Justices may decide if vendors can sn...

Justices may decide if vendors can snub gay weddings

There are 2814 comments on the Daily Press & Argus story from Mar 20, 2014, titled Justices may decide if vendors can snub gay weddings. In it, Daily Press & Argus reports that:

When Vanessa Willock wanted an Albuquerque photographer to shoot her same-sex commitment ceremony in 2006, she contacted Elane Photography.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Daily Press & Argus.

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#2583 Apr 27, 2014
nhjeff wrote:
<quoted text>
All you've proved (once again) with that statement is that your lying is, indeed, pathological. Many organizations consider same-sex attraction to be a normal variation withing the animal kingdom. Indeed, all respected and credentialed organizations have made statements to that effect. So the claim that only one organization considers same-sex attraction normal is your most easily disputed lie, and wa've already provided the information for you ad nauseum. And that's why restating a falsehood is a lie: you know you're a liar. What's worse, you know that we know you're lying, but you do it anyway. What could be more pathological?
You also lie that science was ignored in the conclusion. As you know, psychological associations we're elect any to remove homosexuality from the list of disorders. In fact, however, the science was compelling. And that's why the organizations abandoned a popular misconception: good science demands that we seek truth, however unpopular.
Instead of attacking his intentions why not deal with his assertions? What are all these "organizations"? Do you have a list?

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#2584 Apr 27, 2014
TomInElPaso wrote:
<quoted text>
To you perhaps but fortunately you don't get to set the rules.
When did you obey rules?

Since: Feb 09

Location hidden

#2585 Apr 27, 2014
TomInElPaso wrote:
<quoted text>
Amen. His opinion no longer matters, he's just removed any doubt and no longer has any valid argument.
Tom, What is homosexuality? And what is being gay?

“From a distance...”

Since: Apr 08

Planet Earth

#2586 Apr 27, 2014
Wondering wrote:
Organization, singular.
The World Health Organization publishes the International Classification of Diseases 10th Revision (ICD-10) and the National Center for Health Statistics publishes the International Classification of Diseases 10th Revision Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) for use in the US. So not just one organization.
Wondering wrote:
They used voting, not science.
Nope. But I understand your need to believe your fantasy.
Wondering wrote:
I disagree with them.
You lack the qualifications to disagree with it. You lack the knowledge to even have an informed opinion on the topic.
Wondering wrote:
You are free to disagree with me.
I'm merely pointing out your pathological lying on the topic.
Wondering wrote:
Ain't America great!
It'll be even better when you die since there will be one less stupid bigot wasting the planet's oxygen.

“From a distance...”

Since: Apr 08

Planet Earth

#2587 Apr 27, 2014
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
SHOW ME. GIVE ME A LIST. Don't waste our time by giving me a list of organizations that don't say that. That's what I get when someone tries. As for the animal kingdom, I prefer not to equate myself to lower life forms. You can if it makes you feel better.
There's no need to equate; you ARE a lower life form.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#2588 Apr 28, 2014
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
Not everyone. Because the APA voted away homosexuality from the DSM doesn't mean that it's gone. You're still here. If everyone were born gay back at the beginning of mankind, mankind would have quickly ended. In fact, an argument could be made that it would never have existed. That is proof enough for me. Disorder isn't a dirty word, it simply means an irregularity. The natural order of humanity involves a man and a woman. It's how the species survives.
And if every tree was an oak tree you'd starve.

We've gone over this fallacy with you before.

What has this to do with the jurisprudence of the issue?
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#2589 Apr 28, 2014
Terra Firma wrote:
<quoted text>
1. The World Health Organization publishes the International Classification of Diseases 10th Revision (ICD-10) and the National Center for Health Statistics publishes the International Classification of Diseases 10th Revision Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) for use in the US. So not just one organization.
2. You lack the qualifications to disagree with it. You lack the knowledge to even have an informed opinion on the topic.
3. I'm merely pointing out your pathological lying on the topic.
4. It'll be even better when you die since there will be one less stupid bigot wasting the planet's oxygen.
1. Two organizations, one ICD-10. As I recall, homosexuality isn't listed but these publications don't come out and say it isn't a disorder.
2. Qualifications aren't required.
3. Show me.
4. Don't you mean one less person to make you look stupid.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#2590 Apr 28, 2014
Terra Firma wrote:
It'll be even better when you die since there will be one less stupid bigot wasting the planet's oxygen.
BTW, I own a lot of trees, I make more oxygen than I use. I need a way to prevent you from using what I don't need.

“From a distance...”

Since: Apr 08

Planet Earth

#2591 Apr 28, 2014
Wondering wrote:
BTW, I own a lot of trees, I make more oxygen than I use. I need a way to prevent you from using what I don't need.
Any oxygen you use is still a waste of it.

“From a distance...”

Since: Apr 08

Planet Earth

#2592 Apr 28, 2014
Wondering wrote:
1. Two organizations, one ICD-10.
Nope. The ICD-10-CM is a modification of ICD-10 and therefore a different version.
Wondering wrote:
As I recall, homosexuality isn't listed but these publications don't come out and say it isn't a disorder.
It's implicit when publications designed to categorize all diseases and disorders don't include something that it's not a disease or disorder. Educated people understand that. Stupid *sswipes like you demand affirmations of negatives.
Wondering wrote:
2. Qualifications aren't required.
For your assertions to have any relevance in a professional field they are.
Wondering wrote:
3. Show me.
I already have in many of my posts. It's not my fault that part of your pathological lying includes the inability to recognize what you do.
Wondering wrote:
4. Don't you mean one less person to make you look stupid.
The only person you make look stupid is yourself. Probably because you ARE stupid.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#2594 Apr 28, 2014
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
As long as they aren't teaching it. But then, why would anyone have to try to convince kids that being straight is normal?
Ask NARTH
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#2595 Apr 28, 2014
Terra Firma wrote:
It's implicit when publications designed to categorize all diseases and disorders don't include something that it's not a disease or disorder.
In this case it's not much different than DADT.
Did you see that M/M rape and sexual harassment is way up in the military since the repeal of DADT?

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#2596 Apr 28, 2014
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
1. Two organizations, one ICD-10. As I recall, homosexuality isn't listed but these publications don't come out and say it isn't a disorder.
2. Qualifications aren't required.
3. Show me.
4. Don't you mean one less person to make you look stupid.
A coalition of clergy members filed a federal lawsuit Monday challenging North Carolina's constitutional ban on gay marriage, saying it violated their religious freedom.

The clergy members said that they'd like to perform same-sex marriage ceremonies in their congregations, but that they can't because of the "unjust law."

http://www.wral.com/lawsuit-seeks-to-overturn...

“Take Topix Back From Trolls”

Since: Dec 08

El Paso, TX

#2597 Apr 28, 2014
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
In this case it's not much different than DADT.
Did you see that M/M rape and sexual harassment is way up in the military since the repeal of DADT?
Provide a link to the data. I'm betting you won't/can't.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#2598 Apr 28, 2014
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
In this case it's not much different than DADT.
Did you see that M/M rape and sexual harassment is way up in the military since the repeal of DADT?
Reread the Pentagon report more carefully.

It's REPORTS of these things that are up, right along with REPORTS of incidents against women.

“From a distance...”

Since: Apr 08

Planet Earth

#2599 Apr 28, 2014
Wondering wrote:
In this case it's not much different than DADT.
Does it take a lot of effort to think up these stupid and unresponsive comments, or does it just come naturally too you?
Wondering wrote:
Did you see that M/M rape and sexual harassment is way up in the military since the repeal of DADT?
No, it's not; it's being reported more frequently rather than being covered up as in the past. And who statistically is the perpetrator of sexual assault on males in the military?

"Military data show that the typical perpetrator is a man who has served longer in the military than his victim and holds a higher rank. In most cases, the assailant identifies as heterosexual."

Link: http://data.baltimoresun.com/military-sexual-...

So contrary to you attempt to imply that the increase is due to gay men feeling emboldened by the repeal of DADT, it's really heterosexual men like you that commit most of these male sexual assault crimes. What a surprise. Not
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#2600 Apr 28, 2014
Terra Firma wrote:
<quoted text>
Does it take a lot of effort to think up these stupid and unresponsive comments, or does it just come naturally too you?
I asked for a document from a major medical organization that says homosexuality is not a disorder, any source but the APA. You point to a document that doesn't say it. It will take you a lot of effort to find one.

“Take Topix Back From Trolls”

Since: Dec 08

El Paso, TX

#2601 Apr 28, 2014
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
I asked for a document from a major medical organization that says homosexuality is not a disorder, any source but the APA. You point to a document that doesn't say it. It will take you a lot of effort to find one.
Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. All research always lists things that the subject isn't. NOT!

Could you make yourself look any more foolish?

“Unconvinced”

Since: Nov 09

Seattle, WA

#2602 Apr 28, 2014
Wondering wrote:
I asked for a document from a major medical organization that says homosexuality is not a disorder, any source but the APA. You point to a document that doesn't say it. It will take you a lot of effort to find one.
Do you really think it strengthens your argument to be discussing psychiatric disorders, and then to insist that the primary organization in this field cannot be cited?

I don't think that homosexuality is a breakfast cereal either, but I probably couldn't find a document to say so. Would you ban any consultation with Kellogg's or General Mills on the matter?

The number one organization in the country (and quite possibly the world) for researching and identifying psychiatric disorders is the APA. Who ELSE weighs in on this matter? Whose opinion should HAVE any weight? Who do YOU go to for medical and scientific analyses of mental health conditions? Do you meet a buddy over beers, and discuss what you are and aren't going to consider "disorders"?

“From a distance...”

Since: Apr 08

Planet Earth

#2603 Apr 28, 2014
Wondering wrote:
I asked for a document from a major medical organization that says homosexuality is not a disorder, any source but the APA. You point to a document that doesn't say it. It will take you a lot of effort to find one.
If something isn't explicitly included in a comprehensive listing of all diseases and disorders, then its absence from the list indicates it's not considered a disease or disorder. What you asked for is irrelevant; the world doesn't cater to the irrational demands of uneducated bigots like you.

Besides, I've asked you multiple times for a document from a major medical organization that says you're not mentally ill, but you've never provided that documentation. So by your logic that means you are mentally ill. And since it's unlikely you can provide credible documentation from such an organization stating you aren't a child molester, sociopath or homicidal maniac either we should prime you're those things as well, eh *sswipe?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Photography Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Coastal Country Jam in Huntington Beach combine... Aug 14 Appalled 1
News Paula McConnell: Our fabulous Fair Aug 5 illegal gardener 6
News Has the Steelcase brand lost its appeal with cu... (Jan '12) Jun '17 Jason 4
News Local Brides Say Photographer Owes Them Wedding... (Aug '08) Jun '17 AmPieJam UncleSam 620
Best camera for a beginner (May '13) Jun '17 AmPieJam UncleSam 4
Best place for Wild life Photography? (Sep '12) Jun '17 Shannon 2
News Stunning images capture hidden caves across the... May '17 No doubt 1
More from around the web