Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Now you' re just mincing words. Why does not the transgender need to "tolerate" my beliefs, that I cannot in good conscience go along with him thinking he's a woman? It seems in your warped, twisted little world, "tolerance" only goes one way. Being forced to refer to him in a female context isn't tolerance, it's being forced to accept it.
And all you on the demonic Left LOVE to use force, don't you?
What is being forced on you? What changes in YOUR belief system if you have to call her a her? Do you still disagree with her choices? Yes. That hasn't changed has it? You still get to be all oogied out by her, you just have to call her a her. Nothing about what you think or believe is changed by your having to call her a her is it? No.
Now you're just being stupid. Forcing people to profess something they don't believe is forcing your beliefs on them. This is how evil you people are, being guilty of the VERY CRIMES you insist everyone else is guilty of. You don't want tolerance, you demand unmitigated acquiescence to your agenda. You people are bigots and assholes, and with your circular logic, you perpetuate on others what you claimed they perpetuated on you. Blind and depraved! How will you escape eternal judgement?
You think yourself a Christian right? I don't believe you are. Do you think I have the right to walk around the workplace and say you aren't a Christian even though you believe you are?
I might hold the belief that you aren't a Christian, but I certainly can't walk around work and say it. I can say it to people outside of work (but I might not want to post it on my Facebook...employers have been know to look there) but it is not appropriate behavior for the workplace is it?
I might hold all kinds of "beliefs" about the people I work with, but saying them out loud can get me fired. Why? Because you don't have an absolute right to that job. You follow the rules of the workplace. It is not the government forcing anything on you.
Oh, good, then you believe that the workplace should be laisses-faire and people should be allowed to express what they believe and not be forced to express something they don't believe.
Oh, that's NOT what you're saying?
What are you saying then.....only YOU should have that right?
No, you seem to think only you have that right. I'm saying that if I were to walk around the workplace proclaiming that despite you thinking you're a Christian, you aren't a "real" one, that I would get a talking to from HR. Do you agree that would be the case? That's exactly what you want to do with the transgendered individual. She believes she is a woman just as much as you believe you are a Christian, yes? How come I can't go around calling you not a Christian, but you want to be able to walk around and say she's not a woman?
That's exactly what you want to do with the transgendered individual.
If you put him on ignore, that's where they stay. If you reply, then I can see the ignorant drivel he posts.Welcome to keep your fag-hating thoughts in the closet, where they belong.
You simply can't take seriously someone who continually equates gays to pedophiles. He and Silhouette are cut from the same cloth...and equally deserving of being ignored.
Because it's not fucking relevant. Just because grown men fuck teenage girls doesn't mean we base their civil rights on said fact.If you put him on ignore, that's where they stay. If you reply, then I can see the ignorant drivel he posts.Welcome to keep your fag-hating thoughts in the closet, where they belong.
You simply can't take seriously someone who continually equates gays to pedophiles. He and Silhouette are cut from the same cloth...and equally deserving of being ignored.
Many gay men do have a range of attraction that includes teenage boys, aka pederasty. Why is this not up for discussion?
It's much better than that: National Maps - MEUSAI think this is the most up to date...I'd say the "agenda" is working.
It's moving so quickly...it's a new state every week practically. I do know it's well over 60% of the country now.
Wow, it's like a popular movement, right?
Only it isn't a popular movement, is it? Because you're not winning hearts and minds, you're using hack ideologue judges to overturn popularly passed laws.
So you're just making it seem like a popular wave of support for queer marriage even though you secretly know it isn't. Right?
Hint for you, if the boss says call her a toaster, do it or get another fucking job!What is being forced on you? What changes in YOUR belief system if you have to call her a her? Do you still disagree with her choices? Yes. That hasn't changed has it? You still get to be all oogied out by her, you just have to call her a her. Nothing about what you think or believe is changed by your having to call her a her is it? No.
Now you're just being stupid. Forcing people to profess something they don't believe is forcing your beliefs on them. This is how evil you people are, being guilty of the VERY CRIMES you insist everyone else is guilty of. You don't want tolerance, you demand unmitigated acquiescence to your agenda. You people are bigots and assholes, and with your circular logic, you perpetuate on others what you claimed they perpetuated on you. Blind and depraved! How will you escape eternal judgement?
You think yourself a Christian right? I don't believe you are. Do you think I have the right to walk around the workplace and say you aren't a Christian even though you believe you are?
I might hold the belief that you aren't a Christian, but I certainly can't walk around work and say it. I can say it to people outside of work (but I might not want to post it on my Facebook...employers have been know to look there) but it is not appropriate behavior for the workplace is it?
I might hold all kinds of "beliefs" about the people I work with, but saying them out loud can get me fired. Why? Because you don't have an absolute right to that job. You follow the rules of the workplace. It is not the government forcing anything on you.
Oh, good, then you believe that the workplace should be laisses-faire and people should be allowed to express what they believe and not be forced to express something they don't believe.
Oh, that's NOT what you're saying?
What are you saying then.....only YOU should have that right?
No, you seem to think only you have that right. I'm saying that if I were to walk around the workplace proclaiming that despite you thinking you're a Christian, you aren't a "real" one, that I would get a talking to from HR. Do you agree that would be the case? That's exactly what you want to do with the transgendered individual. She believes she is a woman just as much as you believe you are a Christian, yes? How come I can't go around calling you not a Christian, but you want to be able to walk around and say she's not a woman?
That's exactly what you want to do with the transgendered individual.
So he believes that she's a woman, and that is perfectly FINE. If he believed she was a toaster... what would that be?
(Now ya see why she ran to ignore... she's helpless.)
If you put him on ignore, that's where they stay. If you reply, then I can see the ignorant drivel he posts.Welcome to keep your fag-hating thoughts in the closet, where they belong.
You simply can't take seriously someone who continually equates gays to pedophiles. He and Silhouette are cut from the same cloth...and equally deserving of being ignored.
Many gay men do have a range of attraction that includes teenage boys, aka pederasty. Why is this not up for discussion?
Even if true, and it isn't, it doesn't fucking matter.If you put him on ignore, that's where they stay. If you reply, then I can see the ignorant drivel he posts.Welcome to keep your fag-hating thoughts in the closet, where they belong.
You simply can't take seriously someone who continually equates gays to pedophiles. He and Silhouette are cut from the same cloth...and equally deserving of being ignored.
Many gay men do have a range of attraction that includes teenage boys, aka pederasty. Why is this not up for discussion?
Disproportionately higher percentages of Gay Men have a disposition for pederasty or its more popular accolade pedophilia - Gay men are responsible for about 33/100 of all child molestation cases yet comprise on 3/100 [about 3%] of the general population. That's 1/3 of child molestation cases perpetrated by Gays -
If you put him on ignore, that's where they stay. If you reply, then I can see the ignorant drivel he posts.Welcome to keep your fag-hating thoughts in the closet, where they belong.
You simply can't take seriously someone who continually equates gays to pedophiles. He and Silhouette are cut from the same cloth...and equally deserving of being ignored.
Many gay men do have a range of attraction that includes teenage boys, aka pederasty. Why is this not up for discussion?
Total crap. Utterly total crap. You believe lies little man, as expected.If you put him on ignore, that's where they stay. If you reply, then I can see the ignorant drivel he posts.Welcome to keep your fag-hating thoughts in the closet, where they belong.
You simply can't take seriously someone who continually equates gays to pedophiles. He and Silhouette are cut from the same cloth...and equally deserving of being ignored.
Many gay men do have a range of attraction that includes teenage boys, aka pederasty. Why is this not up for discussion?
Oh it goes WELL beyond that. The Advocacy to Normalize Sexual Abnormality BEGAN in the US with the Eugenics movement wherein 'studies' were done on THOUSANDS of male infants and toddlers, to 'test' their means to achieve sexual orgasm... .
These studies were conducted by a homosexual; a founding member NAMBLA (North American Man-Boy Love Association)... One Dr. Alfred Kinsey.
These studies produced as a result THOUSANDS of homosexuals... by imprinting on those infants and toddlers the base information that sexual gratification comes from people of Dr. Kinsey's gender; the man who first initiated or 'triggered' the flood of hormones common to sexual cravings.
Sadly, none of THAT made it into "Dr." Kinsey's research...
Beside NAMBLA, Dr. Kinsey is the Founder of "The Kinsey Institute" which also just happens to be where a large percentage of those sitting on the APA board are or have been employed.
Conspiracy?
LOL! Dam' straight it is... and its goal is the legalization of the adult pursuit of children for sexual gratification.
If you put him on ignore, that's where they stay. If you reply, then I can see the ignorant drivel he posts.Welcome to keep your fag-hating thoughts in the closet, where they belong.
You simply can't take seriously someone who continually equates gays to pedophiles. He and Silhouette are cut from the same cloth...and equally deserving of being ignored.
Many gay men do have a range of attraction that includes teenage boys, aka pederasty. Why is this not up for discussion?
Disproportionately higher percentages of Gay Men have a disposition for pederasty or its more popular accolade pedophilia - Gay men are responsible for about 33/100 of all child molestation cases yet comprise on 3/100 [about 3%] of the general population. That's 1/3 of child molestation cases perpetrated by Gays -
Nearly all marriages are predicated on the desire to have children eventually, so much so as to render negligible those few marriages forged in an agreement to forgo children.
Says who? And who says that gays and lesbians can't have children? A lesbian couple I know is working on their second kid.
Worse, no one is required to have children or be able to have them to get married. Why then would we exempt gays from marriage for failing to meet a standard that doesn't exist, exempting all straights, and applying it only to gays?
It makes absolutely no sense.
who says that gays and lesbians can't have children? A lesbian couple I know is working on their second kid.
It's not "their" Child - there's a sperm donor involved
Sure there is. And in any straight couple, if one member was infertile and they used a sperm donor for fertilization, it would be the couple's kid. Its no different for gays and lesbians. Or anyone who uses a surrogate. Or anyone who adopts.
Yes , but not the same as producing a child that bears your genes - that is the natural product of your lineage And just for the record -I applaud those Lesbian couples who have been able to give a home and something resembling a family to orphans -while I pity those poor kids who find themselves in the hands of Gay men.
Residents of the states are first and foremost citizens of the United States, and their fundamental rights as citizens are safeguarded by the Constitution, where the laws of states are subordinate to that; one does not forfeit his civil rights merely as a consequence of his state of residence, nor do the states have the authority to decide who will or will not have his civil rights, citizens' rights are not subject to majority rule.That's a good point, and one I've voiced before. There really is no such thing as "gay marriage".
Sure there is. Just go to the 36 of 50 States where they are performed every day.
They can go through the motions and they can play make believe, but true marriage is a spiritual union that can only occur between a man and a woman.
And you are more than welcome to whatever subjective interpretation of marriage you wish. No one really cares. What gays and lesbians are interested in is legal recognition for their marriage.
And in the majority of the nation, they have it.
Congratulations!
Oh wait, you didn't actually win the people over to the idea, you had hack Leftist judges find rights that don't exist in the Constitution to overturn popularly passed state laws. Kind of a hollow victory. It's almost like when the communists violently took over in Russia and China and then claimed they had the popular support of the people. You couldn't win by convincing people, so you used force.
That's not quite the American way, but whatever it takes for you to have gay butt sex, right?
Consequently, when the states enact laws repugnant to the Constitution – such as measures denying same-sex couples access to marriage law they're eligible to participate in – the courts are authorized by Articles III and VI of the Federal Constitution to invalidate those measures, as the states are solely responsible for their measures being overturned.
Where does the Constitution make marrying whoever one wants a civil right? Where in human history has that EVER been a right?
I await your response.
Republicans ... putting less emphasis on fighting same-sex marriage. Might have something to do with the libertarian branch that puts the economy above what people do in the bedroom on their list of priorities.
Isn't it wonderful how those suffering severe intellectual limitations due to their use of a perversion of human reasoning, begin their public statement by speaking of public matters, Marriage: The joining of one man and one woman... , then merge that notion with 'what people do in their bedrooms' , which is an entirely private matter.
Do you allow Pigs and Dogs to marry - They're harmless swine and canine . I grudgingly admit that homosexuals are are degenerate members of the Human Race that should be held to higher standards than the pig that wallows in shit - It does me or anyone else little harm for Pigs to have mock marriages - and it also does no harm to allow perverts to have faux marriages as well - just get out of sane peoples faces if that's how you insist on living your twisted little lives.
That's a good point, and one I've voiced before. There really is no such thing as "gay marriage". They can go through the motions and they can play make believe, but true marriage is a spiritual union that can only occur between a man and a woman. The materialist Left disregards the spiritual aspect or that marriage involves a 3rd party, that is God. They go for surface appearances and think they've achieved parity with the real thing.
You're right that there is no gay marriage, but not for the reasons you believe. There is only marriage. In more than half the states, marriage means that same sex loving partners can also civilly marry. Your belief about what constitutes a "real" marriage is irrelevant. We still get issued the same exact marriage license as those you believe have a "real" marriage and we still get all the same rights, benefits and privileges that are associated with a civil marriage license.
Two fags being married will never be the same as my real marriage no matter how badly they get their panties in a wad about it.
The "fags" don't care what you believe...as long as we're treated equally under the law. In 36 states and counting we are. Hmmmm, whose "panties" are in a wad I wonder?
Wrong. Repeating a lie over and over doesn't make it true. You were always treated equally under the law. State marriage laws allowed any person to marry any other unrelated person of the opposite sex, regardless of your race, religion, or even sexual orientation. That's called equal protection under the law.
What you now claim is that you don't have equal rights until you can marry whoever you want, a concept that has no legal precedent in this country or in any civilization in human history.
So your claim of being treated with disparity is pure bullshit.
Obviously most of this board has turned its back on you little fella - you are irrelevant and have had nothing useful to add, other than canned rhetoric which you continuously rephrase and repost. Do yourself a favor phallic fella - stop embarrassing yourself and STFU - this is a grownup conversation.I'm so glad you little faggot-haters have this forum, and others like it, because the rest of society has grown up and turned their backs on you. Guess who is headed for the closet now my little homophobes? It ain't the fags...
[
BRILLIANT example of a disordered mind... a perversion of human reasoning, .
Oh, but I DO have to accept your deviant, immoral lifestyle. In that situation, I would have to refer to a man as a woman even though my faith informs me that a man cannot become a woman, that we are created male and female. That's forcing your beliefs onto others. It's amazing how you see it when it happens to you, but not when you do it to others.It doesn't seem you are being forced to accept anything.
Really? I'm not forced to accept anything?
So let's say at my job Joe decides he's really Jolene and even has an operation where his genitals are mutilated. He comes back to work and everyone starts calling him Jolene, referring to him as a woman, and using female pronouns to describe him. Let's say I decided not to go along with the charade and continued calling him by his real name, referring to him as a "he" and insisted he's a man. Let's say I'm not even pushy about it, but when it comes up in conversation, everyone notices that I won't acknowledge that he became a she.
And this isn't just hypothetical, it's becoming more than a rare occurrence in work places.
You see, I have rights that are protected by the U.S. Constitution, rights to practice what I believe religiously, that a man cannot turn into a woman. But in this crazy, Leftist world we live in, my constitutional rights will be trumped by somebody else's contrived "right" not to be offended by my beliefs. It would be me being hauled into HR for a lecture, it would be me with my job being threatened because I refuse to go along with somebody else's illusion.
So tell me again how people like me won't be forced to accept the homo-transgender culture?
You don't have a "right" to that job if you can't follow the rules or if you create a hostile work environment. That's on YOU, not the person you're an asshole to.
So I AM being forced to accept your lifestyle. Got it. Thanks for admitting you were lying.
You don't have to "accept" anything. Acceptance equals agreement and you don't have to agree. You do have to tolerate. We all have to tolerate things in our lives we don't agree with...in employment especially. If you work for someone else, you're going to be required to do something you don't agree with, you still do it if you want to continue to be employed there, yes? This is no different.
That's called Leftist hypocrisy.
If only projection were deadly we couldn't dig the mass-graves fast enough.[
BRILLIANT example of a disordered mind... a perversion of human reasoning, .
That describes every one of your posts.
The "fags" don't care what you believe...as long as we're treated equally under the law. In 36 states and counting we are. Hmmmm, whose "panties" are in a wad I wonder?
Yeah.. but here's the problem with THAT.
95% of those 36 States, used subjective jurists to overturn THE LAW... .
t.
