FairHooker11 Posted May 16, 2012 Report Share Posted May 16, 2012 I agree, you have to have standards. As soon as these guys start having kids they'll get standards. SO TRUE!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted May 16, 2012 Report Share Posted May 16, 2012 I'm not sure what your brilliant question is that you think is being dodged VT. Morals are usually made up according to what pisses us off. It might be based on religion, nature, shared social values or just something you made up. If a large enough number of people share that ideal then it becomes the morality. Then if a large enough number of citizens want it those people decide to make it law. It doesn't seem like there's much to miss understand, is there? WSS One may have noticed that VT has arbitrarily subjected the kardashians jersey shore et cetera to his own made up version of morality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicopee John Posted May 16, 2012 Report Share Posted May 16, 2012 . That being said, I'd like you to answer this question: Why can't gay parents raise healthy children? Apparently you think the parents of homosexual kids did something unhealthy. I like how you use the word "simpleton," as if I'm the one who doesn't get it. You're old and past your prime, and I honestly can't wait until your generation dies off. I'm sure mine will screw up quite a few things, but the attitude toward gays isn't going to be one of them. Of course that's 1 of the more humorous ironies of life. Remember don't trust anyone over 30? Remember those who: my generation? " Hope I die before I get old." Yes kids we did it all before. WSS Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted May 16, 2012 Report Share Posted May 16, 2012 I agree, you have to have standards. As soon as these guys start having kids they'll get standards. Maybe one day, once I have kids, I'll be lucky enough to oppress gay people too.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VaporTrail Posted May 16, 2012 Report Share Posted May 16, 2012 I'm not sure what your brilliant question is that you think is being dodged VT. Morals are usually made up according to what pisses us off. It might be based on religion, nature, shared social values or just something you made up. If a large enough number of people share that ideal then it becomes the morality. Then if a large enough number of citizens want it those people decide to make it law. It doesn't seem like there's much to miss understand, is there? WSS One may have noticed that VT has arbitrarily subjected the kardashians jersey shore et cetera to his own made up version of morality. You need a good, logically flowing reason to enact a law. You think that a gay couple should not have the same legal rights as a straight couple. My logic is as follows: a second class of citizenry is created when you refuse to give gay couples the same rights as straight couples. What is your logic? If the only thing that you have is "The Bible says..." then you may as well have nothing. So then you say a large group of people define morality. Well, a large amount of Americans are Christian, yet we aren't a Christian nation. I don't see us putting to death people who work on Sunday, do you? What's your explanation for why we don't kill people for eating shellfish? I don't think the Jersey Shore crowd has any bearing on morality, the point I was making was that my generation has its screwups as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ballpeen Posted May 17, 2012 Report Share Posted May 17, 2012 We are a nation under God. Homosexuals need to be happy we are mostly a Christian nation. If we were a Muslim nation you'd see them buried just above the shoulders with the town throwing rocks at the protruding head. Kill shot wins the prize. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VaporTrail Posted May 17, 2012 Report Share Posted May 17, 2012 We are a nation under God. Homosexuals need to be happy we are mostly a Christian nation. If we were a Muslim nation you'd see them buried just above the shoulders with the town throwing rocks at the protruding head. Kill shot wins the prize. Your argument is "At least we're not brutally killing them." Jesus Christ. How does it feel to know that gay marriage will be legal in most states in the next decade or two? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ballpeen Posted May 17, 2012 Report Share Posted May 17, 2012 The question dodging is strong with this one. It's strong with all of you. This isn't some trick question. You're all stumped because you were raised an ass backward era in which you were taught that gay=evil. Ours is fucked up in our own ways: See the Kardashians, Jersey Shore, Housewives of X County. We're getting stupider on some topics and better in others. Now just answer the damn question. I won't dodge the question. Look at how screwed up it is with one woman raising children with a absent father. Now you'll have two to screw them up even more. And two men raising a kid?? You've got to be kidding me. Here is where I stand. Men and women are half creatures, never to be complete until each has the other to provide the balance, the grounding if you will.....yin and yang. We can talk all we want, but men and women don't seek each other simply for sex and breeding purposes. We seek each other to find that balance as much as anything else. It just doesn't work.....you need both a male and a female to create a child, you need both a male a a female to raise a healthy child, and by healthy I am not talking about some kid who isn't coughing all the time, just in case, which is likely, you are confused. Males and females are as different as night and day, and it takes both to complete the cycle. Just look at the black population. The weak males of that race have been abandoning the females for decades, and look at how that has worked out. Just the facts as I see them, not some racist message as you or some others may try to twist it. All you have to do is look and add 2+2....it isn't hard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VaporTrail Posted May 17, 2012 Report Share Posted May 17, 2012 It just doesn't work.....you need both a male and a female to create a child, you need both a male a a female to raise a healthy child, and by healthy I am not talking about some kid who isn't coughing all the time, just in case, which is likely, you are confused. Then how did we end up with so many gays? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted May 17, 2012 Report Share Posted May 17, 2012 Then how did we end up with so many gays? That damn rock and roll! and skateboarding on the sidewalks! get off my lawn! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ballpeen Posted May 17, 2012 Report Share Posted May 17, 2012 Then how did we end up with so many gays? Fair question. I don't know. Maybe there is a study out there. I wonder how many of these "gay" people are the product of a single parent home?? The next question I have, and I don't know the answer, is homosexuality fairly equal between mean and women? Is the percentage pretty much the same or does it seem more prevalent with one or the other?? I also wonder how many people are truly homosexual v. those who see it as a option for one reason or another? I guess in the end all of this boils down to what we are taught from a religious standpoint. If you believe in that you have one opinion. If you don't, you believe in another. In the end, I don't agree with the marriage part, but I am glad people for the most part are over the persecution part. What those people do is of no real concern to me and am glad things are now where they can be fairly open about things. "Forgive us of our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us". Powerful words for all to hear. I don't see how it is possible for God to forgive me of my trespasses if I hold things against people who have done nothing to me. It is also taught not to lay with another man, so I don't, but that doesn't tell me to go out and destroy a person who does. We all have our baggage, and in the end God is the one who will judge us. That is why I don't think a homo is doomed to Hell. That is just one of the things God will judge him or her on, just as I don't think the person who goes to church every time the doors are open is given a quick passage to Heaven. If some of you who don't believe, and are indeed correct, we simply die...well then, that's that. Dust it is. If believing is only a remote chance of being the way it is, well, I am going to cling to that, just in case I need a little help to move on to whatever it is we move on to. Now, getting back to the political aspect, I don't want the Federal government involved at all. It needs to be a state issue, as marriage has always been. That being the case, the said states need to absorb all costs associated with said decision to allow marriage. In other words, insurance costs as an example shouldn't be distributed to all consumers around the nation. The people of the state who voted to allow homosexual unions should bear all costs. You also have the problem of how you regulate business, but that's another discussion, but time is short. I have to go work out and walk 8 miles, then head to the course for my Thursday afternoon lowball. Later Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VaporTrail Posted May 17, 2012 Report Share Posted May 17, 2012 Whoa. Thanks for the answer. I disagree with lots of it, but I'll come back to it later. The one thing I do want to address is this: The people of the state who voted to allow homosexual unions should bear all costs. In that case, give me back all my tax money that went toward the war in Iraq. Give me back all my tax money that went to abstinence-only education. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kosar_For_President Posted May 17, 2012 Report Share Posted May 17, 2012 That damn rock and roll! and skateboarding on the sidewalks! get off my lawn! Yea he's old, his rational mindedness will soon be replaced with irrational queers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kosar_For_President Posted May 17, 2012 Report Share Posted May 17, 2012 In that case, give me back all my tax money that went toward the war in Iraq. Give me back all my tax money that went to abstinence-only education. Excellent point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted May 17, 2012 Report Share Posted May 17, 2012 Whoa. Thanks for the answer. I disagree with lots of it, but I'll come back to it later. The one thing I do want to address is this: In that case, give me back all my tax money that went toward the war in Iraq. Give me back all my tax money that went to abstinence-only education. Which public schools offer abstinence only education? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted May 17, 2012 Report Share Posted May 17, 2012 You need a good, logically flowing reason to enact a law. Now that's rich! WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ballpeen Posted May 17, 2012 Report Share Posted May 17, 2012 Whoa. Thanks for the answer. I disagree with lots of it, but I'll come back to it later. The one thing I do want to address is this: In that case, give me back all my tax money that went toward the war in Iraq. Give me back all my tax money that went to abstinence-only education. To the first question, that isn't a issue of states voting....nobody votes on Wars, even the Congress anymore. As to the school issue, school boards are voted on. Just because your side didn't win doesn't give you a pass. I am talking about states who's elected representatives who are against the marriage of homosexuals....those states shouldn't have to bear the costs associated with, say California. As an example, if the insurance rates go up, which they would, a company such as Travelers should't distribute those costs across the board. It should apply to Californians only. The problem is health rates aren't calculated the same as say property insurance rates where people in places like Florida have to pay Hurricane rates or Californians earthquake rates. Health insurance rates tend to group everybody together, at minimum by region. We haven't even touched on if business should be required to provide dependent coverage rates to homosexual unions, and to be honest I don't even know if I want to get in to that. I do my clearest thinking in the mornings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted May 18, 2012 Report Share Posted May 18, 2012 VaporTrail, on 17 May 2012 - 07:57 AM, said: In that case, give me back all my tax money that went toward the war in Iraq. Give me back all my tax money that went to abstinence-only education. ********************************* See? Another example of liberal emoting, and failure to think critically. Knee jerk emoting. I'll explain: On the phoney gay "marriage" invention - a state law would benefit only gays wanting to be married, and those who voted for it, are either them, or other folks who go along and vote for it for whatever reasons.. Therefore, those people should bear the cost, since it is an exclusively special interest benefit. However, tax money that went for Iraq, in the war on terror... that benefits every single American. No special interest group exclusively benefits. Huge difference. But liberals ignore differentiation - that is their way of being able to say and feel whatever floats their boat in fits of self-interest and political expediency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VaporTrail Posted May 20, 2012 Report Share Posted May 20, 2012 See? Another example of liberal emoting, and failure to think critically. Knee jerk emoting. No Cal, it was a misunderstanding of his wording on my part. Again, you don't know what critical thinking is so stop pretending like you do. Peen, yeah I totally misread what you said in my last post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. T Posted May 21, 2012 Report Share Posted May 21, 2012 Will Homosexual Marriage Force Black Churches to Reconsider Democratic Party? President Obama's affirmation of gay marriage threatens to undermine the near-monolithic black support Obama enjoyed in 2008. Several members of the black clergy now say they intend to sit out the presidential election. One poll from last November found black opposition to gay marriage at 58 percent, higher than the rest of the country, which is about evenly split. The real question is this: What took black church leaders so long to reconsider their near blind support for the Democratic Party? The historical strength of black churches has been that of a moral and spiritual refuge in a once-hostile country of legalized slavery and Jim Crow. This explains why so many civil rights leaders came out of the church. The moral cause was just and clear: Equal rights mean equal rights -- for everyone. But equal rights and equal results are two very different things. The modern civil rights movement lost its way by failing to appreciate the difference. To achieve "equal results," the Democratic Party, among other things, demands redistribution of wealth, a government response to the "gap" between the rich and poor, higher minimum wages and higher taxes on the so-called rich. The Democratic Party opposes education vouchers, despite polls showing that black and Hispanic inner-city parents want them. The Democratic Party is the party of race-based preferences and also opposes privatization of Social Security. The Democratic Party is the party of the welfare state -- a neutron bomb dropped on the intact nuclear family. Author/editor/professor Marvin Olasky, in his book "The Tragedy of American Compassion," traces the growth of welfare. During a mere three-year period in the 1960s, welfare rolls increased nearly 110 percent. President Johnson established "neighborhood centers" whose workers went door-to-door, apprising people of their welfare "rights and benefits." Until the so-called "War on Poverty," the poverty rate declined steadily. At the turn of the century, nearly 70 percent of Americans were poor. But by the time of the "War on Poverty," the rate stood at approximately 13 or 14 percent. What happened? Welfare created dependency and decreased the incentive of the welfare recipient. The Heritage Foundation compared families on welfare versus families eligible for welfare but that, for one reason or another, refused to take it. The results were startling. Heritage reported: "Young women raised in families dependent on welfare are two to three times more likely to drop out and fail to graduate from high school than are young women of similar race and socioeconomic background not raised on welfare. Similarly, single mothers raised as children in families receiving welfare remain on AFDC longer as adult parents than do single mothers not raised in welfare families, even when all other social and economic variables are held constant." The Democratic Party is the party of Roe v. Wade, even though blacks are more pro-life than whites. Former President Jimmy Carter, a religious man who called himself "twice born," thought the Democratic Party made a tactical and moral error by embracing abortion-on-demand as a federal right guaranteed by the Constitution: "I never have believed that Jesus Christ would approve of abortions, and that was one of the problems I had when I was president, having to uphold Roe v. Wade. ... But except for the times when a mother's life is in danger or when a pregnancy is caused by rape or incest, I would certainly not and never have approved any abortions. ... My position on abortion ... is to minimize the need or requirement for abortion and limit it only to women whose (lives) are in danger or who are pregnant as a result of rape or incest. I think if the Democratic Party would adopt that policy, that would be acceptable to a lot of people who are now estranged from our party because of the abortion issue." The Democratic Party is the party of tax-the-rich. Never mind that Democratic Party icon President John Kennedy sounded downright trickle-downish when he said: "It is a paradoxical truth that tax rates are too high today and tax revenues are too low -- and the soundest way to raise revenues in the long run is to cut rates now. The experience of a number of European countries has borne this out. This country's own experience with tax reductions in 1954 has borne this out, and the reason is that only full employment can balance the budget -- and tax reduction can pave the way to full employment. The purpose of cutting taxes now is not to incur a budgetary deficit, but to achieve the more prosperous expanding economy which will bring a budgetary surplus." The Democratic Party is the party of minimum wage. Nobel Laureate economist Milton Friedman said, "We regard the minimum wage as one of the most, if not the most, anti-black laws on the statute books." For all these reasons, having nothing to do with gay marriage, black churches should have broken with the Democratic Party long ago. Better late than never More HERE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady Z Posted May 21, 2012 Report Share Posted May 21, 2012 Jugears alienated the Bible Belt alright, and preachers north south east and west. He shouldn't have consulted his children on the matter. I thought that was stupid too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted May 21, 2012 Report Share Posted May 21, 2012 Yep, blind support of the democratic party is stupid. Blind support of the Republican party is genius though.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicopee John Posted May 21, 2012 Report Share Posted May 21, 2012 Another 'sexual orientation' thread. This place is sounding more and more like NPR every day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted May 21, 2012 Report Share Posted May 21, 2012 sex sells and freak show homo-sex is place on primetime tv to entertain obama supporters and the dumbed down crowd. You don't have the right to call anyone or anything dumb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted May 21, 2012 Report Share Posted May 21, 2012 No I think that black people will not bail so easily on the democratic party. I think that they are too deeply rooted there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted May 21, 2012 Report Share Posted May 21, 2012 yes i do, even educated people can be stupid. Yeah, but dumber than you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted May 21, 2012 Author Report Share Posted May 21, 2012 Let's separate out this conversation into a separate thread, Tupa. If you would, could you start by telling me the parts of the Bible that you believe are instructing your views regarding homosexual acts as sin. I'm not doubting they exist; they surely do. I'm just wondering if some are more important to you than others. Maybe this is a good place to start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted May 21, 2012 Report Share Posted May 21, 2012 Tupa, pl;ease don't encourage the subject matter. He and others keep putting it in many other threads already. Unless he wants to start a new forum just for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted May 21, 2012 Report Share Posted May 21, 2012 your "misunderstanding" is like you don't understand English when you read it, right? You just got upset that I caught you on it. And emoted in anger. YOu libs can't help it. It's like bark on a tree, it's always there, the tree can't get rid of it. You libs "FEEL" instead of thinking. Knee jerk reaction. Automatic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted May 21, 2012 Report Share Posted May 21, 2012 Tupa, pl;ease don't encourage the subject matter. He and others keep putting it in many other threads already. Unless he wants to start a new forum just for that. There is absolutely nothing wrong with separating that out into its own category. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.