The homophobic thread :>

[bannination]

Oh believe me, I'm not for this idea, but just for the thought experiment, how far would it have to go to work?

I know it's illegal etc, so pretending the laws could get changed in favor.

I guess Mr. B should be on the one figuring this out, but it's pretty obvious that he hasn't thought past "gay people bad."

[Mr.B]

Y'all are stretching this all out of proportion. My contention is that homosexuals, or any other professed groups, should not be allowed to bully any small business owner by demanding they give them what they want, regardless of the business owner's religious convictions.

O Really stated (loosely) the bakery owner should have told them he didn't have time to bake them what they wanted. You know good and well the "gays" would still have not taken no for an answer, using that as an excuse to scream and whine "discrimination"; simply as a bullying tactic.

You don't want to see the side of non-gays and Christians nor their rights, because you're so wrapped up in the rights of homosexuals. You want to chide Christians because of their beliefs and call them all sorts of names, yet embrace the bullying of the homosexual community. What you are doing is bullying others to accept your opinions, and to hell with theirs.

Sharia Law...that's a laugh.

Your examples of Walmart, city bus seats, Muslims, Jews, lunch counters, blah, blah, blah, are so absurd they don't deserve comment.

[O Really]

The examples are not absurd. I could provide examples of people already trying such things, even without the support of a pro-discrimination law.

Mr. B says, " My contention is that homosexuals, or any other professed groups, should not be allowed to bully any small business owner by demanding they give them what they want, regardless of the business owner's religious convictions." We all understand that is your opinion, but it is not consistent with current and (generally) long-standing law.

Mr.B also seems to believe the couple in Colorado set up their cake request so as to create a refusal. If there is any evidence of that, bring it on. I haven't seen anything whatsoever that would hint that their initial request was anything other than ordinary, and if the baker had declined based on, for example, workload or schedule, they wouldn't have even known they had been discriminated against. But the baker told the couple he wouldn't make a gay cake, and he repeated it to the media (which of course he should have known was liberal and his sworn nemesis).

[O Really]

For example - cabbie refuses to transport blind guy's dog for "religious reasons." http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/12 ... guide-dog/

Refusal to transport alcohol and dogs.. http://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=2827800

Booting out the black crowd because a white patron "felt threatened" (not related to religion, but still...) http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/08/24/s ... hreatened/

Complaints of religious discrimination increasing... http://www.cleveland.com/business/index ... e_don.html
Here too... http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB1 ... 2921346076

And here's a pro-religion article that opposes religious-based discrimination.. http://www.religionnews.com/2013/07/17/ ... cceptable/

[bannination]

I won't cite a source, since I think it's common knowledge, but there are plenty of examples of pharmacists not prescribing needed drugs due to religion.

Crazy.

Mr. B, I don't think anyone is stretching anything out of proportion, you just haven't followed your argument to it's logical conclusion. It's a messy world you want to create or would like to exist.

No one is trying to bully someone with an opinion. They can have the opinion that gays are bad, they just shouldn't be discriminatory about it because it creates a crap ton of problems and regulations.

Mr. B. this is straight forward, replace your word gay in this argument with black, and you should be able to see really quickly...... well maybe not. Anyway, if you can substitute a word like this and it still makes perfect since then they are logically equivalent statements. If you feel like that should be legal, then you're going to have to enlarge the government a significant amount to handle this.

[Bungalow Bill]

Very few rights are absolute, so Christians will just have to suck it
up and obey the law. That old Render unto Caesar stuff.

[O Really]

Brewer vetoed.

[Mr.B]

"Mr.B is likely to live long enough to find his hateful ilk as reviled as the misogynists, anti-semites and racists of old now are"......
"faith-based bigotry"......"it's sad that you wish to replace our constitution with Christian bigotry"......"pathetic homophobes"......"your hateful religions"......etc.....

And you call my posts hateful and bigoted. You can't even comment on a someone's post without resorting to name-calling, gouging, or making suppositions
("it's sad that you wish to replace our constitution with Christian bigotry. ") as to what they are thinking. Grow up and act like an adult.....if you know what an adult is.

It's sad that you wish to see the population of this nation living in a perverted, twisted, form of misdirected affection.

BTW...I've never said I "hated" a homosexual; I've always said that the homosexual act is un-natural. Man was not designed to have sex with another man, nor was the male body intended to be used as another male's sexual partner; same goes for the females......unless of course the evolution you believe in was just as haywire as the product that came out of it. Simply put, homosexuality is a product of sin, whether it comes by choice or birth.

You can stop your silly whining about equality, discrimination, bigotry, etc., etc., etc.......you big 'ol whiny baby.

[Mr.B]

"Brewer vetoed."

Good, I was happy to see that. The bill was too vague in it's content and it directed all the ire at the religious community that had very little to do with it's introduction.

[Mr.B]

"Quit being such a crybaby. Neither I nor anyone else has said that Christian bigots shouldn't be able to marry or purchase goods and services like you do about gays. That automatically makes your bilious hatred worse."

"Brewer vetoed."

"Poor Mr.B, maybe he should retire to Uganda rather than AZ."

Point proven....thank you. You did very well.

[Mr.B]

And you can't get your thoughts past "gay people".... period. Obsessed?

[Mr.B]

"Dang, you're being as dumb as homerfobe. My interest is in civil and human rights, tolerance and equality. It's you two that are obsessed with the sex that gays have. Gloating over your abject political and social failure, even to the point of people abandoning your hateful churches in droves because of it, is just a bonus. Thanks for playing, another round?"

And you're just a Class-A jerk who is ashamed to admit your own sexual preference....You can claim your interest is in "civil and human rights, tolerance and equality" all you want, your last post proves my point: "Send us postcards from Iran and Uganda, homophobes."

Your interest in this subject is overwhelming, and your intolerance to other's opinions, on any subject proves you're a jerk.

I am not obsessed with "gay" sex. I have nothing more to say on the subject.

[O Really]

I'm not one who ever thought Mr.B and Homo were the same poster, but it is interesting that both of them seem unable to imagine a person who is not gay being interested in gay rights, and both seem to think "accusing" someone of being gay is insulting. Hmmmmm. Must one be female to stand up for womens' rights? Or an animal to stand up for animal welfare? Must anyone who supports rights for the disabled ride around in a wheelchair?

Yeah, maybe 50 years ago I might have thought it strange for two men or two women to want to marry. Most homosexuals were closeted then anyway. But since then, I've met and been neighbors, friends and colleagues with a lot of people who in all significant and important aspects were just like me, except for being gay. I've met and been friends with some who are nothing like me, but who are nevertheless interesting, creative, and entertaining people. I've met some who were obnoxious flaming queens, but I've never met one who I would vote to deny basic rights of US citizens. Rednecks, on the other hand....

[O Really]

The "Mr.B's" of the world don't seem to realize that one's sex life is a pretty small part of their total person. "Mr.B" has probably known, been friends with, worked with, has in his church, people who have no interest in sex, have interest but can't do it, do it 5 times a week, do it once every couple of months, do it only when intoxicated, do with with anybody within ten miles...none of which he would ever even know about. But the gay couple...oooooh, let's define their whole life by what they do in the sack.

[bannination]

At least Mr. B's true feelings about it finally came shining through. Much better than hiding behind that facade he was putting up.

[Mr.B]

"The only person that posts more about "gay" sex here is homerfobe."

"I'm not one who ever thought Mr.B and Homo were the same poster"

Because Homerfobe and I are the only two posters who speak against homosexuals, that makes us the same poster?
Because I happened to use the same phraseology, that makes us the same poster?

As the only Christian left posting here, my views against homosexuality are religious (and common sense) based, whereas Homerfobe's opinions are, well, let's say more to the point of downright hatred.

I suppose if I began using phrases such as "that you favor", "obsessed", "Christian bigots", or start posting links to silly petitions, that would mean that I'm really Vrede posting under another name? Or if I posted atheist-themed pics, that means I'm Bannination? Maybe if I foul-mouthed my words and called Christians vile names, that would mean I'm Boatrocker?

Get a life. You two have ran most of the other posters off with your hateful backlashes, including some of "your own ilk". Count me as a casualty, I don't really care to converse with the heathen anyway. Good-bye, call me all the childish names you want.

[bannination]

Get a life. You two have ran most of the other posters off with your hateful backlashes, including some of "your own ilk". Count me as a casualty, I don't really care to converse with the heathen anyway. Good-bye, call me all the childish names you want.

Always interesting when a person that hates a group so much that he'd deny the same rights he gives himself and then call other people hateful.

[homerfobe]

It's always good to get home and see the pissers are still bitching about queer rights while calling others names and putting down their religious beliefs in an attempt to justify their idiotic desire to see this country turn into a fucking cesspool. Thanks for keeping this thread going, it's fun to be here.
You claim your interests are in human rights, yet you fly the banner of the faggots and twat twinkies and try to convince others that they are the poor discriminated against victims of the religious right. Bullshit. Let's look at this another way. Being a queer used to be against the law along with incest, pedophilia, and adultery. Now it's perfectly OK to flaunt your filth and disgust publicly in the name of human rights. I'm aware that being against such gross nastiness is soon to be a thing of the past as more and more of the nasty bastards gain 'equal protection' under our laws. One day down the road, incest and sex with children will be tested in the courts as a form of an alternate lifestyle. Ridiculous! you may say. Is it? There's some countries that have legalized incest to a degree, and there are some countries that allow sex with children. One of these countries was one of the first that legalized queer sex. There's even some US states that have relaxed their laws on incest, and have changed their laws on child sex as child abuse and only if it involves a child under the age of 14. One day in the future, some lowlife molester will hire a scumbag lawyer to contest his arrest in court using a claim that the Constitution protected him/her under the pursuit of happiness bullshit.

This sounds farfetched but years ago who would have dreamed that it would be legal for people of the same sex to one day have a legal right to marry? That thought was farfetched too.

So Oreally you have to go take a shower after reading my posts? I suppose that you had rather daydream about some chicken chokers ramming each others ass, or some twat twinkie ramming her arm into another twinkie up to her gullet? Then you got to go and bang the missus a while to relieve your sexual tensions? That's about the gist of faggot on faggot besides the other filth they practice. You can go shower now.

[homerfobe]

Poor homerfobe just doesn't get consent. That's how rapists are, too.

is that supposed to mean? You doping it up again?

[homerfobe]

Waaah, waaah, waaah. Go find your boyfriend to soothe your shattered nerves. Don't let him steal your rainbow coat.