

Yea, I see the picture...as long as liberals and gays embrace the rights bigotry, discrimination and dehumanizing, the right will be quiet and just continue to spread their vile hatred, something that is as anti- Christian as it gets.

No, all they have to do is go elsewhere to someone who is happy catering to them. Is that so hard?
All you want to do is impose your beliefs on others. All we want to do is be left alone.

Yea, all they have to do is go elsewhere...where did we see and hear that before...

One itty-bitty little problem. Blacks couldn't go anywhere. Segregation was so widespread blacks had NOWHERE TO GO, as opposed to gays, who have plenty of options to choose from elsewhere and other places they could go. See the flaw in your logic? See what happens when you start comparing gay rights and race?

My God man, can't you see the flaw in your logic? Discrimination is wrong, regardless of how widespread or narrow.

Should we excuse a murderer because he only killed one person?

You kniow, a lot of things are wrong. Not letting someone in ahead of you while you're stuck in traffic is wrong. Hogging the computer in the library when other people want to use it is wrong. There are a million thijngs that wrong. But they arent criminal and they shouldn't be.
That's the difference. I think people have the right to be stupid and wrong. You want to criminalize it.

 

[The Rabbi]

Has no one informed the extreme right that they don't make small screen TV's anymore and that no one uses landlines either?

The poor got them newfangled microwave ovens and VCRs too

What else could they want from life?

My money is that Jesus will side with me on giving money to someone who needs food vs. a State funded TV and cell phone.

I can assure you that Jesus woud not side with you when it comes to helpig those who need help

Jesus would be very proud of a state that is concerned for its people

You are so sure that Jesus would not side with me if I chose to give directly to someone in need of food, water, shelter vs. the State? You are sure about that??

I have faith that Jesus would support any means that helps the poor.....Regardless of the source

I think Jesus would have gone to Bob Jones University.

 

[Skylar]

yea, we need to embrace the ignorant grunts in America

And lets embrace the fact that you keep making my point, by referring to us as "ignorant grunts" you demonstrate your own intolerance of OUR beliefs, while accosting us for THOSE VERY SAME beliefs as "intolerant" or "discriminatory."

This is where you get off. You are not only intolerant, you are a hypocrite.

You will 'tolerate' a business firing, or not hiring, a person because that person is gay,

but you will not 'tolerate' that same gay person having a legal right not to be discriminated against in hiring.

All your ranting about 'tolerance' is merely your insistence that in order to be properly tolerant,

people must agree with you on what is tolerable or intolerable.

Often when a conservative is talking about 'liberty' or 'tolerance', is about treating someone else like a piece of shit.