Hating teh gays, redux

February 8th, 2008 10:24 am · 76 comments

Why must the wingnuttery always, always, always emanate from Lancaster County?

Because you look at the state of the commonwealth, you see economic issues, you see the plight of our cities, you see questions about gaming revenues and tax issues. So clearly, we can understand why state Sen. Mike Brubaker should make a priority out of: gay marriage.

Dave Pigeon has a piece in this morning’s Intell detailing how Brubaker, who did not return several messages seeking comment, has decided to pick up the ball dropped by state Rep. Scott Boyd and run with it, trying to get a ban on gay marriage written into the state Constitution.

Brubaker is a Republican so this sort of hate teh gay business is a natural. But over in the House the bill is being sponsored by a Democrat, Rep. Richard T. Grucela of Northampton County.

And the Pennsylvania Family Institute, which supported this nonsense last time around, when Boyd was the big backer, is firmly behind this one again - seeing the chief threat to the stability of marriage and society not in divorce (because what percentage, do you think, of its financial supporters have themselves been through a divorce?) but in Teh Dreaded Gays.

“Recognition of other relationships such as same-sex marriage don’t have equivalent benefits to society, and therefore don’t deserve the same level of recognition,” Geer said.

Utter and complete nonsense; mendacious nonsense. What are the benefits of marriage to society, Mr. Geer? Stability in neighborhoods and stability for children? In what respect would a union of two men or two women as opposed to a man and woman take away from this? There is zero evidence to back this up; but then, this assertion isn’t really meant to be taken seriously. Because this is a religious jihad, first and foremost; the other, flimsy rationales are put there merely as cover, to pretend that this is something other than what it is.

I tend to doubt that Brubaker, personally, hates teh gay - just as I’m relatively sure that Boyd didn’t, either. But this is all pure politics, a misdirection play designed to get leather-lunged voters to look the other way, to finally forget all about the pay raise, to reinvigorate the Republican base, that sort of thing. To achieve these goals, neither Brubaker nor Boyd before him has any qualms about throwing gays under the bus; neither hesitates to write into the freakin’ state Constitution a measure specifically stripping rights from one, narrow segment of society. Again, it’s nothing personal. But that doesn’t make it any less execrable.

And I would like to think Pennsylvanians on the whole will see this nonsense and tell legislators to knock it off - to focus on the issues that actually, you know, need to be addressed; that affect Pennsylvania. But that’ll never happen; we’re Pavlovian that way. Brubaker and the others behind this know that, are banking on it. For once, I wish we’d disappoint them.

Share and Enjoy: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Netvouz
  • DZone
  • ThisNext
  • MisterWong
  • Wists

  76 comments  Tags: Homosexuality · Pennsylvania

There are currently 76 comments on this blog post
View Topic | Comment on this blog
rspicer
2/8/08
10:33 AM
I disagree with you on one point Gil. I think this absolutely is personal. When these wingnuts put a target on the backs of homosexuals they make it personal. There are real, flesh and blood human beings who are literally being targeted by the state of Pennsylvania right now. I'm sure for them it's very personal. Sen. Brubaker may claim it isn't personal. I would call that self deception.

On another note, I would think that considering the hatred that has been demonstrated by high school students in his district Sen. Brubaker would want to use a little more care in his legislative agenda. Instead he decides to give those kids the inspiration to hate another group of people.
Lysol54
2/8/08
10:41 AM
QUOTE(rspicer @ Feb 8 2008, 11:33 AM) [snapback]355124[/snapback]

On another note, I would think that considering the hatred that has been demonstrated by high school students in his district Sen. Brubaker would want to use a little more care in his legislative agenda. Instead he decides to give those kids the inspiration to hate another group of people.




LOL i didn't even put that together. WOW there must be something in the water up there. I mean there is something in the water but honestly that half of the county is losing it. biggrin.gif

dodgecrew
2/8/08
10:50 AM
QUOTE(Lancaster Online @ Feb 8 2008, 09:25 AM) [snapback]355105[/snapback]

Brubaker is a Republican so this sort of hate teh gay business is a natural.
Wow, Gil. This is quite a broad statement that you are making. Of course, I need to consider the source. I am taking it that maybe you are in need of readership.......
gsmart
2/8/08
11:07 AM
QUOTE(rspicer @ Feb 8 2008, 11:33 AM) [snapback]355124[/snapback]
I disagree with you on one point Gil. I think this absolutely is personal. When these wingnuts put a target on the backs of homosexuals they make it personal.




I agree that it ultimately becomes personal; but take a look at the likes of Rick Santorum, who employed an openly gay director of communications. There's another example - if Santorum harbored the extreme personal animosity toward gays we think he would have, on the basis of his public (ahem) stance, then why in the world would he employ an openly gay person?



The more likely scenario is that Santorum doesn't actually hate or even dislike gay people - but he had to liken homosexuality to incest, he has to invoke the man-on-dog thing, specifically for political purposes, to appeal to the base which does indeed dislike or even hate teh gays.

Goldilocks
2/8/08
11:08 AM
QUOTE(rspicer @ Feb 8 2008, 10:33 AM) [snapback]355124[/snapback]

On another note, I would think that considering the hatred that has been demonstrated by high school students in his district Sen. Brubaker would want to use a little more care in his legislative agenda. Instead he decides to give those kids the inspiration to hate another group of people.



I fail to see how maintaining an age old institution, is promoting hate. If anything, by the gay community thinking it is their right to redefine marriage, should trump everyone else’s right, is what promotes hate.

And I also realize there is an agenda being pushed that needs to support itself by falsely equating disagreement with a lifestyle with hate.

Shawn
2/8/08
11:12 AM
QUOTE(Goldilocks @ Feb 8 2008, 11:08 AM) [snapback]355147[/snapback]

I fail to see how maintaining an age old institution, is promoting hate. If anything, by the gay community thinking it is their right to redefine marriage, should trump everyone else's right, is what promotes hate.

And I also realize there is an agenda being pushed that needs to support itself by falsely equating disagreement with a lifestyle with hate.




Just because something is "age old" doesn't make it right. Slavery has been around since the beginning of history, and is still practiced today. Does that make it right? Allowing homosexuals to engange in a legally recognized and binding State marriage does nothing in regards to your right to marry.



Later...Shawn

Lysol54
2/8/08
11:27 AM
QUOTE(Goldilocks @ Feb 8 2008, 12:08 PM) [snapback]355147[/snapback]



I fail to see how maintaining an age old institution, is promoting hate. If anything, by the gay community thinking it is their right to redefine marriage, should trump everyone else's right, is what promotes hate.

And I also realize there is an agenda being pushed that needs to support itself by falsely equating disagreement with a lifestyle with hate.





I mean we can go this way too, i personally think we should get rid of the Mennonite church and all other denominations, because there is only one true church, the Catholic church. Your religion is just a cult that tried to redefine the true meaning of Christs word to fit your own purprose. I mean i don't hate Mennonites and other denominations but you aren't practicing the way Christ intended. You just made things up to fit your own way. HUM now that sounds just like how you describe gay people You just really need to watch what you say goldi.

Edit:I'm being hypothtical, before you blow a gasket, just to show you how your way of reasoning is flawed.
Goldilocks
2/8/08
11:42 AM
QUOTE(Shawn @ Feb 8 2008, 11:12 AM) [snapback]355149[/snapback]

Just because something is "age old" doesn't make it right. Slavery has been around since the beginning of history, and is still practiced today. Does that make it right? Allowing homosexuals to engange in a legally recognized and binding State marriage does nothing in regards to your right to marry.



Later...Shawn


Marriage is a “privilege”, not a “right”. That privilege is based on meeting the criteria of being between one man and one woman. That being said, I do feel that the government should grant gay people the same perks as married people through some other means, such as civil unions.

however no matter how you look at it, procreative heterosexual intercourse is and has been historically through all times an important factor of the married privileged status, and that distinct characteristic is a fundamental reason why the State privileges marriage.

The fact of life is that only a male and a female can properly come together and provide the means (sperm and egg) and make a baby. Society needs babies in order to survive. Many studies have shown that the male/female household is the single best situation for developing children.

The reason for the heterosexual marriage privilege is for society to grow and give to the future. Homosexual marriage has absolutely no chance of producing life on its own, for the future. And all too often it is based on "what's in it for me".

Lysol54
2/8/08
11:57 AM
QUOTE(Goldilocks @ Feb 8 2008, 12:42 PM) [snapback]355171[/snapback]


Many studies have shown that the male/female household is the single best situation for developing children.




I'm sure they were Christian Group funded studies. Have any studies that didn't have to awnser to anyone? Didn't think so.

Pericles
2/8/08
12:15 PM
QUOTE(Lancaster Online @ Feb 8 2008, 10:25 AM) [snapback]355105[/snapback]


Post your thoughts and comments about this blog post.


OK, thats it. Can't take this discussion again.

We're granting civil union status to gays. In exchange everyone has to agree to:

1. Not use gay marriage as a political football

2. Accept civil unions - It's the best solution for all sides

3. Shut up

Goldilocks
2/8/08
12:17 PM
QUOTE(Pericles @ Feb 8 2008, 12:15 PM) [snapback]355196[/snapback]

OK, thats it. Can't take this discussion again.

We're granting civil union status to gays. In exchange everyone has to agree to:

1. Not use gay marriage as a political football

2. Accept civil unions - It's the best solution for all sides

3. Shut up


Sounds like a good plan to me.


Lysol54
2/8/08
12:20 PM
QUOTE(Goldilocks @ Feb 8 2008, 01:17 PM) [snapback]355199[/snapback]


Sounds like a good plan to me.






Well that was easy enough biggrin.gif

gsmart
2/8/08
12:48 PM
QUOTE(Pericles @ Feb 8 2008, 01:15 PM) [snapback]355196[/snapback]


OK, thats it. Can't take this discussion again.

We're granting civil union status to gays. In exchange everyone has to agree to:

1. Not use gay marriage as a political football

2. Accept civil unions - It's the best solution for all sides

3. Shut up





Agree wholeheartedly. But how about Mike Brubaker, or Michael Geer.

podunk
2/8/08
1:44 PM
They will always be there. You just need to ignore them. You have done no service to them by giving them press. There is no way the thing will pass. Let them get it out of their system and move on.
pml
2/8/08
2:28 PM
Here is the main reason the govt wants to ban gay marriage--TAXES!!!! Right now gays have to file separate tax returns meaning they get no breaks for joint tax filing. They also pay 15% inheritance tax when their partner dies because they are not blood relatives. Most companies will not allow a gay partner on insurance plans. This to me now is less about religion and more about bleeding people who make a life together dry. Just like they taxing me for what I inherited from my mother. My mom was dead and I spent hours figuring out the taxes making sure they didn;t kill her again and the little piece,of herself she set aside for me after she died. A Gay partner has absolutely no rights to make decisions for their partner, medical, legal or otherwise. The partners family can come in and take everything as next of kin. And yes, our government should have bigger concerns than worrying about who loves who. Gay marriage hurts no one. What hurts society is people who use religion to exclude good tax paying hard working citizens from benefits their straight counterparts take for granted.
Pericles
2/8/08
3:38 PM
QUOTE(gsmart @ Feb 8 2008, 01:48 PM) [snapback]355210[/snapback]




Agree wholeheartedly. But how about Mike Brubaker, or Michael Geer.



Either they haven't gotten the memo, or I'm not making the rules.
Pericles
2/8/08
3:57 PM
QUOTE(pml @ Feb 8 2008, 03:28 PM) [snapback]355254[/snapback]
Here is the main reason the govt wants to ban gay marriage--TAXES!!!!


Did you read that on IRS.gov?


Bigmaclender2
2/8/08
4:12 PM
QUOTE(Goldilocks @ Feb 8 2008, 12:08 PM) [snapback]355147[/snapback]



I fail to see how maintaining an age old institution, is promoting hate. If anything, by the gay community thinking it is their right to redefine marriage, should trump everyone else's right, is what promotes hate.

And I also realize there is an agenda being pushed that needs to support itself by falsely equating disagreement with a lifestyle with hate.





I don't think that gays are trying to "redefine" marriage per se and surely not trying to promote hate in any way. Also, to "insinuate" that gays have an "agenda" is as offensive to me as some other things that you have to say.

Age old institution, huh? hmmm...........thank goodness that Lincoln decided to break that and free the slaves. Not that i am comparing a race with a choice of lifestyle. The fact still remains.............AND JUSTICE FOR ALL..........not just the straight people.

maxandgraysmom
2/8/08
4:16 PM
As a teacher in the Warwick School District, I would like to personally thank Mike Brubaker, Warwick Township Republican, for single-handedly reminding me why it is crucial that we continue to stress the implementation of the "No Place for Hate" program and other measures the district has promoted since the racial "incidents" here a few months ago. I mean, just when I thought we were making headway in the whites vs. blacks department, now I feel responsible for countering Brubaker's intolerant message towards homosexuals. You have no idea how many times I hear students using the word "gay" or calling other kids "homos" in the meanest, most derogatory ways. This legislation serves as a justification that because certain people are different, they do not deserve the same rights as the majority. I've taught in this community long enough to know that my views are considered liberal, "ungodly," and dangerous. So tell me, if the parents and representatives of these students (Brubaker included) don't believe we are ALL equal, how am I supposed to get them to take my message that Warwick is "No Place for Hate" seriously?
lancoman
2/8/08
4:17 PM
QUOTE(Goldilocks @ Feb 8 2008, 12:42 PM) [snapback]355171[/snapback]


Marriage is a "privilege", not a "right". That privilege is based on meeting the criteria of being between one man and one woman. That being said, I do feel that the government should grant gay people the same perks as married people through some other means, such as civil unions.

however no matter how you look at it, procreative heterosexual intercourse is and has been historically through all times an important factor of the married privileged status, and that distinct characteristic is a fundamental reason why the State privileges marriage.

The fact of life is that only a male and a female can properly come together and provide the means (sperm and egg) and make a baby. Society needs babies in order to survive. Many studies have shown that the male/female household is the single best situation for developing children.

The reason for the heterosexual marriage privilege is for society to grow and give to the future. Homosexual marriage has absolutely no chance of producing life on its own, for the future. And all too often it is based on "what's in it for me".

my friend got hit in the groin with a ball when he was young and now his little friend shoots blanks. does that mean he can't get married?
rspicer
2/8/08
4:31 PM
QUOTE(Pericles @ Feb 8 2008, 01:15 PM) [snapback]355196[/snapback]


OK, thats it. Can't take this discussion again.

We're granting civil union status to gays. In exchange everyone has to agree to:

1. Not use gay marriage as a political football

2. Accept civil unions - It's the best solution for all sides

3. Shut up



Can we get you to see down at a table with Israelis and Palestinians?
TexasGeorge
2/8/08
4:50 PM
You know what I do really hate?



Bad newspaper columnists that have to resort to tabloid journalism.

Lysol54
2/8/08
4:57 PM
QUOTE(TexasGeorge @ Feb 8 2008, 05:50 PM) [snapback]355294[/snapback]
You know what I do really hate?



Bad newspaper columnists that have to resort to tabloid journalism.





Wow somebodys alittle grumpy this afternoon.

TexasGeorge
2/8/08
5:10 PM
Who's grumpy? Not me.



Not with the fresh scent of pine in my nostrils.

LancCitizen
2/8/08
10:21 PM
QUOTE(Goldilocks @ Feb 8 2008, 12:08 PM) [snapback]355147[/snapback]



I fail to see how maintaining an age old institution, is promoting hate. If anything, by the gay community thinking it is their right to redefine marriage, should trump everyone else's right, is what promotes hate.

And I also realize there is an agenda being pushed that needs to support itself by falsely equating disagreement with a lifestyle with hate.





It's not "redefining marriage". Marriage is the union of two people. It's those who want to write a constitutional ban against it that want to REDEFINE marriage. They want to define it as the union of ONE MAN AND ONE WOMAN instead of just the union of two people. You have to throw out the 14th ammendment before you can even begin to write the hate-filled ammendment and put it in place. It's like a bunch of racists wanting to write an ammendment saying blacks are 3/4 people so that we don't "redefine humanity" or something. It's hate-filled BS.

It's based on hatred and a CINO viewpoint to make the right wing nutjobs take their eye off the ball and it works every time.

Soon, those hate filled, homophobic bigots will pass away and will no longer blemish the face of PA in their hatred and bigotry. Then this issue will die with them.

The ONLY reason for a constitutional change is for the purpose of hatred and bigotry and anyone who supports that is a hateful bigot. Doesn't suprise me to see your name on the list Cino-locks.

I can personally GUARANTEE that no gay person anywhere is "after you" or wants you in any way and you will never be forced to marry one. Therefor, gay marriage has ZERO effect on you in any way whatsoever.

If you want to protect the "sanctity of marriage", then make a constitutional ammendment outlawing divorce, not one preventing more people from getting married. DUH.



QUOTE(Goldilocks @ Feb 8 2008, 12:42 PM) [snapback]355171[/snapback]


Marriage is a "privilege", not a "right". That privilege is based on meeting the criteria of being between one man and one woman. That being said, I do feel that the government should grant gay people the same perks as married people through some other means, such as civil unions.





NO Cino, when there are government benefits attached to something, it CEASES to be a privelege and becomes a RIGHT.

The ONLY fair thing to do is not recognize ANY marriage. If people want to be married, they can get married at church, but don't give them any government benefits for it.

Either give the same RIGHTS to all people or no people, there is no "in between" based on a CINOs viewpoint.

You are nothing but a homophobic, right wing nutjob. Your kind is dying off at an exponential rate and I can't wait until the last is gone and forgotten so that the HUMAN race can move on without the bigotry and hatred these FALSE Christians have pushed on us for so long.



QUOTE(Goldilocks @ Feb 8 2008, 12:42 PM) [snapback]355171[/snapback]


The fact of life is that only a male and a female can properly come together and provide the means (sperm and egg) and make a baby. Society needs babies in order to survive. Many studies have shown that the male/female household is the single best situation for developing children.





The ONLY group that has been PROVEN to raise homosexual children are the heterosexual parents of today's homosexuals. That male/female household is what created homosexuals so your story is FULL OF HOLES just like your head CINO.



QUOTE(TexasGeorge @ Feb 8 2008, 05:50 PM) [snapback]355294[/snapback]
You know what I do really hate?



Bad newspaper columnists that have to resort to tabloid journalism.





We know what you really hate. You hate anyone and everyone that doesn't fit your views. Just another CINO who is full of manure.

Now go look at your gay porn and secretly lust after the same sex while telling everyone how terrible it is like all good little republican right wingnut whackos do.



QUOTE(TexasGeorge @ Feb 8 2008, 06:10 PM) [snapback]355300[/snapback]
Who's grumpy? Not me.



Not with the fresh scent of pine in my nostrils.





We've told you a hundred times to stop sticking those air fresheners up your nose. Look at the brain damage it's already caused, do you want to end up even more vegatative than you already are???

Woody
2/8/08
11:06 PM
Same old !profanity! = poop, different day.
usedmeat
2/9/08
12:19 PM
Yeah, let's revisit Creationism and see how long we can make that thread. laugh.gif
pml
2/9/08
1:30 PM
Take away the marriage "perks" as you call them and I guarantee you marriage rats will drop through the floor. The only reason I got married was for the "perks. My husbadn and I lived together for eight wonderful happy years. He supported me financially and I provided him with a home and a business. BUT if we had not married, everything we worked together for would be subject to the totally unfair and repulsive 15% inheritance tax. Basically we would have to pay tax on our money if one of us died. Everything in our home that we shared from televisions to books would be taxed at 15%. We also save $6000 per year in taxes because my husband now that we are "LEGAL" can claim me as a dependent which I am.



What we need to do is get rid of inheritance taxes and stop rewarding child birthing vessels. It appals me that people who have children are getting $300 per child in a rebate while our elderly who are unable to work and who have paid in to our govt their whole lives will only get $300 period.



Most parents get large tax refunds while singles and marrieds get none. They do not buy diapers and formula wiht this money. Instead they by HD TV's and brand new cars. Or they take expensive vacations to Disney World. Last I heard Disney world was not a right yet everyone I know who has kids manages to afford trips to FL every year. When I take a vacation, Lysol54 tells me I don;t deserve it. Nice huh?



Gays do not harm anyone and they deserve all the rights anyone else has including the right to adopt or bear children and raise them. I know of no gay couple raising a child on welfare. Why? Because they planned for their children and are raising them in a loving two parent home. Heteros take child bearing as a right to use as much as they can while gays cherish their children and know how lucky they are to have them. They are not just another deduction.



With all the issues facing us in this country, with the slow dying of America and the American dream, this issue should not be any public officials main agenda. Sex is not an issue. Healthcare, getting out of Iraq, and getting the economy back on track shoud be what these jack asses are talking about. Instead they worry about controlling what the supposedly most free society in the world eats, smokes, and has sex with. I wonder if Iraquis know what they are getting into if they become a "democracy" just like America.

Artie See
2/9/08
1:32 PM
QUOTE(maxandgraysmom @ Feb 8 2008, 04:16 PM) [snapback]355281[/snapback]
As a teacher in the Warwick School District, I would like to personally thank Mike Brubaker, Warwick Township Republican, for single-handedly reminding me why it is crucial that we continue to stress the implementation of the "No Place for Hate" program and other measures the district has promoted since the racial "incidents" here a few months ago. I mean, just when I thought we were making headway in the whites vs. blacks department, now I feel responsible for countering Brubaker's intolerant message towards homosexuals. You have no idea how many times I hear students using the word "gay" or calling other kids "homos" in the meanest, most derogatory ways. This legislation serves as a justification that because certain people are different, they do not deserve the same rights as the majority. I've taught in this community long enough to know that my views are considered liberal, "ungodly," and dangerous. So tell me, if the parents and representatives of these students (Brubaker included) don't believe we are ALL equal, how am I supposed to get them to take my message that Warwick is "No Place for Hate" seriously?
This is absolutely one of the best posts I've seen on TalkBack EVER.

Thank you very much!
TexasGeorge
2/9/08
1:33 PM
QUOTE(pml @ Feb 9 2008, 02:30 PM) [snapback]355556[/snapback]
I wonder if Iraquis know what they are getting into if they become a "democracy" just like America.





Are they associated with the Iroquois indian tribe?
Goldilocks
2/9/08
2:36 PM
QUOTE(maxandgraysmom @ Feb 8 2008, 04:16 PM) [snapback]355281[/snapback]

As a teacher in the Warwick School District, I would like to personally thank Mike Brubaker, Warwick Township Republican, for single-handedly reminding me why it is crucial that we continue to stress the implementation of the "No Place for Hate" program and other measures the district has promoted since the racial "incidents" here a few months ago. I mean, just when I thought we were making headway in the whites vs. blacks department, now I feel responsible for countering Brubaker's intolerant message towards homosexuals. You have no idea how many times I hear students using the word "gay" or calling other kids "homos" in the meanest, most derogatory ways. This legislation serves as a justification that because certain people are different, they do not deserve the same rights as the majority. I've taught in this community long enough to know that my views are considered liberal, "ungodly," and dangerous. So tell me, if the parents and representatives of these students (Brubaker included) don't believe we are ALL equal, how am I supposed to get them to take my message that Warwick is "No Place for Hate" seriously?


You may personally disagree with this proposed amendment, which is your prerogative, but if you go before your students and equate the ammedment with hate, you are purporting and spreading the very intolerence and hate you are condemning. You are teaching your students to equate any disagreement in opinions with hate. You are teaching them that any voices that are different than theirs must be hateful. It leaves no room for people who think differently or for debate, just feeds the cancer of hate.

Why not tell them the truth that keeping marriage between one man and one woman isn’t about hate, but is a privilege given to two people of the opposite sex. The hate you speak of isn’t hate but is in reality only resistance to the aggressive pro gay agenda to change an age old institution. If gays wouldn’t have pushed for a change in the definition of marriage, we wouldn’t need these laws.

As a teacher you have a responsibility to teach your students that tolerence includes all people, even those who believe that marriage should be between one man and one woman. Your post only reflects tolerence to those with whom you agree on the matter. You have a responsibilty to teach that certain privileges are based on criteria, like voting, drinking, drivers license, etc. If that criteria isn't met the privilege is denied. And that it hasn't anything to do with equal rights, because marriage isn't a right, it is a privilege.


We have property in Warwick Twp. making me a tax payer. Something tells me that my hard earned tax money will be going to further the "if you don't agree with gays on marriage you are a hater" agenda and not academics, (sigh).








tugrad
2/9/08
7:10 PM
QUOTE(Pericles @ Feb 8 2008, 12:15 PM) [snapback]355196[/snapback]

OK, thats it. Can't take this discussion again.

We're granting civil union status to gays. In exchange everyone has to agree to:

1. Not use gay marriage as a political football

2. Accept civil unions - It's the best solution for all sides

3. Shut up


Sounds good to me. You have my vote!
TexasGeorge
2/9/08
7:53 PM
The sound of aluminum foil sounds good to you.

tugrad
2/9/08
7:57 PM
QUOTE(TexasGeorge @ Feb 9 2008, 07:53 PM) [snapback]355662[/snapback]

The sound of aluminum foil sounds good to you.

What do you mean by that?
twinmom
2/9/08
9:25 PM
QUOTE(tugrad @ Feb 9 2008, 07:10 PM) [snapback]355647[/snapback]

Sounds good to me. You have my vote!




I think we should start a write-in campaign. Pericles for President.

wonderwoman
2/9/08
10:09 PM
QUOTE
QUOTE(maxandgraysmom @ Feb 8 2008, 04:16 PM) As a teacher in the Warwick School District, I would like to personally thank Mike Brubaker, Warwick Township Republican, for single-handedly reminding me why it is crucial that we continue to stress the implementation of the "No Place for Hate" program and other measures the district has promoted since the racial "incidents" here a few months ago. I mean, just when I thought we were making headway in the whites vs. blacks department, now I feel responsible for countering Brubaker's intolerant message towards homosexuals. You have no idea how many times I hear students using the word "gay" or calling other kids "homos" in the meanest, most derogatory ways. This legislation serves as a justification that because certain people are different, they do not deserve the same rights as the majority. I've taught in this community long enough to know that my views are considered liberal, "ungodly," and dangerous. So tell me, if the parents and representatives of these students (Brubaker included) don't believe we are ALL equal, how am I supposed to get them to take my message that Warwick is "No Place for Hate" seriously?
This has nothing to do with hate in your district. School districts giving in to the "gay agenda" and making it have reality and merit is what has caused some of the hatred in your district. HOMOSEXUALITY should not be allowed to hold clubs and special status in a school. I suppose wiccan and beastiality clubs will be given status next.

http://www.life-ministry.com

Your school's counselors would probably get into trouble for promoting the fact that homosexuality is learned and is an addiction. But, the truth is often kept under wraps. Here we have the lie of homosexuality taking the lead... over the truth of marriage between a woman and man being sacred. I am all for giving single people more tax breaks and accommodations. If people choose to live together and own property together...then let them will property rights each to the other. Pay the taxes because you legally must. You should not have the same rights as relatives [as it is now], so you need to accommodate and pay. If singles were given rights to own property together [instead of all this energy going into the homosexual agenda],....many singles would benefit who cannot afford to live alone. A single person should not have to choose to live with their own family into adulthood because they cannot afford to live on their own. It is a fine line of demarcation, but I am so tired of homosexuality being forced down my throat when they could choose to be UNaddicted. It is their CHOICE so quit bellyaching and bawling and fight for the rights for all singles....because YOU HOMOSEXUALS are single whether you believe it or not.

LancCitizen
2/9/08
11:08 PM
QUOTE(Goldilocks @ Feb 9 2008, 03:36 PM) [snapback]355587[/snapback]


You may personally disagree with this proposed amendment, which is your prerogative, but if you go before your students and equate the ammedment with hate, you are purporting and spreading the very intolerence and hate you are condemning. You are teaching your students to equate any disagreement in opinions with hate. You are teaching them that any voices that are different than theirs must be hateful. It leaves no room for people who think differently or for debate, just feeds the cancer of hate.

Why not tell them the truth that keeping marriage between one man and one woman isn't about hate, but is a privilege given to two people of the opposite sex. The hate you speak of isn't hate but is in reality only resistance to the aggressive pro gay agenda to change an age old institution. If gays wouldn't have pushed for a change in the definition of marriage, we wouldn't need these laws.

As a teacher you have a responsibility to teach your students that tolerence includes all people, even those who believe that marriage should be between one man and one woman. Your post only reflects tolerence to those with whom you agree on the matter. You have a responsibilty to teach that certain privileges are based on criteria, like voting, drinking, drivers license, etc. If that criteria isn't met the privilege is denied. And that it hasn't anything to do with equal rights, because marriage isn't a right, it is a privilege.


We have property in Warwick Twp. making me a tax payer. Something tells me that my hard earned tax money will be going to further the "if you don't agree with gays on marriage you are a hater" agenda and not academics, (sigh).

Teachers in public schools don't teach religions of any cult, therefore, she doens't have to include your hypocritical views.

Makes sense you would be in warwick with all your bigoted, hate filled attitudes. Luckily, you are in a minority and always will be until that minority finally dies off and the rest of us are left alone by the self-righteous cino opinions that do so much to propogate hatred in the rest of the world.










QUOTE(tugrad @ Feb 9 2008, 08:57 PM) [snapback]355663[/snapback]

What do you mean by that?




he's not the sharpest tack in the box. I think he's cino-lock's grandson or something and definitely inherited his mental fortitude from his grandma.



QUOTE(wonderwoman @ Feb 9 2008, 11:09 PM) [snapback]355689[/snapback]
This has nothing to do with hate in your district. School districts giving in to the "gay agenda" and making it have reality and merit is what has caused some of the hatred in your district. HOMOSEXUALITY should not be allowed to hold clubs and special status in a school. I suppose wiccan and beastiality clubs will be given status next.

http://www.life-ministry.com

Your school's counselors would probably get into trouble for promoting the fact that homosexuality is learned and is an addiction. But, the truth is often kept under wraps. Here we have the lie of homosexuality taking the lead... over the truth of marriage between a woman and man being sacred. I am all for giving single people more tax breaks and accommodations. If people choose to live together and own property together...then let them will property rights each to the other. Pay the taxes because you legally must. You should not have the same rights as relatives [as it is now], so you need to accommodate and pay. If singles were given rights to own property together [instead of all this energy going into the homosexual agenda],....many singles would benefit who cannot afford to live alone. A single person should not have to choose to live with their own family into adulthood because they cannot afford to live on their own. It is a fine line of demarcation, but I am so tired of homosexuality being forced down my throat when they could choose to be UNaddicted. It is their CHOICE so quit bellyaching and bawling and fight for the rights for all singles....because YOU HOMOSEXUALS are single whether you believe it or not.





more fairy-tales from the right-wingnut whack job CINO trying to force her false ideaology onto other people.

TexasGeorge
2/9/08
11:24 PM
Fairy tales? Did someone just invoke the Clinton legacy?

LancCitizen
2/9/08
11:27 PM
QUOTE(TexasGeorge @ Feb 10 2008, 12:24 AM) [snapback]355724[/snapback]
Fairy tales? Did someone just invoke the Clinton legacy?





no, just your halloween costume you still wear because it makes you feel "pretty"

TexasGeorge
2/9/08
11:28 PM
QUOTE(LancCitizen @ Feb 10 2008, 12:27 AM) [snapback]355727[/snapback]

no, just your halloween costume you still wear because it makes you feel "pretty"




Obama is kind of pretty, I guess. Not as pretty as Edwards, but he dropped out.



Obama the fairy tale.



Who can even fathom a black president? Not Bill Clinton!

Artie See
2/10/08
12:37 PM
QUOTE(TexasGeorge @ Feb 9 2008, 11:28 PM) [snapback]355728[/snapback]
Who can even fathom a black president?
PLEASE don't play the racist card. This country is already far too divided.
maxandgraysmom
2/10/08
2:46 PM
First of all, I never said that I go before my students and discuss these things. Typically, when I mention anything in the political/moral sphere I'm appalled at the blind ignorance forced on these children and then I just hang my head in shame and leave it alone so as to keep my job. For example, after briefly mentioning that Shakespeare's 18th sonnet was, in fact, written for a man he was romantically linked with, the influx of emails and whines from parents was overwhelming despite the myriad historical evidence to support my claim. The parents simply do not want their children to know the truth. I'm not sure why-- would it somehow damage their children to know that one of the most amazing minds of all time was-- gasp-- bisexual? Does it somehow diminish his worth?

I'm sure the thousands of men put to death during Shakespeare's time for being homosexual, including many noblemen of high rank and honor, would disagree that they had a CHOICE in their desires. If it were that simple, don't you think they would've CHOSEN not to be burned alive or had their heads chopped off?

If you think it will hurt the "sacred institution of marriage" to change its traditional definition, by all means, let's go back to the way things were. Change is bad, right? So let's go back to the days when women were sold like cattle to fat old men just to gain titles for their families. Let's go back to when men could commit adultery without punishment while women were put to death for the same offense? Let's go back to submitting to our husbands, no matter if they beat us or treat us like dirt. By all means, I know I would love to be in a "traditional" marriage where my husband ruled over me like a king and my only job was to birth babies.

The world changes. The institution of marriage has been maleable, changing as time goes by as people become more understanding and oppressed people-- women, minorities, homosexuals-- force the rest of the world to admit to their own intolerance.
Goldilocks
2/10/08
10:23 PM
QUOTE(maxandgraysmom @ Feb 10 2008, 02:46 PM) [snapback]356007[/snapback]

First of all, I never said that I go before my students and discuss these things. Typically, when I mention anything in the political/moral sphere I'm appalled at the blind ignorance forced on these children and then I just hang my head in shame and leave it alone so as to keep my job. For example, after briefly mentioning that Shakespeare's 18th sonnet was, in fact, written for a man he was romantically linked with, the influx of emails and whines from parents was overwhelming despite the myriad historical evidence to support my claim. The parents simply do not want their children to know the truth. I'm not sure why-- would it somehow damage their children to know that one of the most amazing minds of all time was-- gasp-- bisexual? Does it somehow diminish his worth?


What does amazing minds have to do with sexual preference? Do you make it a point to include the sexual orientation of every person you teach about?


QUOTE
If you think it will hurt the "sacred institution of marriage" to change its traditional definition, by all means, let's go back to the way things were. Change is bad, right? So let's go back to the days when women were sold like cattle to fat old men just to gain titles for their families. Let's go back to when men could commit adultery without punishment while women were put to death for the same offense? Let's go back to submitting to our husbands, no matter if they beat us or treat us like dirt. By all means, I know I would love to be in a "traditional" marriage where my husband ruled over me like a king and my only job was to birth babies.

The world changes. The institution of marriage has been maleable, changing as time goes by as people become more understanding and oppressed people-- women, minorities, homosexuals-- force the rest of the world to admit to their own intolerance.


That last paragragh is scary. Just how malleable should the institution of marriage become? Because the mantra of the polygamists is that marriage should be redefined to include multiple spouses. If the institution of marriage is malleable, changing as time goes by, what’s to stop men who desire multiple wives demanding understanding in that they are an oppressed minority who should be allowed to redefine marriage to fit their agenda? And if the institution is so malleable, what about those who have a desire to marry little girls or little boys, What is to stop them from demanding their “right” to marry whom they please? Redefining marriage will be a slippery slope and we will be heading back to the dark ages, if marriage is viewed as malleable to fit everybody’s vim and wish.



citydweller
2/10/08
10:49 PM
QUOTE(pml @ Feb 9 2008, 01:30 PM) [snapback]355556[/snapback]


With all the issues facing us in this country, with the slow dying of America and the American dream, this issue should not be any public officials main agenda. Sex is not an issue. Healthcare, getting out of Iraq, and getting the economy back on track shoud be what these jack asses are talking about. Instead they worry about controlling what the supposedly most free society in the world eats, smokes, and has sex with. I wonder if Iraquis know what they are getting into if they become a "democracy" just like America.


Damn PMS I hate it when I have to agree with you, but I do in this case.
supervenusfreak
2/10/08
11:12 PM
I go away for awhile and look what happens! I see that the usual homophobes and hate mongers are here and that they have new playmates. What fun! They remind me of Carrie White's mother... laugh.gif

I hope that you are feeling better tugrad. I really enjoy reading your posts.
why?
2/10/08
11:19 PM
QUOTE(citydweller @ Feb 10 2008, 10:49 PM) [snapback]356133[/snapback]


Damn PMS I hate it when I have to agree with you, but I do in this case.

aww, city is being nice!
i agree, as well...
but there are a few things in this thread that set me off.
1- goldianne whatever you think you are- got a question.
where did you get these ideas?
were they from the constitution?
the bill of rights?
oh, i know...the declaration of independence!
yeah, guess not.
they are from your Bible.
not mine.
yours.
what makes you think that everyone should have to deal with you and your interpretation of the Bible?
honestly?
why can't anyone see beyond their own crap nonsense to let something happen that doesn't even affect them?
c'mon....
hey goldi- your hubby gonna leave you for his best friend?
nope- didn't think so.
it has naught to do with you but you still can't shut your non affected mouth.
FFS.
grow up, people.
GOYS.
get over your selves.
FFS.
wonderwoman
2/11/08
12:43 AM
It is really enlightening that the worst name-calling toward others comes from the supporters of homosexuality.

I just have to wonder which abomination will next become acceptable. If some senator's daughter or son becomes a pedophile, will we then have to constantly listen to why we should accept this in people because so many are doing it?

LancCitizen...you did not really read my link, did you? You discount a person's whole life who is living a normal lifestyle and who is helping others in pain to do the same...and you call them names. That is easier than considering some unacceptable [to you] alternative. So all of us who have overcome difficult times in our own childhood and lived a normal lifestyle...are wing nuts. It would have been better, I suppose, if we had become sexually addicted and joined the verbal minority to cry out our poor, poor, poor me, plight.

I respect the adults who live their lives within their own walls and harm no one and ask for no benefit they have not earned. The people choosing the homosexual lifestyle who decry their own choices and want benefits they do not deserve, I do not respect. They only prove they are children in adult bodies....with unsettled childhood issues.

Why. I would venture that Goldie's Bible that she uses to support the evil of homosexuality, also is the part of the Bible that is your own.
Kirkwoodkid
2/11/08
3:18 AM
It is really enlightening that the worst name-calling toward others comes from the supporters of homosexuality.
Amen
LancCitizen
2/11/08
6:59 AM
QUOTE(wonderwoman @ Feb 11 2008, 01:43 AM) [snapback]356152[/snapback]
It is really enlightening that the worst name-calling toward others comes from the supporters of homosexuality.

I just have to wonder which abomination will next become acceptable. If some senator's daughter or son becomes a pedophile, will we then have to constantly listen to why we should accept this in people because so many are doing it?

LancCitizen...you did not really read my link, did you? You discount a person's whole life who is living a normal lifestyle and who is helping others in pain to do the same...and you call them names. That is easier than considering some unacceptable [to you] alternative. So all of us who have overcome difficult times in our own childhood and lived a normal lifestyle...are wing nuts. It would have been better, I suppose, if we had become sexually addicted and joined the verbal minority to cry out our poor, poor, poor me, plight.

I respect the adults who live their lives within their own walls and harm no one and ask for no benefit they have not earned. The people choosing the homosexual lifestyle who decry their own choices and want benefits they do not deserve, I do not respect. They only prove they are children in adult bodies....with unsettled childhood issues.

Why. I would venture that Goldie's Bible that she uses to support the evil of homosexuality, also is the part of the Bible that is your own.




oh poor, poor wonderlesswart, you haven't a clue of what you speak. You come in the middle of something and make a bunch of false claims and then develop your own lies to justify what you do.

There is NOTHING "normal" about you, therefore, your little diatribe is negated.

You cannot accept that others do not have the same feelings you have, you cannot understand that others are intellectually superior to you because you don't have the ability to understand it and you won't listen to any other possibility becuase it doesn't reflect your incorrect interpretation of an 1800 year old book.

Talk about a child in an adult's body, you fit that bill to a T.

You are uncapable of actual though and have to have someone tell you what to think.

I feel very sorry for you and will pray for you that God will deliver you from your demonic cult. It's a HUGE plea, but with God, anything is possible, even turning you into an actual human being.

Lysol54
2/11/08
7:12 AM
QUOTE(wonderwoman @ Feb 11 2008, 01:43 AM) [snapback]356152[/snapback]
It is really enlightening that the worst name-calling toward others comes from the supporters of homosexuality.




Not quite ther WW. I find it funny that people that "follow" Christs teaching of love thy neighbor are the first ones to condomn someone else. Isn't there something in the Bible about "do not judge, lest ye be judged? I guess you guys missed that part?? Or just don't care? I mean i know how your religion is, just picking and choseing what you want to apply. See thats what i have a hard time with. You claim to be Christian but just use that as a tool for hate and discrimination.



Like i said on previous posts, i think the Mennonite Church should be outlawed. Since its just a cult that split from the true Catholic Church. They didn't like it so they just invented their own way of thinking. They didn't like Christ's orginal church, so they go start their own? Funny for a religion that started out being differant and on the fringe, you guys sure have no time for anything other than yourselves. Rather sad. (I'm being hypothetcial before you get your panties in a bunch there WW)

Goldilocks
2/11/08
7:51 AM
QUOTE(why? @ Feb 10 2008, 11:19 PM) [snapback]356137[/snapback]

aww, city is being nice!
i agree, as well...
but there are a few things in this thread that set me off.
1- goldianne whatever you think you are- got a question.
where did you get these ideas?
were they from the constitution?
the bill of rights?
oh, i know...the declaration of independence!
yeah, guess not.
they are from your Bible.
not mine.
yours.
what makes you think that everyone should have to deal with you and your interpretation of the Bible?
honestly?
why can't anyone see beyond their own crap nonsense to let something happen that doesn't even affect them?
c'mon....
hey goldi- your hubby gonna leave you for his best friend?
nope- didn't think so.
it has naught to do with you but you still can't shut your non affected mouth.
FFS.
grow up, people.
GOYS.
get over your selves.
FFS.


Heaven forbid anyone use anti-Semitic terms here, yet you use the derogatory yiddish word “GOYS” for non-Jewish people. The equivelent to the derogatory word "K-ke used against jews. Unbelievable bigotted, hateful, and extremely offensive. I am shocked at this new low against non-jewish people on the part of a jewish person!

FYI, I didn't quote the Bible, just looking into the future and what could happen if society views marriage as a malleable institution that can be changed to fit anyone’s definition, including opening the door for child predators.


QUOTE
It is really enlightening that the worst name-calling toward others comes from the supporters of homosexuality.


You can say that again. Just by reading TB, it is evident that many (not all) are hateful, bigoted and intolerant people.

It is funny how tolerance is the rallying cry for many, until it applies to those with which they disagree. Than intolerance, prejudice, and bigotry is acceptable.

Many times they resort to below-the-belt verbal attacks at another posters thoughts and ideas, instead of debating the issue giving strong implication that their argument is either seriously flawed or that they have none. If they have a strong argument, the facts would speak for themselves and no insults and name calling would be necessary.
Lysol54
2/11/08
8:46 AM
QUOTE(Goldilocks @ Feb 11 2008, 08:51 AM) [snapback]356166[/snapback]


Many times they resort to below-the-belt verbal attacks at another posters thoughts and ideas, instead of debating the issue giving strong implication that their argument is either seriously flawed or that they have none. If they have a strong argument, the facts would speak for themselves and no insults and name calling would be necessary.



Thats because even if you are shown facts or things to the contrary to your belief you still just write it off. You can't have a debate with a religious person, because they just run behind their religion and refuse to hear anything to the contrary. You have been shown facts/research before that lend to homosexuality as biological and not a choice, but you refuse to even consider that a possiblity. You just dismiss it right away without even stopping to think. So don't sit here and accuse people of doing something that your do yourself. .

ihavehorns
2/11/08
8:57 AM
QUOTE(Lysol54 @ Feb 11 2008, 08:46 AM) [snapback]356173[/snapback]

Thats because even if you are shown facts or things to the contrary to your belief you still just write it off. You can't have a debate with a religious person, because they just run behind their religion and refuse to hear anything to the contrary. You have been shown facts/research before that lend to homosexuality as biological and not a choice, but you refuse to even consider that a possiblity. You just dismiss it right away without even stopping to think. So don't sit here and accuse people of doing something that your do yourself. .


You can't debate with someone who gets ALL their "facts" from the focus on the family website. wink.gif rolleyes.gif
Shawn
2/11/08
9:01 AM
QUOTE(Goldilocks @ Feb 11 2008, 07:51 AM) [snapback]356166[/snapback]

FYI, I didn't quote the Bible, just looking into the future and what could happen if society views marriage as a malleable institution that can be changed to fit anyone's definition, including opening the door for child predators.




Part of the reason you receive so much backlash is that you continue to make idiotic mis-informed statments like the one I bolded above. How can someone have an intelligent debate with you regarding this issue when you continue to bring up irrelevant comparisons. Marriage and homosesexuality have absolutely no links to pedophelia whatsoever. They are two completely seperate and unrelated issues. Homosexual marriage is about two adults mutually agreeing to engage in the contract of marriage and all of the responsibilities that come along with that. Pedophelia is about adults who engage or attempt to engage in sexual acts with children who cannot, by definition and law, give consent for such acts. How can you debate an issue when you continue to bring up unrelated and irrelevant comparisons?



You did make somewhat of a point about polygamy. I would support that as long as it was equal for everyone. Not just for men having multiple wives. Women would have to be able to have multiple husbands as well. And, all of the standard trappings of marriage would also have to apply, such that if a man has 3 wives and he cheats on them with a 4th woman, the 3 women would be able to simultaneously divorce the guy and each would receive the same settlement as if she were his only wife. The financial risk and strain of having multiple spouses would be so daunting that nobody would do it. If they did, then more power to them.



Later...Shawn



Lysol54
2/11/08
9:04 AM
QUOTE(ihavehorns @ Feb 11 2008, 09:57 AM) [snapback]356175[/snapback]


You can't debate with someone who gets ALL their "facts" from the focus on the family website. wink.gif rolleyes.gif




LOL yeah i forgot about that, last time this topic came up i think she referanced them 2-3 times. They wouldn't be biased at all now would they?? blink.gif

Goldilocks
2/11/08
9:07 AM
QUOTE(Shawn @ Feb 11 2008, 09:01 AM) [snapback]356177[/snapback]

Part of the reason you receive so much backlash is that you continue to make idiotic mis-informed statments like the one I bolded above. How can someone have an intelligent debate with you regarding this issue when you continue to bring up irrelevant comparisons. Marriage and homosesexuality have absolutely no links to pedophelia whatsoever. They are two completely seperate and unrelated issues. Homosexual marriage is about two adults mutually agreeing to engage in the contract of marriage and all of the responsibilities that come along with that. Pedophelia is about adults who engage or attempt to engage in sexual acts with children who cannot, by definition and law, give consent for such acts. How can you debate an issue when you continue to bring up unrelated and irrelevant comparisons?




True, if the age of consent remains where it is now in this nation. But if that age of consent is lowered than the issue does become related.


Shawn
2/11/08
9:14 AM
QUOTE(Goldilocks @ Feb 11 2008, 09:07 AM) [snapback]356179[/snapback]

True, if the age of consent remains whewre it is now in this nation. But if that age of consent is lowered than the issue does become related.




If the age of consent is lowered, then there would need to be a reason for it, and it will be based on the same type of reasoning that put it there in the first place. In many countries, it is much lower. In fact, what was the age of consent during biblical times? Homosexual marriages would have no affect on that one way or the other. If it did, wouldn't it stand to reason that heterosexual marriages would in some way make heterosexual pedophilia more accepted? How about interracial marriage? Did that make pedophilia more accepted? Many people still consider interracial marriages to be an abomination. What about marriages where the partners are of different religions. Gasp. Surely such an abomination has caused pedophilia to run rampant. Probably got a few animals in trouble as well. Don't even get me started on those cretins who get married in a courtroom without even going to a church. A few more of those and it will be total anarchy. Oh the horror.



Later...Shawn

Goldilocks
2/11/08
9:26 AM
QUOTE(Lysol54 @ Feb 11 2008, 08:46 AM) [snapback]356173[/snapback]

Thats because even if you are shown facts or things to the contrary to your belief you still just write it off. You can't have a debate with a religious person, because they just run behind their religion and refuse to hear anything to the contrary. You have been shown facts/research before that lend to homosexuality as biological and not a choice, but you refuse to even consider that a possiblity. You just dismiss it right away without even stopping to think. So don't sit here and accuse people of doing something that your do yourself. .


Provide the links to prove that unequivocally science has proven on many occasions that homosexuality is in the genes.



LOL..I rarely bring my religion in the fray here, but why should I, because I have you to do that on a consistent basis. After all you are the world religion expert, especially on the Catholic religion, and the Mennonite religion, but interestingly enough not a peep out of you when a Jewish person uses a disparaging name for Non-Jews. If that scenario were reversed and it were a Non-Jewish person using anti-semetic names against a Jewish person, the thread would be closed and the person banned, and rightly so. But where is the outcry from those who tout tolerance? Not a word is said. Unbelievable.





QUOTE(Shawn @ Feb 11 2008, 09:14 AM) [snapback]356181[/snapback]

If the age of consent is lowered, then there would need to be a reason for it, and it will be based on the same type of reasoning that put it there in the first place. In many countries, it is much lower. In fact, what was the age of consent during biblical times? Homosexual marriages would have no affect on that one way or the other. If it did, wouldn't it stand to reason that heterosexual marriages would in some way make heterosexual pedophilia more accepted? How about interracial marriage? Did that make pedophilia more accepted? Many people still consider interracial marriages to be an abomination. What about marriages where the partners are of different religions. Gasp. Surely such an abomination has caused pedophilia to run rampant. Probably got a few animals in trouble as well. Don't even get me started on those cretins who get married in a courtroom without even going to a church. A few more of those and it will be total anarchy. Oh the horror.



Later...Shawn


As much as I hate to admit it, you have some good points Shawn.

You and I rarely agree on anything, but you debate the issues instead of attacking and you deserve an applause for that.
lol_thumbsupsmile.gif cheer2.gif cheer1.gif


Lysol54
2/11/08
9:31 AM
QUOTE(Goldilocks @ Feb 11 2008, 10:26 AM) [snapback]356183[/snapback]


Provide the links to prove that unequivocally science has proven on many occasions that homosexuality is in the genes.



After all you are the world religion expert, especially on the Catholic religion, and the Mennonite religion, but interestingly enough not a peep out of you when a Jewish person uses a disparaging name for Non-Jews. If that scenario were reversed and it were a Non-Jewish person using anti-semetic names against a Jewish person, the thread would be closed and the person banned, and rightly so. But where is the outcry from those who tout tolerance? Not a word is said. Unbelievable.








What are you talking about? I haven't seen a post like that? I'm sorry i don't live on TB and don't see everything that is posted. If i had seen it i prob would have commented on it. But even still what wasn't the point i was making. I've seen plenty of your posts to make a commment though. Funny that rather than debate my post you just completely change the subject to something else?
As far as showing some type of facts about homosexuality, why don't you try to post some without using some type of religious website. See you can't. I've posted 3 links before that had showed research that was showing that it might be biological, and you went to your FOF website and posted a link that had nothing to do with what i was showing, and said "See thats why your wrong"
Like i said before, being from a religion that was never really accepted by a larger group, and stayed on the fringes, i would think you and your group would be a lot more accepting of things/people that were differant
Shawn
2/11/08
9:38 AM
QUOTE(Goldilocks @ Feb 11 2008, 07:51 AM) [snapback]356166[/snapback]

Heaven forbid anyone use anti-Semitic terms here, yet you use the derogatory yiddish word "GOYS" for non-Jewish people. The equivelent to the derogatory word "K-ke used against jews. Unbelievable bigotted, hateful, and extremely offensive. I am shocked at this new low against non-jewish people on the part of a jewish person!




My assumption is that GOYS is an abbreviation for "Get Over YourSelves" sense it was in all caps. Generally all caps means something is an abbreviation, just like FFS.



Later...Shawn



QUOTE(Goldilocks @ Feb 11 2008, 09:26 AM) [snapback]356183[/snapback]

As much as I hate to admit it, you have some good points Shawn.

You and I rarely agree on anything, but you debate the issues instead of attacking and you deserve an applause for that.
lol_thumbsupsmile.gif cheer2.gif cheer1.gif





Thanks....I certainly do try!



Later...Shawn

Lysol54
2/11/08
9:54 AM
QUOTE(Shawn @ Feb 11 2008, 10:38 AM) [snapback]356187[/snapback]




My assumption is that GOYS is an abbreviation for "Get Over YourSelves" sense it was in all caps. Generally all caps means something is an abbreviation, just like FFS.



Later...Shawn






Oh is that was she was talking about?? Yeah i think your right Shawn. Goldi you seemed to get really offended by that? YOu didn't even know what they were talking about. blink.gif

Goldilocks
2/11/08
10:03 AM
QUOTE(Shawn @ Feb 11 2008, 09:38 AM) [snapback]356187[/snapback]

My assumption is that GOYS is an abbreviation for "Get Over YourSelves" sense it was in all caps. Generally all caps means something is an abbreviation, just like FFS.



Later...Shawn



QUOTE
Oh is that was she was talking about?? Yeah i think your right Shawn. Goldi you seemed to get really offended by that? YOu didn't even know what they were talking about.



http://www.answers.com/topic/goy

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/goy

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/goys

http://www.yourdictionary.com/goy

Lysol54
2/11/08
10:13 AM
QUOTE(Goldilocks @ Feb 11 2008, 11:03 AM) [snapback]356196[/snapback]




Thats great goldi, but like shawn said it was in all caps which signifies an Acronym. Kind of like LOL.



QUOTE(why? @ Feb 11 2008, 12:19 AM) [snapback]356137[/snapback]

grow up, people.
GOYS.
get over your selves.
FFS.




Wow goldi, maybe next time you should read alittle closer before you just go spouting off. Read that again. See what it says underneath GOYS. I'm sorry if that offends your delicate sensibliies, but honestly your just looking for stuff to complain about now. Why don't you stick to the topic at hand??

Goldilocks
2/11/08
10:17 AM
QUOTE(Lysol54 @ Feb 11 2008, 10:10 AM) [snapback]356199[/snapback]

Thats great goldi, but like shawn said it was in all caps which signifies an Acronym. Kind of like LOL.



Believe what you want, but I think she knew perfectly well what she was saying and what she meant, and it wasn't an acronyn.

Isn't anywhere to be found on chat slang definition sites. You would think that at least one would have it listed.

http://www.web-friend.com/help/lingo/chatslang.html

http://www.rediff.com/chat/slang.htm

http://www.pulpchat.com/faq/faq215.php

http://www.computerhope.com/jargon/c/chatslan.htm
twinmom
2/11/08
10:18 AM
I got the GOYS one, but what does FFS mean?
Lysol54
2/11/08
10:20 AM
QUOTE(Goldilocks @ Feb 11 2008, 11:17 AM) [snapback]356201[/snapback]



Believe what you want, but I think she knew perfectly well what she was saying and what she meant, and it wasn't an acronyn.

Isn't anywhere to be found on chat slang definition sites.
http://www.web-friend.com/help/lingo/chatslang.html

http://www.rediff.com/chat/slang.htm

http://www.pulpchat.com/faq/faq215.php

http://www.computerhope.com/jargon/c/chatslan.htm







Whatever ya say there Goldi. THe poster put it right underneath, like i said stick to the topic instead of reading something into a word that isn't even true.

Goldilocks
2/11/08
10:22 AM
QUOTE(twinmom @ Feb 11 2008, 10:18 AM) [snapback]356202[/snapback]

I got the GOYS one, but what does FFS mean?


For F-cks Sake



QUOTE(Lysol54 @ Feb 11 2008, 10:20 AM) [snapback]356203[/snapback]

Whatever ya say there Goldi. THe poster put it right underneath, like i said stick to the topic instead of reading something into a word that isn't even true.



How do you know, are you clairvoyant?


Lysol54
2/11/08
10:25 AM
QUOTE(Goldilocks @ Feb 11 2008, 11:20 AM) [snapback]356204[/snapback]


For F-cks Sake





Now you know what that was but you want to believe GOYS was something else? LMAO ROTFL biggrin.gif



QUOTE(Goldilocks @ Feb 11 2008, 11:22 AM) [snapback]356204[/snapback]


How do you know, are you clairvoyant?






Because the poster put it right underneath. Your the one here getting all offended about it. And they wrote in all caps, if you look for GOYS in the dictionary, its usually a lowercase word. Uppercase indicates an Acronym, or did you miss that day in school? LIke i said stick with the actual topic.
tugrad
2/11/08
5:11 PM
QUOTE(supervenusfreak @ Feb 10 2008, 11:12 PM) [snapback]356136[/snapback]

I go away for awhile and look what happens! I see that the usual homophobes and hate mongers are here and that they have new playmates. What fun! They remind me of Carrie White's mother... laugh.gif

I hope that you are feeling better tugrad. I really enjoy reading your posts.


Thanks supervenusfreak! I've been getting a lot of rest and I am starting to feel better. Even put on a few pounds!

Hi Why?! Hope you and city are doing well?

xoxoxoxo
TexasGeorge
2/11/08
5:28 PM
I agree that it should not be a pressing priority. However, the legislative and media pressure being pursued by the gay agenda unfortunately makes these responses to it at least somewhat necessary.

Bigmaclender2
2/11/08
8:53 PM
QUOTE(wonderwoman @ Feb 11 2008, 01:43 AM) [snapback]356152[/snapback]
It is really enlightening that the worst name-calling toward others comes from the supporters of homosexuality.

I just have to wonder which abomination will next become acceptable. If some senator's daughter or son becomes a pedophile, will we then have to constantly listen to why we should accept this in people because so many are doing it?

LancCitizen...you did not really read my link, did you? You discount a person's whole life who is living a normal lifestyle and who is helping others in pain to do the same...and you call them names. That is easier than considering some unacceptable [to you] alternative. So all of us who have overcome difficult times in our own childhood and lived a normal lifestyle...are wing nuts. It would have been better, I suppose, if we had become sexually addicted and joined the verbal minority to cry out our poor, poor, poor me, plight.

I respect the adults who live their lives within their own walls and harm no one and ask for no benefit they have not earned. The people choosing the homosexual lifestyle who decry their own choices and want benefits they do not deserve, I do not respect. They only prove they are children in adult bodies....with unsettled childhood issues.

Why. I would venture that Goldie's Bible that she uses to support the evil of homosexuality, also is the part of the Bible that is your own.




Oh my, I don't even know where to start......WOW.........okay, let me start really simple, obviously..............you know what.....never mind.......you aren't even worth my time.......I have no time for ignorance this low.....I'm guessing........IQ just above 25???????

LancCitizen
2/11/08
9:53 PM
QUOTE(Bigmaclender2 @ Feb 11 2008, 09:53 PM) [snapback]356378[/snapback]




Oh my, I don't even know where to start......WOW.........okay, let me start really simple, obviously..............you know what.....never mind.......you aren't even worth my time.......I have no time for ignorance this low.....I'm guessing........IQ just above 25???????





Oh, she's one of the psychos (wonderbralesswoman) along with Cinolocks and kirkwoodgeorge. Don't worry about them, they don't have the combined IQ of a peanut.

TexasGeorge
2/11/08
9:55 PM
They have peanuts at the circus, don't they? I hear you are the ringleader.

Kirkwoodkid
2/11/08
10:56 PM
QUOTE(Bigmaclender2 @ Feb 11 2008, 09:53 PM) [snapback]356378[/snapback]




Oh my, I don't even know where to start......WOW.........okay, let me start really simple, obviously..............you know what.....never mind.......you aren't even worth my time.......I have no time for ignorance this low.....I'm guessing........IQ just above 25???????

Great comeback laugh.gif IQ just above 25 ???? you crack me up laugh.gif WOW
Bigmaclender2
2/12/08
1:16 AM
QUOTE(TexasGeorge @ Feb 11 2008, 10:55 PM) [snapback]356404[/snapback]
They have peanuts at the circus, don't they? I hear you are the ringleader.





With a name like Texas George, you're obviously a follower of some type.

Bigmaclender2
2/13/08
8:36 AM
QUOTE(Bigmaclender2 @ Feb 12 2008, 02:16 AM) [snapback]356444[/snapback]




With a name like Texas George, you're obviously a follower of some type.





Of course, now that I know you are KirkwoodKid it is completely understandable.....

View Topic | Comment on this blog