Whatever ever happened to the little sign ‘We have a right to refuse service’?

[Kondor3]

You know what....you are right on that last point. I must apologize. You are obviously not an idiot. But...you have some kind of flaw that permits you to buy into such nonsense in spite of your intelligence. Not sure what that is. Wish I knew.

Well, thank you for that much, anyway. I will confess to great surprise at such an honest and open undertaking, and also apologize, in turn, for some of what I've said this morning, without impairing our adversarial roles and behaviors. Much obliged.

If it's any consolation, we both see 'flaws' in the others' personalities and/or behaviors or arguments, and are irreconcilable on this issue. On my end, I assure you that I hold very little - perhaps even no - personal animosity directed towards homosexuals. It is merely that I hold a much more traditional and conservative and negative and visceral perception of that mode of behavior and the risks attendant with legitimizing it.

Rightly or wrongly, I believe it to be dangerous, and a shameful turn of events for our Nation and its People.

 

[LoneLaugher]

On the contrary...

The Constitution is designed to protect The Nation and its People from tyranny...

Forcing the population to legitimize Sexual Perversity against its will is a form of tyranny...

The Constitution is also designed to protect The Nation and its People from the imposition of restrictions on Sexual Perversity without due process of Law...

Opponents of the Legitimizing of Homosexuality seek to use the Law, to reverse the recent and most unfortunate trend toward such legitimizing...

The Constitution does not prohibit Opposition working within The Law...

Not the last time I looked anyway...

Liberals have not yet been able to wreak that degree of havoc upon our Republic...

The People also get to define what is 'sexual perversity'. Not you...

Historically, the Laws of the United States have supported the Conservative perspective on this.

It is only in recent months and years, that we have begun to drift away from that wise and more wholesome perspective.

I agree that The People get to define 'perversity', in a legal context.

They have done so... long-since... long ago.

It is Activist Judges that have overridden The People in this regard.

And THAT is what all the fuss is about, isn't it?

Overriding the Will of he People.


I don't know, to be very honest, and that is a matter of some genuine concern, to the Opposition. Far too many Sheeple, and few too few Stalwarts, willing to take a stand.

Then again, it would not require an Amendment; there is a much simpler approach.

Namely, high-level Conservative -caliber rulings, which reinstate Homosexuality as an undesirable mode of behavior, dangerous and detrimental to the Republic and its People.

But even that will require courage, and persistence, over a generation or two, and I really and truly question whether America still has the balls to undertake such a campaign.


You may be right.

I suspect we will learn more about whether this is the case, after Obama and his Liberal Administration have cleared off the public stage.

...Democracy wins...

Perhaps.

That, or Apathy wins.

I don't know which that would be, if things end-up remaining as they are now.

...and we get treated to the spectacle of you crying about it ad nauseum.

Enjoy the show.

Gee. That's not very kind. Calling those who oppose you.....sheeple. That is so unlike you to throw insults around like that.

 

[Kondor3]

...YOU are the menace to a civil society.

You are cleared to proceed to blow it out your ass, at your earliest convenience and discretion.

 

[Pete7469]

The gay community and the liberals have lost their little Nazi minds. A privately owned business has the right to refuse to conduct business with anybody they want. Period. It's not even open for debate.

Further still, the 1st Amendment affords you the right to practice your religious belief. And the little liberal/gay Nazi community is working so hard to trample on that right as well.

All I can say is that I hope these companies deliver the most dreadful products and services when they are unconstitutionally forced to by the liberal Nazi's. If you're a bakery and you're forced to bake a cake for a gay wedding, I hope you put 70lbs of salt in the cake and make the frosting primarily out of vinegar so that they vomit when they eat it. Then maybe word will spread in their little gay circles that your bakery isn't any good and you can be left the hell alone to conduct your private business as you see fit.

*Note - desperate Nazi liberals will try to spin this as "homophobia" because they need to justify their anti-constitutional Nazi beliefs. However, it is not. I couldn't care less if someone is gay. What I do care about however is when they unconstitutionally force someone to do their bidding because they think being gay makes them special and entitled.

It's an agenda of reeducation

Large amounts of Epsom Salts would be my main ingredient.

I'd give it to them free.


No liability that way.

 

[kaz]

Our government is pro-gay and anti-Christian, you're full of it

I'm missing the "anti-Christian" part. "Oh, boo-hoo, I can't impose my bronze age superstitions to other people."

Life is so unfair, they whine. Who the hell raised these brats? My mother would have spanked them, and their mothers.

My goodness that's a lot of tears. I'm sorry I made you cry man, the Internet is brutal isn't it? Here's a tissue and don't worry about it.

BTW, I'm not a Christian.

 

[Bfgrn]

.

Once one of the parties is compared to Hitler and/or the Nazis, it's a safe bet that the conversation will pretty much be in the shitter for a while.



.

Post # 1

 

[Kondor3]

Gee. That's not very kind. Calling those who oppose you.....sheeple. That is so unlike you to throw insults around like that.

1. you have a core of people who are firmly supportive of legitimizing Homosexuality.

2. you have a core of people who are firmly opposed to the legitimizing of Homosexuality.

3. you have a huge mass of people who are fickle and who sway with the latest wind.

Those falling under Category Three are Sheeple.

They don't oppose me (the anti-Homosexuality side of the debate).

They don't oppose you (the pro-Homosexuality side of the debate).

They bend and sway and "trend" with whatever way the wind is blowing.

Oh, and, I'm about as far from being free from the sin of name-calling as one can get.

It's just that I usually reserve that for extremis, rather than as part-and-parcel of my day-to-day interactions.

But, when the mood descends, I can get down and dirty with the best (and worst) of them.

And enjoy myself, and take my lumps, like anybody else.

 

[LoneLaugher]

You know what....you are right on that last point. I must apologize. You are obviously not an idiot. But...you have some kind of flaw that permits you to buy into such nonsense in spite of your intelligence. Not sure what that is. Wish I knew.

Well, thank you for that much, anyway. I will confess to great surprise at such an honest and open undertaking, and also apologize, in turn, for some of what I've said this morning, without impairing our adversarial roles and behaviors. Much obliged.

If it's any consolation, we both see 'flaws' in the others' personalities and/or behaviors or arguments, and are irreconcilable on this issue. On my end, I assure you that I hold very little - perhaps even no - personal animosity directed towards homosexuals. It is merely that I hold a much more traditional and conservative and negative and visceral perception of that mode of behavior and the risks attendant with legitimizing it.

Rightly or wrongly, I believe it to be dangerous, and a shameful turn of events for our Nation and its People.

I suspect that you'll come around in time. You could speed that up by making a list of all of the people in your life....past and present.....who you love dearly and respect unconditionally.

Then consider that 1-3% of them ( your numbers) are homosexual. Finally, imagine how much you'd hurt them if you read this thread to them.

Yes. I suspect that you will end up having a change of heart.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Gee. That's not very kind. Calling those who oppose you.....sheeple. That is so unlike you to throw insults around like that.

1. you have a core of people who are firmly supportive of legitimizing Homosexuality.

2. you have a core of people who are firmly opposed to the legitimizing of Homosexuality.

3. you have a huge mass of people who are fickle and who sway with the latest wind.

Those falling under Category Three are Sheeple.

They don't oppose me (the anti-Homosexuality side of the debate).

They don't oppose you (the pro-Homosexuality side of the debate).

They bend and sway and "trend" with whatever way the wind is blowing.

Oh, and, I'm about as far from being free from the sin of name-calling as one can get.

It's just that I usually reserve that for extremis, rather than as part-and-parcel of my day-to-day interactions.

But, when the mood descends, I can get down and dirty with the best (and worst) of them.

And enjoy myself, and take my lumps, like anybody else.

Please...have your sarcasm meter checked.

 

[Bfgrn]

You know what....you are right on that last point. I must apologize. You are obviously not an idiot. But...you have some kind of flaw that permits you to buy into such nonsense in spite of your intelligence. Not sure what that is. Wish I knew.

Well, thank you for that much, anyway. I will confess to great surprise at such an honest and open undertaking, and also apologize, in turn, for some of what I've said this morning, without impairing our adversarial roles and behaviors. Much obliged.

If it's any consolation, we both see 'flaws' in the others' personalities and/or behaviors or arguments, and are irreconcilable on this issue. On my end, I assure you that I hold very little - perhaps even no - personal animosity directed towards homosexuals. It is merely that I hold a much more traditional and conservative and negative and visceral perception of that mode of behavior and the risks attendant with legitimizing it.

Rightly or wrongly, I believe it to be dangerous, and a shameful turn of events for our Nation and its People.

"Today Christians stand at the head of our country. I pledge that I will never tie myself to parties who want to destroy Christianity... We want to fill our culture again with the Christian spirit.... We want to burn out all the recent immoral developments in literature, in the theatre, and in the press - in short, we want to burn out the poison of immorality which has entered into our whole life and culture as a result of liberal excess during the past few years."

Adolf Hitler
The Speeches of Adolph Hitler, 1922-1939, Vol. 1 (London, Oxford University Press, 1942), pg. 871-872.

 

[kaz]

Freedom includes the freedom to discriminate. It's nonsensical to claim that freedom doesn't promote freedom. The idea that you are not allowed to choose who you do business with is so stupid that only a libturd could have conceived it. It's literally a blank check for government to do whatever it likes to you.

You nailed it. That ... is the point ...

To allow businesses to deny service to anyone for any reason would truly be stupid; we've been there and done that. Only a lunatic would want to go back to those days when a black person could be deny service for no other reason than he was black or a Jew could be told that his kind would be more comfortable some place else, or fine restaurants would display signs that said No Micks Allowed, or businesses could decide facilities for the disabled weren't worth the cost.

To force people to do with their own assets what they don't want to do is an abomination to liberty and an abuse of power. For a freaking cake? Almost no bakeries would deny a gay whatever cake they want. What's truly stupid is you comparing going to the bakery down the street to Jim Crow. BTW, Jim Crow was ... government ... Man up and argue like an adult instead of a hysterical child.

 

[kaz]

I used to be in that biz and turned down a pro-abortion bumper sticker job for Planned Parenthood on principle. I guess I'm lucky they didn't sue me for sexism.

We do work for Planned Parenthood. We also do lots of work for Democrats. I won't do the sexually explicit but at work I'm about business, not politics.

I did work for PP before, I just wasn't going to do a pro abortion deal. I didn't work for Democrats because they only would do business with a union shop. Dues that go back to their coffers, ya know.

I almost bought a business that I would have merged into mine that does a lot of work with Democrats who as you said only do business with union shops. The deal fell apart at the last second, but it had nothing to do with that.

The seller told me the secret, you can for like $100 a year get a certificate from a bogus union and the Democrats are happy with that. They just want the stamp. LOL.

We do work for local candidates, it hasn't come up for us so far here.

 

[Pete7469]

Queers are not advancing the cause of gay marriage just for whatever benefits they get from government or insurance.

They're shoving queer in our faces. They represent a marginal fraction of the population, but combined with environazis, vegans, occutards, gun grabbers and every other sort of bed wetter their voice is louder than it deserves to be.

I personally don't care what consenting adults do in private.

Queers aren't content with privacy, and obviously moonbats in general have little respect for anyone else's privacy, but privacy isn't the issue.

The goal of the marxist cult is to pervert the values of this nation. All this bullshit about "liberating" the sexuality of people is... well... bullshit...

and every cognizant person knows it.

If being queer was so natural the pillow biters wouldn't be so adamant about being accepted. They know they're fucked up, but rather than find a solution they've joined a political bandwagon that caters to their deviance.

Again I not only don't care what these fuckers do in private, I advocate that all liberals convert to homosexuality. Practice what you preach. If it's so wonderful... be a cumdumpster. I don't care.

I would have an even greater sense of optimism for the future if all libtards went queer.

 

[Iceweasel]

The seller told me the secret, you can for like $100 a year get a certificate from a bogus union and the Democrats are happy with that. They just want the stamp. LOL.

We do work for local candidates, it hasn't come up for us so far here.

I MAY have printed with a union bug for a friend once. I didn't ask questions. They don't ask questions if it looks good either, image is everything. I printed political posters for a Democrat before I knew the deal and he came back a day later, presumably after finding out they were supposed to boycott non union shops, wanting his money back since they had no union bug. I think my refusal and Rush Limbaugh blaring in the background convinced him it was a fruitless endeavor.

 

[jon_berzerk]

You know what....you are right on that last point. I must apologize. You are obviously not an idiot. But...you have some kind of flaw that permits you to buy into such nonsense in spite of your intelligence. Not sure what that is. Wish I knew.

Well, thank you for that much, anyway. I will confess to great surprise at such an honest and open undertaking, and also apologize, in turn, for some of what I've said this morning, without impairing our adversarial roles and behaviors. Much obliged.

If it's any consolation, we both see 'flaws' in the others' personalities and/or behaviors or arguments, and are irreconcilable on this issue. On my end, I assure you that I hold very little - perhaps even no - personal animosity directed towards homosexuals. It is merely that I hold a much more traditional and conservative and negative and visceral perception of that mode of behavior and the risks attendant with legitimizing it.

Rightly or wrongly, I believe it to be dangerous, and a shameful turn of events for our Nation and its People.

"Today Christians stand at the head of our country. I pledge that I will never tie myself to parties who want to destroy Christianity... We want to fill our culture again with the Christian spirit.... We want to burn out all the recent immoral developments in literature, in the theatre, and in the press - in short, we want to burn out the poison of immorality which has entered into our whole life and culture as a result of liberal excess during the past few years."

Adolf Hitler
The Speeches of Adolph Hitler, 1922-1939, Vol. 1 (London, Oxford University Press, 1942), pg. 871-872.

then he quickly destroyed it and rewrote his own version

Third Reich Bible


Hitler's 12 Commandments

 

[Mac1958]

Third Reich Bible

Hitler's 12 Commandments

Holy crap.

No pun intended.

.

 

[P@triot]

Have an adult decipher what Kondor is saying about gays.

You're the one who needs an adult to have things explained to you. He's saying that, unlike race, homosexuality is a behavior that has negative consequences for society. Pointing those consequences doesn't make you a racist or someone who wants to commit genocide. Only a sleazy scumbag like you would make such a claim.

He is painting gays with the same ignorant bigoted brush Hitler painted the Jews with. And you are agreeing with him.

Stop freaking out about who says what about homosexuals. That is not the issue here.

The issue is FREEDOM. Nazi liberals do not have the right to force someone into their views. If you want to serve the gay community wedding cakes, then get up off of your lazy ass open up your own fucking bakery. But you have zero right to force someone else who did just that to bend to your will just because you're too lazy to open your own bakery. That is the issue...

Trying to paint people as "homophobes" to justify your Nazi position is pure idiocy. Whether they are or not is not the issue.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Third Reich Bible

Hitler's 12 Commandments

Holy crap.

No pun intended.

.

yes it is a myth that hitler was a Christian

 

[zeke]

Gee. That's not very kind. Calling those who oppose you.....sheeple. That is so unlike you to throw insults around like that.

1. you have a core of people who are firmly supportive of legitimizing Homosexuality.

2. you have a core of people who are firmly opposed to the legitimizing of Homosexuality.

3. you have a huge mass of people who are fickle and who sway with the latest wind.

Those falling under Category Three are Sheeple.

They don't oppose me (the anti-Homosexuality side of the debate).

They don't oppose you (the pro-Homosexuality side of the debate).

They bend and sway and "trend" with whatever way the wind is blowing.

Oh, and, I'm about as far from being free from the sin of name-calling as one can get.

It's just that I usually reserve that for extremis, rather than as part-and-parcel of my day-to-day interactions.

But, when the mood descends, I can get down and dirty with the best (and worst) of them.

And enjoy myself, and take my lumps, like anybody else.

Maybe you mean those of us who take the live and let live approach. I have known quite a few homosexuals. None of them ever impacted my life in a negative way. Therefore why should I be all upset about what they do in their sexual lives and care about who they love?

What is it that gay sex does to you personally Kondor that hurts you or yours? How does it effect your life in a negative way? Just curious.

If your reasoning is that you hate gay sex cause you hate gay sex, well guess what. That just isn't going to be a good enough reason anymore to deny gays the same rights as non gays.

Gays may not like your sex life either. What you gonna do?

 

[Pete7469]

.

Once one of the parties is compared to Hitler and/or the Nazis, it's a safe bet that the conversation will pretty much be in the shitter for a while.



.

I had to laugh at that.