An Alabama Pastor's Epic Speech against Gay Marriage (Please finish drinking your beverage first)

[NLT]

Now I will start off by saying that his views don't necessarily reflect mine, so save the "you're a bigot" or "you're a homophobe", "or where in the Bible does it say this, that or the other thing" posts. But you must admire the gall and the guts of a Birmingham Pastor named Cedric Hatcher for absolutely taking a taking a Town Hall meeting by storm, throwing political correctness to the wind to voice his mind on the topic of homosexuality.



I tell you what, hoss, Duracell didn't have no batteries on the shelf that morning.

"I know Alabama pay [sic] a lotta money yesterday. I know somebody else who paid a lotta money too: Duracell ain't got no batteries on the shelf this morning. All 'them batteries gone. I tried to find a battery for my radio this morning, couldn't find there [sic] nowhere. I said, "what happened?" They said, "Rev, them done bought all the batteries last night, they celebrated some kind of way, just bought all the batteries." I don't know what they do to batteries, but I mo preach.. I ain't going there. I don't know what they did with all them batteries."

-2:19 through 2:45

 

[bodecea]

Well, you did:

...while all the same trying to legislate his way of life on others as well.

While all the same trying to cherrypick my statements. There are gay rights lobbyists right now in Washington trying to influence policy, hence, trying to use legislation to force tolerance of their ways on the population. Sorry, it holds true.

No, it doesn't.

Making discrimination illegal is not "legislating a gay way of life on others". It's just not.

What are you talking about? I'm referring to those who want to go beyond that, by wanting stop any speech against homosexuality, forcing tolerance on people whether they want to or not. Discrimination is wrong don't misunderstand me, but so is subversion. People can use the law to influence opinion, or even downright suppress it.

What laws have been suggested making speech against homosexuals illegal?

What does "forcing tolerance" even mean?

Ever hear of militant activism?

"Accept us or be destroyed."

Who's been "destroyed"?

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Now I will start off by saying that his views don't necessarily reflect mine, so save the "you're a bigot" or "you're a homophobe", "or where in the Bible does it say this, that or the other thing" posts. But you must admire the gall and the guts of a Birmingham Pastor named Cedric Hatcher for absolutely taking a taking a Town Hall meeting by storm, throwing political correctness to the wind to voice his mind on the topic of homosexuality.



I tell you what, hoss, Duracell didn't have no batteries on the shelf that morning.

"I know Alabama pay [sic] a lotta money yesterday. I know somebody else who paid a lotta money too: Duracell ain't got no batteries on the shelf this morning. All 'them batteries gone. I tried to find a battery for my radio this morning, couldn't find there [sic] nowhere. I said, "what happened?" They said, "Rev, them done bought all the batteries last night, they celebrated some kind of way, just bought all the batteries." I don't know what they do to batteries, but I mo preach.. I ain't going there. I don't know what they did with all them batteries."

-2:19 through 2:45

Let me be the first to thank you...that was a muthafuggan hoot!

It made the homos mad...

Looks like the guy in the OP is the "mad" one.

I'm referring to you and the posse of perverted clowns you carnival with

Why would my "side" be mad? We're winning this fight.

Gay marriage will be legal in all 50 states within the next 6 months. Your "side" is losing ground by the minute.

I know how the story plays out, you lose in the end

 

[TemplarKormac]

And this is exactly why there will always be hatred. Bragging about it will only being about more animosity. Good for them though, equality is equality. Though, I get lectured about hatred, but then there are people who (intentionally or not) make statements which stir the pot.

While gay marriage will be legal, the process is shaking out where those who have religious and moral objections as businessmen and women can refuse to serve homosexuals, via the Hobby Lobby decision. I see this as a stalemate.

I think you'll find that your interpretation of the Hobby Lobby decision isn't going to hold the water that you think it will.

Not to mention, refusing to read my posts in context and instead just trying to find a "gotcha" just makes you look childish.

Like I said in our previous discussion, I have read the decision more times than I care to. That decision has wide ranging implications on Federal law regarding discrimination and religious conviction. People can now freely exempt themselves from laws they deem violate their religious convictions. Solid case.

However, isn't it ironic that when I'm seriously trying to address your posts, you accuse me of not reading your posts "in context"? So do you want me to read them in your context? That's not how it works, sir.

Accusing me of nonsensical logical fallacies, cutting my posts up looking for a "gotcha", etc are not "seriously trying to address my posts".

And as I've said in other threads, the Hobby Lobby is nowhere near as broad a decision as you seem to think. It wouldn't make murder legal if someone claimed it was part of their religion, for example.

I'm not looking for anything except a good debate. As far as Hobby Lobby goes, I'm not talking out of my backside here. The scope is very wide:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/25/u...have-reach-far-beyond-womens-rights.html?_r=0

Religion run amok Hobby Lobby apos s case comes to the Supreme Court - LA Times

And that last sentence is reductio ad absurdum. You resort to extremes to pose an argument. Also, notice how I quoted your post in it's entirety. I multiquote for a reason, because trying to address an essay is a bit hard to do. They have multiple points I want to address, so I quote them point by point. I have no intention of blowing anything out of context.

I used an absurd example to show that your interpretation of the decision ("People can now freely exempt themselves from laws they deem violate their religious convictions. Solid case.") was absurd.

It isn't. You can call it absurd all you want to, but having a general sense of how the law actually works, I can tell you for a fact that this ruling will impact federal law regarding discrimination against homosexuals. Trust me, I know.

The law specifically impacted will be this one:

42 U.S.C. 2000a

(a) Equal access
All persons shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, as defined in this section, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin.

It can be gleaned here that people can and will file for an exemption based on this law, because such compliance would violate their religious beliefs, they will cite the Burwell v Hobby Lobby case as precedent.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Let me be the first to thank you...that was a muthafuggan hoot!

It made the homos mad...

Looks like the guy in the OP is the "mad" one.

I'm referring to you and the posse of perverted clowns you carnival with

Why would my "side" be mad? We're winning this fight.

Gay marriage will be legal in all 50 states within the next 6 months. Your "side" is losing ground by the minute.

I know how the story plays out, you lose in the end

Is that what your crystal ball tells you, oh great Swami?

 

[bodecea]

Let me be the first to thank you...that was a muthafuggan hoot!

It made the homos mad...

Looks like the guy in the OP is the "mad" one.

I'm referring to you and the posse of perverted clowns you carnival with

Why would my "side" be mad? We're winning this fight.

Gay marriage will be legal in all 50 states within the next 6 months. Your "side" is losing ground by the minute.

I know how the story plays out, you lose in the end

Oh really? Doesn't look like it. Or are you more in line with the Islamic States and Russia?

 

[bodecea]

It made the homos mad...

Looks like the guy in the OP is the "mad" one.

I'm referring to you and the posse of perverted clowns you carnival with

Why would my "side" be mad? We're winning this fight.

Gay marriage will be legal in all 50 states within the next 6 months. Your "side" is losing ground by the minute.

I know how the story plays out, you lose in the end

Is that what your crystal ball tells you, oh great Swami?

LGBT rights in the Republic of Ireland - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[theDoctorisIn]

I think you'll find that your interpretation of the Hobby Lobby decision isn't going to hold the water that you think it will.

Not to mention, refusing to read my posts in context and instead just trying to find a "gotcha" just makes you look childish.

Like I said in our previous discussion, I have read the decision more times than I care to. That decision has wide ranging implications on Federal law regarding discrimination and religious conviction. People can now freely exempt themselves from laws they deem violate their religious convictions. Solid case.

However, isn't it ironic that when I'm seriously trying to address your posts, you accuse me of not reading your posts "in context"? So do you want me to read them in your context? That's not how it works, sir.

Accusing me of nonsensical logical fallacies, cutting my posts up looking for a "gotcha", etc are not "seriously trying to address my posts".

And as I've said in other threads, the Hobby Lobby is nowhere near as broad a decision as you seem to think. It wouldn't make murder legal if someone claimed it was part of their religion, for example.

I'm not looking for anything except a good debate. As far as Hobby Lobby goes, I'm not talking out of my backside here. The scope is very wide:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/25/u...have-reach-far-beyond-womens-rights.html?_r=0

Religion run amok Hobby Lobby apos s case comes to the Supreme Court - LA Times

And that last sentence is reductio ad absurdum. You resort to extremes to pose an argument. Also, notice how I quoted your post in it's entirety. I multiquote for a reason, because trying to address an essay is a bit hard to do. They have multiple points I want to address, so I quote them point by point. I have no intention of blowing anything out of context.

I used an absurd example to show that your interpretation of the decision ("People can now freely exempt themselves from laws they deem violate their religious convictions. Solid case.") was absurd.

It isn't. You can call it absurd all you want to, but having a general sense of how the law actually works, I can tell you for a fact that this ruling will impact federal law regarding discrimination against homosexuals. Trust me, I know.

The law specifically impacted will be this one:

42 U.S.C. 2000a

(a) Equal access
All persons shall be entitled to the full and equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages, and accommodations of any place of public accommodation, as defined in this section, without discrimination or segregation on the ground of race, color, religion, or national origin.

It can be gleaned here that people can and will file for an exemption based on this law, because such compliance would violate their religious beliefs, they will cite the Burwell v Hobby Lobby case as precedent.

Filing an "exemption" is not the same as receiving one.

And please don't try to act like an expert on the law. I know you're not a lawyer, you're no more an expert on how the law works than any of us are.

 

[NLT]

You don't seem to understand the dynamics in play here. You're trying to warp the conversation into making gay people into "bigots" against Christianity, and that position isn't supported by reality.

When was the last time a gay person tried to make it illegal for Christians to get married?

BFS, the gay agenda is full on anti-christan. If they could get religion banned they would.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Looks like the guy in the OP is the "mad" one.

I'm referring to you and the posse of perverted clowns you carnival with

Why would my "side" be mad? We're winning this fight.

Gay marriage will be legal in all 50 states within the next 6 months. Your "side" is losing ground by the minute.

I know how the story plays out, you lose in the end

Is that what your crystal ball tells you, oh great Swami?

LGBT rights in the Republic of Ireland - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

It's a mistake where ever the perversion is coddled, just look at Sodom and Gomorrah

 

[theDoctorisIn]

You don't seem to understand the dynamics in play here. You're trying to warp the conversation into making gay people into "bigots" against Christianity, and that position isn't supported by reality.

When was the last time a gay person tried to make it illegal for Christians to get married?

BFS, the gay agenda is full on anti-christan. If they could get religion banned they would.

Most of the gay people I know are Christian.

 

[bodecea]

I'm referring to you and the posse of perverted clowns you carnival with

Why would my "side" be mad? We're winning this fight.

Gay marriage will be legal in all 50 states within the next 6 months. Your "side" is losing ground by the minute.

I know how the story plays out, you lose in the end

Is that what your crystal ball tells you, oh great Swami?

LGBT rights in the Republic of Ireland - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

It's a mistake where ever the perversion is coddled, just look at Sodom and Gomorrah

You mean that story where the "good guy" offers his virgin daughters to the crowd so they'd just leave him alone? And then his wife is killed for looking back at all the commotion?

That story?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Anyone disagreeing with this man is a bigoted racist.

What did he say that was racist? He is sick of the gay agenda, I dont blame him one bit. For your information I am not a Christian.

Gay Americans seeking their comprehensive civil rights and defending themselves from discrimination does not constitute an 'agenda.'

If you're tired of 'hearing about it' then admonish state and local lawmakers to stop enacting or proposing measures hostile to gay Americans, such as Amendment 3 in Utah.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

You don't seem to understand the dynamics in play here. You're trying to warp the conversation into making gay people into "bigots" against Christianity, and that position isn't supported by reality.

When was the last time a gay person tried to make it illegal for Christians to get married?

BFS, the gay agenda is full on anti-christan. If they could get religion banned they would.

Most of the gay people I know are Christian.

BAHAHAHAHAHAHA you deal in oxymorons

 

[bodecea]

You don't seem to understand the dynamics in play here. You're trying to warp the conversation into making gay people into "bigots" against Christianity, and that position isn't supported by reality.

When was the last time a gay person tried to make it illegal for Christians to get married?

BFS, the gay agenda is full on anti-christan. If they could get religion banned they would.

Most of the gay people I know are Christian.

Our first marriage, in 1990, was in a Christian church with a minister, etc.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Why would my "side" be mad? We're winning this fight.

Gay marriage will be legal in all 50 states within the next 6 months. Your "side" is losing ground by the minute.

I know how the story plays out, you lose in the end

Is that what your crystal ball tells you, oh great Swami?

LGBT rights in the Republic of Ireland - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

It's a mistake where ever the perversion is coddled, just look at Sodom and Gomorrah

You mean that story where the "good guy" offers his virgin daughters to the crowd so they'd just leave him alone? And then his wife is killed for looking back at all the commotion?

That story?

Yeah the one where the perverts tried to rape God's angel...then paid the price

 

[bodecea]

You don't seem to understand the dynamics in play here. You're trying to warp the conversation into making gay people into "bigots" against Christianity, and that position isn't supported by reality.

When was the last time a gay person tried to make it illegal for Christians to get married?

BFS, the gay agenda is full on anti-christan. If they could get religion banned they would.

Most of the gay people I know are Christian.

BAHAHAHAHAHAHA you deal in oxymorons

What he says is true, whether you like it or not.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

You don't seem to understand the dynamics in play here. You're trying to warp the conversation into making gay people into "bigots" against Christianity, and that position isn't supported by reality.

When was the last time a gay person tried to make it illegal for Christians to get married?

BFS, the gay agenda is full on anti-christan. If they could get religion banned they would.

Most of the gay people I know are Christian.

Our first marriage, in 1990, was in a Christian church with a minister, etc.

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA you mean pretend marriage in a pretend Christian "church"

 

[rightwinger]

You don't seem to understand the dynamics in play here. You're trying to warp the conversation into making gay people into "bigots" against Christianity, and that position isn't supported by reality.

When was the last time a gay person tried to make it illegal for Christians to get married?

BFS, the gay agenda is full on anti-christan. If they could get religion banned they would.

Actually, they just want the phony religious to leave them alone

 

[rightwinger]

You don't seem to understand the dynamics in play here. You're trying to warp the conversation into making gay people into "bigots" against Christianity, and that position isn't supported by reality.

When was the last time a gay person tried to make it illegal for Christians to get married?

BFS, the gay agenda is full on anti-christan. If they could get religion banned they would.

Most of the gay people I know are Christian.

Our first marriage, in 1990, was in a Christian church with a minister, etc.

BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA you mean pretend marriage in a pretend Christian "church"

All churches are pretend

Let's pretend there is a magic man who lives in the sky