BluesLegend
Diamond Member
So don't move to Wyoming, move to San Francisco and be happy.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
This is what you get when you use courts to force gay marriage on places that don't want it, and force non-essential businesses to either "bake or die".
When your side becomes unreasonable, don't be surprised when the other side does the exact same thing.
You were surprised because you don't know the full histories of the events. Mormons were both perpetrators and victims of civil rights abuses. I used them as example that certain religious groups try to use the public square to tell how people to live and what to do. That battle is still fought in the Utah legislature every year.Certain religious groups in America have trouble understanding they cannot interfere with others' civil liberties.
Mormons, for instance, learned that the hard way in Missouri, Nauvoo Illinois, and the InterMountain West.
I was astounded to see a post trying to paint the early Mormons in Missouri and Illinois as perpetrators of civil rights abuses, then I saw who it was that made that posting.
This is what you get when you use courts to force gay marriage on places that don't want it, and force non-essential businesses to either "bake or die".
When your side becomes unreasonable, don't be surprised when the other side does the exact same thing.
Since you brought "reason" into it...
YOUR SIDE bases its position on a religious text--The Bible--a collection of writings (prose fiction, poetry, tribal records, oral histories, fables and fairy tales), specifically Leviticus, a book of HEBREW TRIBAL CUSTOMS that were practiced by the Levite Tribe. There is a laundry list of "abominations"(shellfish, mixed threads) but YOUR SIDE, picks one and only one to make an issue out of. YOUR SIDE "reasons" that pulling one line of scripture out of historical/cultural context as justifications for their own fears and insecurities makes perfect sense. (just like segregationists did back in the 1960's)
Furthermore, YOUR SIDE believes an invisible man in the sky told them they don't have to bake a cake for the filthy pillow biters and muff divers. YOUR SIDE says they practice a religion based on the teachings of Christ (who never said anything about homosexuals), practicing unconditional love and tolerance, however your actions and attitudes are anything but. Homophobia, like any bigotry, is fear-based. YOUR SIDE believes that teaching children about homosexuality and tolerance might "turn" them gay. How so very "reasonable" of you.
YOUR SIDE wants to ignore SUPREME COURT DECISIONS based on reason and thoughtful review of the law. Although they are happy to applaud the same supreme court when it tells Hobby Lobby they doesn't have to provide proper health care for their female employees.
The rest of us... we understand that sexual preference and gender identity are NOT CHOICES, they are hard-wired personality traits, not genetic, but a function of prenatal brain development and thus to discriminate against people born different would be UN-AMERICAN and not very Christ-like.
OUR SIDE understand GOD made them how they are. And the God we believe in doesn't make mistakes.
We understand that it is very unreasonable to force a left-handed child to write with his or her right hand. Their brain just isn't wired that way.
Since you brought "reason" into it...
The proposed bathroom bill percolating in the Texas Legislature doesn’t do what its supporters say it is supposed to do.
It purports to protect Texans answering nature’s calls from people of the opposite sex. It has a logical flaw, however, because it doesn’t protect them in most of the public restrooms in the state — only the public restrooms in public buildings.
That makes no sense if the state wants to protect people from a clear-and-present danger or an existential threat. Imagine if Texas protected foster children on state property and nowhere else.
If allowing transgender people to choose which stalls to use was dangerous, the state would protect everyone everywhere — in publicly owned and privately owned buildings alike.
SB 6, as currently written, doesn’t do that — which is how you can tell that that’s not its real purpose. What it would do is highlight disdain for transgender people in a public way that might be rewarded by conservative voters at the polls in 2018 and beyond.