I'm Okay With It!: Homosexuals Stand With Countries On Trump's Ban That Throw Them Off Rooftops

[Steve_McGarrett]

Saying homosexuality is a sin according to your own personal religious or ethical viewpoint is hatespeech, violence and completely unacceptable to the LGBT community.

BUT...

throwing the gays off buildings or burning the gays alive makes you a beautiful culture and peaceful religion in which the gays are quick to embrace.


Makes total sense to me.

Apache2 Ubuntu Default Page: It works.m.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/feb/4/lgbt-americans-rage-against-donald-trumps-immigran/

 

[JakeStarkey]

Then you go after the homosexuals later, Steve.

The Board understands.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Saying homosexuality is a sin according to your own personal religious or ethical viewpoint is hatespeech, violence and completely unacceptable to the LGBT community.

BUT...

throwing the gays off buildings or burning the gays alive makes you a beautiful culture and peaceful religion in which the gays are quick to embrace.


Makes total sense to me.

Apache2 Ubuntu Default Page: It works.m.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/feb/4/lgbt-americans-rage-against-donald-trumps-immigran/

Tell the nurse on the floor of your Psych Ward that you're only pretending to take your meds

 

[BULLDOG]

Saying homosexuality is a sin according to your own personal religious or ethical viewpoint is hatespeech, violence and completely unacceptable to the LGBT community.

BUT...

throwing the gays off buildings or burning the gays alive makes you a beautiful culture and peaceful religion in which the gays are quick to embrace.


Makes total sense to me.

Apache2 Ubuntu Default Page: It works.m.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/feb/4/lgbt-americans-rage-against-donald-trumps-immigran/

So all you got, is that you aren't quite as extreme as the terrorists. You might not personally throw a gay person off the roof (there are like minded right wingers who have killed gays just for being gay), but you're perfectly OK with banning their constitutional rights. How enlightened of you.

 

[Silhouette]

So all you got, is that you aren't quite as extreme as the terrorists. You might not personally throw a gay person off the roof (there are like minded right wingers who have killed gays just for being gay), but you're perfectly OK with banning their constitutional rights. How enlightened of you.

What hyperbole! When was the last time we heard of a blue collar worker throwing a gay off the roof here in the US? When was the last time we heard of a muslim extremist gunning a bunch of them down at one of their greasy nightclubs? Oh, that's right...wasn't that just last year in FLA?

Gays don't have constitutional rights more than any other person doing a behavior. Behaviors are regulated by the states, not the federal government. The only exception to this is protection for religion which is intimately lined into the Constitution. No vagueness or ambiguity about it.

In 2016 with Hively v Ivy Tech, the 7th circuit federal court of appeals found that homosexuality is not a protected status under the 1964 Civil Rights Act. And, that to change that would take an Act of Congress. Which isn't going to happen any time soon. FindLaw's United States Seventh Circuit case and opinions.

Deviant sex addiction is one of a number of addictive behaviors that some could call "an immutable orientation!" and make claims to special status. But that isn't fair to the rest of them, is it? Either all addictive orientations get rights or they are simply regulated by the states. The fed does not have the right to weigh in on that. Oddly, the United States v Windsor found that exact same conclusion and reiterated it no less than 56 times in the Windsor opinion. Windsor said in essence that because New York went through agonies and cast a vote to make gay marriage legal, the fed had no right to regulate what New York found in it's social searchings was legal marriage. That knife cuts both ways friend. Applying that logic to Prop 8 in California, Windsor would have had to uphold that gay marriage was illegal in California.

Remember, it's legal for 13 year olds to marry in New Hampshire. So does that mean all states must now marry 13 year olds?

 

[BULLDOG]

So all you got, is that you aren't quite as extreme as the terrorists. You might not personally throw a gay person off the roof (there are like minded right wingers who have killed gays just for being gay), but you're perfectly OK with banning their constitutional rights. How enlightened of you.

What hyperbole! When was the last time we heard of a blue collar worker throwing a gay off the roof here in the US? When was the last time we heard of a muslim extremist gunning a bunch of them down at one of their greasy nightclubs? Oh, that's right...wasn't that just last year in FLA?

Gays don't have constitutional rights more than any other person doing a behavior. Behaviors are regulated by the states, not the federal government. The only exception to this is protection for religion which is intimately lined into the Constitution. No vagueness or ambiguity about it.

In 2016 with Hively v Ivy Tech, the 7th circuit federal court of appeals found that homosexuality is not a protected status under the 1964 Civil Rights Act. And, that to change that would take an Act of Congress. Which isn't going to happen any time soon. FindLaw's United States Seventh Circuit case and opinions.

Deviant sex addiction is one of a number of addictive behaviors that some could call "an immutable orientation!" and make claims to special status. But that isn't fair to the rest of them, is it? Either all addictive orientations get rights or they are simply regulated by the states. The fed does not have the right to weigh in on that. Oddly, the United States v Windsor found that exact same conclusion and reiterated it no less than 56 times in the Windsor opinion. Windsor said in essence that because New York went through agonies and cast a vote to make gay marriage legal, the fed had no right to regulate what New York found in it's social searchings was legal marriage. That knife cuts both ways friend. Applying that logic to Prop 8 in California, Windsor would have had to uphold that gay marriage was illegal in California.

Remember, it's legal for 13 year olds to marry in New Hampshire. So does that mean all states must now marry 13 year olds?

It's true that throwing gays off of roofs isn't the main way they are murdered here, but other ways are just as effective.
Nashville gay man murdered

Nashville gay man murdered / LGBTQ Nation

 

[MindWars]

Citizens in Mosul, Iraq, told outside media the Islamic State (ISIS/ISIL/IS) threw nine alleged homosexuals off a roof Sunday. The news comes after the UN Security Council met about ISIS’ violence against LGBT people and determined the group has executed 30 homosexuals in the past year.

ISIS Throws Nine More Homosexuals Off Roof

 

[Carl in Michigan]

Gays don't have constitutional rights more than any other person doing a behavior. Behaviors are regulated by the states, not the federal government. The only exception to this is protection for religion which is intimately lined into the Constitution. No vagueness or ambiguity about it.

To the Left, saying a politically correct BEHAVIOUR is wrong is somehow worse than throwing their asses off a building.

Stop the world and let me off!

 

[BULLDOG]

View attachment 110883
Citizens in Mosul, Iraq, told outside media the Islamic State (ISIS/ISIL/IS) threw nine alleged homosexuals off a roof Sunday. The news comes after the UN Security Council met about ISIS’ violence against LGBT people and determined the group has executed 30 homosexuals in the past year.

ISIS Throws Nine More Homosexuals Off Roof

30 in one year? Those slackers. Right wing anti gay crazies burned 32 gays in one night.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

View attachment 110883
Citizens in Mosul, Iraq, told outside media the Islamic State (ISIS/ISIL/IS) threw nine alleged homosexuals off a roof Sunday. The news comes after the UN Security Council met about ISIS’ violence against LGBT people and determined the group has executed 30 homosexuals in the past year.

ISIS Throws Nine More Homosexuals Off Roof

And the crazy Left still hates American Christians and loves their Muslim Masters

 

[Carl in Michigan]

So all you got, is that you aren't quite as extreme as the terrorists. You might not personally throw a gay person off the roof (there are like minded right wingers who have killed gays just for being gay), but you're perfectly OK with banning their constitutional rights. How enlightened of you.

What hyperbole! When was the last time we heard of a blue collar worker throwing a gay off the roof here in the US? When was the last time we heard of a muslim extremist gunning a bunch of them down at one of their greasy nightclubs? Oh, that's right...wasn't that just last year in FLA?

Gays don't have constitutional rights more than any other person doing a behavior. Behaviors are regulated by the states, not the federal government. The only exception to this is protection for religion which is intimately lined into the Constitution. No vagueness or ambiguity about it.

In 2016 with Hively v Ivy Tech, the 7th circuit federal court of appeals found that homosexuality is not a protected status under the 1964 Civil Rights Act. And, that to change that would take an Act of Congress. Which isn't going to happen any time soon. FindLaw's United States Seventh Circuit case and opinions.

Deviant sex addiction is one of a number of addictive behaviors that some could call "an immutable orientation!" and make claims to special status. But that isn't fair to the rest of them, is it? Either all addictive orientations get rights or they are simply regulated by the states. The fed does not have the right to weigh in on that. Oddly, the United States v Windsor found that exact same conclusion and reiterated it no less than 56 times in the Windsor opinion. Windsor said in essence that because New York went through agonies and cast a vote to make gay marriage legal, the fed had no right to regulate what New York found in it's social searchings was legal marriage. That knife cuts both ways friend. Applying that logic to Prop 8 in California, Windsor would have had to uphold that gay marriage was illegal in California.

Remember, it's legal for 13 year olds to marry in New Hampshire. So does that mean all states must now marry 13 year olds?

It's true that throwing gays off of roofs isn't the main way they are murdered here, but other ways are just as effective.
Nashville gay man murdered

Nashville gay man murdered / LGBTQ Nation

Do you want to compare notes with all the gay mass murderers?

 

[BULLDOG]

So all you got, is that you aren't quite as extreme as the terrorists. You might not personally throw a gay person off the roof (there are like minded right wingers who have killed gays just for being gay), but you're perfectly OK with banning their constitutional rights. How enlightened of you.

What hyperbole! When was the last time we heard of a blue collar worker throwing a gay off the roof here in the US? When was the last time we heard of a muslim extremist gunning a bunch of them down at one of their greasy nightclubs? Oh, that's right...wasn't that just last year in FLA?

Gays don't have constitutional rights more than any other person doing a behavior. Behaviors are regulated by the states, not the federal government. The only exception to this is protection for religion which is intimately lined into the Constitution. No vagueness or ambiguity about it.

In 2016 with Hively v Ivy Tech, the 7th circuit federal court of appeals found that homosexuality is not a protected status under the 1964 Civil Rights Act. And, that to change that would take an Act of Congress. Which isn't going to happen any time soon. FindLaw's United States Seventh Circuit case and opinions.

Deviant sex addiction is one of a number of addictive behaviors that some could call "an immutable orientation!" and make claims to special status. But that isn't fair to the rest of them, is it? Either all addictive orientations get rights or they are simply regulated by the states. The fed does not have the right to weigh in on that. Oddly, the United States v Windsor found that exact same conclusion and reiterated it no less than 56 times in the Windsor opinion. Windsor said in essence that because New York went through agonies and cast a vote to make gay marriage legal, the fed had no right to regulate what New York found in it's social searchings was legal marriage. That knife cuts both ways friend. Applying that logic to Prop 8 in California, Windsor would have had to uphold that gay marriage was illegal in California.

Remember, it's legal for 13 year olds to marry in New Hampshire. So does that mean all states must now marry 13 year olds?

It's true that throwing gays off of roofs isn't the main way they are murdered here, but other ways are just as effective.
Nashville gay man murdered

Nashville gay man murdered / LGBTQ Nation

Do you want to compare notes with all the gay mass murderers?

If it took them a year for 30, that isn't a mass murder. 30 separate events, but not a mass murder. How many gays have been killed for being gay here?