# Politics and News > SOCIETY & humanities >  Gays/Lesbians Likely To Be Wealthier & More Educated Than Their Straight Counterparts

## Karl

http://money.cnn.com/2012/12/06/pf/gay-money/

Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people are better at managing their money than the average American, new research shows.

They earn more, save more, have less debt and are better prepared for retirement, according to a Prudential survey of more than 1,000 LGBT respondents.


Respondents not only reported significantly higher annual incomes -- $61,500 compared with the national median of $50,054 -- but they also carried about $4,000 less in debt than the average American and had $6,000 more in household savings. They were even slightly more likely to have jobs in the first place, with an unemployment rate of 7% versus the national rate of 7.9%, Prudential found.


A combination of factors play into this, said Michele Meyer-Shipp, chief diversity officer at Prudential. To start, LGBT individuals are generally well-educated, with more than half of respondents receiving at least a bachelor's degree, and tend to live in higher-income areas, she said.


"It flows down -- you have a higher level of education, access to higher paying jobs in areas where there are good salaries, and more disposable income to allocate to things like saving and retirement," Meyer-Shipp said.

----------


## catfish

and your point?

----------

countryboy (05-04-2014),texmaster (05-20-2014)

----------


## Karl

> and your point?


The "point" is that homophobia and bigotry might be rooted in CLASS WARFARE or Jealousy that on average Gays and Lesbians are More Successful financially and academically

Yes @catfish this is the redneck version of Class Envy

----------


## catfish

I disagree Karl.....In this world money covers a multitude of sin.It seems you are attempting to legitimize deviancy because those who practice it are good with money...I know this offends you...but it is what it is because I am who I am.

----------


## Old Ridge Runner

> The "point" is that homophobia and bigotry might be rooted in CLASS WARFARE or Jealousy that on average Gays and Lesbians are More Successful financially and academically
> 
> Yes @catfish this is the redneck version of Class Envy


And they determined this by interviewing 1000 deviants and no one else, does the word bias fit in here anywhere?

----------

Calypso Jones (05-04-2014),catfish (05-04-2014),Mordent (05-04-2014)

----------


## Karl

> And they determined this by interviewing 1000 deviants and no one else, does the word bias fit in here anywhere?


Where did you come up with that?

----------


## Karl

> I disagree Karl.....In this world money covers a multitude of sin.It seems you are attempting to legitimize deviancy because those who practice it are good with money...I know this offends you...but it is what it is because I am who I am.


Are you a CONSERVATIVE and if so @catfish you must be Against "Class Warfare" of any kind

----------


## catfish

> Are you a CONSERVATIVE and if so @catfish you must be Against "Class Warfare" of any kind


I don't know how you are making this class warfare

----------


## squidward

> might be


lots of things "might be". Most aren't

----------


## Dos Equis

> http://money.cnn.com/2012/12/06/pf/gay-money/
> 
> Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people are better at managing their money than the average American, new research shows.
> 
> They earn more, save more, have less debt and are better prepared for retirement, according to a Prudential survey of more than 1,000 LGBT respondents.
> 
> 
> Respondents not only reported significantly higher annual incomes -- $61,500 compared with the national median of $50,054 -- but they also carried about $4,000 less in debt than the average American and had $6,000 more in household savings. They were even slightly more likely to have jobs in the first place, with an unemployment rate of 7% versus the national rate of 7.9%, Prudential found.
> 
> ...


It is more about the war on family.  The family unit is what holds society together.

The state does everything in its power to erode the strength of the family whether knowingly or otherwise.  For example, it used to be that having children was the means to survival.  If you did not have children to work the fields and give a lending hand and have them be around to take care of you during your retirement, then you were going to have a short life.  However, today children are more of a financial burden than blessing.  That is why abortion on demand is so popular now.  It this Obama economy no one can afford to have children.  Then those that do are encouraged further to leave them at home till they are age 26 cause they can stay on your health care thanks to Obamacare.  It used to be that kids were kicked out of the home at 18, but now this notion has become virtually impossible unless they want to join the military or live on the streets.  This, in turn, causes those children to delay having children, if at all.

Now those in the family are no longer dependent upon each other due to the nanny state.  That means if a teenager gets pregnant, she no longer is dependent upon her parents or even the father to pay up.  This makes the parents and fathers much more indifferent to her plight as opposed to actually holding the teenager accountable and perhaps making a greater effort to see to it that she does not get pregnant so that their lives are not made a living hell.

Every position the left holds is counterproductive to the family unit.  The nanny state, abortion, gay marriage, etc.  The dirty little secret about gay marriage is that as you point out gays don't need our help.  They make far more money than those who are not gay, and with good reason.  It is because they don't have to support children.  Do we then as a nation wish to go further into debt by giving these free loaders more tax payer perks?  It is a far cry from how blacks struggled financially.  But then, money talks.  The gay lobby is akin to a corporate lobby in this regard, so it is no wonder they are so powerful and influential.

As for myself, I just assume the state get completely out of marriage altogether.  Why should the state give us perks for certain sexual arrangements?  This is beyond bizarre.

Any conservative worth their salt would look at this like I do.  If you really want less government, then give them the boot when it comes to endorsing and suuporting gay, straight, or any other sexual arrangement you can fathom.

But as we all know, the state just keeps increasing the entitlement pool so that their political support will increase despite becoming more oppressive and intrusive.

----------

GreenBean (05-12-2014),Jim Scott (05-07-2014),Old Ridge Runner (05-05-2014)

----------


## QuaseMarco

> and your point?


You took the words right out of my mouth.

BTW, @Dos Equis makes a good point. Maybe the marriage deduction should be eliminated and just level the playing field instead of adding more and more to our already complicated and convoluted income tax system.
That's the problem with the tax code ...... it has and continues to be used for social and economic engineering.
Obamacare is just the latest attempt to control the masses through their pocketbooks.

----------

catfish (05-04-2014),Old Ridge Runner (05-05-2014)

----------


## Dos Equis

> You took the words right out of my mouth.
> 
> BTW, @Dos Equis makes a good point. Maybe the marriage deduction should be eliminated and just level the playing field instead of adding more and more to our already complicated and convoluted income tax system.
> That's the problem with the tax code ...... it has and continues to be used for social and economic engineering.
> Obamacare is just the latest attempt to control the masses through their pocketbooks.


Polygamists are next........assuming they can come up with the loot to lobby Washington.

Maybe it will be gay polygamists, since straight polygamists are often poor, drowning is expenses due to raising their children.

----------

catfish (05-04-2014)

----------


## Dos Equis

> You took the words right out of my mouth.
> 
> BTW, @Dos Equis makes a good point. Maybe the marriage deduction should be eliminated and just level the playing field instead of adding more and more to our already complicated and convoluted income tax system.
> That's the problem with the tax code ...... it has and continues to be used for social and economic engineering.
> Obamacare is just the latest attempt to control the masses through their pocketbooks.


Try getting straight "conservatives" to agree.  

They will not.  They like their entitlements as well.

As a result, the GOP will never go along with this.   You will either get a candidate beating their Bible to prevent gays from marrying, an obvious dead end, or you will get them supporting gay marriage.  Both are losing positions for conservatives.

----------


## keymanjim

They can't, on their own, have children. Which is a huge drain on anyone's budget.
Thus, they have more money for education and use that education to get higher paying jobs.

It's not rocket science.

----------

Old Ridge Runner (05-05-2014)

----------


## catfish

It seems that gays are going for the "preferred class" status to me.....And no that doesn't buttress Karl's contention in fact it refutes it.

----------


## Katzndogz

When a point needs to be emphasized, always drag out some manufactured report to prove it.

----------


## sky dancer

"Deviancy" these days may be among the people who don't see the common humanity in LGBT or who focus only on our sex lives.

----------

sotmfs (05-05-2014)

----------


## Dos Equis

> They can't, on their own, have children. Which is a huge drain on anyone's budget.
> Thus, they have more money for education and use that education to get higher paying jobs.
> 
> It's not rocket science.


Plus they don't have the drain on their time.  All their waking hours can be directed towards careers rather than children.

----------


## Dos Equis

> "Deviancy" these days may be among the people who don't see the common humanity in LGBT or who focus only on our sex lives.


There is also a cost to society, would you not agree?

For example, if you look at statistics regarding gay males in terms of STD's, it will show you that only about 5% of the population accounts for well over half the reported AIDS cases and other STD's.

As a society, employers are free to discriminate against smokers by not hiring them or even firing them because they tend to be unhealthy and miss work.  However, when it comes to other lifestyle choices, such as gay sex, then somehow it is not OK to discriminate against them.

I think I know why this is.  If you look at those who smoke, most are the poor and uneducated.  However, gays are upper class and higher on average, and as such, have much more sway over law makers.

----------

Old Ridge Runner (05-05-2014)

----------


## Dos Equis

What I think is repugnant is how our political leaders further divide society by making them take a stand on gay sex.  We are asked to vote on gay related laws and then elect those who say they will help or hinder gay related legislation.

This is all blatantly absurd.  Why is a secular state either advocating or condemning a particular sexual practice?   The truth of the matter is, they should be doing their jobs, which is balancing budgets instead.  This is the real travesty.  If it were not for such issues as this, they would have virtually no support politically, which is how it should be.

This goes for both parties.

----------


## lostbeyond

Part of the gay/lesbian mental disorder is that they think that their coworkers are their family.  Bad for everyone, but very advantageous for the gay/lesbian individual to rise on top of all power.  At the very top, family life does become just a small part of power-socializing for all participants gay or not.

----------


## Dos Equis

> Part of the gay/lesbian mental disorder is that they think that their coworkers are their family.  Bad for everyone, but very advantageous for the gay/lesbian individual to rise on top of all power.  At the very top, family life does become just a small part of power-socializing for all participants gay or not.


This brings up a very important question.  Is being gay a mental disorder.

It was not too long about that it was accepted in the medical field that it was a mental disorder.  This was only about 50 years or so ago.

With political pressure, they changed their minds.

----------


## sachem

Most polls are based on small samplings. 

Thank you.

----------


## lostbeyond

> This brings up a very important question.  Is being gay a mental disorder.
> 
> It was not too long about that it was accepted in the medical field that it was a mental disorder.  This was only about 50 years or so ago.
> 
> With political pressure, they changed their minds.


Yes, with political pressure as the operative word.  There are a few diagnosis standards documented in DSMV-IV(?), that are regularly exploited politically.  Most famously the Borderline Disorder, that a lesbian member of this forum described in the Rants section earlier.  That too, will eventually be removed from the diagnosis lists, for the same reason.  But the fact, that things like e.g. car accidents can turn people into homos is a proof of the medical disorder, on a scientific basis, regardless of politics. 

In either case, discrimination against gays/lesbians should not happen based of their sexual choices.  ...  They make plenty of political choices against themselves and against other people.

----------


## catfish

@skydancer....I don't want to alienate you so early on.But,just like the black leadership has politicized being black to their advantage.I am certain the same is being done by the LBGT leadership...nobody is denying your humanity or your right to exist as human beings.What is being challenged is the LGBT claim that they have a right to change what has been understood from the earliest of recorded history.

----------

Old Ridge Runner (05-05-2014)

----------


## sachem

> @skydancer....I don't want to alienate you so early on.But,just like the black leadership has politicized being black to their advantage.I am certain the same is being done by the LBGT leadership...nobody is denying your humanity or your right to exist as human beings.*What is being challenged is the LGBT claim that they have a right to change what has been understood from the earliest of recorded history*.


Why not?

----------

BleedingHeadKen (05-05-2014)

----------


## catfish

simple.....that's not a right that is negotiable

----------


## Mordent

Weenie in the brownstar is deviant. Period.

----------

Old Ridge Runner (05-05-2014)

----------


## QuaseMarco

> "Deviancy" these days may be among the people who don't see the common humanity in LGBT or who focus only on our sex lives.


LGBT is a label based only on sexual orientation....... so, sorry ........ I really do not understand what you are trying to say.

----------


## lostbeyond

The problem with the gay sex thing is that that white gue comes out of the dick regardless that girls are not present.  I am not surprised that people hate gay sex then.  You can wash and scrub everything on your body, but not what comes from inside it.

----------


## Dos Equis

> Yes, with political pressure as the operative word.  There are a few diagnosis standards documented in DSMV-IV(?), that are regularly exploited politically.  Most famously the Borderline Disorder, that a lesbian member of this forum described in the Rants section earlier.  That too, will eventually be removed from the diagnosis lists, for the same reason.  But the fact, that things like e.g. car accidents can turn people into homos is a proof of the medical disorder, on a scientific basis, regardless of politics. 
> 
> In either case, discrimination against gays/lesbians should not happen based of their sexual choices.  ...  They make plenty of political choices against themselves and against other people.


From an biological point of view, being gay is "abnormal", simply because their drive to reproduce is dysfunctional.  However, when it comes to the medical field, I think they just decided that if gays can function in society and contribute to society then they should not be labeled "abnormal".  I think that since being gay is considered "unchangeable", then why make those who are gay feel worse about themselves by declaring them abnormal?

I question this line of thinking, however.  In ancient Sparta, it was culturally accepted to have gay sex.  Pretty much all the men participated.  You can't convince me that they were all genetically predisposed to be gay.  They learned it.  At the same time, I think it possible that some are predisposed and will always be attracted to their own sex.  But like anything else when it comes to the human body, things go wrong.  They go wrong mentally, physically, spiritually, and sexually.  So it stands to reason that some simply are dysfunctional sexually naturally.  What I worry about, however, is that society will gravitate towards ancient Sparta and begin to embrace gay sex, which will send AIDS rates and other STD's through the roof.   This is what I see in the potential damage of the state embracing gay marriage.  Sure, you don't want dysfunctional people feeling bad about themselves, but at the same time, you don't want to embrace the dysfunction which might lead others down the same dark road.

----------

catfish (05-05-2014),Old Ridge Runner (05-05-2014)

----------


## lostbeyond

> From an biological point of view, being gay is "abnormal", simply because their drive to reproduce is dysfunctional.  However, when it comes to the medical field, I think they just decided that if gays can function in society and contribute to society then they should not be labeled "abnormal".  I think that since being gay is considered "unchangeable", then why make those who are gay feel worse about themselves by declaring them abnormal?
> 
> I question this line of thinking, however.  In ancient Sparta, it was culturally accepted to have gay sex.  Pretty much all the men participated.  You can't convince me that they were all genetically predisposed to be gay.  They learned it.  At the same time, I think it possible that some are predisposed and will always be attracted to their own sex.  But like anything else when it comes to the human body, things go wrong.  They go wrong mentally, physically, spiritually, and sexually.  So it stands to reason that some simply are dysfunctional sexually naturally.  What I worry about, however, is that society will gravitate towards ancient Sparta and begin to embrace gay sex, which will send AIDS rates and other STD's through the roof.   This is what I see in the potential damage of the state embracing gay marriage.  Sure, you don't want dysfunctional people feeling bad about themselves, but at the same time, you don't want to embrace the dysfunction which might lead others down the same dark road.


In the case of Sparta, they exploited gay sex to the level of military dominance, and yes, the same today, gay workers often become managers faster, and get to the top of the hierarchy faster.  Even in the animal kingdom, gays have a clear advantage in those social hierarchies, because they use their homosexual attraction to manipulate a part of their group to take down the leaders.  Heterosexual animals don't have the energy nor the inclination, after bidding for their goal of heterosexual sex.

----------


## Old Ridge Runner

> Where did you come up with that?


From the opening post.

----------


## catfish

> Weenie in the brownstar is deviant. Period.


LOL.....a salami in the ol' dirt button is a no no.

----------


## Micketto

> The "point" is that homophobia and bigotry might be rooted in CLASS WARFARE or Jealousy that on average Gays and Lesbians are More Successful financially and academically
> 
> Yes @catfish this is the redneck version of Class Envy


Right... homophobia is rooted in jealousy over bank accounts... and has _nothing_ to do with the repulsiveness of men sucking off men.

ffs...

----------


## Micketto

> "Deviancy" these days may be among the people who don't see the common humanity in LGBT or who focus only on our sex lives.


No idea what you mean by "common humanity in LGBT", but if a group creates a label _based_ on their sexuality... why would you blame others for focusing on that?

----------


## Micketto

> From the opening post.


Pretty awesome... for a report comparing gays versus straights, let's only poll 1,000 gays.

----------

Old Ridge Runner (05-05-2014)

----------


## Old Ridge Runner

> Pretty awesome... for a report comparing gays versus straights, let's only poll 1,000 gays.


Well actually it said over a thousand, but I didn't see where the op said anything about polling straights, that is why I mentioned it.

----------


## Sheldonna

> And they determined this by interviewing 1000 deviants and no one else, does the word bias fit in here anywhere?


Add to that the fact that gays only make up about 5% of the US population.....and that homosexual couples made up only 1% of US households according to the 2000 census (and things haven't changed THAT much since then)...and it's clear that this op ed is pure leftie BS.  

Sure, gays are less likely to be in debt because gay couples don't (can't) procreate except by artificial (and expensive) methods.  So they're not getting married, having kids and starting families and incurring debt like heterosexual couples.  (friggin duh)  

Also, since more gay males are black vs. caucasian....I do NOT believe that most gay black males earn more than most white heterosexual males earn.  And even HuffPo backs that up here....




> "This data reveals that, relative to the general population, the LGBT population has a larger proportion of non-white people and clearly is not overly wealthy,"


The idiot left (and SleeperCell/Karl) really needs to get their stories, lies and propaganda straight before spewing for a refreshing change.  But they can't even get 'comparing notes' right...lol.

So basically....the "class envy or redneck class envy" premise that SC/Karl is trying to push here is ASININE (and about par).

----------


## Karl

> Add to that the fact that gays only make up about 5% of the US population.....and that homosexual couples made up only 1% of US households according to the 2000 census (and things haven't changed THAT much since then)...and it's clear that this op ed is pure leftie BS.  
> 
> Sure, gays are less likely to be in debt because gay couples don't (can't) procreate except by artificial (and expensive) methods.  So they're not getting married, having kids and starting families and incurring debt like heterosexual couples.  (friggin duh)  
> 
> Also, since more gay males are black vs. caucasian....I do NOT believe that most gay black males earn more than most white heterosexual males earn.  And even HuffPo backs that up here....
> 
> 
> 
> The idiot left (and SleeperCell/Karl) really needs to get their stories, lies and propaganda straight before spewing for a refreshing change.  But they can't even get 'comparing notes' right...lol.
> ...


O

Thank you for "Proving" my point about the CLASS WARFARE as the NEW ANGLE for Anti-Gay sentiment in America 

This is what you SAID.....".Sure, gays are less likely to be in debt because gay couples don't (can't) procreate except by artificial (and expensive) methods. So they're not getting married, having kids and starting families and incurring debt like heterosexual couples. (friggin duh) "

----------


## Sheldonna

> O
> 
> Thank you for "Proving" my point about the CLASS WARFARE as the NEW ANGLE for Anti-Gay sentiment in America 
> 
> This is what you SAID.....".Sure, gays are less likely to be in debt because gay couples don't (can't) procreate except by artificial (and expensive) methods. So they're not getting married, having kids and starting families and incurring debt like heterosexual couples. (friggin duh) "


LMAO!  The only thing "proven" is all in your mind.  Much....like....everything else you seem to "think".

----------


## Karl

> Polygamists are next........assuming they can come up with the loot to lobby Washington.
> 
> Maybe it will be gay polygamists, since straight polygamists are often poor, drowning is expenses due to raising their children.





> They can't, on their own, have children. Which is a huge drain on anyone's budget.
> Thus, they have more money for education and use that education to get higher paying jobs.
> 
> It's not rocket science.





> Plus they don't have the drain on their time.  All their waking hours can be directed towards careers rather than children.





> I don't know how you are making this class warfare


There are many fine examples of CLASS WARFARE @catfish see above

----------


## fyrenza

So ...  if I'm, like, _semi_-gay, 

I, too, could be counted amongst the semi-rich/powerful/educated?

I am SOOO there!!!
(i love me some of our female members! lol
And if i can "get rich," doing it?
Cripes! 
i'd have to be brain-dead not to ... explore the possibilities,
eh?)

----------


## Karl

> Polygamists are next........assuming they can come up with the loot to lobby Washington.
> 
> Maybe it will be gay polygamists, since straight polygamists are often poor, drowning is expenses due to raising their children.





> They can't, on their own, have children. Which is a huge drain on anyone's budget.
> Thus, they have more money for education and use that education to get higher paying jobs.
> 
> It's not rocket science.





> Plus they don't have the drain on their time.  All their waking hours can be directed towards careers rather than children.





> LMAO!  The only thing "proven" is all in your mind.  Much....like....everything else you seem to "think".


All in my mind REALLY

I think not and have cited several examples of Class Warfare against gays in this very thread

----------


## Sheldonna

> All in my mind REALLY
> 
> I think not and have cited several examples of Class Warfare against gays in this very thread


Based on false data and leftie ASSumptions.  And keep in mind that I used that term "your mind" quite loosely.  LOL!

----------


## metheron

So gay people are smarter because they can't have babies, so they don't have to spend that money on children so they take that money instead and put it on education. Right?

Friggen hilarious, you people must have tons of kids. I mean seriously. reading this thread and the excuses in it is hilarious.

----------

Karl (05-05-2014)

----------


## Karl

> So gay people are smarter because they can't have babies, so they don't have to spend that money on children so they take that money instead and put it on education. Right?
> 
> Friggen hilarious, you people must have tons of kids. I mean seriously. reading this thread and the excuses in it is hilarious.


You are witnessing the conservative version of Class Warfare when the very Class Warfare they incessantly decry happens to suit a Right Wing agenda.

----------


## JustPassinThru

> http://money.cnn.com/2012/12/06/pf/gay-money/
> 
> Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people are better at managing their money than the average American, new research shows.
> 
> They earn more, save more, have less debt and are better prepared for retirement, according to a Prudential survey of more than 1,000 LGBT respondents.
> 
> 
> Respondents not only reported significantly higher annual incomes -- $61,500 compared with the national median of $50,054 -- but they also carried about $4,000 less in debt than the average American and had $6,000 more in household savings. They were even slightly more likely to have jobs in the first place, with an unemployment rate of 7% versus the national rate of 7.9%, Prudential found.
> 
> ...


They're better at MAKING money - for whatever reason, they seem to do well in creative pursuits.  There's also the "Gay Mafia" - they're very parochial in whatever business they take over in.  The only ways to succeed in Hollywood are to be either a secular lapsed Jew or a verified homosexual.  You need talent; but talent isn't what opens the door.

They also SPEND a boatload of it.  Vacations; homes; clothes; sexual pursuits.  No, they're not better at managing money.

Now...why is making money BAD when it's a business owner or chief executive doing it, but suddenly GOOD when it's a sodomite doing so?

----------


## Mordent

This fascination we have with grouping people together by virtue of one attribute and then assuming that attribute is responsible for other, unrelated attributes is intellectually vapid. We are individuals. Some are more intelligent. Some are more successful. Some are gay, some are straight. Correlation does not equal causation, even if the assumption of such fuels the OP's aggravational goal.

----------

Jim Scott (05-07-2014),OriginalCyn (06-08-2014)

----------


## metheron

> This fascination we have with grouping people together by virtue of one attribute and then assuming that attribute is responsible for other, unrelated attributes is intellectually vapid. We are individuals. Some are more intelligent. Some are more successful. Some are gay, some are straight. Correlation does not equal causation, even if the assumption of such fuels the OP's aggravational goal.


I agree with that statement. However liberals and conservatives seem to get blamed by their attributes.

----------


## Calypso Jones

They must all be jews.

----------


## catfish

I hear regular enema's make you smarter.....

----------


## sotmfs

> and your point?


He forgot to mention that they are disgusting,perverted creatures that want to destroy the sanctity of marriage,force churches to marry them,make bestiality legal and acceptable,etc.You know the stuff that people post so as everyone understands the point.

----------


## sotmfs

> I disagree Karl.....In this world money covers a multitude of sin.It seems you are attempting to legitimize deviancy because those who practice it are good with money...I know this offends you...but it is what it is because I am who I am.


I don't think that was his intention.

----------


## sotmfs

> Polygamists are next........assuming they can come up with the loot to lobby Washington.
> 
> Maybe it will be gay polygamists, since straight polygamists are often poor, drowning is expenses due to raising their children.


Do not forget bestiality!!And of course opening the door to "anything and everything"

----------


## sotmfs

> http://money.cnn.com/2012/12/06/pf/gay-money/
> 
> Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people are better at managing their money than the average American, new research shows.
> 
> They earn more, save more, have less debt and are better prepared for retirement, according to a Prudential survey of more than 1,000 LGBT respondents.
> 
> 
> Respondents not only reported significantly higher annual incomes -- $61,500 compared with the national median of $50,054 -- but they also carried about $4,000 less in debt than the average American and had $6,000 more in household savings. They were even slightly more likely to have jobs in the first place, with an unemployment rate of 7% versus the national rate of 7.9%, Prudential found.
> 
> ...


You mean that they spend time getting educated,seeking jobs that they want enabling them to save money,pay bills,prepare for retirement?
Shit,I thought all they were interested in is having sex with anyone all the time.

----------


## sotmfs

> lots of things "might be". Most aren't


Maybe!

----------


## sotmfs

> It seems that gays are going for the "preferred class" status to me.....And no that doesn't buttress Karl's contention in fact it refutes it.


It seems to me some,possibly many,gays desire to be educated and find a job they like so as to earn a decent income to live a comfortable life and enjoy retirement. I do not know if that is part of the gay "agenda" or not.

----------


## sotmfs

> "Deviancy" these days may be among the people who don't see the common humanity in LGBT or who focus only on our sex lives.


I was in P-town last summer with my Daughter.We were sitting next to a hetero sexual married couple listening to a gay guy singing Sinatra songs while dressed in drag.We all were listening and talking,having a good time.At one point I made the comment"People think that gay men want to have sex with every guy they see." The Husband replied"I agree"
Then I said"But we are not that attractive,are we!"
We all  laughed and He gave me a Hi five.

----------


## sotmfs

> There is also a cost to society, would you not agree?
> 
> For example, if you look at statistics regarding gay males in terms of STD's, it will show you that only about 5% of the population accounts for well over half the reported AIDS cases and other STD's.
> 
> As a society, employers are free to discriminate against smokers by not hiring them or even firing them because they tend to be unhealthy and miss work.  However, when it comes to other lifestyle choices, such as gay sex, then somehow it is not OK to discriminate against them.
> 
> I think I know why this is.  If you look at those who smoke, most are the poor and uneducated.  However, gays are upper class and higher on average, and as such, have much more sway over law makers.


I do not think smokers are getting a fair shake,but I disagree with your post.

----------


## sotmfs

> Part of the gay/lesbian mental disorder is that they think that their coworkers are their family.  Bad for everyone, but very advantageous for the gay/lesbian individual to rise on top of all power.  At the very top, family life does become just a small part of power-socializing for all participants gay or not.


I think not.

----------


## sotmfs

> This brings up a very important question.  Is being gay a mental disorder.
> 
> It was not too long about that it was accepted in the medical field that it was a mental disorder.  This was only about 50 years or so ago.
> 
> With political pressure, they changed their minds.


It was not that many years ago not washing hands and practicing high sanitary methods ,childbirth fever being only one of the consequences,was accepted in the medical field.With political pressure,they changed their minds.

----------


## sotmfs

> Most polls are based on small samplings. 
> 
> Thank you.


Any polls you can show that exhibit that?

----------


## sotmfs

> @skydancer....I don't want to alienate you so early on.But,just like the black leadership has politicized being black to their advantage.I am certain the same is being done by the LBGT leadership...nobody is denying your humanity or your right to exist as human beings.What is being challenged is the LGBT claim that they have a right to change what has been understood from the earliest of recorded history.


I say let us live according to what was understood and accepted from the times the earliest recorded history was recorded from.

----------


## sotmfs

> Why not?


Because!

----------


## Dos Equis

> I do not think smokers are getting a fair shake,but I disagree with your post.


What exactly do you disagree with in my post?

----------


## sotmfs

> Weenie in the brownstar is deviant. Period.


Sex is for procreation.

----------


## Calypso Jones

> I say let us live according to what was understood and accepted from the times the earliest recorded history was recorded from.



oh..well that will be forced service in temples to the false gods as temple prostitues of both sexes...and sacrifice...child and adult.   And lots of blood and lots of death and lots of evil.

----------

sotmfs (05-05-2014)

----------


## sachem

> Sex is for procreation.


 :Wink:

----------


## sachem

> Any polls you can show that exhibit that?


Let me find ten people and ask them.

----------


## Calypso Jones

> It was not that many years ago not washing hands and practicing high sanitary methods ,childbirth fever being only one of the consequences,was accepted in the medical field.With political pressure,they changed their minds.


political pressure?  You think politicians care if the peons die at the hands of doctors?   Take a look around you today.  hell.  Our gov't is behind the fact that we have veterans dying and VA is laundering their records.  With ObamaCare we ARE going to have death panels...it has already started.       What changed minds and it wont easy was other doctors pushing it and clients dying off...maybe some lawsuits I hope.

----------

Mordent (05-05-2014)

----------


## Calypso Jones

ask away.

----------


## sotmfs

> LGBT is a label based only on sexual orientation....... so, sorry ........ I really do not understand what you are trying to say.


Thanks for exhibiting the point.

----------


## sotmfs

> LOL.....a salami in the ol' dirt button is a no no.


Seems like a lot of guys do not mind doing it to a female.

----------


## sotmfs

> So gay people are smarter because they can't have babies, so they don't have to spend that money on children so they take that money instead and put it on education. Right?
> 
> Friggen hilarious, you people must have tons of kids. I mean seriously. reading this thread and the excuses in it is hilarious.


Some may think that is what is being said,some will never get a point being made.

----------


## Roadmaster

They don't want to stop it. It's called population control. They want to kill off a lot of people. HIV runs strong in the gay lifestyle and the majority of them spread it without a conscience.  The majority of women in NY alone from the ages of 20-25 die from AIDS more than any other. Even back then when they knew the blood supply was tainted they did nothing until it hit some other groups. Most of the suspicious blood was given to hospitals in the US and other countries in certain areas. The war on drugs always targeted certain ethnic groups if it be black, Latino, Asian ect. If people want to play and say it's all about sex go ahead but might as well put on bullet in the gun and take your chance when you click it.

----------


## sotmfs

Now...why is making money BAD when it's a business owner or chief  executive doing it, but suddenly GOOD when it's a sodomite doing so? 						

I do not think most people believe that.You believe that is the point?

----------


## Dos Equis

> I do not think smokers are getting a fair shake,but I disagree with your post.


****Bump*****

What exactly did you disagree with in my post?

----------


## sotmfs

> They must all be jews.


The Jews started homosexuality.They totally convinced the Greeks to accept it.
The Jews used to leave body building magazines in places where young Greek boys could find them.
Well as Paul Harvey used to say"now you know the rest of the story!"

----------


## sotmfs

> I hear regular enema's make you smarter.....


I think your full of shit!LOL!

----------


## sky dancer

> @skydancer....I don't want to alienate you so early on.But,just like the black leadership has politicized being black to their advantage.I am certain the same is being done by the LBGT leadership...nobody is denying your humanity or your right to exist as human beings.What is being challenged is the LGBT claim that they have a right to change what has been understood from the earliest of recorded history.


I'm assuming you mean that you object to us getting legally married.  Sorry for you, but I am.  My family is as valid as yours.

----------

sachem (05-05-2014)

----------


## sky dancer

> LGBT is a label based only on sexual orientation....... so, sorry ........ I really do not understand what you are trying to say.


None of us asked for the label.  I love who I love.  Period.  My relationship and my family are no less than yours.

----------


## sky dancer

> There is also a cost to society, would you not agree?
> 
> For example, if you look at statistics regarding gay males in terms of STD's, it will show you that only about 5% of the population accounts for well over half the reported AIDS cases and other STD's.
> 
> As a society, employers are free to discriminate against smokers by not hiring them or even firing them because they tend to be unhealthy and miss work.  However, when it comes to other lifestyle choices, such as gay sex, then somehow it is not OK to discriminate against them.
> 
> I think I know why this is.  If you look at those who smoke, most are the poor and uneducated.  However, gays are upper class and higher on average, and as such, have much more sway over law makers.


Lesbians are the least likely group of sexually active adults to get AIDS or STD's.

----------


## sotmfs

> ****Bump*****
> 
> What exactly did you disagree with in my post?


I was not ignoring you Dos Equis.
I do not think discriminating against smokers is right anymore than discriminating against people that eat unhealthy,or drink,etc.Unless it interferes with being able to perform the job.
I also do not believe   because gays are upper class and higher on average, and as such, have much more sway over law makers.

----------


## sky dancer

> No idea what you mean by "common humanity in LGBT", but if a group creates a label _based_ on their sexuality... why would you blame others for focusing on that?


Love isn't only about sex.  I love my wife.  Fully and completely.  Sex is only one part of the equation.  We're talking about emotional intimacy as well.  You only focus on the sex part.  That really marginalizes our lives.

That said, I'm completely done with posting on this forum about gay topics.  

I do not feel welcome here.

Goodbye.

----------

BleedingHeadKen (05-05-2014)

----------


## Roadmaster

> Lesbians are the least likely group of sexually active adults to get AIDS or STD's.


Now that is NOT the truth. Most of them don't have as many partners as gay men but they are just under them and the CDC has gay women high in contracting HIV.

----------

Calypso Jones (05-05-2014)

----------


## Calypso Jones

> Lesbians are the least likely group of sexually active adults to get AIDS or STD's.


I don't think so.  Women simply by their anatomy are most likely.    Add that to sexually active lesbians and you've got a raging infection of some type.

----------


## Calypso Jones

ohmy gosh I just learned new terms.  The top and the bottom partner....the insertive and the receptive partner.  Ick.

----------


## sky dancer

Lesbians are the least likely group of sexual active adults to get HIV.

----------


## BleedingHeadKen

> What is being challenged is the LGBT claim that they have a right to change what has been understood from the earliest of recorded history.


Civil marriage is really not that old. They are only asking to change what the state considers a civil marriage, or really, a domestic partnership.

What has been understood since the "earliest of recorded history" and has only recently changed is that the wife was the property of the man, but you don't have any problem with that change, do you?

----------


## Mordent

> Sex is for procreation.


Primarily, by nature, yes. However, in practice, it can be enjoyable in non-procreative ways.

----------


## sky dancer

This is a perfect forum for you, Mordent, but not for me.

----------


## Mordent

> Love isn't only about sex.  I love my wife.  Fully and completely.  Sex is only one part of the equation.  We're talking about emotional intimacy as well.  You only focus on the sex part.  That really marginalizes our lives.
> 
> That said, I'm completely done with posting on this forum about gay topics.  
> 
> I do not feel welcome here.
> 
> Goodbye.


So soon?

----------


## Mordent

> This is a perfect forum for you, Mordent, but not for me.


You can speak your mind without worrying about a bunch of PC ninnies getting all agro. Just don't attack the poster. What's not to like?

----------


## sotmfs

> This is a perfect forum for you, Mordent, but not for me.


Sky dancer ,no forum is perfect.Welcome to the forum.Post,have fun,do not let people make you feel  a way you do not deserve or want to feel.
Post your opinion.

----------


## sotmfs

> Primarily, by nature, yes. However, in practice, it can be enjoyable in non-procreative ways.


Women"Honey,would you like a blowjob?
Man"No dear.Sex is for procreation."

----------


## sky dancer

> Sky dancer ,no forum is perfect.Welcome to the forum.Post,have fun,do not let people make you feel  a way you do not deserve or want to feel.
> Post your opinion.


The TPF posts I've read on LGBT subjects literally make me sick.  This is not the forum for me.

----------


## Calypso Jones

> The TPF posts I've read on LGBT subjects literally make me sick.  This is not the forum for me.



well.. OKAY...how many times do you have to say it?   Is three the magic number?  We get it...you don't feel welcomed although you chose to volunteer the info that you're homosexual...and now we know you are the bottom.    happy now?

----------


## Mordent

> The TPF posts I've read on LGBT subjects literally make me sick.  This is not the forum for me.


So don't read those threads, Skied Answer.

----------


## sotmfs

> The TPF posts I've read on LGBT subjects literally make me sick.  This is not the forum for me.


If you want to preach to the choir go to where there are no people that hate homosexuals.I am a straight guy that responds to homophobia because I have gay friends and relatives and this site is representative of society.The difference is most people hide their bigotry in public.

----------


## Mordent

> well.. OKAY...how many times do you have to say it?   Is three the magic number?  We get it...*you don't feel welcomed although you chose to volunteer the info that you're homosexual*...and now we know you are the bottom.    happy now?


Technically, I let that cat out of the bag.

----------


## Mordent

> If you want to preach to the choir go to where there are no people that hate homosexuals.I am a straight guy that responds to homophobia because I have gay friends and relatives and this site is representative of society.The difference is most people hide their bigotry in public.


90% of the porn I watch is lesbians. Good stuff. No weenies.

----------


## ManilaFolder

Yea it's always about class warfare according to the Dems.

----------


## sotmfs

> 90% of the porn I watch is lesbians. Good stuff. No weenies.


Are you saying watching heterosexual porn is bad stuff?

----------


## Mordent

> Are you saying watching heterosexual porn is bad stuff?


No, but two chicks give me more to look at than one.

----------


## sotmfs

> No, but two chicks give me more to look at than one.


One sexy,experienced straight woman is all I need.

----------


## Calypso Jones

> Technically, I let that cat out of the bag.


If you say so.   I don't know.  I just know that saying you don't feel welcomed more than once is over doing it.   It's good he's moved on to someplace that will stroke his ego and his belief system.    I don't know what these people want...well...yes I do to a degree.

----------


## sotmfs

> If you say so.   I don't know.  I just know that saying you don't feel welcomed more than once is over doing it.   It's good he's moved on to someplace that will stroke his ego and his belief system.    I don't know what these people want...well...yes I do to a degree.


Some people are thin-skinned or overly sensitive.I feel welcome.Let people post their opinion,I post mine.Do not get personal,angry,or spiteful.
If you want everyone to be overly nice and agree with you all the time ,find a site that works that way.
Read my About Me on my Profile page and you know a little more about me.It seems like not many say much about themselves in their profile.
We have the right to disagree!! But we must agree on that!!

----------

Calypso Jones (05-05-2014)

----------


## JustPassinThru

> If you say so.   I don't know.  I just know that saying you don't feel welcomed more than once is over doing it.   It's good he's moved on to someplace that will stroke his ego and his belief system.    I don't know what these people want...well...yes I do to a degree.


They want to wear the VICTIM label - so they can be all butt-hurt and sniffly and be comforted with more laws that mainstreams their perversions and slaps normal people and human history and religious tenets and basically everything society is based on.

I'm fed up with it.  If he's here to do that, he can go sulk off...elsewhere.

It's just one more bit of proof of the mental illness of sodomites.

----------


## sotmfs

> They want to wear the VICTIM label - so they can be all butt-hurt and sniffly and be comforted with more laws that mainstreams their perversions and slaps normal people and human history and religious tenets and basically everything society is based on.
> 
> I'm fed up with it.  If he's here to do that, he can go sulk off...elsewhere.
> 
> It's just one more bit of proof of the mental illness of sodomites.


It proves nothing except this particular guy is overly sensitive and can't deal with shit.

----------


## Dan40

_"Michele Meyer-Shipp, chief diversity officer at Prudential."
_

What are the duties of a "diversity officer?"

----------


## sotmfs

> _"Michele Meyer-Shipp, chief diversity officer at Prudential."
> _
> 
> What are the duties of a "diversity officer?"


A diversity officer is in charge of a variety of things.

----------


## JustPassinThru

> A diversity officer is in charge of a variety of things.


Like WHAT.

----------


## JustPassinThru

> It proves nothing except this particular guy is overly sensitive and can't deal with shit.


That seems to be common in persons who can't grasp where their libidos are to be directed.  Or the difference between a sexual relationship and abuse of anuses.

----------


## BleedingHeadKen

> _"Michele Meyer-Shipp, chief diversity officer at Prudential."
> _
> 
> What are the duties of a "diversity officer?"


That will depend on the organization. The purpose in a large, international company, is to promote multi-cultural diversity and inclusion. While it's unfortunate that companies have to protect themselves from civil rights violations (though big corporations probably promote more such regulation in order to harm their smaller competitors), the diversity officer is also responsible for understanding the different cultures that contribute to the overall corporate culture.

----------


## sky dancer

> If you say so.   I don't know.  I just know that saying you don't feel welcomed more than once is over doing it.   It's good he's moved on to someplace that will stroke his ego and his belief system.    I don't know what these people want...well...yes I do to a degree.


"these people"?

----------


## Calypso Jones

> "these people"?


As in homosexuals.   Am I not allowed to use that term 'these people' without some people getting their skivvies in a bunch?  

by the way.. Nice to see you back.  have you had a change of mind on feeling welcomed.

----------


## sotmfs

> Like WHAT.


Being serious here is a link:http://www.ehow.com/facts_5194525_im...-training.html
Many people are going to react in a negative manner ,the usual shit like lefties,liberals,etc without seriously thinking about it.

----------


## Calypso Jones

> 90% of the porn I watch is lesbians. Good stuff. No weenies.


what?  no pumpkin porn?    naked pumpkin pies...no whipped topping.

----------


## sky dancer

> As in homosexuals.   Am I not allowed to use that term 'these people' without some people getting their skivvies in a bunch?  
> 
> by the way.. Nice to see you back.  have you had a change of mind on feeling welcomed.


It shows your prejudice, that's all.

And your presumption that I'm a man.

----------


## Calypso Jones

> That will depend on the organization. The purpose in a large, international company, is to promote multi-cultural diversity and inclusion. While it's unfortunate that companies have to protect themselves from civil rights violations (though big corporations probably promote more such regulation in order to harm their smaller competitors), the diversity officer is also responsible for understanding the different cultures that contribute to the overall corporate culture.


must be a real weenie.

----------


## Calypso Jones

> It shows your prejudice, that's all.
> 
> And your presumption that I'm a man.


frankly dude/dudette. I don't really care all that much what you are. And don't tell me you're not prejudiced.   You displayed a little of it here just recently.

----------


## Calypso Jones

> Being serious here is a link:http://www.ehow.com/facts_5194525_im...-training.html
> Many people are going to react in a negative manner ,the usual shit like lefties,liberals,etc without seriously thinking about it.


totally unrealistic.  You can run those trainings till blood comes out your ears and it is not going to substantively change anyone's mind.   All it's gonna do is to make them more protective of themselves and their opinions.

----------


## sky dancer

> frankly dude/dudette. I don't really care all that much what you are. And don't tell me you're not prejudiced.   You displayed a little of it here just recently.


You're right.  I'm prejudiced against ignorant gay haters who've got nothing better to do than think about what kind of sex "those people" are having.

----------


## sotmfs

> totally unrealistic.  You can run those trainings till blood comes out your ears and it is not going to substantively change anyone's mind.   All it's gonna do is to make them more protective of themselves and their opinions.


Maybe,maybe not.

----------


## Calypso Jones

> You're right.  I'm prejudiced against ignorant gay haters who've got nothing better to do than think about what kind of sex "those people" are having.


okay...are you here to engage in some kind of conversation or are you all about the homosexual.  if that is the case, this is going to be very boring.

----------


## sky dancer

> okay...are you here to engage in some kind of conversation or are you all about the homosexual.  if that is the case, this is going to be very boring.


I'm into conversation, but not about this topic. See you elsewhere perhaps.

----------


## JustPassinThru

> You're right.  I'm prejudiced against ignorant gay haters who've got nothing better to do than think about what kind of sex "those people" are having.


Knock off with your projection.  It ain't us who're dancing down the street with our genitalia hanging out, engaging in public outrages and demanding people notice and approve.

If you don't want to talk about what kind of sex you have, DO NOT TALK ABOUT WHAT KIND OF SEX YOU HAVE.  

Got it?  It ain't that difficult.

----------

Jim Scott (05-08-2014)

----------


## Mordent

> what?  no pumpkin porn?    naked pumpkin pies...no whipped topping.


That whip part sounds intriguing, now that you mention in it. Brb.

----------


## Mordent

> One sexy,experienced straight woman is all I need.


Nothing wrong with that. Sometimes less is more, sometimes more is more.

----------


## catfish

> They want to wear the VICTIM label - so they can be all butt-hurt and sniffly and be comforted with more laws that mainstreams their perversions and slaps normal people and human history and religious tenets and basically everything society is based on.
> 
> I'm fed up with it.  If he's here to do that, he can go sulk off...elsewhere.
> 
> It's just one more bit of proof of the mental illness of sodomites.


Yep, that's the preferred class that I was meaning

----------


## Micketto

> None of us asked for the label.


The gays created the label and cling to it.
Remember when they decided "gay" was too broad so they changed it to "LGB".
Then they felt bad for leaving another group out and added the "T" ?
Straights didn't do this.  

Not only did you ask for the label.... you created it in the first place.

So while constantly bring up your gayness in the forums, you get upset that people see your sexual choices before they see anything deeper.

All while hiding under the shield of "LGBTQ" so that you are, by default, off-limits as a target.

zzz...

----------


## Micketto

*8:37* 


> Love isn't only about sex.  I love my wife.   Fully and completely.  Sex is only one part of the equation.  We're  talking about emotional intimacy as well.  You only focus on the sex  part.  That really marginalizes our lives.
> That said, *I'm completely done with posting on this forum* about gay topics.  
> I do not feel welcome here.
> *Goodbye.*


*8:44* 


> Lesbians are the least likely group of sexual active adults to get HIV.


*8:49* 


> This is a perfect forum for you, Mordent, but not for me.


*9:02* 


> The TPF posts I've read on LGBT subjects literally make me sick.  This is not the forum for me.


*11:23* 


> "these people"?


*11:33* 


> It shows your prejudice, that's all.  And your presumption that I'm a man.


*11:42* 


> You're right.  I'm prejudiced against ignorant  gay haters who've got nothing better to do than think about what kind of  sex "those people" are having.


*
12:01* 


> I'm into conversation, but not about this topic. See you elsewhere perhaps.



You "left"... then 3 1/2 hours you still sat here reading and responding.

Since we all know you'll still be checking in, I need to tell you something.  I couldn't care less if you're gay or not... nor could most others.
What is quite clear, though, is that you certainly don't have the strength to be here.
If a stupid thread comparing gays to straights, based on a poll of "gays only", is able to make you feel this insecure, then by all means... get out before you end up in the fetal position under your computer desk.

Like Calypso said... stop announcing your exit.  Just do it. 

I'm sure your life at Hotwire is much _safer_, since they're just a bunch of angry liberals who ban anyone who isn't....   but over here, the juvenile routine of _"I'm leaving!"_... _"no really, I meant it"_  will only get you laughed at.

Thus feeding you more victimization manna, to fill that emptiness you obviously have ... but after crying "they don't like me because I'm gay!"... try and remember it's the drama posted above... and not the sexual preference you love to advertise.

For the record... if someone's assumption that you were a male, based on your pic, is a problem for you.... change the pic.

----------


## Archer

I hear single people and couples without children are doing quite well.

So how many of those gays were (are) single parents? How many are transient (mobile)?

----------


## metheron

> They can't, on their own, have children. Which is a huge drain on anyone's budget.
> Thus, they have more money for education and use that education to get higher paying jobs.
> 
> It's not rocket science.


Yea, because straight people aren't smart enough to wait to have kids until they get an education. So how is that justified. To blame the education gap on nat having kids is just an ignorant viewpoint. YOU choose when to have kids. The smarter ones wait.

----------


## Dan40

> "Deviancy" these days may be among the people who don't see the common humanity in LGBT or who focus only on our sex lives.


Sex life is how queers choose to define themselves.  Normal people did not make this decision, abnormal people choose to define themselves according to their perverted sexual activity.

----------

Jim Scott (05-08-2014)

----------


## QuaseMarco

> I'm into conversation, but not about this topic. See you elsewhere perhaps.


I hope you don't get blown out of the forum (on your own accord) based on this stupid thread.
I personally for the most part avoid the Gay threads........ just not that interested and also lot of emotions run high in them.

----------

metheron (05-06-2014)

----------


## Sheldonna

> I'm into conversation, but not about this topic. See you elsewhere perhaps.


I'm curious.  Who, exactly, forced you to discuss this topic in this thread?

----------


## Sheldonna

> ohmy gosh I just learned new terms.  The top and the bottom partner....the insertive and the receptive partner.  Ick.


It sounds like a redefinition of the Missionary position to me.  Uh....like they never switch places?  Bo-ring.  LOL!!!

----------


## Sheldonna

> "Deviancy" these days may be among the people who don't see the common humanity in LGBT or who focus only on our sex lives.


Quite frankly, my dear, I am sick to death of hearing about 'your sex lives'.  Please stop announcing your (collectively speaking) sexual preference and talking about it.  I mean.  Who gives a shit?  Really?

----------


## Ginger

> You "left"... then 3 1/2 hours you still sat here reading and responding.
> 
> Since we all know you'll still be checking in


*She went invisible too.*

----------


## Trinnity

LOL, just saw this elsewhere.........had to share. Too funny.

----------


## Dan40

> Quite frankly, my dear, I am sick to death of hearing about 'your sex lives'.  Please stop announcing your (collectively speaking) sexual preference and talking about it.  I mean.  Who gives a shit?  Really?


Don't say, "gives a shit," to a fudge packer.................................

----------


## JustPassinThru

> Don't say, "gives a shit," to a fudge packer.................................


She's a carpet-muncher, if I have the program right.

----------


## sky dancer

> Quite frankly, my dear, I am sick to death of hearing about 'your sex lives'.  Please stop announcing your (collectively speaking) sexual preference and talking about it.  I mean.  Who gives a shit?  Really?


I didn't announce it.  Mordent did.  Notice that the topic has nothing to do with anyone's sex lives.  It's about education and income levels in a specified group of people.  It's pretty similar to what people accused the Jews of--being too prosperous and successful.

----------


## Calypso Jones

Homosexuals snot nosed arrogance does not win them any brownie points.....well.......you know what I mean.

----------


## sky dancer

> Homosexuals snot nosed arrogance does not win them any brownie points.....well.......you know what I mean.


Neither do your posts.

----------


## Jim Scott

After reading all the usual pro and anti-gay opinions that are axiomatic in any thread that has anything related to homosexual behavior in it I came to the conclusion that the OP (remember that?) is about a poll that found homosexuals are more affluent and allegedly manage their finances better than heterosexuals.  My reaction to this bit of news is: so what?  

The pro/anti homosexual debate, like legalized abortion, will never be resolved no matter what laws are made or who endorses or condemns what.  I think a majority of heterosexuals, the vast majority of the U.S. population, are weary of reading and hearing about gays and their incessant demands for 'respect' they will likely never receive despite laws and 'support' from both politicians and entertainers.  

Heterosexuals are quite willing to be tolerant of homosexual behavior but the escalating demands for same-sex 'marriage' and legal attacks on religious business owners refusing to cater or photograph a 'gay wedding' are a huge turn-off to most.  The reality is that, despite massive PR efforts and the growing political clout of gay advocates, homosexual behavior is and always will be quietly considered perverse by most heterosexuals.  

The pro/anti homosexual and 'gay marriage' debate is interminable and effectively futile but a part of our modern culture and cannot simply be ignored.

*Jim*

----------

Calypso Jones (05-07-2014)

----------


## Mordent

> I didn't announce it.  Mordent did.


Bad Mordent.

----------


## Calypso Jones

> after reading all the usual pro and anti-gay opinions that are axiomatic in any thread that has anything related to homosexual behavior in it i came to the conclusion that the op (remember that?) is about a poll that found homosexuals are more affluent and allegedly manage their finances better than heterosexuals.  My reaction to this bit of news is: So what?  
> 
> *jim*


thwock!

----------


## JustPassinThru

It will be solved when people of this culture regain the moral courage to point at deviancy and degeneracy and call it deviant and degenerate.  Until then, we will have the destruction wreaked by deviancy and degeneracy and the moral anomie that comes of being forbidden to place value judgments on things clearly of varying worth, some good and beneficial, some destructive and injurious.  To society and to those who practice those acts.

We cannot solve this with debate or name calling.  We can only do so by calibrating and using our moral compass.

----------

fyrenza (05-07-2014),Mordent (05-07-2014)

----------


## sky dancer

> Bad Mordent.


Listen dude, you outed me to the board and I've gotten nothing but shit for it.

----------


## Calypso Jones

> Listen dude, you outed me to the board and I've gotten nothing but shit for it.


no you haven't gotten 'shit' for what you claim to be.  It is for what you are portraying to the other posters.  You are rude.  And unfriendly.  and antagonistic.  It's almost as if you don't want to engage in any polite conversation.   Want to start over?

----------


## sky dancer

> Homosexuals snot nosed arrogance does not win them any brownie points.....well.......you know what I mean.


Rude post.

----------


## Mordent

> Listen dude, you outed me to the board and I've gotten nothing but shit for it.


Double bad Mordent. How did I know you were gay, anyways?

----------


## Calypso Jones

> Rude post.


well probably.  But it was directed at the homosexual agenda and their attitudes as assessed in Jim's post.    

I am prepared to start over... are you.

----------


## Trinnity

*I expect everyone to be civil. This thread is about the economic status of gays, not sky dancer. No harassment from either side will be tolerated. Fair warning.*

----------

sotmfs (05-12-2014)

----------


## catfish

is gay money tainted?......I had to..lol

----------

fyrenza (05-07-2014)

----------


## sky dancer

> is gay money tainted?......I had to..lol


About as much as yours is.

----------


## Mordent



----------


## sky dancer

> 


Ah, Invayne's famous taunt.  Thanks for bringing it up again.  NOT.

----------


## Mordent

> Ah, Invayne's famous taunt.  Thanks for bringing it up again.  NOT.


It was aimed at the intolerant, not you. You can be the kicker this time!

----------


## Mordent

Every time I watch that I only see the scissors.

----------


## sky dancer

> Every time I watch that I only see the scissors.


I would not have seen the scissors if you hadn't pointed them out.  I see only the kick.  Maybe some get a kick out of being obnoxious.

----------


## Trinnity

*Civility on this thread had better resume or there will be consequences. 
Stay on topic.*

----------


## sky dancer

Since gays and lesbians have less opportunity to marry, it's not surprising that we'd have harder times establishing a family, and therefore may be better educated and more prosperous.  I got the impression that some people are jealous that LGBT may be better educated and wealthier, that's the kind of jealousy that fueled anti-Semitism when people said that same thing about the Jews.

----------


## Mordent

> Since gays and lesbians have less opportunity to marry, it's not surprising that we'd have harder times establishing a family, and therefore may be better educated and more prosperous.  I got the impression that some people are jealous that LGBT may be better educated and wealthier, that's the kind of jealousy that fueled anti-Semitism when people said that same thing about the Jews.


The only thing that matters in life is happiness. If family makes you happy, awesome. If education makes you happy, awesome. If money makes you happy, awesome. It's really up to the individual to determine what makes themselves happy and pursue that to the best of their ability.

----------


## Sheldonna

> Bad Mordent.


Mordy...are you being a bad boy again, still, as usual?  LMAO!

How dare you out someone that is already WELL known!

----------


## sky dancer

> Mordy...are you being a bad boy again, still, as usual?  LMAO!
> 
> How dare you out someone that is already WELL known!


Who is well known?

----------


## Calypso Jones

Mordy:

----------

Mordent (05-07-2014)

----------


## Trinnity

Well, America is a land of possibility. Rags to riches happens here.
That's not the case in many countries. Let's not take it for granted.

----------


## fyrenza

> Listen dude, you outed me to the board and I've gotten nothing but shit for it.


You just "turned" on your staunchest supporter ...

----------


## fyrenza

> Double bad Mordent. How did I know you were gay, anyways?


You're psychotic?   :Smiley20:

----------


## Calypso Jones

I don't particularly believe that homosexuals are better educated or make more money.   I think some of the more 'famous' ones do well...particularly in the entertainment industry, fashion, artsy stuff.   And being such a small segment of the population and so 'out' well....how can you not notice them when the media makes such a big deal out of it.

hmmmm.  well.

In _Forbes_' latest tally of the world’s billionaires, only 7 — or 0.4% — of the total 1,645 openly identify as part of the LGBT community. To be exact, 6 of those 7 are gay men. When Jennifer Pritzker, heiress to the Hyatt Hotel fortune, announced that she will conduct all business under her new name in August 2013, she also became the first transwoman billionaire, according to Forbes.
Three of these gay men — Domenico Dolce, Stefano Gabbana, Michael Kors — are fashion moguls, while David Geffen (Hollywood business magnate), Peter Thiel (founder of PayPal, and, as _Queerty_ noted, conservative politician funder) and Jon Stryker (heir to a medical equipment company) round out the list.
All of these men are white. In fact, all seven LGBT billionaires are white.
None are openly lesbian or bisexual.

pfffft.    so much for that.

----------

Sheldonna (05-07-2014)

----------


## fyrenza

> is gay money tainted?......I had to..lol





> About as much as yours is.


She's a female, for sure!  ROFLMAO!

----------


## Sheldonna

> I didn't announce it.  Mordent did.  Notice that the topic has nothing to do with anyone's sex lives.  It's about education and income levels in a specified group of people.  It's pretty similar to what people accused the Jews of--being too prosperous and successful.


I wasn't speaking about you personally....but about some gays who seem to think (these days) that anyone gives a damn what they are sexually.  I mean really.  WHO CARES?  It seems to me that the only gays that do this are the ones trying to score political points for their leftist buds and party.  It's gotten real old real fast.

And I already addressed the bogus "class envy" theory BS (the topic).

----------


## fyrenza

> Since gays and lesbians have less opportunity to marry, it's not surprising that we'd have harder times establishing a family, and therefore may be better educated and more prosperous.  I got the impression that some people are jealous that LGBT may be better educated and wealthier, that's the kind of jealousy that fueled anti-Semitism when people said that same thing about the Jews.


Sadly enough, we think of it more like Affirmative Action,

with a little arm-twister thrown in ~ the whole lawsuit risk.

We know most of the "best educated" were simply indoctrinated,

but are standing in the middle of some very deep quicksand,

because they feed off of each other, cannibalistically,
with no real empathy for each other,
and no concept of what love and/or lovingkindness could possibly mean,
because it's just All About THEM, whom are their own gods.

----------


## sky dancer

> I wasn't speaking about you personally....but about some gays who seem to think (these days) that anyone gives a damn what they are sexually.  I mean really.  WHO CARES?  It seems to me that the only gays that do this are the ones trying to score political points for their leftist buds and party.  It's gotten real old real fast.
> 
> And I already addressed the bogus "class envy" theory BS (the topic).


Most young people don't care.  A few "old fogies" still do.

Being gay is a political act, only when we want to be legally married.  All of a sudden, then, OTHER people think they have a right to dictate civil law due to their religious beliefs.

----------


## Sheldonna

> Most young people don't care.  A few "old fogies" still do.
> 
> Being gay is a political act, only when we want to be legally married.  All of a sudden, then, OTHER people think they have a right to dictate civil law due to their religious beliefs.


I'm curious.  How do gays that are "legally married" enjoy paying that marriage penalty/tax the Democrats insisted on re-enacting?  If, as the op ed claims, there are so many gay couples making top money these days.....they must really enjoy the "equality" of being penalized for being legally married.  Right?

----------


## Trinnity

I think it's up to the Church who it'll marry. Civil unions are available; very helpful for estate matters, power of attny, loved ones in the hospital...

----------

Mordent (05-07-2014)

----------


## fyrenza

You know what?

The Libertarians didn't even care if it was called a Civil Union,
and done at a courthouse,

but we ALL objected to it being brought into OUR Churches,
that have no agreement with this perversion of what is considered "right" and "wrong."

There is SCIENCE behind this "religious" belief;
there is a MORALITY, some of it completely separate from, this "religious" belief;
there are our OWN instinctual longings/cravings,

and this was a thread that I did, many years ago, I think,

but WHAT is the POINT of being "gay,"

if you're just going to IMITATE the natural act???

Why couldn't dudes just rub their dicks together, and get off?
Enjoy each other's innate manliness?

Why couldn't lesbians just rub the bud, and be on cloud 9?
Enjoy NOT being "invaded," by ANYTHING?

...

----------


## sky dancer

> I think it's up to the Church who it'll marry. Civil unions are available; very helpful for estate matters, power of attny, loved ones in the hospital...


If "civil unions" were enough, then lesbians and gay men wouldn't need marriage licenses to have the same benefits as straight couples.  Being legally married has made a HUGE difference in my life.

----------


## sky dancer

> You know what?
> 
> The Libertarians didn't even care if it was called a Civil Union,
> and done at a courthouse,
> 
> but we ALL objected to it being brought into OUR Churches,
> that have no agreement with this perversion of what is considered "right" and "wrong."
> 
> There is SCIENCE behind this "religious" belief;
> ...


This thread is NOT about sex.  Your post is crude.

----------


## Trinnity

> If "civil unions" were enough, then lesbians and gay men wouldn't need marriage licenses to have the same benefits as straight couples.  Being legally married has made a HUGE difference in my life.


Well then, I guess laws that affect that should be pursued on the state level.

----------


## sky dancer

> Well then, I guess laws that affect that should be pursued on the state level.


They already are being pursued on the state level.  We need to make marriage equality the law of the land on a national level.

----------


## Calypso Jones

> Most young people don't care.  A few "old fogies" still do.
> 
> Being gay is a political act, only when we want to be legally married.  All of a sudden, then, OTHER people think they have a right to dictate civil law due to their religious beliefs.


it has nothing to do with religious beliefs...the homosexual agenda seems to want to take it that way seeing as that marriage thing is said to be BY GOD, between a man and a woman. There are plenty of reasons to eschew the homosexual lifestyle...or the predominance of it....now by all means if homosexuals feel compelled, have a  go at it, but it is not normal, it will never be.  And as far as many young people being okay with it, well that comes with a decade or more of pure bs propaganda.   Truth is.   Homosexuals will never be happy,  they can't....even with what could be called 100 percent tolerance....because...deep down, in their very heart and soul...they know it is wrong.

but then...you weren't addressing the OP of the topic were you?   More likely to be wealthier...proven incorrect.   Now...for more educated.   We know the homosexual agenda is aimed at propagandizing heterosexual youth.  Is that kosher?  especially when there is an underlying agenda at work?  That homosexuals know about but they're not so forthcoming with that for their target audience.  your thoughts?

----------

Jim Scott (05-08-2014),Mordent (05-07-2014)

----------


## Calypso Jones

In light of the fact of the matter of these stats, I don't think I begrudge homosexuals their money or their alleged education.

http://www.traditioninaction.org/Hot...Statistcs.html

----------


## sky dancer

> it has nothing to do with religious beliefs...the homosexual agenda seems to want to take it that way seeing as that marriage thing is said to be BY GOD, between a man and a woman. There are plenty of reasons to eschew the homosexual lifestyle...or the predominance of it....now by all means if homosexuals feel compelled, have a  go at it, but it is not normal, it will never be.  And as far as many young people being okay with it, well that comes with a decade or more of pure bs propaganda.   Truth is.   Homosexuals will never be happy,  they can't....even with what could be called 100 percent tolerance....because...deep down, in their very heart and soul...they know it is wrong.
> 
> but then...you weren't addressing the OP of the topic were you?   More likely to be wealthier...proven incorrect.   Now...for more educated.   We know the homosexual agenda is aimed at propagandizing heterosexual youth.  Is that kosher?  especially when there is an underlying agenda at work?  That homosexuals know about but they're not so forthcoming with that for their target audience.  your thoughts?


I don't like the term "agenda".  It has a bad connotation.  What gay and lesbians want is EQUAL rights to a legal union.  No one can be made to be gay.  Your attitude toward gay people is primitive.  

As for the term, "normal", as you well know it changes over time.  It used to not be "normal" for women to have careers AND raise children.  Now it is a woman's choice to parent, or have a career, or both.

What's clear from your post is that you will NEVER respect or allow equality to exist for people you have contempt for, LGBT.  I can't in all honesty say that warms the shackles of my heart toward you.

I am very happy that people like you, with such negative views of gay people aren't in my life to a large extent.  Most everyone I know love me, my wife and family and feel open toward us.  They want us to be treated the same way heteros are regarded in the law.

----------


## Calypso Jones

We know what normal is...we're talking sexual practices here, not employement and the economy.   

And I think you need to see this.

http://www.kpopstarz.com/articles/26...iral-video.htm

Masha Gessen, LGBT activist reveals the homosexual agenda.   It may be an ugly word, but it fits.

----------


## Calypso Jones

> I don't like the term "agenda".  It has a bad connotation.  What gay and lesbians want is EQUAL rights to a legal union.  No one can be made to be gay.  Your attitude toward gay people is primitive.  
> 
> As for the term, "normal", as you well know it changes over time.  It used to not be "normal" for women to have careers AND raise children.  Now it is a woman's choice to parent, or have a career, or both.
> 
> What's clear from your post is that you will NEVER respect or allow equality to exist for people you have contempt for, LGBT.  I can't in all honesty say that warms the shackles of my heart toward you.
> 
> I am very happy that people like you, with such negative views of gay people aren't in my life to a large extent.  Most everyone I know love me, my wife and family and feel open toward us.  They want us to be treated the same way heteros are regarded in the law.


Homosexuals have equal rights..they just want extra ones.  And in the process homosexuals want heterosexuals to shut up and just take it.  They get everything the way they want, heteros give in day after day.  now really...is that ....FAIR?

----------


## Mordent

> We need to make marriage equality the law of the land on a national level.


Why? The tenth amendment leaves it up to the states.

----------


## Calypso Jones

> They already are being pursued on the state level.  We need to make marriage equality the law of the land on a national level.


why?  So homosexuals can just sue anyone anywhere anytime?   Marriage laws are different in some states..perhaps state level would be the better way for homosexuals to go.

----------


## fyrenza

> I don't like the term "agenda".  It has a bad connotation.  What gay and lesbians want is EQUAL rights to a legal union.  No one can be made to be gay.  Your attitude toward gay people is primitive.  
> 
> As for the term, "normal", as you well know it changes over time.  It used to not be "normal" for women to have careers AND raise children.  Now it is a woman's choice to parent, or have a career, or both.
> 
> What's clear from your post is that you will NEVER respect or allow equality to exist for people you have contempt for, LGBT.  I can't in all honesty say that warms the shackles of my heart toward you.
> 
> I am very happy that people like you, with such negative views of gay people aren't in my life to a large extent.  Most everyone I know love me, my wife and family and feel open toward us.  They want us to be treated the same way heteros are regarded in the law.


Amazing, how someone with such a FAB "real life"

could feel the need to invade a site 
with a bunch of whining and crying 
about how 


*EVERYONE* here "hates" gay folks.

Go be with the folks that don't seem to mind where your mouth has been ~
and be sure to kiss them Hello for me!

Cripes.

----------

Rudy2D (05-07-2014)

----------


## Trinnity

> They already are being pursued on the state level.  We need to make marriage equality the law of the land on a national level.


No we don't. It's not a federal issue at all. It's a sate issue. The govt has no right to make marriage of gays a  mandate for churches. It's not constitutional and it's not under federal jurisdiction. It doesn't even qualify as a civil rights issue, BECAUSE it's based on an unnatural act/lifestyle. 

But it can be done on the state level. That's how our govt works.


However, I do think the gay lobby will have it's way and it'll be legal in all 50 states, eventually.

----------

Mordent (05-07-2014)

----------


## Calypso Jones

> However, I do think the gay lobby will have it's way and it'll be legal in all 50 states, eventually.


and they will still  not be happy.

----------

JustPassinThru (05-08-2014)

----------


## Calypso Jones

I was just thinking.   This claim that homosexuals are 10% of the population.   Actually from the figures, it is more likely 1 to 2% of the population of the US.   And it makes me wonder if women are not driven to lesbianism because of feminism.   Think about it.

----------


## Roadmaster

> And it makes me wonder if women are not driven to lesbianism because of feminism.   Think about it.


 The type out today I can see it, you can be a strong women without being like them. I also think some turn because of bad relationships and then you have the people telling them it's a cool fad.

----------


## sky dancer

> I was just thinking.   This claim that homosexuals are 10% of the population.   Actually from the figures, it is more likely 1 to 2% of the population of the US.   And it makes me wonder if women are not driven to lesbianism because of feminism.   Think about it.


Why don't you ask people why they think they're gay, rather than making silly claims that women are "driven to lesbianism because of feminism".

What is it you think feminism is?  To me it's just that women are equal human beings to men.  Period.  We should not be paid less for the same work, or presumed to have no interest in career advancement because we have uterus and ovaries.

----------


## Mordent

> To me it's just that women are equal human beings to men.  Period.


No two beings are truly equal. 



> We should not be paid less for the same work,


Agreed. However, if two people are hired to do the same work, and one performs better, faster, or more consistently, that one becomes more valuable to the employer, and thusly should get paid more for the same work.



> or presumed to have no interest in career advancement because we have uterus and ovaries.


Who presumes that?

----------


## sky dancer

Men and women are equally human beings.  All beings have Buddha nature.

----------


## Calypso Jones

not me.

----------


## Calypso Jones

feminism.   man haters.  Equal pay for less work.  Let me in to your things but don't you dare try to get into my stuff..like golf and car racing...women want into the men's sport.  But if they have a women's league they don't want men in it. Of course, MEN don't want in it. 

They say they want and equal playing field and when they get it they cry and demand special consideration.

----------


## sky dancer

Feminism does not equal man hating.  IMO, far more "man-hating" goes on with non-feminists.

----------


## Belinda

> I was just thinking.   This claim that homosexuals are 10% of the population.   Actually from the figures, it is more likely 1 to 2% of the population of the US.   And it makes me wonder if women are not driven to lesbianism because of feminism.   Think about it.


As far as I know it's about 3%.

----------


## Mordent

> Men and women are equally human beings.  All beings have Buddha nature.


That doesn't mean they perform the same job equally.

----------


## Dan40

> Men and women are equally human beings.  All beings have Buddha nature.


Yes men and women ARE both human beings.  But NO TWO human beings have the same abilities.  Equal rights under the law does not have ANYTHING to do with abilities.  And an abnormal sex proclivity does not entitle you to ANY "special" rights.

----------


## sky dancer

> Yes men and women ARE both human beings.  But NO TWO human beings have the same abilities.  Equal rights under the law does not have ANYTHING to do with abilities.  And an abnormal sex proclivity does not entitle you to ANY "special" rights.


Equality is an American value.  What country are you from?

----------


## Mordent

> Equality is an American value.  What country are you from?


Equality is a mathematical concept. It knows no man made boundaries.

----------


## sky dancer

Equal kind regard=equanimity.  An immeasurable quality.

----------


## Mordent

> Equal kind regard=equanimity.  An immeasurable quality.


I'll sell you a gallon of it for ten bucks.

----------

Calypso Jones (05-10-2014)

----------


## Calypso Jones

What IS Buddha nature and if you don't have it are you qualified to say who else doesn't?

----------


## sky dancer

> What IS Buddha nature and if you don't have it are you qualified to say who else doesn't?


Buddha nature is the capacity that all beings have to become enlightened.

----------


## Dan40

> Equality is an American value.  What country are you from?


The REAL United States of America.  Where we know without a doubt that no two people are equal in abilities.

If YOU would check the origin of the USA, all people were, and are, offered equal opportunity.  Not universal equality, that would be disgustingly horrible for everyone, even the least capable.

Not equality of results.

Not equality of earnings.

Not equality of position.

Equality of OPPORTUNITY,,,,,*ONLY*.

That is more than enough for me, you evidently REQUIRE much more nannying.

It is too bad indeed that you don't know the first thing about the country you live in.

You are an abnormal homosexual.  I am a well adjusted, successful, intelligent, hetro male.  Are we equal in any way?  Both human beings, otherwise not equal in any way.

Is one of us braking the imaginary EQUALITY law you claim exists?  If so, then it is you.  I'm doing what nature intended.

----------

metheron (05-11-2014)

----------


## metheron

> The REAL United States of America.  Where we know without a doubt that no two people are equal in abilities.
> 
> If YOU would check the origin of the USA, all people were, and are, offered equal opportunity.  Not universal equality, that would be disgustingly horrible for everyone, even the least capable.
> 
> Not equality of results.
> 
> Not equality of earnings.
> 
> Not equality of position.
> ...


I do love the points that you break up and do believe that is the spirit behind this country. Equal opportunity for all, do with it what you may. But when I think of some people I believe there are gaps in that.  And I guess its not gaps in the opportunity that is offered, it is just gaps in opportunity to take advantage of them. I mean face it, opportunity can be bought. I don't believe for a second that my child and Mitt Romney's kids have the same opportunities? Do you? I do believe that our system is one in which being born into a family of money and/or stature provides you with more opportunity in America than other people and I don't believe that is necessarily a good system.

That being said, I am not sure what you do about it. I don't believe in having to share wealth to equalize things. What I believe is the underlying problem is the greed that provides some people with more opportunity than others. And I don't think there is a fix for that, that all comes down to the individual.

----------


## Calypso Jones

our kids, the young people of this country have had their educations subverted. They know nothing except that 'life is supposed to be fair'.   And fair is their definition of fair.   Forget the law, forget tradition, forget ethics, morals all of it.  It is what they think because schools have led them to believe that they are just the smartest things evah.

----------


## metheron

> our kids, the young people of this country have had their educations subverted. They know nothing except that 'life is supposed to be fair'.   And fair is their definition of fair.   Forget the law, forget tradition, forget ethics, morals all of it.  It is what they think because schools have led them to believe that they are just the smartest things evah.


While I agree that our education systems today suck. I don't agree that is what they are being taught. At least not in public schools in northern Michigan. My daughter is a junior and has never mentioned anything about fairness as being part of her education. But it is clear that as only 23% of the graduating seniors are considered 'college ready' that our education system has failed.

----------


## Dan40

> I do love the points that you break up and do believe that is the spirit behind this country. Equal opportunity for all, do with it what you may. But when I think of some people I believe there are gaps in that.  And I guess its not gaps in the opportunity that is offered, it is just gaps in opportunity to take advantage of them. I mean face it, opportunity can be bought. I don't believe for a second that my child and Mitt Romney's kids have the same opportunities? Do you? I do believe that our system is one in which being born into a family of money and/or stature provides you with more opportunity in America than other people and I don't believe that is necessarily a good system.
> 
> That being said, I am not sure what you do about it. I don't believe in having to share wealth to equalize things. What I believe is the underlying problem is the greed that provides some people with more opportunity than others. And I don't think there is a fix for that, that all comes down to the individual.


Let me put it this way.  Romney was born rich.  I was born the son of a crippled bartender in a blue collar bar.  POOR!  Romney and I had the same opportunities.  He had a head start, but his opportunities in NO way detracted from mine.  By age 40 I had passed the million dollar net worth mark.  That was over 30 years ago.  My success did not and does not detract from anyone's opportunity.  Opportunity, intelligence, wealth, ability, ALL are infinite.  No one is or can, hog it all.
I wanted to be a professional football player. [silly, looking back]  I was good, to very good.  But did not have professional ability.  So I did not make it.  Many did and do.  They took nothing away from me, I did not have the ability.  Today, I'm much better off than many of them, maybe MOST of them.  There is no inherent connection.

----------

catfish (05-11-2014)

----------


## Karl

> As far as I know it's about 3%.


Something about @Belinda just "Cries" @Perianne cant quite put my Finger on it exacfly but NICE to SEE YA AGAIN there Peri

----------


## metheron

> Let me put it this way.  Romney was born rich.  I was born the son of a crippled bartender in a blue collar bar.  POOR!  Romney and I had the same opportunities.  He had a head start, but his opportunities in NO way detracted from mine.  By age 40 I had passed the million dollar net worth mark.  That was over 30 years ago.  My success did not and does not detract from anyone's opportunity.  Opportunity, intelligence, wealth, ability, ALL are infinite.  No one is or can, hog it all.
> I wanted to be a professional football player. [silly, looking back]  I was good, to very good.  But did not have professional ability.  So I did not make it.  Many did and do.  They took nothing away from me, I did not have the ability.  Today, I'm much better off than many of them, maybe MOST of them.  There is no inherent connection.


We'll probably never agree. You don't think that Romney's dad opened up doors for him in politics that weren't open for others? Same with the Bush's?

We may even agree with some points. So I can say that I will go so far as to agree that much of the same opportunity is available, it just comes at different costs for people. The costs should really be the same. For me to make a go of it in politics I would have to do something extraordinary at a lower level to get big dollar backing. Those already with political ties, not so much. Its about who you know.

----------


## metheron

> Let me put it this way.  Romney was born rich.  I was born the son of a crippled bartender in a blue collar bar.  POOR!  Romney and I had the same opportunities.  He had a head start, but his opportunities in NO way detracted from mine.  By age 40 I had passed the million dollar net worth mark.  That was over 30 years ago.  My success did not and does not detract from anyone's opportunity.  Opportunity, intelligence, wealth, ability, ALL are infinite.  No one is or can, hog it all.
> I wanted to be a professional football player. [silly, looking back]  I was good, to very good.  But did not have professional ability.  So I did not make it.  Many did and do.  They took nothing away from me, I did not have the ability.  Today, I'm much better off than many of them, maybe MOST of them.  There is no inherent connection.


Abd btw, that is awesome for you. You did good. You broke a cycle and you earned it. But many that start poor stay that way and there is a reason behind it.

----------


## Belinda

> Something about @Belinda just "Cries" @Perianne cant quite put my Finger on it exacfly but NICE to SEE YA AGAIN there Peri


I don't know that person and I'm not that person.

----------

Mordent (05-12-2014)

----------


## Dan40

> We'll probably never agree. You don't think that Romney's dad opened up doors for him in politics that weren't open for others? Same with the Bush's?
> 
> We may even agree with some points. So I can say that I will go so far as to agree that much of the same opportunity is available, it just comes at different costs for people. The costs should really be the same. For me to make a go of it in politics I would have to do something extraordinary at a lower level to get big dollar backing. Those already with political ties, not so much. Its about who you know.


Of course he had advantages.  But did he take an opportunity away from me?  Or you?  Or some kid from a ghetto?  No, he did not.

Bill Gates's farther was well to do.  Did Gates take away anyone's opportunity?  Or did he create thousands more for others.  and Steve Jobs as well.  My son worked for Jobs, and went on to become wealthy in his own business.  He did not take away anyone's opportunity because of me.  In fact he choose to pass on entering my business, because he wanted his own.  It upset his mother, but made me even more proud of him.
Whatever wealth one has, earned or given, it is theirs.  It never was mine, and it never would have been mine.  Mine is what I went out and got for myself.  Would it have been nice to have it handed to me?  I don't know, but I doubt it.  My son choose to do all he could on his own.  He got advice from me, that's all he ever asked for.


Different costs for different people?  YES, that will always be true and as it should be.
One person can look at a sheet of music and hear a symphony in their head.  I could study the same music for 25 years and never hear a grunt.  Should I envy their talent and ability?  No.  I can glance at a blueprint and see the entire structure.  The musician looks at it and wonders what all the squiggly stuff is.

Envy is an excuse.  Determine that you will accept NO EXCUSES, from yourself, of yourself, and the rest is easy.

----------

Mordent (05-12-2014)

----------


## Dan40

> Abd btw, that is awesome for you. You did good. You broke a cycle and you earned it. But many that start poor stay that way and there is a reason behind it.


The ONLY "reason" behind it is the lack of drive or the lack of ability.  And no successful person caused either of those problems.  The worst anchor that anyone drags is themselves.

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> I was just thinking.   This claim that homosexuals are 10% of the population.   Actually from the figures, it is more likely 1 to 2% of the population of the US.   And it makes me wonder if women are not driven to lesbianism because of feminism.   Think about it.


The 10% figure is an exploitation.  An exaggeration.  It includes anyone who has had a "homosexual experience" which means if you kissed a girl in high school, you're in that group.  It's a bullshit figure IMO.  

2% is closer to the truth.  Disagreed that feminism has anything to do with it.  People are either wired to be heterosexual or, 98% less likely, to be wired homosexual.  Bitching about it, brainwashing or any other behavioral modification techniques won't change that fact.  It may cause people to change their public behavior, but it certainly won't change who they are.

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> Something about @Belinda just "Cries" @Perianne cant quite put my Finger on it exacfly but NICE to SEE YA AGAIN there Peri


Wrong assumption as googling her picture would show.  Belinda is a publisher and managing editor.  A cute one too....pretty just like Perianne.  :Big Grin:

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> What IS Buddha nature and if you don't have it are you qualified to say who else doesn't?


I think Sky Dancer tends to put it more as a religion than an actual state of being, but all it means is being enlightened.

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> Equality is an American value.  What country are you from?


Dan40 is correct; it's about equality under the law such as the 14th Amendment says.  Even the commies understand people are different "each according to their need, each according to their ability".  

Can you match me in distance running?  Strength?  My professional abilities?  Me yours?  Can I match you talent for talent?  Ability for ability? No, I cannot.  We may be equal under the law and equal in the eyes of God, but we certainly are not equal in abilities.  Otherwise, why would each of us be unique?

----------

Dan40 (05-11-2014)

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> "It flows down -- you have a higher level of education, access to higher paying jobs in areas where there are good salaries, and more disposable income to allocate to things like saving and retirement," Meyer-Shipp said.


An interesting revelation.  I'd seen and heard this before back in the 1990s down in Key West, where for a time, about 1/3 of the island was gay.  Most of the gays were very successful with their own businesses or managers of existing businesses.  I don't know why.  This article points out some theories:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/outward/2...rk_harder.html



> Gay couples are more likely to have higher household incomes and college degrees than straight couplestwo possible proxies for intelligence. Gay men in college, moreover, have higher-than-average GPAs and are significantly more likely to participate in extracurricular activities. Gays are wealthier and better educated than most Americans; shouldnt that indicate that theyre also smarter?
> 
> If youre prone to gay exceptionalism, you might believe so. But theres good cause for skepticism. Here, again, an alternative explanation seems highly persuasive: Gay people might just work harder than their heterosexual counterparts. Starting in childhood, most gay people are acutely aware of the challenges theyll face, the roadblocks theyll encounter, the discrimination theyll battle. Gays born into small townswhich tend toward homophobiaunderstand early on that they must escape in order to find acceptance. For LGBT youths, escape usually hinges on two all-important factors: good grades and money. When excelling in school and making money are the only escape hatch to happiness, hitting the books and working overtime have a lot more appeal.

----------


## Micketto

> I don't like the term "agenda".  It has a bad connotation.


Good... it's working.

When a gay couple seek out a baker known for being religious, hoping that baker will refuse them a wedding cake so they can make a media spectacle of it and hopefully close the baker down.... it's an "agenda".

Despite your constant whining about people caring about who you lick... the problem most have is the way some of you seek to stir up trouble for people who simply disagree.





> As for the term, "normal", as you well know it changes over time


I'm not sure that at 3.6% of the population... you should be refuting the word "normal".

----------


## sky dancer

> Good... it's working.
> 
> When a gay couple seek out a baker known for being religious, hoping that baker will refuse them a wedding cake so they can make a media spectacle of it and hopefully close the baker down.... it's an "agenda".
> 
> Despite your constant whining about people caring about who you lick... the problem most have is the way some of you seek to stir up trouble for people who simply disagree.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not sure that at 3.6% of the population... you should be refuting the word "normal".


First of all, the lesbian couple you refer to did not seek out a bakery in order to make a political statement.  They chose a bakery and were denied service, which is against Oregon law.

I have stated that if that happened to me I would have chosen another bakery and told all my friends that business is bigoted against gays.  I don't support bigoted businesses.

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> First of all, the lesbian couple you refer to did not seek out a bakery in order to make a political statement.  They chose a bakery and were denied service, which is against Oregon law.
> 
> I have stated that if that happened to me I would have chosen another bakery and told all my friends that business is bigoted against gays.  I don't support bigoted businesses.


The point was that it shouldn't be against the law; private business owners should be able to serve whom they please.  OTOH, you are quite correct to avoid bigoted businesses.  People should have the right to complain, picket and otherwise identify immoral, unethical and/or bigoted businesses.   Some states make that against the law too.

----------


## Calypso Jones

so having religious beliefs is bigoted.  that's what I thought.

----------


## sky dancer

Break the law, pay the consequences.

----------


## Micketto

> First of all, the lesbian couple you refer to did not seek out a bakery in order to make a political statement.  They chose a bakery and were denied service, which is against Oregon law.


It's cute how you think there's only been one railroaded bakery.






> I have stated that if that happened to me I would have chosen another bakery and told all my friends that business is bigoted against gays.  I don't support bigoted businesses.


That's what anyone without an agenda would have done.

And rarely what actually happens.

----------


## GreenBean

> It is more about the war on family.  The family unit is what holds society together.
> 
> The state does everything in its power to erode the strength of the family whether knowingly or otherwise.  For example, it used to be that having children was the means to survival.  If you did not have children to work the fields and give a lending hand and have them be around to take care of you during your retirement, then you were going to have a short life.  However, today children are more of a financial burden than blessing.  That is why abortion on demand is so popular now.  It this Obama economy no one can afford to have children.  Then those that do are encouraged further to leave them at home till they are age 26 cause they can stay on your health care thanks to Obamacare.  It used to be that kids were kicked out of the home at 18, but now this notion has become virtually impossible unless they want to join the military or live on the streets.  This, in turn, causes those children to delay having children, if at all.
> 
> Now those in the family are no longer dependent upon each other due to the nanny state.  That means if a teenager gets pregnant, she no longer is dependent upon her parents or even the father to pay up.  This makes the parents and fathers much more indifferent to her plight as opposed to actually holding the teenager accountable and perhaps making a greater effort to see to it that she does not get pregnant so that their lives are not made a living hell.
> 
> Every position the left holds is counterproductive to the family unit.  The nanny state, abortion, gay marriage, etc.  The dirty little secret about gay marriage is that as you point out gays don't need our help.  They make far more money than those who are not gay, and with good reason.  It is because they don't have to support children.  Do we then as a nation wish to go further into debt by giving these free loaders more tax payer perks?  It is a far cry from how blacks struggled financially.  But then, money talks.  The gay lobby is akin to a corporate lobby in this regard, so it is no wonder they are so powerful and influential.
> 
> As for myself, I just assume the state get completely out of marriage altogether.  Why should the state give us perks for certain sexual arrangements?  This is beyond bizarre.
> ...





> But as we all know, the state just keeps increasing the entitlement pool so that their political support will increase despite becoming more oppressive and intrusive.


*Cloward Piven* - Cloward and Pliven pointed out that the number of Americans subsisting on social services probably represented less than half the number who were actually eligible for full benefits. They proposed a "massive drive to recruit the poor onto the welfare rolls." Cloward and Piven presented calculations that persuading even a fraction of potential welfare recipients to demand what they viewed as entitlements would bankrupt the system. The result, theoretically would be "a profound financial and political crisis" - basically an initiating domino that would eventually lead to the economic collapse of the USA and leave Humanity ripe for the ensuing onslaught of Marxism or other illogical derivatives of it. Rudolph Giuliani, while serving as NY City Mayor attempted to expose Cloward-Pliven in the late 1990s. As part of his drive for welfare reform he accused the militant scholars by name and cited their 1966 manifesto as evidence that they had engaged in *deliberate economic sabotage.*

----------

Trinnity (05-12-2014)

----------


## Archer

> The point was that it shouldn't be against the law; private business owners should be able to serve whom they please.  OTOH, you are quite correct to avoid bigoted businesses.  People should have the right to complain, picket and otherwise identify immoral, unethical and/or bigoted businesses.   Some states make that against the law too.



AFAIK picketing and the like is more in line with government protest!

I mean seriously @Max Rockatansky they are free to do business but how can they when commerce is being interfered with?

Why don't people just go to places they approve of and let others the fuck alone.

----------


## Calypso Jones

> Break the law, pay the consequences.


what law did the baker break again?

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> AFAIK picketing and the like is more in line with government protest!
> 
> I mean seriously @Max Rockatansky they are free to do business but how can they when commerce is being interfered with?
> 
> Why don't people just go to places they approve of and let others the fuck alone.


Freedom of speech and freedom of assembly.  Where do you want to draw the line limiting the rights of citizens to speech and assembly? 

http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/first_amendment



> Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

----------


## sky dancer

> what law did the baker break again?


They broke a civil rights law in Oregon that says that Oregonians may not be denied service based on sexual orientation any more than they can deny service based on age, disability, religion, race or gender.

----------


## JustPassinThru

> Break the law, pay the consequences.


When the law commands some to serve others against their will; when the law places the wishes of a few higher than the rights of the rest...the law has lost its moral anchor and SHOULD be broken - in large numbers, with non-violent - and other - resistance.

----------

Mordent (05-12-2014)

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> They broke a civil rights law in Oregon that says that Oregonians may not be denied service based on sexual orientation any more than they can deny service based on age, disability, religion, race or gender.


I disagree with such laws.  Not just gays, but anything.  While I'm sure many here would bitch up a storm of a Muslim decided not to search Christians, the fact remains government shouldn't be interfering with private business. 

As an alternative,  I suggest that governments encourage businesses to respect such guidelines, but not pass such oppressive, dictatorial rules.  Governments can offer incentives such as low cost business loans and tax breaks to businesses that follow guidelines, but they shouldn't interfere with those who don't want to comply.

----------


## Micketto

> When the law commands some to serve others against their will; when the law places the wishes of a few higher than the rights of the rest...the law has lost its moral anchor and SHOULD be broken - in large numbers, with non-violent - and other - resistance.


The left, and their big government dependency... are legislating morals.

----------


## JustPassinThru

> The left, and their big government dependency... are legislating morals.


...except they cannot even claim morality.  

Not to anyone who understands what is "Freedom."  My rights end where yours begin.  I have basic rights; those are those activities and communications and ownerships that cost others nothing.

NO ONE has the right to my labor; the product of my labor; the wages I earn with my labor.  Nor do I have the right to the labors or the results of the labors of any other.

To claim otherwise is to throw morality into the trash can - it makes some the masters of others, according to an ownership structure which is determined on-the-fly and by people who were neither elected nor can be reprised.

----------

Mordent (05-12-2014)

----------


## sky dancer

> When the law commands some to serve others against their will; when the law places the wishes of a few higher than the rights of the rest...the law has lost its moral anchor and SHOULD be broken - in large numbers, with non-violent - and other - resistance.


Good luck with breaking civil rights laws.

----------


## sky dancer

> I disagree with such laws.  Not just gays, but anything.  While I'm sure many here would bitch up a storm of a Muslim decided not to search Christians, the fact remains government shouldn't be interfering with private business. 
> 
> As an alternative,  I suggest that governments encourage businesses to respect such guidelines, but not pass such oppressive, dictatorial rules.  Governments can offer incentives such as low cost business loans and tax breaks to businesses that follow guidelines, but they shouldn't interfere with those who don't want to comply.


Civil Rights laws have been necessary.  Study history.

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> Civil Rights laws have been necessary.  Study history.


I'm a big fan of history.  Agreed on Civil Rights laws regarding government, but disagreed on legislating morality on common citizens.  Please get off your fucking high horse and understand I think people who are prejudiced against their fellow human beings due to race, gender, sexual persuasion, religion and other like factors are idiots.   OTOH, to paraphrase the quote often attributed to Voltaire, I will defend their right to be stupid as much as I'd defend your right to be gay or CJ's right to hate those not like herself.

The 14th Amendment guarantees all of our rights to be equal in the eyes of the law, not our fellow citizens.  Private business is, IMO, equal to a private home.  As mentioned previously, there are better ways to handle this than by legislating morality to businesses.

----------

Mordent (05-12-2014),OriginalCyn (06-08-2014)

----------


## sky dancer

> I'm a big fan of history.  Agreed on Civil Rights laws regarding government, but disagreed on legislating morality on common citizens.  Please get off your fucking high horse and understand I think people who are prejudiced against their fellow human beings due to race, gender, sexual persuasion, religion and other like factors are idiots.   OTOH, to paraphrase the quote often attributed to Voltaire, I will defend their right to be stupid as much as I'd defend your right to be gay or CJ's right to hate those not like herself.
> 
> The 14th Amendment guarantees all of our rights to be equal in the eyes of the law, not our fellow citizens.  Private business is, IMO, equal to a private home.  As mentioned previously, there are better ways to handle this than by legislating morality to businesses.


First of all, I'm not ON a high horse.  Someone asked me what law did the bakers break and I answered.  Businesses may say they have the right to refuse service to anyone, but actually since the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that has been challenged.

I do not need you or anyone else to defend my "right to be gay".  That's one of the more ridiculous phrases I've ever heard.  The right to marry is what most of us want.  We want to live our lives fully, and being legally married makes a great difference to a families security.

As for people who "hate gays", so what?  I don't like them either.

----------


## JustPassinThru

> Good luck with breaking civil rights laws.


Yes, we are morphing into a despotic tyranny.

I'm sure that pleases you - liberalism is a mental disorder.  You'll be delighted, until the Emperor is replaced with someone who's repulsed by sodomites.

To the point of exterminating them - which has happened periodically in societies after periods of debauchery.

And you...will have no leg to stand on.  You've already sold out the concept of Equal Protection in favor of political in-groups with special rights and priorities.  It will be your turn in the barrel; and as anyone who'd escaped Stalinist Russia or Pol Pot's Cambodia can tell you, it's not pleasant or pretty.

----------

Mordent (05-12-2014)

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> First of all, I'm not ON a high horse.  Someone asked me what law did the bakers break and I answered.  Businesses may say they have the right to refuse service to anyone, but actually since the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that has been challenged.


You are correct to say that is the law.  The discussion was, should it be?  I said no and that's where you hopped on your pony with "Civil Rights laws have been necessary. Study history."

----------


## sky dancer

> You are correct to say that is the law.  The discussion was, should it be?  I said no and that's where you hopped on your pony with "Civil Rights laws have been necessary. Study history."


Yes, if you study history, you understand the reasons why civil right law was necessary.  It's merely clarification on the original intent of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> Yes, if you study history, you understand the reasons why civil right law was necessary.  It's merely clarification on the original intent of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.


Disagreed on your premise.  Is prejudice and hate bad?  Evil even?  Yes.  However, following the quotes of Gerald Ford and Barry Goldwater given below, I'm very wary of giving our government the power to legislate morality since it could so easily backfire as other such legislation have done before.

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=4694 :"_a government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have._"

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/05...ligious-right/ :
"_On religious issues there can be little or no compromise. There is no position on which people are so immovable as their religious beliefs. There is no more powerful ally one can claim in a debate than Jesus Christ, or God, or Allah, or whatever one calls this supreme being. But like any powerful weapon, the use of God’s name on one’s behalf should be used sparingly. The religious factions that are growing throughout our land are not using their religious clout with wisdom. They are trying to force government leaders into following their position 100 percent. If you disagree with these religious groups on a particular moral issue, they complain, they threaten you with a loss of money or votes or both._"

----------


## sky dancer

> Disagreed on your premise.  Is prejudice and hate bad?  Evil even?  Yes.  However, following the quotes of Gerald Ford and Barry Goldwater given below, I'm very wary of giving our government the power to legislate morality since it could so easily backfire as other such legislation have done before.
> 
> http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=4694 :"_a government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have._"
> 
> http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/05...ligious-right/ :
> "_On religious issues there can be little or no compromise. There is no position on which people are so immovable as their religious beliefs. There is no more powerful ally one can claim in a debate than Jesus Christ, or God, or Allah, or whatever one calls this supreme being. But like any powerful weapon, the use of Gods name on ones behalf should be used sparingly. The religious factions that are growing throughout our land are not using their religious clout with wisdom. They are trying to force government leaders into following their position 100 percent. If you disagree with these religious groups on a particular moral issue, they complain, they threaten you with a loss of money or votes or both._"


We ended slavery.  That was legislating morality.  We legalized abortion.  We legalize the death penalty.That was legislating morality.  We legislate morality all the time in our history, we simply disagree on what is and isn't "moral".

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> We ended slavery.  That was legislating morality.  We legalized abortion.  We legalize the death penalty.That was legislating morality.  We legislate morality all the time in our history, we simply disagree on what is and isn't "moral".


Slavery was a violation of rights of American citizens.  Legalizing an issue such as abortion, liquor, marijuana, is simply another way of saying it's no long legislated as a moral issue.  IOW, it's up to the person to decide.  No one is forced to have an abortion, drink liquor or smoke a joint.  It's up to the individual.  The comparison to laws that make something illegal are apples and oranges.  

If you really want to use the "We legislate morality all the time in our history" line as an excuse to do what you think is best, I will caution you that could easily backfire into anti-gay laws and a return to Jim Crow.  Be careful what you ask for young lady.

----------


## Calypso Jones

> We ended slavery.  That was legislating morality.  We legalized abortion.  We legalize the death penalty.That was legislating morality.  We legislate morality all the time in our history, we simply disagree on what is and isn't "moral".



are you calling abortion moral?

----------


## sky dancer

> Slavery was a violation of rights of American citizens.  Legalizing an issue such as abortion, liquor, marijuana, is simply another way of saying it's no long legislated as a moral issue.  IOW, it's up to the person to decide.  No one is forced to have an abortion, drink liquor or smoke a joint.  It's up to the individual.  The comparison to laws that make something illegal are apples and oranges.  
> 
> If you really want to use the "We legislate morality all the time in our history" line as an excuse to do what you think is best, I will caution you that could easily backfire into anti-gay laws and a return to Jim Crow.  Be careful what you ask for young lady.


I'm just talking.  There is no need to make this personal.

----------


## sky dancer

> are you calling abortion moral?


I'm calling the decision to legalize abortion a moral decision, and the decision to have an abortion is a moral decision.

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> I'm just talking.  There is no need to make this personal.


Babe, you made it personal when you started handing out advice on what others should do.

----------


## Calypso Jones

> I'm calling the decision to legalize abortion a moral decision, and the decision to have an abortion is a moral decision.


HAH...BAD morals.  OR LACK of Morals.

----------

JustPassinThru (05-12-2014)

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> are you calling abortion moral?


It is moral up to a limit.  Do you think contraception is immoral?

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> I'm calling the decision to legalize abortion a moral decision, and the decision to have an abortion is a moral decision.


Agreed abortion is a moral decision but my point earlier is that it shouldn't be up to the government to decide what is moral and what is not regarding abortion, liquor, drugs and other personal choices.

----------


## sky dancer

> HAH...BAD morals.  OR LACK of Morals.


That is your moral view.  IMO, it was immoral of us to criminalize abortion and make it more likely women would die from the back alley procedures.  BTW, morally I would never have an abortion, or counsel a woman to have one, but it is NOT my moral decision to make about other women's pregnancies.

----------


## sky dancer

> Babe, you made it personal when you started handing out advice on what others should do.


What advice are you talking about?  I think you just want to fight.

----------


## sky dancer

> Agreed abortion is a moral decision but my point earlier is that it shouldn't be up to the government to decide what is moral and what is not regarding abortion, liquor, drugs and other personal choices.


We are the people.  We are the government.  It certainly is up to us to make just laws.

----------


## Calypso Jones

abortion is murder.  period. 

contraception was never addressed in the bible because it was unknown. There was a time when having Children was considered a blessing from the LORD.  NOW we consider it a punishment on our children.    I guess I would have to say, Contraception would be immoral if it were used as in the instances with those girls imprisoned by that Castro guy.   He abused them sexually but didn't want them to have children. I'd say his reasons were immoral.

But a married couple using contraception because they are in no position to have children due to finances say, would be moral.  They are preventing the birth of a child BEFORE the fact.

----------


## Calypso Jones

> It is moral up to a limit.  Do you think contraception is immoral?


abortion is not moral.  I will be willing to say in the rare instance that a child is impregnated that she be allowed an abortion.   I've answered the contraception matter.

----------


## sky dancer

> abortion is murder.  period. 
> 
> contraception was never addressed in the bible because it was unknown. There was a time when having Children was considered a blessing from the LORD.  NOW we consider it a punishment on our children.    I guess I would have to say, Contraception would be immoral if it were used as in the instances with those girls imprisoned by that Castro guy.   He abused them sexually but didn't want them to have children. I'd say his reasons were immoral.
> 
> But a married couple using contraception because they are in no position to have children due to finances say, would be moral.  They are preventing the birth of a child BEFORE the fact.


Well, some disagree with you and they think ALL contraception is immoral because it is "up to God" not family planning methods.  They are anti-abortion and anti-contraception.  More or less pro-pregnancy slavery.

----------


## JustPassinThru

> abortion is murder.  period. 
> 
> contraception was never addressed in the bible because it was unknown. There was a time when having Children was considered a blessing from the LORD.  NOW we consider it a punishment on our children.    I guess I would have to say, Contraception would be immoral if it were used as in the instances with those girls imprisoned by that Castro guy.   He abused them sexually but didn't want them to have children. I'd say his reasons were immoral.
> 
> But a married couple using contraception because they are in no position to have children due to finances say, would be moral.  They are preventing the birth of a child BEFORE the fact.


You are familiar with the Crime of Onan, right?

He took his pleasure but spilled his seed - to prevent conception as he and his brother's widow were ordered to do.  For that, Onan was cursed; and Onanism is...not a complementary term.

Whether a person practices contraception or not is a personal choice - no other lives are involved, unlike abortion.  But I'd hold that by the Bible it is in fact immoral.

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> abortion is murder.  period. 
> 
> contraception was never addressed in the bible because it was unknown. There was a time when having Children was considered a blessing from the LORD.  NOW we consider it a punishment on our children.    I guess I would have to say, Contraception would be immoral if it were used as in the instances with those girls imprisoned by that Castro guy.   He abused them sexually but didn't want them to have children. I'd say his reasons were immoral.
> 
> But a married couple using contraception because they are in no position to have children due to finances say, would be moral.  *They are preventing the birth of a child BEFORE the fact.*


Abortion is "preventing the birth of a child before the fact".    

Aborting a zygote or a blastocyst isn't murder and it certainly isn't immoral.  Aborting a fetus with brain wave activity is much more morally ambiguous.  I think it would be wrong to do so, but I also wouldn't put the life of the mother at risk to avoid aborting it.  If a fetus is viable on it's own, then by all means, take it from the mother and raise it yourself.

----------


## Calypso Jones

> That is your moral view.  IMO, it was immoral of us to criminalize abortion and make it more likely women would die from the back alley procedures.  BTW, morally I would never have an abortion, or counsel a woman to have one, but it is NOT my moral decision to make about other women's pregnancies.



hell..you got women dying now right along with their aborted babies and you don't seem to have a problem with that!!

----------


## sky dancer

> hell..you got women dying now right along with their aborted babies and you don't seem to have a problem with that!!


You're assuming I don't care about women's health or that I have somehow caused women to get abortions.

----------


## Calypso Jones

> Abortion is "preventing the birth of a child before the fact".    
> 
> Aborting a zygote or a blastocyst isn't murder and it certainly isn't immoral.  Aborting a fetus with brain wave activity is much more morally ambiguous.  I think it would be wrong to do so, but I also wouldn't put the life of the mother at risk to avoid aborting it.  If a fetus is viable on it's own, then by all means, take it from the mother and raise it yourself.


that is so disingenuous. 

In a key passage innocent blood cries out:
_How long, Sovereign Lord, holy and true, until you judge the inhabitants of the earth and avenge our blood?   _  -Revelation 6:10

----------


## sky dancer

> that is so disingenuous. 
> 
> In a key passage innocent blood cries out:
> _How long, Sovereign Lord, holy and true, until you judge the inhabitants of the earth and avenge our blood?   _  -Revelation 6:10


Rather than quote scripture, it would be great if you put it in your own words, your understanding of it.  Otherwise, I find it unhelpful unless all you want to do is talk with other Christians.

----------


## Calypso Jones

> Rather than quote scripture, it would be great if you put it in your own words, your understanding of it.  Otherwise, I find it unhelpful unless all you want to do is talk with other Christians.


It is the authority of Scripture.  Older than Buddhism.

----------


## Calypso Jones

what does Buddhism say about killing the unborn?

----------


## sky dancer

> what does Buddhism say about killing the unborn?


First of all, we think all life has Buddha nature, even the lives of insects and animals.  We aren't moral absolutists though.  Generally, if a woman asked a great Buddhist teacher or Rinpoche for advice about terminating a pregnancy or carrying it to term, the path to ultimate happiness would be a self-less decision in that regard.

----------


## sky dancer

> It is the authority of Scripture.  Older than Buddhism.


Buddhism is older than Christianity.  Shakamuni Buddha was not the first Buddha.  It's OK, CJ.  I won't get you to stop quoting scripture, I can only say what's helpful to me in that regard.

----------


## Calypso Jones

God places a very high value on children and encourages us to bring them into our lives.  This is a Christian viewpoint greatly at variance with today's anti-child, anti-life sentiments.
 _ Behold, children are a blessing from the Lord.  The fruit of the womb is a reward.  Like armies in the hand of a warrior, so are the children of one's youth.   _  -Psalm 127:3

*God's Attitude Toward Abortion
*The matter of shedding innocent blood threads through the scriptures from Genesis to Revelation:
_The Lord...hates...hands that shed innocent blood._       -Proverbs 6:16

God's beloved nation Israel was sent into exile for sacrificing its children to idols:
_They shed innocent blood, the blood of their sons and daughters, whom they sacrificed to the idols of Canaan, and the land was desecrated by their blood...Therefore the Lord was angry with his people...He handed them over to the nations, and their foes ruled over them._  -Psalm 106:38-41

----------


## Calypso Jones

> Buddhism is older than Christianity.  Shakamuni Buddha was not the first Buddha.


of course they say that now after the fact.  Sources say Buddhism's founder was Siddharta Gautama.  Founded in @600BC

----------


## sotmfs

> Nothing wrong with that. Sometimes less is more, sometimes more is more.


More or less!

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> that is so disingenuous.


Disagreed, but understood why you would say so.  It's sooooo you to label others.

----------


## sky dancer

> of course they say that now after the fact.


No, it's more like that particular teaching of previous Buddha's or even countless Buddha's is less common than Shakamuni Buddha. Historical Jesus came AFTER the historical Buddha.  There are Buddhas to come.

----------


## Calypso Jones

> No, it's more like that particular teaching of previous Buddha's or even countless Buddha's is less common than Shakamuni Buddha.


they are dead Men.

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> *Buddhism is older than Christianity*.  Shakamuni Buddha was not the first Buddha.  It's OK, CJ.  I won't get you to stop quoting scripture, I can only say what's helpful to me in that regard.


Correct.  About 500 years older.

http://www.patheos.com/Library/Buddhism.html



> Most historians agree that Buddhism originated in northern India in the 5th century B.C.E. The tradition traces its origin to Siddhartha Gautama (or Gotama), who is typically referred to as the Buddha (literally the "Awakened" or "Enlightened One"). Siddhartha observed the suffering in the world and set out to find an antidote. Through meditation and analysis, he attained an enlightened state of being that marked the end of attachments (and therefore suffering), and ultimately, upon his death, release from the cycle of rebirth (_samsara_). The Buddha's teachings are often summarized in the Four Noble Truths, which form the basis of the first sermon he delivered after attaining enlightenment, and the Eightfold Path, which provides a basic guide for how to live in the world. Over the course of its 2500-year history, Buddhism has experienced many schisms and modifications; there are currently three major branches of the tradition — the Theravada ("Doctrine of the Elders"), the Mahayana ("Great Vehicle), and the Vajrayana ("Diamond Vehicle," often simply called "Tibetan Buddhism"), although there are many sects and groups within each of these branches. The Buddhist canon consists of a vast corpus of texts that cover philosophical, devotional, and monastic matters, and each of the major divisions of Buddhism has its own distinct version of what it considers to be canonical scriptures. Buddhism has spread from its roots in India to virtually every corner of the world, and in each place it has spread it has adopted and adapted local practices and beliefs. Although Buddhism is a distinct religious tradition, many people in the contemporary West have adopted philosophical and practical aspects of Buddhism and incorporated them into their religious and social practices; thus there are people who identify themselves "Buddhist Christians," "Buddhist Jews," and "Buddhist Atheists."

----------


## sky dancer

> they are dead Men.


No, Buddha isn't a dead man, it's a state of being.

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> they are dead Men.


So is Moses, all the Apostles, Paul and many others.  What's your point?  That we all die?

----------


## sotmfs

> The only thing that matters in life is happiness. If family makes you happy, awesome. If education makes you happy, awesome. If money makes you happy, awesome. It's really up to the individual to determine what makes themselves happy and pursue that to the best of their ability.


Yes,pursue it without causing harm to others.
Treat others as you want to be treated,unless    you are a masochist.

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> No, Buddha isn't a dead man, it's a state of being.


The person referred to as "the Buddha", Siddhartha Gautama, is most certainly dead, but understood that word itself simply means "awakened one".

----------


## Calypso Jones

good thing.  That's all you got.

----------


## sotmfs

> You're psychotic?

----------


## sky dancer

> The person referred to as "the Buddha", Siddhartha Gautama, is most certainly dead, but understood that word itself simply means "awakened one".


Or just "awake".  In Tibetan the term "Buddha" a Sanskrit word is "sang gye" which means "to clear away and to unfold."

----------


## sky dancer

> good thing.  That's all you got.


I certainly mean you no disrespect, and I hope you return that kindness.

----------


## sotmfs

> Homosexuals have equal rights..they just want extra ones.  And in the process homosexuals want heterosexuals to shut up and just take it.  They get everything the way they want, heteros give in day after day.  now really...is that ....FAIR?


What extra rights would that be,Calypso Jones?

----------


## newpublius

> http://money.cnn.com/2012/12/06/pf/gay-money/
> 
> Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people are better at managing their money than the average American, new research shows.
> 
> They earn more, save more, have less debt and are better prepared for retirement, according to a Prudential survey of more than 1,000 LGBT respondents.
> 
> 
> Respondents not only reported significantly higher annual incomes -- $61,500 compared with the national median of $50,054 -- but they also carried about $4,000 less in debt than the average American and had $6,000 more in household savings. They were even slightly more likely to have jobs in the first place, with an unemployment rate of 7% versus the national rate of 7.9%, Prudential found.
> 
> ...


Well, let's face it, children are expensive. Now, don't get me wrong, many homosexuals have children, either biological or adopted, but statistically there's far fewer children....

----------


## sotmfs

> why?  So homosexuals can just sue anyone anywhere anytime?   Marriage laws are different in some states..perhaps state level would be the better way for homosexuals to go.


So their marriages will be recognized nationwide.Not a big deal.More important issues need to be dealt with.

----------


## sotmfs

> Amazing, how someone with such a FAB "real life"
> 
> could feel the need to invade a site 
> with a bunch of whining and crying 
> about how 
> 
> 
> *EVERYONE* here "hates" gay folks.
> 
> ...


No,not everyone here hates gay folks.

----------


## Calypso Jones

No one hates them. They're just wrong. We know it, they know it, they know we know it, we know they know it.   Any truth spoken to homosexuals is considered hate.

----------


## sky dancer

> No one hates them. They're just wrong. We know it, they know it, they know we know it, we know they know it.   Any truth spoken to homosexuals is considered hate.


I happen to be a lesbian.  If you're talking about the truth of a bias against homosexuals, I certainly do know who has it and who doesn't from how they post on this forum.  Does it rise to the level of hate?  I don't know.  That would be for you and they to find out for yourselves.

We don't need you to value us or our families, only to understand that we value ourselves and our families as dearly as you value your own.

----------


## sotmfs

> I was just thinking.   This claim that homosexuals are 10% of the population.   Actually from the figures, it is more likely 1 to 2% of the population of the US.   And it makes me wonder if women are not driven to lesbianism because of feminism.   Think about it.


You really think women can be driven to lesbianism?
What about men?Massachusetts had a state police unit up ,until the mid sixties ,that focused on fighting "smut" such as homosexuality.
One method of recruiting young boys,according to these fearless defenders of morality,was leaving "body building magazines"in places were boys would find them.It doesn't take much to drive people to homosexuality!!!LOL!

----------

sky dancer (05-12-2014)

----------


## sky dancer

> You really think women can be driven to lesbianism?
> What about men?Massachusetts had a state police unit up ,until the mid sixties ,that focused on fighting "smut" such as homosexuality.
> One method of recruiting young boys,according to these fearless defenders of morality,was leaving "body building magazines"in places were boys would find them.It doesn't take much to drive people to homosexuality!!!LOL!


And masturbation makes your penis fall off.  Some "religious" gay haters, seem to think the "sin" of homosexuality is worse than murder.  I find that very strange.

----------


## sotmfs

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

*Full Definition of FEMINISM*1
*:*  the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes 

2
*:*  organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests

----------


## sky dancer

> http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/feminism
> 
> *Full Definition of FEMINISM*
> 
> 1
> *:*  the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes 
> 
> 2
> *:*  organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests


You are apparently not listening to Rush Limbaugh.

----------


## sky dancer

Just out of curiosity, among those who think gays are "just wrong" how many of you know any personally?  Are they all wrong about everything?

----------


## sotmfs

> The type out today I can see it, you can be a strong women without being like them. I also think some turn because of bad relationships and then you have the people telling them it's a cool fad.


Many men turn gay because of bad relationships.Some abuse the women that want to end the relationship and end up in prison where they turn to other men for sex! LOL!

----------


## sky dancer

> Many men turn gay because of bad relationships.Some abuse the women that want to end the relationship and end up in prison where they turn to other men for sex! LOL!


Funny, the men in prisons who are fucking other men usually consider themselves straight.

----------


## Calypso Jones

> Funny, the men in prisons who are fucking other men usually consider themselves straight.


how would you know that?

----------


## sotmfs

> That doesn't mean they perform the same job equally.


Men put signs up to let everyone know that they are working.
Women work without having to post it.

----------


## Calypso Jones

> http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/feminism
> 
> *Full Definition of FEMINISM*
> 
> 1
> *:*  the theory of the political, economic, and social equality of the sexes 
> 
> 2
> *:*  organized activity on behalf of women's rights and interests


wouldn't it be better to use their own mission statement?

http://www.now.org/history/purpos66.html

----------


## sotmfs

> Yes men and women ARE both human beings.  But NO TWO human beings have the same abilities.  Equal rights under the law does not have ANYTHING to do with abilities.  And an abnormal sex proclivity does not entitle you to ANY "special" rights.


Equal rights means equal opportunity.

----------


## sky dancer

> how would you know that?


Ask them.

----------


## sky dancer

> No one hates them. They're just wrong. We know it, they know it, they know we know it, we know they know it.   Any truth spoken to homosexuals is considered hate.


How many gay friends do you have?  Do they know you think "they're just wrong".  Maybe you have no gay friends or you think gayness can be caught.

----------


## sotmfs

> our kids, the young people of this country have had their educations subverted. They know nothing except that 'life is supposed to be fair'.   And fair is their definition of fair.   Forget the law, forget tradition, forget ethics, morals all of it.  It is what they think because schools have led them to believe that they are just the smartest things evah.


I am happy my kids(son,29,daughter,26) are doing very well after being educated in the public school system.They know a lot more than "life is not fair"which I taught them.The schools taught them mathematics,science,history(know who wrote it,which I instilled in them)and logic.

----------


## sotmfs

> While I agree that our education systems today suck. I don't agree that is what they are being taught. At least not in public schools in northern Michigan. My daughter is a junior and has never mentioned anything about fairness as being part of her education. But it is clear that as only 23% of the graduating seniors are considered 'college ready' that our education system has failed.


Parents have to do their part also.

----------

metheron (05-13-2014)

----------


## sotmfs

> The ONLY "reason" behind it is the lack of drive or the lack of ability.  And no successful person caused either of those problems.  The worst anchor that anyone drags is themselves.


Two reasons?That is a simplification.
Lack of encouragement from an early age can prevent drive and stifle ability.

----------


## sotmfs

> The left, and their big government dependency... are legislating morals.


Just as the right is.

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> Funny, the men in prisons who are fucking other men usually consider themselves straight.


He was joking.  People don't "turn" gay.  They either are or they aren't.

----------

sky dancer (05-13-2014)

----------


## sotmfs

> wouldn't it be better to use their own mission statement?
> 
> http://www.now.org/history/purpos66.html


So what is the problem?

----------


## sotmfs

> He was joking.  People don't "turn" gay.  They either are or they aren't.

----------


## Trinnity

> He was joking.  People don't "turn" gay.  They either are or they aren't.


I think some choose it for whatever reason.

----------


## sotmfs

> I think some choose it for whatever reason.


Trinity,people choose things for many reasons.I choose to not be gay.My brother is gay and has been that way from birth.
There are choices that people make that are worse than choosing to have sex with someone of the same sex.

----------


## Roadmaster

> He was joking.  People don't "turn" gay.  They either are or they aren't.


LOL right, when people turn away from God they will do anything. 
1. Sleep around and not care if they get something or pass it around.
2. Experiment with same sex because it's all about them. Once you step over lines you will do almost anything.
3. Try animals because others are hey as long as the animal is not hurt right.
4. Rape kids because you haven't experienced that yet. Problem is there are many kids that grow up killing themselves or their attacker. But in the rapist mind the kid enjoys it.
You are wrong people are not born to do these things.

----------


## Calypso Jones

> Trinity,people choose things for many reasons.I choose to not be gay.My brother is gay and has been that way from birth.
> There are choices that people make that are worse than choosing to have sex with someone of the same sex.


I know and I have no hate for your brother.   But homosexual sex is a sin, just like wanton heterosexual sex.  So what must one do.  Repent and not do it anymore.   Repentent Homosexual and celibate.  Repentent adulterer and celibate or repentant faithful husband.

----------

catfish (05-13-2014),sparsely (05-12-2014)

----------


## sotmfs

> LOL right, when people turn away from God they will do anything. 
> 1. Sleep around and not care if they get something or pass it around.
> 2. Experiment with same sex because it's all about them. Once you step over lines you will do almost anything.
> 3. Try animals because others are hey as long as the animal is not hurt right.
> 4. Rape kids because you haven't experienced that yet. Problem is there are many kids that grow up killing themselves or their attacker. But in the rapist mind the kid enjoys it.
> You are wrong people are not born to do these things.


Really?Shit ,I do not believe in god or gods or the devil ,nor angels.I have not and would not do or even consider doing anything you mention in your post.

----------


## sotmfs

Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone.

----------


## Mordent

> Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone.


 
tomato_zps28ac6943.gif

----------


## sotmfs

> tomato_zps28ac6943.gif


Fuck,that hurt buddy!!LOL!

----------


## catfish

> Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone.


As the late venerable radio broadcaster Paul Harvey used to say on his show."and now for the rest of story....."

That must be the most misused verse in all of the Bible because it seems the hard part is left out.....go and sin no more....the verse is about forgiveness but it is also about repentance.

----------


## Micketto

> I happen to be a lesbian.


I'm pretty sure, with the dozens of times you've made that announcement, despite you saying you don't want to be the "gay member" here, everyone is well aware.

Btw, nice pic of you and the wife.

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> LOL right, when people turn away from God they will do anything. 
> 1. Sleep around and not care if they get something or pass it around.
> 2. Experiment with same sex because it's all about them. Once you step over lines you will do almost anything.
> 3. Try animals because others are hey as long as the animal is not hurt right.
> 4. Rape kids because you haven't experienced that yet. Problem is there are many kids that grow up killing themselves or their attacker. But in the rapist mind the kid enjoys it.
> You are wrong people are not born to do these things.


Incorrect.  Some are.  However, that doesn't mean a person who hurts others or animals should be allowed to walk around free to do it.  Best place for their own safety and the safety of others is a concrete box.

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> I think some choose it for whatever reason.


Some might.  Studies of gays show there is a genetic component, but gay or straight, the whole sexual preference mechanism isn't clearly understood.  I didn't choose to like girls, I just did.  It was the way I was born.   

EDIT: Did you always like men when you became a woman or did you go through a period of decision?

----------

sky dancer (05-13-2014)

----------


## Micketto

> Did you choose to like men or did you go through a period of decision?


What is the difference between choosing and deciding ?!

----------


## sky dancer

> I'm pretty sure, with the dozens of times you've made that announcement, despite you saying you don't want to be the "gay member" here, everyone is well aware.
> 
> Btw, nice pic of you and the wife.


That's my brother, Craig and my friend Candace.  No wife in the photo.

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> What is the difference between choosing and deciding ?!


Bad wording on my  part.  I corrected it.

----------


## sky dancer

> Bad wording on my  part.  I corrected it.


Choosing to be happy.

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> Choosing to be happy.


We are what we are, but our actions are choices.  For purely religious reasons, some consider homosexuality to be a sin punishable by death.   Their zealousness in this belief causes them to believe the false idea that homosexuality is purely a choice but heterosexuality is a "natural" matter of birth.   In short, they jump from condemning the actions to condemning the person by denying that their proclivities are genetic.  

This gives rise to the funny observation that Democrats believe nothing is genetic except homosexuality while Republicans believe everything is genetic except homosexuality.

----------

sky dancer (05-13-2014)

----------


## sky dancer

> We are what we are, but our actions are choices.  For purely religious reasons, some consider homosexuality to be a sin punishable by death.   Their zealousness in this belief causes them to believe the false idea that homosexuality is purely a choice but heterosexuality is a "natural" matter of birth.   In short, they jump from condemning the actions to condemning the person by denying that their proclivities are genetic.  
> 
> This gives rise to the funny observation that Democrats believe nothing is genetic except homosexuality while Republicans believe everything is genetic except homosexuality.


What bugs me about it is they harp on butt fucking and oral sex as sinful but hets engage in them too and that isn't a big deal to them.  Do they really give what kind of sex their neighbors do in the privacy of their own homes that much obsession?  It's bizarre.

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> What bugs me about it is they harp on butt fucking and oral sex as sinful but hets engage in them too and that isn't a big deal to them.  Do they really give what kind of sex their neighbors do in the privacy of their own homes that much obsession?  It's bizarre.


The fall of the Republican party began when they moved from being mostly concerned about business and national security to becoming voyeurs inside American bedrooms.  

Barry Goldwater warned us this would happen.

----------


## Micketto

> What bugs me about it is they harp on butt fucking and oral sex as sinful but hets engage in them too


I assume you personally know Christians who have "harped" on, yet indulge in, those things you listed with such class ?

Or is this just more assumption...

----------


## Dan40

> What bugs me about it is they harp on butt fucking and oral sex as sinful but hets engage in them too and that isn't a big deal to them.  Do they really give what kind of sex their neighbors do in the privacy of their own homes that much obsession?  It's bizarre.


I don't give a damn what kind of sex my neighbors do in the *PRIVACY* of their own bedrooms.  Or what you do in the *PRIVACY* of your own bedroom.

It is when your abnormal sex activities are screamed all over the media and into my *PRIVACY,* that I object.

And the abnormality is not oral sex or butt fucking, is is doing it with another homosexual  That is  the abnormal part.  Not the description of or the variety of the acts

Do YOU, do I, know anything at all about what all the heterosexuals on this forum DO in the privacy of their own bedrooms?  Do I care?  NO, I don't.  Could they be doing weird things I never heard of? _[that would be difficult to imagine]_  I don't know, they keep it PRIVATE.

*YOU DO NOT!*

You are a homosexual.





_ho·mo·sex·u·al_  (hō′mə-sĕk′sho̅o̅-əl, -mō-)_adj.__ 

Of, relating to, or having a sexual orientation to persons of the same sex.
_
_A homosexual person; a gay man or a lesbian.
_


Your life, your being, your very existence is DEFINED by your sexual activity.

You are not nurses, cab drivers, cooks, lawyers.  You are  _GAY_ nurses, _GAY_  cab drivers, _GAY_  cooks, _GAY_  lawyers. 

If you _GAYS_ would exercise some privacy, I wouldn't care about you at all.

----------


## Max Rockatansky

I've never heard a nurse, cab driver, cook or lawyer say "I'm gay" at the hospital, in a cab, restaurant or courtroom......although my Gay-Dar told me a few certainly were.   Then again, I don't go around prying into other people's business.

----------


## Dan40

> I've never heard a nurse, cab driver, cook or lawyer say "I'm gay" at the hospital, in a cab, restaurant or courtroom......although my Gay-Dar told me a few certainly were.   Then again, I don't go around prying into other people's business.



Max, I've 'splained to you.  When you agree with me you look pretty smartzig.  When you don't, not so much.

----------


## sky dancer

> I assume you personally know Christians who have "harped" on, yet indulge in, those things you listed with such class ?
> 
> Or is this just more assumption...


Bug off.

----------


## sky dancer

> I don't give a damn what kind of sex my neighbors do in the *PRIVACY* of their own bedrooms.  Or what you do in the *PRIVACY* of your own bedroom.
> 
> It is when your abnormal sex activities are screamed all over the media and into my *PRIVACY,* that I object.
> 
> And the abnormality is not oral sex or butt fucking, is is doing it with another homosexual  That is  the abnormal part.  Not the description of or the variety of the acts
> 
> Do YOU, do I, know anything at all about what all the heterosexuals on this forum DO in the privacy of their own bedrooms?  Do I care?  NO, I don't.  Could they be doing weird things I never heard of? _[that would be difficult to imagine]_  I don't know, they keep it PRIVATE.
> 
> *YOU DO NOT!*
> ...


I never have sex in public.

----------


## Dan40

> I never have sex in public.


No sense of adventure?

----------


## sky dancer

> No sense of adventure?


No, maturity.

----------


## GreenBean

Thou Shalt not Offendeth The Gay Mafia 

The Eleventh Commandment

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> Thou Shalt not Offendeth The Gay Mafia 
> 
> The Eleventh Commandment


"Thou Shalt not Offendeth the Religious Right" was the Eleventh Commandment as pointed out by Barry Goldwater in 1980.  The Gay Mafia is much further down the list.

----------


## Micketto

> Bug off.


2 words... all to say "I can make things up if I want!.. stop calling me out on it!"

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> Max, I've 'splained to you.  When you agree with me you look pretty smartzig.  When you don't, not so much.


You need to tell your doctor your medication is off.  You're still having delusions of grandeur.

----------

Karl (05-15-2014)

----------


## Calypso Jones

> "Thou Shalt not Offendeth the Religious Right" was the Eleventh Commandment as pointed out by Barry Goldwater in 1980.  The Gay Mafia is much further down the list.



what hypocrisy. The so called Religious right is offended all the time and it hasn't been just lately that they've caught on from the left and they now make themselves known on the matter.  you don't see Catholics throwing slurpees, tearing up signs or yelling obscenities at the Satanists at Harvard a day or so ago.  All they did was have a quiet protest.  And for that...for having the AUDACITY of standing up for something they believe in, they're called obnoxious.   More projection.   The left is obnoxious. The right better get to being more vocal in standing against this insanity.

----------

Roadmaster (05-14-2014),Rudy2D (05-14-2014)

----------


## Dan40

> You need to tell your doctor your medication is off.  You're still having delusions of grandeur.


Dang!  You've flunked another valuable lesson.  But I can only lead a horse to water, I cannot make him roll over and bark.

----------


## Calypso Jones

I'm just making a statement here on something that I believe.   I have also seen this tactic before and knew the person that it was used against and the person who used this technique.  It was low down then.  It is low down now.  I think the first time I saw this used has colored my opinion of the technique but that is okay.  That is sometimes how we form opinions.    Referring to someone's meds particularly some one over certain ages, is a vile thing.   insulting.  It is not the MOST vile thing but it is up there in my opinion.

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> I'm just making a statement here on something that I believe.   I have also seen this tactic before and knew the person that it was used against and the person who used this technique.  It was low down then.  It is low down now.  I think the first time I saw this used has colored my opinion of the technique but that is okay.  That is sometimes how we form opinions.    Referring to someone's meds particularly some one over certain ages, is a vile thing.   insulting.  It is not the MOST vile thing but it is up there in my opinion.


You're selection of what is vile and what is not varies widely.  Most of the time it depends on who is saying it, not what was actually said.  Many define that as being hypocritical.

----------


## JustPassinThru

> No, maturity.


You accidentally hit the comma key there.  Changes the meaning.

You surely meant "No maturity."

You're welcome.

----------


## Dan40

> What is the difference between choosing and deciding ?!


The degree of _"HOTNESS?"_

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> You accidentally hit the comma key there.  Changes the meaning.
> 
> You surely meant "No maturity."
> 
> You're welcome.

----------


## Calypso Jones

I was just thinking...actually I was watching for a few minutes some john Stossel thingy on fox debating traditional marriage and homosexual marriage.   The homo supporter had the  final word...not that he was good or interesting or even had a point, he just had the final word.  So I was thinking...what if we all just said, hell with it, what if we just let them have their way, homosexual marriage, give them all the benefits, make them go to court to get divorces, make churches marry them, as many times as they want, we all have to bake them cakes, paint their wedding portraits and take their wedding photos.   Knowing that they can't ever be happy, even with everything they say they want right now.......what is the next thing that they'll be demanding.
 @Katzndogz could probably answer this being an attorney.

----------

Conservative Libertarian (05-20-2014)

----------


## JustPassinThru

> I was just thinking...actually I was watching for a few minutes some john Stossel thingy on fox debating traditional marriage and homosexual marriage.   The homo supporter had the  final word...not that he was good or interesting or even had a point, he just had the final word.  So I was thinking...what if we all just said, hell with it, what if we just let them have their way, homosexual marriage, give them all the benefits, make them go to court to get divorces, make churches marry them, as many times as they want, we all have to bake them cakes, paint their wedding portraits and take their wedding photos.   Knowing that they can't ever be happy, even with everything they say they want right now.......what is the next thing that they'll be demanding.
>  @Katzndogz could probably answer this being an attorney.


Bestiality; or pedophile marriage; or group marriage.

Marriage to one's self.  Marriage to roommates to get tax and employer bennies.  

What it will do, is make these married-family benefits unaffordable, since everyone claims them not just people with families that actually COST.

So the bennies go out the window, in the end.  And then, having children becomes unaffordable.

Unaffordable; and a liability, what with Child Protective Services dykes ready to arrest every parent that comes to their attention...arrest them and take the child and put it in a foster home, frequently a place where REAL abuse happens.

What it means is, just HAVING CHILDREN becomes a horrible liability.  So WASPs stop having children.

Meantime we're bringing all the my-nore-ittys into the nation.

End of Caucasians in America.  Another liberal wet dream...except that America cannot be America with ignorant, corrupt turd-world garbage which knows nothing of either work or liberty.  So even before the whites die off, America becomes one more despotic hell.

----------


## Max Rockatansky

Remember those Liberal, Lefty Nanny Staters always telling others how to live?  I wish those dumb mother fucking cocksuckers would just mind their own fucking business.  What a bunch of busy body assholes.

----------

Conservative Libertarian (05-20-2014),Trinnity (05-19-2014)

----------


## Dan40

> Remember those Liberal, Lefty Nanny Staters always telling others how to live?  I wish those dumb mother fucking cocksuckers would just mind their own fucking business.  What a bunch of busy body assholes.


WELCOME, finally.

 :Smiley ROFLMAO:  :Smiley ROFLMAO:  :Smiley ROFLMAO:  :Smiley ROFLMAO:

----------

Calypso Jones (05-20-2014),Conservative Libertarian (05-20-2014)

----------


## Max Rockatansky

Did I mention they're also fucking hypocrites?   :Big Grin:

----------


## Reverend

> I was just thinking...actually I was watching for a few minutes some john Stossel thingy on fox debating traditional marriage and homosexual marriage.   The homo supporter had the  final word...not that he was good or interesting or even had a point, he just had the final word.  So I was thinking...what if we all just said, hell with it, what if we just let them have their way, homosexual marriage, give them all the benefits, make them go to court to get divorces, make churches marry them, as many times as they want, we all have to bake them cakes, paint their wedding portraits and take their wedding photos.   Knowing that they can't ever be happy, even with everything they say they want right now.......what is the next thing that they'll be demanding.
>  @Katzndogz could probably answer this being an attorney.



I will never marry them.

----------


## Trinnity

Nor should the Church be forced to. Ever. That's a line the govt dare not cross.

----------

Max Rockatansky (05-19-2014),sotmfs (05-20-2014)

----------


## Reverend

> The "point" is that homophobia and bigotry might be rooted in CLASS WARFARE or Jealousy that on average Gays and Lesbians are More Successful financially and academically
> 
> Yes @catfish this is the redneck version of Class Envy


I wouldn't work for 61 grand, I couldn't take the pay cut.

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> Nor should the Church be forced to. Ever. That's a line the govt dare not cross.


Agreed and a very important reason to keep the line between Church and State very clear.

----------

sotmfs (05-20-2014)

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> The "point" is that homophobia and bigotry might be rooted in CLASS WARFARE or Jealousy that on average Gays and Lesbians are More Successful financially and academically
> 
> Yes @catfish this is the redneck version of Class Envy


Disagreed. I think it's rooted psychologically in our natural tendency toward xenophobia; the dislike of anything different than us.   This, IMO, is also the root of racism, religious animosity and other hatreds mankind expresses against his fellow man.    The basis of all "dang furriner"-type hatreds.

In the case of homosexuality, a secondary basis for the hatred is religion.  Christians will praise Jesus, but quickly bypass Jesus to dive into the Old Testament to support any hatreds they want to express.

----------

sotmfs (05-20-2014)

----------


## Calypso Jones

nobody is envious of homosexuals.  They just don't want them around their children and families.

I wonder if that isn't the problem.  Normal people want them to go away so they won't or can't.  It is the dance of ,,,,,I forget the term i'll go look it up.   It's like in normal relationships, Guys want what they can't have and they don't want it once they get it.  Women are the same.

----------


## metheron

> Agreed and a very important reason to keep the line between Church and State very clear.


So then, as not to confuse the line between Church and State, you are fine with gays being allowed to marry, just not any institutions being forced into doing so? Right?

Otherwise it would seem to clog that line.

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> So then, as not to confuse the line between Church and State, you are fine with gays being allowed to marry, just not any institutions being forced into doing so? Right?
> 
> Otherwise it would seem to clog that line.


I believe government shouldn't be involved in marriage, that's a religious function.   OTOH, there are legal ramifications such as survivorship, debt, children and the like for couples.   Per the 14th Amendment, government shouldn't discriminate against American citizens nor treat them differently under the law.  If government grants special rights and privileges to couples, then that should apply to all couples.  Since I'm single, I'm fine with getting rid of all those laws just to be fair to single people.

----------


## Katzndogz

> I was just thinking...actually I was watching for a few minutes some john Stossel thingy on fox debating traditional marriage and homosexual marriage.   The homo supporter had the  final word...not that he was good or interesting or even had a point, he just had the final word.  So I was thinking...what if we all just said, hell with it, what if we just let them have their way, homosexual marriage, give them all the benefits, make them go to court to get divorces, make churches marry them, as many times as they want, we all have to bake them cakes, paint their wedding portraits and take their wedding photos.   Knowing that they can't ever be happy, even with everything they say they want right now.......what is the next thing that they'll be demanding.
>  @Katzndogz could probably answer this being an attorney.


Probably they will demand that rejecting a sexual advance be deemed a hate crime!

When I still had my shop, one of my customers had a son in the local high school.  He had a girlfriend.   He caught the eye of some gay classmate who would walk up to him in the hallway and kiss him.   Then laugh and tell him there was nothing he could do about it because he's the one that would be punished for sexual harassment.   The poor guy just had to take it because no one would listen to him.  That's why when the high school called for a donation to some high school program I always turned them down.  

You may have heard about the murder of Larry King by Brandon McInerney.  Larry King was a mentally disturbed child who slathered on make up like a clown, wore high heels and cast off prom dresses.   He had been suspended from numerous schools for causing trouble with other boys.   Then Brandon caught Larry's eye.   Larry began mercilessly harassing Brandon.  He went up to him when Brandon was with his friends and asked him to be his valentine.   Brandon's mother went to the school to complain.  Nothing happened.   Brandon was a homophobe.   Larry showed up at Brandon's home.   The police said it was just flirting and there was nothing they could so about it.  Under the continued pressure and harassment, Brandon began to change.  He became enamored of Nazis and their murder of gays.  One day he took a gun to school and blew Larry King's head off.  

What can they demand next?   Simple, demand you take it, whatever they dish out.   Just like in prison.  Every one gets a turn in the barrel.  

Historically acceptance of homosexuality is certainly the wrong side of history.    For as many cultures as have accepted homosexuality in the past, not a single one has passed that along as a value.   Legislatures and the judiciary intend to force feed homosexuality on everyone, first the acceptance then the PRACTICE.  It's already going on in the military.   Refuse an advance and the risk is dismissal.   Once the practice of homosexuality is normal and you do want to be normal don't you?  Don't you want your children to be normal?   Not making sure that children are raised in a homosexual friendly environment, they will be taken from you and given to someone who will make sure they engage in sex, frequently, as much with same sex partners as not.

----------


## Reverend

> nobody is envious of homosexuals.  They just don't want them around their children and families.
> 
> I wonder if that isn't the problem.  Normal people want them to go away so they won't or can't.  It is the dance of ,,,,,I forget the term i'll go look it up.   It's like in normal relationships, Guys want what they can't have and they don't want it once they get it.  Women are the same.


I learned the hard way that these people are human beings in addition to everything else. I got to know some of them in a dialogue a while back and their POV is very similar to ours. They have the same feelings, the same dreams, and the same needs. Some are very devout Christians, some are as rabid as any atheistic God hater. I just can't escape the feeling that they define themselves by their sexuality, and IMO anybody who does that, gay or straight, has their priorities bass ackwards.

----------


## Roadmaster

> I learned the hard way that these people are human beings in addition to everything else. I got to know some of them in a dialogue a while back and their POV is very similar to ours. They have the same feelings, the same dreams, and the same needs. Some are very devout Christians, some are as rabid as any atheistic God hater. I just can't escape the feeling that they define themselves by their sexuality, and IMO anybody who does that, gay or straight, has their priorities bass ackwards.


 I don't hate them and many that I have known walked down the isle to receive Jesus. Never will I tell them they can keep sinning.  You call them devout Christians. I am not PC nor do I back down.

----------


## sotmfs

> I don't hate them and many that I have known walked down the isle to receive Jesus. Never will I tell them they can keep sinning.  You call them devout Christians. I am not PC nor do I back down.


Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone.
If people felt as strongly about men abandoning their children,men abusing women,adultery,murder,etc as they do about the sin of homosexuality it would help society more.

----------


## Roadmaster

> Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone.
> If people felt as strongly about men abandoning their children,men abusing women,adultery,murder,etc as they do about the sin of homosexuality it would help society more.


 You don't know my master.

----------


## Calypso Jones

> Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone.
> If people felt as strongly about men abandoning their children,men abusing women,adultery,murder,etc as they do about the sin of homosexuality it would help society more.


could say the same about you.

----------


## metheron

> Let he who has not sinned cast the first stone.
> If people felt as strongly about men abandoning their children,men abusing women,adultery,murder,etc as they do about the sin of homosexuality it would help society more.


What? Rail against adultery or men abandoning their children? Thats acceptable these days isn't it? Some Christians on here thought I was just stupid to suggest stiffer adultery laws. But homosexuality? That must be a bigger sin than adultery? 

I used to think that Christians were generally taught many of the same things. But there is a whole other breed of Christians on this site, full of hate and picking and choosing which parts of the Bible to judge about. Not sure where the priority list of sins come from though. Must be a web site or something.

----------


## texmaster

> The "point" is that homophobia and bigotry might be rooted in CLASS WARFARE or Jealousy that on average Gays and Lesbians are More Successful financially and academically
> 
> Yes @catfish this is the redneck version of Class Envy


Hey genius,

Don't get pissy with us just because we have science on our side.

Homosexuals represent an incredibly small percentage of Americans and many have found sanctuary with Liberal Elitists in news and politics so naturally they will be paid more.

But that doesn't change the scienctific fact that homosexuality is neither genetic nor natural and never will be.   Their own bodies betray them.

----------


## Reverend

> I don't hate them and many that I have known walked down the isle to receive Jesus. Never will I tell them they can keep sinning.  You call them devout Christians. I am not PC nor do I back down.


I am a devout Christian but I have my share of problems, too. All I can do is speak my peace and let God handle the rest.

----------


## Roadmaster

> I am a devout Christian but I have my share of problems, too. All I can do is speak my peace and let God handle the rest.


I can respect than but does your problems include not saying what our Master said. Do you tell them they can remain the same.

----------


## metheron

> I can respect than but does your problems include not saying what our Master said. Do you tell them they can remain the same.


We all sin, so we all have problems that include not doing/saying what our master said. Are you without sin?

----------


## Roadmaster

> We all sin, so we all have problems that include not doing/saying what our master said. Are you without sin?


Yes, when I stand before God He will see no sin for the holly spirit will see none.

----------


## Roadmaster

> We all sin, so we all have problems that include not doing/saying what our master said. Are you without sin?


You don't understand. No one is without sin. I want the reverend to tell me what he thinks. I want to know how he justifies his thinking. Atheist need not apply.

----------


## metheron

> Yes, when I stand before God He will see no sin for the holly spirit will see none.


Blasphemy!! Only God is without sin.

----------


## Roadmaster

> Blasphemy!! Only God is without sin.


 You are not a believer. I only go after who claims to be His.

----------


## Roadmaster

> Blasphemy!! Only God is without sin.


 For once you are correct, God is without sin.

----------


## metheron

> You are not a believer. I only go after who claims to be His.


Why do you think I am not a believer?

----------


## Roadmaster

> Why do you think I am not a believer?


Because I know who is with me and against me. I don't  have to know you to know.

----------


## metheron

> Because I know who is with me and against me. I don't  have to know you to know.


Oh.....I thought we were talking about a higher power....lol......yea, you are right. I believe in God, not you. You and I may believe in the same God, but we obviously interpret his word differently.

----------

sotmfs (05-20-2014)

----------


## Reverend

> You don't understand. No one is without sin. I want the reverend to tell me what he thinks. I want to know how he justifies his thinking. Atheist need not apply.


I thought I answered that. 

My position is that all men were created by God in His image, and judging another man's sin is above my pay grade. That doesn't mean I approve. It's just that the older I get the less likely I am to speak too quickly. 

I got into a discussion with a gay guy on another forum. The way he spoke about his devotion to God was so powerful I was in tears reading it. So what was I supposed to do? The same thing I do with the other sinners I run into - trust them to God's care.

----------

metheron (05-20-2014),sotmfs (05-20-2014)

----------


## Reverend

> I can respect than but does your problems include not saying what our Master said. Do you tell them they can remain the same.


We all know that lifestyle is not scriptural, and if asked I will say so.

I have yet to have anyone agree with me.

----------


## metheron

> I thought I answered that. 
> 
> My position is that all men were created by God in His image, and judging another man's sin is above my pay grade. That doesn't mean I approve. It's just that the older I get the less likely I am to speak too quickly. 
> 
> I got into a discussion with a gay guy on another forum. The way he spoke about his devotion to God was so powerful I was in tears reading it. So what was I supposed to do? The same thing I do with the other sinners I run into - trust them to God's care.


Well put reverend. I believe we are here to love, not judge. God will take care of the judgement part.

----------


## Reverend

> Well put reverend. I believe we are here to love, not judge. God will take care of the judgement part.


There are times to judge and times to stay silent. My Bishop says whatever we do, we should do it with love, a skill I have not perfected!

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> could say the same about you.


Of course it can.  Do you think SOTMFS is expressing hatred and prejudice against deadbeat dads and adulterers like others on this forum express toward gays?  




> What? Rail against adultery or men abandoning their children? *Thats acceptable these days isn't it?* Some Christians on here thought I was just stupid to suggest stiffer adultery laws. But homosexuality? That must be a bigger sin than adultery?


Given the remarks here and on numerous other threads, homosexuality is also a much bigger sin than child abandonment.

----------

sotmfs (05-20-2014)

----------


## Dan40

> Of course it can.  Do you think SOTMFS is expressing hatred and prejudice against deadbeat dads and adulterers like others on this forum express toward gays?  
> 
> Given the remarks here and on numerous other threads, homosexuality is also a much bigger sin than child abandonment.


I'd seriously disagree with that.

Gays don't know what kind of sex you engage in.

Gays don't know what kind of sex I engage in.

It is none of their business.

And what kind of sex they engage in is none of our business.  But gays make their sex lives OUR business.

It is not the abnormal homosexuality, it is the constant, massive ADVERTISING of their sex lives, that I object to.  If THEY would keep their private sex lives, PRIVATE, clearly it would be none of our business, and we wouldn't even know about it to be concerned.

Child abandonment is a crime.  Homosexuality is a _________________?  But not a crime,,,here.  

Maybe the screaming advertisement of homosexuality should be a crime, but we have too many laws now.

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> I'd seriously disagree with that.
> 
> Gays don't know what kind of sex you engage in.
> 
> Gays don't know what kind of sex I engage in.
> 
> It is none of their business.


Correct, it's none of their business and vice-versa.

As for the "constant, massive ADVERTISING" and "screaming advertisement of homosexuality", I don't see it.  Maybe it's because I don't go looking for it.  I do see a lot of sex in advertising, but it's 99% heterosexual from my observations.  

Several years ago, it was common practice for male pilots to hide little bits of porn torn from magazines and hide them in the cockpit.  HIDE.  Not out in the open, but hidden inside seat covers, inside small compartments and whatnot.   We had a senior female officer who would habitually search the cockpit for these items, remove them and then bitch about it to the CO.    The only way to find this stuff was to go looking for it.  It wasn't like it was pasted on the walls out in the open where people who didn't want to see it would see it.   Eventually she raised a big enough stink, the order was put out that we couldn't have that kind of fun anymore.  Do you think she was in the right to do this or do you think she was just being a busybody causing harm to others because she had some serious mental issues or self-esteem problems?

----------

sotmfs (05-20-2014)

----------


## Dan40

> Correct, it's none of their business and vice-versa.
> 
> As for the "constant, massive ADVERTISING" and "screaming advertisement of homosexuality", I don't see it.  Maybe it's because I don't go looking for it.  I do see a lot of sex in advertising, but it's 99% heterosexual from my observations.  
> 
> Several years ago, it was common practice for male pilots to hide little bits of porn torn from magazines and hide them in the cockpit.  HIDE.  Not out in the open, but hidden inside seat covers, inside small compartments and whatnot.   We had a senior female officer who would habitually search the cockpit for these items, remove them and then bitch about it to the CO.    The only way to find this stuff was to go looking for it.  It wasn't like it was pasted on the walls out in the open where people who didn't want to see it would see it.   Eventually she raised a big enough stink, the order was put out that we couldn't have that kind of fun anymore.  Do you think she was in the right to do this or do you think she was just being a busybody causing harm to others because she had some serious mental issues or self-esteem problems?


You don't see the advertisement of gay sex?

Max, don't be insulting and post like a liberal.

The screaming advertisement is everywhere.

----------


## metheron

> I'd seriously disagree with that.
> 
> Gays don't know what kind of sex you engage in.
> 
> Gays don't know what kind of sex I engage in.
> 
> It is none of their business.
> 
> And what kind of sex they engage in is none of our business.  But gays make their sex lives OUR business.
> ...


Do you have an issue with heterosexual sex scenes on TV I see all the time? I see much more advertising of heterosexual sex. That being said, it doesn't draw my notice or stick with me when I see an act of homosexuality because homosexuality is not normal to me. But that is my issue, not anyone else's.

Child abandonment is a crime and is punishable. Homosexuality is considered by some to be a sin and by others to be a disease and you seem to imply that it is punishable in other places and might should be here.

I disagree that its a mental issue and am not sure where I stand sin wise, but lets say it is one of those. You don't see an issue with criminalizing sin or mental issues?

----------

sotmfs (05-20-2014)

----------


## Roadmaster

> Well put reverend. I believe we are here to love, not judge. God will take care of the judgement part.


 That's not the meaning of judging in the Bible. Stating His word is not judging. There are many verses that tell us to judge also. He explains it clear on what to do and what not to do. You can't bring up one verse and say there.

----------

metheron (05-20-2014)

----------


## Calypso Jones

I don't judge you whether you're going to hell or not or your relationship with Christ.  But I can judge you deciding whether I want to associate with you, eat with you, invite you to my home.  God says be discerning.    I have children.  I will be discerning.

----------

metheron (05-20-2014)

----------


## metheron

> That's not the meaning of judging in the Bible. Stating His word is not judging. There are many verses that tell us to judge also. He explains it clear on what to do and what not to do. You can't bring up one verse and say there.





> I don't judge you whether you're going to hell or not or your relationship with Christ.  But I can judge you deciding whether I want to associate with you, eat with you, invite you to my home.  God says be discerning.    I have children.  I will be discerning.


Both valid points that I don't disagree with. But when your individual judgment of another lifestyle grows into something bigger, such as limiting rights and freedoms, that is not loving your neighbor.

I know we all judge, its inherent. Its to what extent you take those judgments, imo, that matter. If I don't agree with a particular lifestyle, I don't live it. I don't go so far as to try to limit their rights, make things illegal, etc.......

----------


## Calypso Jones

no one is limiting 'their' rights.  They have the same rights as the rest of us.    I'm sure you going to get your sodomite loving ways....but not with my consent.  Must make you really happy to know that the majority of americans vote against 'same sex marriage' everytime they can and it takes  a judge to over turn  it.

so what is your religion?

----------


## metheron

> no one is limiting 'their' rights.  They have the same rights as the rest of us.    I'm sure you going to get your sodomite loving ways....but not with my consent.  Must make you really happy to know that the majority of americans vote against 'same sex marriage' everytime they can and it takes  a judge to over rule it.


Please let me know what my sodomite loving ways are?

And you call yourself a Christian. Shame on you. People like you are the reason the country is shifting towards Atheism. If you are an example of Christianity who would want to believe in something so full of hate and judgment?

My wife and I will pray for you and your homophobia.

----------

sotmfs (05-20-2014)

----------


## Roadmaster

> Both valid points that I don't disagree with. But when your individual judgment of another lifestyle grows into something bigger, such as limiting rights and freedoms, that is not loving your neighbor.
> 
> I know we all judge, its inherent. Its to what extent you take those judgments, imo, that matter. If I don't agree with a particular lifestyle, I don't live it. I don't go so far as to try to limit their rights, make things illegal, etc.......


But I can't ok their lifestyle or go around telling people God said it's ok to do this. There was a hitman, and a porn star, that also claimed to be Christians. If you are a Christian you will change not continue to do things in which you know is not Gods will. It doesn't happen overnight. That hitman claimed he was for the entire time over 10 years and people shouldn't judge him because it to him was his work. You are correct we can't change people only God can. But telling him murdering people is not Gods plan and it's wrong is not judging him. A good tree doesn't bear bad fruit.

----------


## metheron

> But I can't ok their lifestyle or go around telling people God said it's ok to do this. There was a hitman, and a porn star, that also claimed to be Christians. If you are a Christian you will change not continue to do things in which you know is not Gods will. It doesn't happen overnight. That hitman claimed he was for the entire time over 10 years and people shouldn't judge him because it to him was his work. You are correct we can't change people only God can. But telling him murdering people is not Gods plan and it's wrong is not judging him. A good tree doesn't bear bad fruit.


Killing people is a sin and a crime. Being a porn star is neither. You are picking and choosing as well. I agree that you can't just pick one worse, but where in the Bible does it say to accuse homosexuals of pedophilia, or mental illness? Or to deny their ability to wed?

If you believe it's a sin, fine, don't be homosexual. But recognize that we don't adjudicate based on the Bible.

----------

sotmfs (05-20-2014)

----------


## Roadmaster

> Please let me know what my sodomite loving ways are?
> 
> And you call yourself a Christian. Shame on you. People like you are the reason the country is shifting towards Atheism. If you are an example of Christianity who would want to believe in something so full of hate and judgment?
> 
> My wife and I will pray for you and your homophobia.


Do you want her to lie and tell them it's ok in Gods eyes. He made it clear it isn't.  It's not hate it's telling the truth. Some people thank they can negotiate with God. I watched a gay parade that a group was singing Jesus loves me song. Now the majority didn't believe or know Him but they wanted others to think they did. It's not shame on us because we refuse to lie.

----------


## Roadmaster

> Killing people is a sin and a crime. Being a porn star is neither. You are picking and choosing as well. I agree that you can't just pick one worse, but where in the Bible does it say to accuse homosexuals of pedophilia, or mental illness? Or to deny their ability to wed?
> 
> If you believe it's a sin, fine, don't be homosexual. But recognize that we don't adjudicate based on the Bible.


I don't just believe it's a sin He said it was. Don't ask me to back this movement.

----------


## metheron

> Do you want her to lie and tell them it's ok in Gods eyes. He made it clear it isn't.  It's not hate it's telling the truth. Some people thank they can negotiate with God. I watched a gay parade that a group was singing Jesus loves me song. Now the majority didn't believe or know Him but they wanted others to think they did. It's not shame on us because we refuse to lie.


No, I fully support everyone's rights to their beliefs. But remember there are 400 million people in this country and what about half, maybe a bit more believe in the same God? And not all of them even believe it is as clear as you make it out to be. So why demand our country go off of what a faction of Christians believe?

No one is saying not to lie. If you think its a sin, say so. And then don't do it. But beyond that, it is not your place to judge and alienate.

It makes 'Christians' look hypocritical, though, when they put the full court press on homosexuals while appearing to let adulterers and child abandoners off the hook.

----------

sotmfs (05-20-2014)

----------


## metheron

> I don't just believe it's a sin He said it was. Don't ask me to back this movement.


What movement?

----------


## Roadmaster

> It makes 'Christians' look hypocritical, though, when they put the full court press on homosexuals while appearing to let adulterers and child abandoners off the hook.


 I don't care how it makes me look while trying to protect our children. I give no one a pass.

----------


## metheron

> I don't care how it makes me look while trying to protect our children. I give no one a pass.


What are you trying to protect them from? Do you homeschool them and not let them online or allow them to watch tv? By thinking its a Sin doesn't mean that it doesn't exist or that its going away?

Sinning to try to protect others from Sin? It makes you a Sinner all the same. Good chance you and them homosexuals might all be hanging out for eternity!!

----------


## Dan40

> Do you have an issue with heterosexual sex scenes on TV I see all the time? I see much more advertising of heterosexual sex. That being said, it doesn't draw my notice or stick with me when I see an act of homosexuality because homosexuality is not normal to me. But that is my issue, not anyone else's.
> 
> Child abandonment is a crime and is punishable. Homosexuality is considered by some to be a sin and by others to be a disease and you seem to imply that it is punishable in other places and might should be here.
> 
> I disagree that its a mental issue and am not sure where I stand sin wise, but lets say it is one of those. You don't see an issue with criminalizing sin or mental issues?


I do not invoke religion into any situation.  I made no claim of homosexuality being a sin or a crime.  I made a sarcastic reference to the advertising and promotion of homosexuality has reached the level of so much, it is criminal.

I said, "Child abandonment is a crime.  Homosexuality is a _________________? "

Fill in the blank in your own way.

In the USA , my OPINION, is that it is neither sinful or criminal.

I believe homo sex is abnormal and unnatural.  Not the oral sex or the anal sex.  The sex with a person of the same sex.  Humans engage in so many "activities" that I can't say what is proper conduct.  Even tho I call it fudge packing and dick smoking, heteros do both as well.

----------

metheron (05-20-2014)

----------


## Roadmaster

> What are you trying to protect them from? Do you homeschool them and not let them online or allow them to watch tv? By thinking its a Sin doesn't mean that it doesn't exist or that its going away?
> 
> Sinning to try to protect others from Sin? It makes you a Sinner all the same. Good chance you and them homosexuals might all be hanging out for eternity!!


So you have no problem putting young kids around men who say they are women in the same bathroom or shower.

----------


## metheron

> I do not invoke religion into any situation.  I made no claim of homosexuality being a sin or a crime.  I made a sarcastic reference to the advertising and promotion of homosexuality has reached the level of so much, it is criminal.
> 
> I said, "Child abandonment is a crime.  Homosexuality is a _________________? "
> 
> Fill in the blank in your own way.
> 
> In the USA , my OPINION, is that it is neither sinful or criminal.
> 
> I believe homo sex is abnormal and unnatural.  Not the oral sex or the anal sex.  The sex with a person of the same sex.  Humans engage in so many "activities" that I can't say what is proper conduct.  Even tho I call it fudge packing and dick smoking, heteros do both as well.


Hmmm....seems like I must have read your post very wrong. Sorry about that.

----------


## metheron

> So you have no problem putting young kids around men who say they are women in the same bathroom or shower.


I don't think you'll see that in a broad setting. I know you are going to show me something in a school setting or something and in that instance, no. I think to try to broadbrush it like its going to be all over is a big stretch.

I answered your question, will you answer the ones I presented to you?

----------


## Roadmaster

> I don't think you'll see that in a broad setting. I know you are going to show me something in a school setting or something and in that instance, no. I think to try to broadbrush it like its going to be all over is a big stretch.
> 
> I answered your question, will you answer the ones I presented to you?


 I asked if you have a problem with it. The same goes with restaurant bathrooms, mall, ect. If you have a granddaughter is it ok for men to go to the same restroom.

----------


## metheron

> I asked if you have a problem with it. The same goes with restaurant bathrooms, mall, ect. If you have a granddaughter is it ok for men to go to the same restroom.


Can we stick with actual things not things we are afraid are going to happen? This whole homophobia, once you stray from the Bible is based on a fear of the unknown and those of you that fear it just make up shit as you go.

----------


## Calypso Jones

> No, I fully support everyone's rights to their beliefs. But remember there are 400 million people in this country and what about half, maybe a bit more believe in the same God? And not all of them even believe it is as clear as you make it out to be. So why demand our country go off of what a faction of Christians believe?
> 
> No one is saying not to lie. If you think its a sin, say so. And then don't do it. But beyond that, it is not your place to judge and alienate.
> 
> It makes 'Christians' look hypocritical, though, when they put the full court press on homosexuals while appearing to let adulterers and child abandoners off the hook.


If you claim to be part of the followers of Christ and you are wrong, it is entirely in our purview to tell you that you are adding to/subtracting from the Word of God.  AND says Paul, I am not to allow you in my house NOR to say to you, 'God bless  you' else I will be as guilty as you.

----------


## Calypso Jones

We do not let adulterers nor child abusers/abandoners  off the hook.  Why would you say such a thing?  If you support homosexuals do you also support Abortion??  And you justify that HOW??

----------


## metheron

> We do not let adulterers nor child abusers/abandoners  off the hook.  Why would you say such a thing?  If you support homosexuals do you also support Abortion??  And you justify that HOW??


I see many anti-gay threads on this site, can you link me to one anti-adultery thread?

----------


## metheron

> If you claim to be part of the followers of Christ and you are wrong, it is entirely in our purview to tell you that you are adding to/subtracting from the Word of God.  AND says Paul, I am not to allow you in my house NOR to say to you, 'God bless  you' else I will be as guilty as you.


But you are full of hate and disdain. I see traits from you that seem to be anti-Christian and yet you want me to believe you. I feel that we can't tell each other who adds/subtracts from the word of God. He will do that. There are many different interpretations. I can't believe that my god is as hateful as those on this site that claim to represent his Word. 

If I am wrong, so be it, I wouldn't want to spend eternity with a bitter, angry, hateful God that spews hate and calls people all kinds of names anyway.

----------


## Calypso Jones

Trying to Use the Bible to Justify Homosexual Behavior     An article appeared in the March 10, 2007 issue of the Marietta (Georgia) Daily Journal with the title “Homosexuals try to find place in Christianity.” Substitute the words “thieves,” “adulterers,” “liars,” “drunkards,” “murderers,” and any other group of sinners, and you have a good description of who makes up the church of Jesus Christ. If you are not a sinner, then you are not a Christian. Christianity is not for perfect people. The question is, Can a person roll his sin into his new life in Christ?

 Can a murderer, for example, continue to murder and still claim to be a Christian? The Bible says no: “What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin so that grace may increase? May it never be! How shall we who died to sin still live in it?” (Rom. 6:1–2). Of course, being a Christian does not mean that we become sinless and never struggle with old and new sins. It does mean that we acknowledge our sinful failings and work to overcome them through repentance and calling on God for the necessary spiritual help.

 This was Jesus’ message to the woman caught in adultery: “From now on sin no more” (John 8:11). What’s implied by Jesus’ admonition is for the woman to establish new relationships based on biblical precepts, the very precepts she was violating. The same is true for the Samaritan woman (John 4:39). It’s not enough to say no to bad behavior. The bad behavior must be replaced with good behavior. Paul tells the thief to “steal no longer” (the negative exclusion), “but rather let him labor, performing with his own hands what is good” (the positive fix) (Eph. 4:28). I’ve met some really good thieves in my day. If they had put the same amount of energy into a real business enterprise as they did into figuring out how to con people out of their money, they would be millionaires today. Instead, they spent 24 hours a day avoiding getting caught by the police for their nefarious deeds.

 If homosexuals spent as much time trying to establish biblical relationships as they do trying to justify their homosexual lifestyle, they could overcome the hold that homosexual desires have on them.  What the Marietta Daily Journal article reports is that a group of homosexuals is attempting to find a way “to find a balance between being gay and Christian” by asking whether “these two things could coexist.” 


Their first step was to look at the Bible on the subject. Rev. Kimberleigh Buchanan, pastor of Pilgrimage United Church of Christ, makes the following claim: “The Bible says very little about homosexuality and Jesus says nothing about homosexuality.” Her first assertion is untrue. The Bible says quite a bit about homosexuality. 

But let’s suppose there is no mention of a same-sex prohibition found in the Bible. Does this mean that homosexuality is approved sexual behavior, and homosexual marriages should be sanctioned? The Bible doesn’t have to say anything about homosexuality and homosexual marriage since the established standard is a male and female sexual and marital relationship. If I say to my children, “stay in the house while you’re dad is fixing the roof,” I don’t have to follow this up by saying “don’t go outside.” The positive standard implies the negative prohibition. The speed limit sign that says “55” includes any speed over “55” without ever saying don’t go faster than “55 miles per hour.” Based on the Genesis account alone, there is no need for a single verse condemning homosexuality. 


Affirming the heterosexual relationship—one man with one woman—condemns the homosexual relationship by definition. With the norm established, any deviation is by definition abnormal. 

Let’s look at Buchanan’s second claim that “the Bible says very little about homosexuality.” There are explicit references to homosexual practices in the following texts (Gen. 19; Lev. 18:22; 20:13; Deut. 23:17–18; Judges 19:16–30; Rom. 1:26–27; 1 Cor. 6:9; 1 Tim. 1:9; Jude 7). Her claim is false. 

What about her claim that “Jesus says nothing about homosexuality”? Jesus doesn’t say anything about rape, incest, bestiality, pedophilia, or tripping blind people, and yet these practices are condemned today. God’s Word is more than the words of Jesus in red.

 In order to discredit the validity and applicability of OT ethics, Buchanan takes us to Leviticus 20:9. Based on this verse, she tells us that “you are supposed to stone your kids if they sass you.” There are two problems with this line of reasoning. First, let’s assume that the death penalty sanction is no longer applicable under the New Covenant. Does this mean that sassing parents becomes a virtue in the NT? So even if the sanction is no longer in force, the command not to curse one’s parents still is since Jesus links this behavior to the fifth commandment. 

In a similar way, we could argue that while the death penalty no longer applies to public displays of same-sex behavior, the prohibition still exists similar to the way the prohibition about cursing one’s parents is still in effect. Second, remember that Buchanan said, “Jesus says nothing about homosexuality.” Would it matter if Jesus had said something about homosexuality? 

The OT says a number of things about same-sex behavior, and NT writers do as well, and these are deemed as inconsequential and non-applicable to the current debate by homosexuals who attempt to justify their behavior by an appeal to the Bible. So would anything Jesus said make any difference?


 She has a further problem. Jesus actually quotes and applies Leviticus 20:9 in the NT: “For Moses said, ‘HONOR YOUR FATHER AND YOUR MOTHER’; and, ‘HE WHO SPEAKS EVIL OF FATHER OR MOTHER IS TO BE PUT TO DEATH’” (Mark 7:10). So if you’re going to use Jesus in one case (He doesn’t say anything about homosexuality), then why not in the NT application of Leviticus 20:9? 


No matter what way the subject is approached, there is nothing in the Bible that can be used to support homosexual behavior. Homosexuals who claim to believe the Bible should take comfort in* Paul’s words:

 “Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God” (1 Cor. 6:9b–11).* -


 See more at: http://americanvision.org/1274/tryin....XHJ8Wcic.dpuf

----------


## Roadmaster

> Can we stick with actual things not things we are afraid are going to happen? This whole homophobia, once you stray from the Bible is based on a fear of the unknown and those of you that fear it just make up shit as you go.


 It's already happening. Any pervert you can't question and they have already fought in courts and won to say they don't have to be or have parts of a women to enter. I am not straying from the Bible, He tells us thing that are wrong will be right and right will be wrong.

----------


## metheron

> * Paul’s words:
> 
>  “Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God” (1 Cor. 6:9b–11).* -
> 
> 
>  See more at: http://americanvision.org/1274/tryin....XHJ8Wcic.dpuf


And out of all those groups, the only targets by 'Christians' on this site are the homosexuals. Why is that? Why aren't you as active at attacking fornicators? Or adulterers? Where are those threads?

----------


## metheron

> It's already happening. Any pervert you can't question and they have already fought in courts and won to say they don't have to be or have parts of a women to enter. I am not straying from the Bible, He tells us thing that are wrong will be right and right will be wrong.


While I am still waiting for a link to some evidence from you yesterday that you are having trouble find you, I will dare ask you again to back up your claim with some sort of evidence of a restaurant with bathrooms that men and women share at the same time.

Pardon me if I don't hold my breath while I wait.

----------


## metheron

> It's already happening. Any pervert you can't question and they have already fought in courts and won to say they don't have to be or have parts of a women to enter. I am not straying from the Bible, He tells us thing that are wrong will be right and right will be wrong.


The Bible talks about men using women's restrooms? Come on now this is getting ridiculous.

----------


## Roadmaster

> And out of all those groups, the only targets by 'Christians' on this site are the homosexuals. Why is that? Why aren't you as active at attacking fornicators? Or adulterers? Where are those threads?


You want any pervert to have special rights to our children. That's not keeping it to themselves.

----------


## Roadmaster

> The Bible talks about men using women's restrooms? Come on now this is getting ridiculous.


You care more about a persons lifestyle than protecting others. 20 kids and you will defend one gay person like those 20 don't matter. This is the reason most Christians don't want them in their restaurants. They think they have a right to walk into a womans restroom when states or the judge passes a law in favor of marriage for them. It's not going to work well in the South. We won't put up with them disrespecting our children.

----------


## metheron

I am not afraid of my shadow which you appear to be. Keep making stuff up and soon you'll be locking your kids in 'for their own good'. Seems a lot like a lefty might do. Hmmmm.........thoughts to ponder. Is Christianity similar in nature to the lefts thinking they know whats best for everyone else.

----------


## Calypso Jones

> And out of all those groups, the only targets by 'Christians' on this site are the homosexuals. Why is that? Why aren't you as active at attacking fornicators? Or adulterers? Where are those threads?


maybe because they at least have the decency to keep their mouths shut about their carnal sins.   And besides....we don't host too many democrat politicians here as far as we know.    If someone wants to admit their fornication then I'm sure someone will have something to say.

----------


## metheron

> maybe because they at least have the decency to keep their mouths shut about their carnal sins.   And besides....we don't host too many democrat politicians here as far as we know.    If someone wants to admit their fornication then I'm sure someone will have something to say.


So God says it makes it more ok if they are quiet about it? Does God instruct us when to make exceptions for when people go against his word too? Or is that a human audible to excuse our own behavior?

----------


## Calypso Jones

> So God says it makes it more ok if they are quiet about it? Does God instruct us when to make exceptions for when people go against his word too? Or is that a human audible to excuse our own behavior?


  You don't read  very well.  I said, THEY have the sense not to come out about it as if they're proud of it, as if it is something honorable and good like homosexuals continuously do here and everywhere they post.   

IF they were so stupid to do it they would meet with condemnation.   If you're a homosexual sinner, repent, go and sin no more,  work on that relationship with God.

----------


## metheron

> You don't read  very well.  I said, THEY have the sense not to come out about it as if they're proud of it, as if it is something honorable and good like homosexuals continuously do here and everywhere they post.   
> 
> IF they were so stupid to do it they would meet with condemnation.   If you're a homosexual sinner, repent, go and sin no more,  work on that relationship with God.


So you think if they don't come out about it its not happening? Come on now. You know if both you and I know better than that you aren't fooling God either.

----------


## Roadmaster

You can't make a wrong a right or a lie the truth no matter how hard people try.

----------


## metheron

> You can't make a wrong a right or a lie the truth no matter how hard people try.


You are the only one in this thread that is equating this to a wrong or right. I have said that I don't claim to know what the Bible says. I know many Christians that support gay rights and marriage, so I find it confusing.

So I support your right to believe its Biblically wrong. I don't have an issue with that. I take exception to have the Bible run our country. Not everyone believes. We are a nation of laws.

It is simple discrimination to me. It is not a personal thing until people start bastardizing Christianity over it. Trying to claim a moral high ground while acting very un-Christianlike in their behavior toward them.

----------


## Roadmaster

I don't have a problem with them as long as they don't try to exploit our children, and try to control us. Many Christians at the beginning had no problem if they wanted to have a civil wedding. We know we can't nor want to control others. As soon as it got passed in one state, all heck broke loose and they started not only attacking Churches but the limits on what they can do as a special people. They don't want equal rights they want to attack us and our families. I knew this just watching other countries problems with them. But most said it would never happen here, they were wrong.

----------


## metheron

> I don't have a problem with them as long as they don't try to exploit our children, and try to control us. Many Christians at the beginning had no problem if they wanted to have a civil wedding. We know we can't nor want to control others. As soon as it got passed in one state, all heck broke loose and they started not only attacking Churches but the limits on what they can do as a special people. They don't want equal rights they want to attack us and our families. I knew this just watching other countries problems with them. But most said it would never happen here, they were wrong.


I don't get how allowing them to marry is exploiting your children. Nor have I heard of any 'gay' armies taking over other countries. You have made wild claims lately with no substantiation and all these troubles with gays in other countries I'm afraid might be another.

----------


## Calypso Jones

The behavior is not one that is safe for society or children for that matter.  Why do homosexuals have to be front and center stage and in every one else's face.   I don't want to know about that life style.  I do not want my grandchildren exposed to it. As it is now I have to explain this perverse behavior to them at some point.  It is nothing to be proud of.

----------


## sotmfs

> You don't know my master.


What does that have to do with my post?
No I do not.I do not have nor do I need a master.

----------


## sotmfs

> could say the same about you.


You bet and you just did.

----------


## sotmfs

> What? Rail against adultery or men abandoning their children? Thats acceptable these days isn't it? Some Christians on here thought I was just stupid to suggest stiffer adultery laws. But homosexuality? That must be a bigger sin than adultery? 
> 
> I used to think that Christians were generally taught many of the same things. But there is a whole other breed of Christians on this site, full of hate and picking and choosing which parts of the Bible to judge about. Not sure where the priority list of sins come from though. Must be a web site or something.


You cannot legislate morality.It is sad if christians need government laws to force them to follow their religion.

----------

Max Rockatansky (05-20-2014)

----------


## sotmfs

> The Bible talks about men using women's restrooms? Come on now this is getting ridiculous.


Moses dropped one of the tablets and it broke into many unreadable pieces.The 11th commandment stated:"Men shall not useth the restrooms of women"

----------


## sotmfs

> You care more about a persons lifestyle than protecting others. 20 kids and you will defend one gay person like those 20 don't matter. This is the reason most Christians don't want them in their restaurants. They think they have a right to walk into a womans restroom when states or the judge passes a law in favor of marriage for them. It's not going to work well in the South. We won't put up with them disrespecting our children.


LOL! Does not occur in the part of the country I live.

----------


## sotmfs

> You want any pervert to have special rights to our children. That's not keeping it to themselves.


No one is saying what you assume.

----------


## sotmfs

> You don't read  very well.  I said, THEY have the sense not to come out about it as if they're proud of it, as if it is something honorable and good like homosexuals continuously do here and everywhere they post.   
> 
> IF they were so stupid to do it they would meet with condemnation.   If you're a homosexual sinner, repent, go and sin no more,  work on that relationship with God.


They are not talking about their sex lives.People that fear them are.They are people and deserve to feel self respect and to love themselves just as others do.

----------


## sotmfs

> I don't have a problem with them as long as they don't try to exploit our children, and try to control us. Many Christians at the beginning had no problem if they wanted to have a civil wedding. We know we can't nor want to control others. As soon as it got passed in one state, all heck broke loose and they started not only attacking Churches but the limits on what they can do as a special people. They don't want equal rights they want to attack us and our families. I knew this just watching other countries problems with them. But most said it would never happen here, they were wrong.


How are they attacking you and your families?
Point out the gay posters here that do that?

----------


## Calypso Jones

> They are not talking about their sex lives.People that fear them are.They are people and deserve to feel self respect and to love themselves just as others do.


Please.  We get started on these things at least half the time because either a lesbian or homosexual come here to stir up trouble.

----------


## sotmfs

> Please.  We get started on these things at least half the time because either a lesbian or homosexual come here to stir up trouble.


I have not been here long.Please direct me to some threads started by them doing that.
Thanks,in advance,Calypso Jones for the help.

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> You don't see the advertisement of gay sex?
> 
> Max, don't be insulting and post like a liberal.
> 
> The screaming advertisement is everywhere.


Quite dodging the question like a pussy liberal.  Do you think the female pilot was right or wrong in her actions?

I rarely see homosexual advertising.  What magazines are you reading and what channels are you watching?   Maybe there's a clue there.

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> You cannot legislate morality.It is sad if christians need government laws to force them to follow their religion.


Agreed we can't and we certainly shouldn't, but the liberals and religious nuts will continue to try anyway.  This is another example of why they are some much alike in actions, but only different in goals.  Both are assholes IMO.

----------

sotmfs (05-20-2014)

----------


## sotmfs

> Quite dodging the question like a pussy liberal.  Do you think the female pilot was right or wrong in her actions?
> 
> I rarely see homosexual advertising.  What magazines are you reading and what channels are you watching?   Maybe there's a clue there.


I see it on the gay channel.The fact that it exists is disgusting.I was watching it for hours the other night.It made me sick.It made me sick!!

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> I see it on the gay channel.The fact that it exists is disgusting.I was watching it for hours the other night.It made me sick.It made me sick!!


You should invite Dan over!  Pop some popcorn and open a bottle of White Zin.  I bet he'd think it is fabulous!!!

----------


## Roadmaster

> How are they attacking you and your families?
> Point out the gay posters here that do that?


 By wanting to go into the same restrooms, changing areas, showing gay sex to elementary school students, demanding Churches have their receptions against their will on Church grounds which we haven't lost that one yet and too many to list. They send couples to a state that voted against just to still trouble. I could care less about the gay posters. I am talking about real life.

----------


## sotmfs

> You should invite Dan over!  Pop some popcorn and open a bottle of White Zin.  I bet he'd think it is fabulous!!!


Do you think he would come!  Shit,nevermind!!

----------


## sotmfs

> By wanting to go into the same restrooms, changing areas, showing gay sex to elementary school students, demanding Churches have their receptions against their will on Church grounds which we haven't lost that one yet and too many to list. They send couples to a state that voted against just to still trouble. I could care less about the gay posters. I am talking about real life.


I live in Massachusetts.Shit like that does not occur here.The gay people I know would be appalled and totally against showing gay sex or any type of sex to children of any age at any school.They would never consider using the same restrooms or changing areas.They would never try and force a church to marry them or use church facilities.
As for Protesting for your beliefs ,all folks have that right.

----------


## Roadmaster

> I live in Massachusetts.Shit like that does not occur here.The gay people I know would be appalled and totally against showing gay sex or any type of sex to children of any age at any school.They would never consider using the same restrooms or changing areas.They would never try and force a church to marry them or use church facilities.
> As for Protesting for your beliefs ,all folks have that right.


 You are kidding right. They do is Massachusetts hand out gay sex and positions to elementary schools kids. Last year I warned some people when they were coming again.

----------


## sotmfs

> You are kidding right. They do is Massachusetts hand out gay sex and positions to elementary schools kids. Last year I warned some people when they were coming again.


Really?When and where?

----------


## Roadmaster

> Really?When and where?


 They come in the GLAAD group under the either "safe school" or bullying. They hand out pornographic pamphlets (they will pick them up when finished) and talk to students and don't need to warn or let parents know. In fact they will ask them not to tell. A parent got arrested in one state after finding out they were there and wanted to take his child out. These people have no right to do this without letting parents let their children opt out. We are talking about 1st and second graders.

----------


## sotmfs

> They come in the GLAAD group under the either "safe school" or bullying. They hand out pornographic pamphlets (they will pick them up when finished) and talk to students and don't need to warn or let parents know. In fact they will ask them not to tell. A parent got arrested in one state after finding out they were there and wanted to take his child out. These people have no right to do this without letting parents let their children opt out. We are talking about 1st and second graders.


Come on!!I can't go to the school board with this post.
I need specifics!No urban or suburban myths!!

Show me examples or direct me to sources.

----------


## Roadmaster

> Come on!!I can't go to the school board with this post.
> I need specifics!No urban or suburban myths!!
> 
> Show me examples or direct me to sources.


 I found out threw their sites, it's always best to go to the source. In SC they tried this and they use to have copies of their pamphlets on their site and notified some friends. They went to the school and confirmed it and pretty much made sure it didn't happen again. The one in Mass, last year it was in a small town outside of Boston. They also confirmed it but didn't allow their children to participate because they knew from me ahead of time, I have kin there. Those pamphlets are graphic. Leaves nothing to the imagination. Most parents have no idea and hear safe school or confront the bullying and don't pay that any mind. It doesn't sound bad they just have no idea and the majority of schools don't even let the parents know they are coming.

----------


## sotmfs

> I found out threw their sites, it's always best to go to the source. In SC they tried this and they use to have copies of their pamphlets on their site and notified some friends. They went to the school and confirmed it and pretty much made sure it didn't happen again. The one in Mass, last year it was in a small town outside of Boston. They also confirmed it but didn't allow their children to participate because they knew from me ahead of time, I have kin there. Those pamphlets are graphic. Leaves nothing to the imagination. Most parents have no idea and hear safe school or confront the bullying and don't pay that any mind. It doesn't sound bad they just have no idea and the majority of schools don't even let the parents know they are coming.


Roadmaster,the sites? What sites? I need to know so I can go to the school board.
Please help? Give me the sites!

----------


## Micketto

> I see many anti-gay threads on this site, can you link me to one anti-adultery thread?


Adulterers aren't trying to close down businesses for not catering to them, or having loud, flamboyant parades celebrating their adultery.

When adulterers put themselves in the news as much as gays.... you will see the threads.

Seems like common sense to me.

----------


## Micketto

> And out of all those groups, the only targets by 'Christians' on this site are the homosexuals. Why is that? Why aren't you as active at attacking fornicators? Or adulterers? Where are those threads?


zzz... Adulterers, fornicators, child abusers, et al.... are all vilified they're known.

But unlike gays, they don't define themselves, or present themselves as those things... so they go unnoticed.

Your argument is many years old.  It has never held up.  I'd try a different angle.

----------


## metheron

> Adulterers aren't trying to close down businesses for not catering to them, or having loud, flamboyant parades celebrating their adultery.
> 
> When adulterers put themselves in the news as much as gays.... you will see the threads.
> 
> Seems like common sense to me.


Adulterers aren't being called out like gays are. I bet adulterers are in Congress, trying to close down businesses, even starting threads on this site. But no one is out there saying its wrong.

My point was for the religious folks on here claiming it is their mission by being a Christian to point out when something is wrong. They choose to only point out gays and not all the others. If you wait to point things out until they do first it doesn't really look like they are fulfilling their Christian 'mission'.

You can not support a gay lifestyle, I have no problem with that. If you think putting yourself in the news to support a cause, I have no problem with that either. We all have our beliefs. But to say you are doing it on behalf of a higher power when that higher power asked you to condemn a whole lot of things. By picking out only one shows the true motives and its not religious in nature.

----------

sotmfs (05-21-2014)

----------


## metheron

> zzz... Adulterers, fornicators, child abusers, et al.... are all vilified they're known.
> 
> But unlike gays, they don't define themselves, or present themselves as those things... so they go unnoticed.
> 
> Your argument is many years old.  It has never held up.  I'd try a different angle.


Never held up to who? I don't give two cents what most people think. I am spreading the word of God. He notices.

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> My point was for the religious folks on here claiming it is their mission by being a Christian to point out when something is wrong. They choose to only point out gays and not all the others. If you wait to point things out until they do first it doesn't really look like they are fulfilling their Christian 'mission'.


Agreed.  When they do so, it appears they are just using religion as an excuse to hate gays since they don't have any problem with adulterers, pork eaters and other sins in the Bible that they are probably guilty of doing themselves.   It goes directly to Matthew 7:3-5.

----------


## Calypso Jones

> Agreed.  When they do so, it appears they are just using religion as an excuse to hate gays since they don't have any problem with adulterers, pork eaters and other sins in the Bible that they are probably guilty of doing themselves.   It goes directly to Matthew 7:3-5.


well.  talk about subverting the truth. The message. Which seems to legitimize sodomy.

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> well.  talk about subverting the truth. The message. Which seems to legitimize sodomy.


What is the subversion you are accusing me of doing?

----------


## sotmfs

> What is the subversion you are accusing me of doing?


Come on MAX!! Your posts in general indicate you are a subversive!!Although they appear reasonable one that knows the truth knows subversion when they see it,no matter how hard you try to hide it with sane posts!!

----------


## Micketto

> Agreed.  When they do so, it appears they are just using religion as an excuse to hate gays


Not sure it really matters how it "appears".     I know for me it certainly doesn't.
For most... it's homosexuality they are against, not homosexuals.  
But of course that gets twisted into "hatred" of certain people... in the same way so many other _victimized_ groups tend to twist things.





> since they don't have any problem with adulterers, pork eaters and other sins in the Bible that they are probably guilty of doing themselves


Seriously flawed rationale. "Probably guilty" ?!

And the Pork law was not only Jew-specific... but Old Testament law.  
This changed in Acts when Peter was given direction from God.


Homosexuality, to any Christian, is obviously sin.  It is very well defined in the Bible.
But sin is the same, no matter which one it is.

Homosexuality is not worse than lying or cheating or stealing... or any of the many other sins all of us have committed.
Why people act like it is, I have no idea.

To pretend these same people have no problem with adultery is just dumb.
There is a reason homosexuality is discussed so much right now.

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> Homosexuality is not worse than lying or cheating or stealing... or any of the many other sins all of us have committed.


Good to hear.  There are several threads here condemning homosexuals (not just homosexuality) but very few, if any, condemning lying, cheating or stealing.  Unless it's about blacks, then there are plenty of those.

Further, there are members here who lie about others and deliberately twist posts to trump up false accusations against others for their personal agendas.  Right @Calypso Jones?  @DonGlock26?

----------


## Calypso Jones

I just read the weirdest article by a lesbian who after 15 years of lesbianism decided it is time to date a man. I'm not sure but I think she was expecting a load of criticism.   Poor poor lesbians..so maligned by society....in their own minds.   Her article wasn't all that good and didn't seem cogent enough or something to even comment on it.   So....whatever.

http://www.xojane.com/sex/gold-star-...erested-in-men

Here it is just in case.  She should stick to lesbianism and forget writing.

----------


## Reverend

> Adulterers aren't trying to close down businesses for not catering to them, or having loud, flamboyant parades celebrating their adultery.
> 
> When adulterers put themselves in the news as much as gays.... you will see the threads.
> 
> Seems like common sense to me.


My best friend says that his favorite sin is "pride" but he doesn't organize "pride pride" parades.

----------

Karl (07-04-2014)

----------


## Max Rockatansky

> I just read the weirdest article by a lesbian who after 15 years of lesbianism decided it is time to date a man. I'm not sure but I think she was expecting a load of criticism.   Poor poor lesbians..so maligned by society....in their own minds.   Her article wasn't all that good and didn't seem cogent enough or something to even comment on it.   So....whatever.
> 
> http://www.xojane.com/sex/gold-star-...erested-in-men
> 
> Here it is just in case.  She should stick to lesbianism and forget writing.





> Now 35, I’m still not defined by how others might perceive me. My only responsibility is to harness my younger self’s courage and be as true to who I am now as who I was then.


Someone's biological clock is ticking.  

$20 says after she has a kid or two, she either goes it alone as a single mother or reverts.

----------

