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.
Since when have they ever been equal? You act as if their rights are superior to mine. In that instance, they never will be equal. Case in point. Oh for two buddy.
All men are created equal, that was said and written in 1776 at the founding of the USA.
Rights, inherently, are for all people. When there is a conflict one part simply isn't a right, like the right to free speech with the ability to hurt people through libel, treason and so on, they simply aren't part of rights because they hurt others.
Gay people's rights aren't superior, they can do what they like as long as it doesn't hurt others, two gay people marrying doesn't hurt you at all. Hence why it's a right.
Since when have they ever been equal? You act as if their rights are superior to mine. In that instance, they never will be equal. Case in point. Oh for two buddy.
All men are created equal, that was said and written in 1776 at the founding of the USA.
Rights, inherently, are for all people. When there is a conflict one part simply isn't a right, like the right to free speech with the ability to hurt people through libel, treason and so on, they simply aren't part of rights because they hurt others.
Gay people's rights aren't superior, they can do what they like as long as it doesn't hurt others, two gay people marrying doesn't hurt you at all. Hence why it's a right.
Apparently, two married gay people can destroy my business when I choose to express my beliefs in not serving them. There's not any enumerated rights about destroying someone's livelihood for acting on their faith now is there?
Yes, they can do what they want, without hurting others. So why don't they? If rights are for all people, then why can't these proprietors have a right to their beliefs and run their business too?[/QUOTE]
This is how stupid Republicans are. And evidently Republican business men and women are just as stupid.
You don't loudly proclaim God is my savior and gays are going to hell and oh by the way I run a business that won't serve gays of blacks or whatever. If you want to be a businessman, then run a business. You want to be a moral crusader, get a sign and march.
If a business person isn't smart enough to let a customer know that there needs won't be met by the business they are soliciting, without shouting out "I don't serve gays, blacks, or whatever" then they are probably to stupid to run a business for very long.
Apparently, two married gay people can destroy my business when I choose to express my beliefs in not serving them. There's not any enumerated rights about destroying someone's livelihood for acting on their faith now is there?
Yes, they can do what they want, without hurting others. So why don't they? If rights are for all people, then why can't these proprietors have a right to their beliefs and run their business too?
All his study ended up showing was that intact families are better than divorced families.
In other words, a study from the Department of No Shit Sherlock.
200 researchers respond to Regnerus paper
STATEMENT FROM THE CHAIR REGARDING PROFESSOR REGNERUS
the conclusions he draws from his study of gay parenting are fundamentally flawed on conceptual and methodological grounds
Professor)Darren)E.)Sherkats)Audit)of)the)Severely)Flawed)Regnerus)Paper
His study is garbage and treated by such by the scientific community.
Sure, if you call freedomtomarry.org or familyinequality.wordpress.com "the scientific community."
The web page isn't the source, just the vehicle.
Apparently, two married gay people can destroy my business when I choose to express my beliefs in not serving them. There's not any enumerated rights about destroying someone's livelihood for acting on their faith now is there?
Yes, they can do what they want, without hurting others. So why don't they? If rights are for all people, then why can't these proprietors have a right to their beliefs and run their business too?
Because PC is a one-way street, and anyone who doesn't follow the rules is a target.
.
All his study ended up showing was that intact families are better than divorced families.
In other words, a study from the Department of No Shit Sherlock.
200 researchers respond to Regnerus paper
STATEMENT FROM THE CHAIR REGARDING PROFESSOR REGNERUS
the conclusions he draws from his study of gay parenting are fundamentally flawed on conceptual and methodological grounds
Professor)Darren)E.)Sherkats)Audit)of)the)Severely)Flawed)Regnerus)Paper
His study is garbage and treated by such by the scientific community.
Sure, if you call freedomtomarry.org or familyinequality.wordpress.com "the scientific community."
Templar, don't know whether it was intentional or not ,but your quote has statements from myself and Seawytch switched around - you credited my knowledgable post to it [her] and her tripe to me .
Since when have they ever been equal? You act as if their rights are superior to mine. In that instance, they never will be equal. Case in point. Oh for two buddy.
All men are created equal, that was said and written in 1776 at the founding of the USA.
Rights, inherently, are for all people. When there is a conflict one part simply isn't a right, like the right to free speech with the ability to hurt people through libel, treason and so on, they simply aren't part of rights because they hurt others.
Gay people's rights aren't superior, they can do what they like as long as it doesn't hurt others, two gay people marrying doesn't hurt you at all. Hence why it's a right.
Apparently, two married gay people can destroy my business when I choose to express my beliefs in not serving them. There's not any enumerated rights about destroying someone's livelihood for acting on their faith now is there?
Yes, they can do what they want, without hurting others. So why don't they? If rights are for all people, then why can't these proprietors have a right to their beliefs and run their business too?
Apparently, two married gay people can destroy my business when I choose to express my beliefs in not serving them. There's not any enumerated rights about destroying someone's livelihood for acting on their faith now is there?
Yes, they can do what they want, without hurting others. So why don't they? If rights are for all people, then why can't these proprietors have a right to their beliefs and run their business too?
Because PC is a one-way street, and anyone who doesn't follow the rules is a target.
.
I wonder....do you find TK's argument compelling?
Yet you can't point out anyone not influenced by political bias. Nobody outside the APA - which is not a scientific organization by the way - but a politicized one. In fact the only so called "debunking" was not based on any factual evidence, but misguided sense of social conscience, and ideological agenda.
Nobody in the scientific community or the the political arena was able to prove that his results were any less valid than that of Hooker or Kinsey - both of whom have been proven a laughing stock and total charlatans . Not a single MF fact he presented can be or ever will be disproven . YOu can not disprove Good SCience but only try to hide the truth behind a facade of false noise . The Regenrus Study is valid - never has been proven otherwise and when you can demonstrate that 2+2= 3 and not 4 than perhaps you'll be able to do something about altering reality - in the interim STFU .
All his study ended up showing was that intact families are better than divorced families.
In other words, a study from the Department of No Shit Sherlock.
200 researchers respond to Regnerus paper
STATEMENT FROM THE CHAIR REGARDING PROFESSOR REGNERUS
the conclusions he draws from his study of gay parenting are fundamentally flawed on conceptual and methodological grounds
Professor)Darren)E.)Sherkat’s)Audit)of)the)“Severely)Flawed”Regnerus)Paper
His study is garbage and treated by such by the scientific community.
Getting down to Basics :
Regnerus set out to answer the question of whether children who have parents in a gay relationship experience disadvantages in comparison to children raised by their biological, heterosexual parents. The answer, appears to be a resounding yes, despite the socio-facist gay backlash against reality. Children with a parent in a same-sex relationship “underperform” in almost every category.
Less than 2 percent of children from intact, biological families reported sexual abuse , but that figure for children of gay couples is 23 percent. This trend mirrors the statistics pointed out on previous threads from various studies re: homosexuals tendencies towards pedophillia and that gays molest children an an astoundingly higher rate than people not sufferring from their sexual dysphoria.
14 percent of children from same-sex couples have been in foster care, compared with around 2 percent of the General population .
Arrest, drug use, and welfare and unemployment rates were all significantly higher among children from gay parents.
Oh, I dunno, 888 posts before this one, and I bet that nothing on this thread is going to make gay people less gay or straight people less straight.
Anyone here feeling more of less gay since having read this thread? More or less straight?
I, mean, either you're gay or you're not. So, whatever.
Because PC is a one-way street, and anyone who doesn't follow the rules is a target.
.
I wonder....do you find TK's argument compelling?
I don't know about Mac, but I'm sure glad we "targeted" the bigots...
When Religious Liberty Was Used To Justify Racism Instead Of Homophobia
All his study ended up showing was that intact families are better than divorced families.
In other words, a study from the Department of No Shit Sherlock.
200 researchers respond to Regnerus paper
STATEMENT FROM THE CHAIR REGARDING PROFESSOR REGNERUS
the conclusions he draws from his study of gay parenting are fundamentally flawed on conceptual and methodological grounds
Professor)Darren)E.)Sherkats)Audit)of)the)Severely)Flawed)Regnerus)Paper
His study is garbage and treated by such by the scientific community.
Getting down to Basics :
Regnerus set out to answer the question of whether children who have parents in a gay relationship experience disadvantages in comparison to children raised by their biological, heterosexual parents. The answer, appears to be a resounding yes, despite the socio-facist gay backlash against reality. Children with a parent in a same-sex relationship underperform in almost every category.
Less than 2 percent of children from intact, biological families reported sexual abuse , but that figure for children of gay couples is 23 percent. This trend mirrors the statistics pointed out on previous threads from various studies re: homosexuals tendencies towards pedophillia and that gays molest children an an astoundingly higher rate than people not sufferring from their sexual dysphoria.
14 percent of children from same-sex couples have been in foster care, compared with around 2 percent of the General population .
Arrest, drug use, and welfare and unemployment rates were all significantly higher among children from gay parents.
Why would you keep posting from a debunked study? You can repeat his flawed conclusions all you want to, but they're still flawed.
Apparently, two married gay people can destroy my business when I choose to express my beliefs in not serving them. There's not any enumerated rights about destroying someone's livelihood for acting on their faith now is there?
Yes, they can do what they want, without hurting others. So why don't they? If rights are for all people, then why can't these proprietors have a right to their beliefs and run their business too?
I wonder....do you find TK's argument compelling?
I don't know about Mac, but I'm sure glad we "targeted" the bigots...
When Religious Liberty Was Used To Justify Racism Instead Of Homophobia
[MENTION=32973]LoneLaugher[/MENTION], you continue to post directly to me, you continue to ask me direct questions, even though I have you on ignore. I wish you would stop. I admit it's not a big deal, but it's creepy, a little like being stalked. So, again, I wish you would stop. I also wish I could make it so that you can't see my posts. Please. Thanks. Last try.
[MENTION=24452]Seawytch[/MENTION], I'll try to make this as clear as I can, and I sincerely don't understand why this needs to be so difficult to grasp:
I want bigots (like those who someone based on that person's sexual orientation or skin color) beaten soundly, organically and naturally, in the court of public opinion. Within the culture. That, to me, is the best, longest-lasting (and, if I may, "most American") way to do it. Just punishing people or screaming "racist" or "homophobe" only increases animosity and does not move us forward.
I want to know who the bigots are, where they are, what they are thinking, and (perhaps most importantly) who agrees with them. Then, when they exercise their bigotry, it gives me the opportunity to (a) shine a light on them for all to see and (b) engage them in conversation. Heavy lifting, yes. But that's how you change a culture.
I don't know how much more clear I can make it than that.
Now, you can pretend that I'm a bigot because it helps you make your case, but lying to make a point really doesn't make the point, does it?
.
I don't know about Mac, but I'm sure glad we "targeted" the bigots...
When ‘Religious Liberty’ Was Used To Justify Racism Instead Of Homophobia
[MENTION=32973]LoneLaugher[/MENTION], you continue to post directly to me, you continue to ask me direct questions, even though I have you on ignore. I wish you would stop. I admit it's not a big deal, but it's creepy, a little like being stalked. So, again, I wish you would stop. I also wish I could make it so that you can't see my posts. Please. Thanks. Last try.
[MENTION=24452]Seawytch[/MENTION], I'll try to make this as clear as I can, and I sincerely don't understand why this needs to be so difficult to grasp:
I want bigots (like those who someone based on that person's sexual orientation or skin color) beaten soundly, organically and naturally, in the court of public opinion. Within the culture. That, to me, is the best, longest-lasting (and, if I may, "most American") way to do it. Just punishing people or screaming "racist" or "homophobe" only increases animosity and does not move us forward.
I want to know who the bigots are, where they are, what they are thinking, and (perhaps most importantly) who agrees with them. Then, when they exercise their bigotry, it gives me the opportunity to (a) shine a light on them for all to see and (b) engage them in conversation. Heavy lifting, yes. But that's how you change a culture.
I don't know how much more clear I can make it than that.
Now, you can pretend that I'm a bigot because it helps you make your case, but lying to make a point really doesn't make the point, does it?
.
You're one of those "I'm against all public accommodation laws", kind of fellas right? Well, I'm sorry, but you're in the very definite minority in the country. Most people don't believe you should be able to refuse to serve a Denny's Scramble to Muslim family, refuse to let the black folks stay at your hotel or even refuse to bake the gay wedding cake (but are willing to bake a DOG wedding cake)...Which is why there isn't legislation to repeal ALL public accommodation laws and only bigoted legislation targeting gays and why the legislation targeting gays is only passing in places like Mississippi.
Your homophobia is tiresome, and you've lost the war. There simple aren't enough children with votes like you left anymore to pass your discrimination and have it hold up in court. It's dead Jim, move along to another fear that keeps you up at night please.Oh, I dunno, 888 posts before this one, and I bet that nothing on this thread is going to make gay people less gay or straight people less straight.
Anyone here feeling more of less gay since having read this thread? More or less straight?
I, mean, either you're gay or you're not. So, whatever.
It's not a matter of altering sexual orientation, that can be done but only after extensive ex-gay therapy . It's a matter of exposing the deliberate misinformation put out by the Liberal-Progressive Socio-Facist and Gay political machine, misinformation more properly termed propaganda and brain washing.
Twisting the meaning does not help your cause. And it is just a cause.All men are created equal, that was said and written in 1776 at the founding of the USA.
Rights, inherently, are for all people. When there is a conflict one part simply isn't a right, like the right to free speech with the ability to hurt people through libel, treason and so on, they simply aren't part of rights because they hurt others.
Gay people's rights aren't superior, they can do what they like as long as it doesn't hurt others, two gay people marrying doesn't hurt you at all. Hence why it's a right.
Apparently, two married gay people can destroy my business when I choose to express my beliefs in not serving them. There's not any enumerated rights about destroying someone's livelihood for acting on their faith now is there?
Yes, they can do what they want, without hurting others. So why don't they? If rights are for all people, then why can't these proprietors have a right to their beliefs and run their business too?
No, your refusing service to gays in a locality that protects them from discrimination is "taking away your business", not the gays you refuse to serve.
[MENTION=32973]LoneLaugher[/MENTION], you continue to post directly to me, you continue to ask me direct questions, even though I have you on ignore. I wish you would stop. I admit it's not a big deal, but it's creepy, a little like being stalked. So, again, I wish you would stop. I also wish I could make it so that you can't see my posts. Please. Thanks. Last try.
[MENTION=24452]Seawytch[/MENTION], I'll try to make this as clear as I can, and I sincerely don't understand why this needs to be so difficult to grasp:
I want bigots (like those who someone based on that person's sexual orientation or skin color) beaten soundly, organically and naturally, in the court of public opinion. Within the culture. That, to me, is the best, longest-lasting (and, if I may, "most American") way to do it. Just punishing people or screaming "racist" or "homophobe" only increases animosity and does not move us forward.
I want to know who the bigots are, where they are, what they are thinking, and (perhaps most importantly) who agrees with them. Then, when they exercise their bigotry, it gives me the opportunity to (a) shine a light on them for all to see and (b) engage them in conversation. Heavy lifting, yes. But that's how you change a culture.
I don't know how much more clear I can make it than that.
Now, you can pretend that I'm a bigot because it helps you make your case, but lying to make a point really doesn't make the point, does it?
.
You're one of those "I'm against all public accommodation laws", kind of fellas right? Well, I'm sorry, but you're in the very definite minority in the country. Most people don't believe you should be able to refuse to serve a Denny's Scramble to Muslim family, refuse to let the black folks stay at your hotel or even refuse to bake the gay wedding cake (but are willing to bake a DOG wedding cake)...Which is why there isn't legislation to repeal ALL public accommodation laws and only bigoted legislation targeting gays and why the legislation targeting gays is only passing in places like Mississippi.
Well, I tried.
And I certainly wasn't trying to change your mind or your behaviors.
At least you know we have the same ultimate goals, whether you choose to admit it or not.
.
These laws will not go away, and there's no reason they should. They allow people to get on with their lives without worrying about whether this gas station or that hotel serves their kind. There is only one kind here, human. Either serve one and serve all or go work for a club or a church where discrimination is allowable.You're one of those "I'm against all public accommodation laws", kind of fellas right? Well, I'm sorry, but you're in the very definite minority in the country. Most people don't believe you should be able to refuse to serve a Denny's Scramble to Muslim family, refuse to let the black folks stay at your hotel or even refuse to bake the gay wedding cake (but are willing to bake a DOG wedding cake)...Which is why there isn't legislation to repeal ALL public accommodation laws and only bigoted legislation targeting gays and why the legislation targeting gays is only passing in places like Mississippi.
Well, I tried.
And I certainly wasn't trying to change your mind or your behaviors.
At least you know we have the same ultimate goals, whether you choose to admit it or not.
.
My goal is equality. As long as I can't refuse service, fire or kick out of my apartment building anyone I want to for any reason I feel like, you shouldn't be able to do the same to me.
And I totally get where you're coming from, you think that everyone SHOULD be able to put up signs that say "no gays served" or "no chistians allowed" just to "get it out in the open". You think we're ready to shed light on the bigots and maybe in some places we are. Sure, an end to Public Accommodation laws would be just dandy in large urban areas...but they don't work in rural ones, yet. I hold out hope for a day they will, but we simply are not there yet.
