Conservative group says gay activists 'mull terrorism'

[nhjeff]

Hesed wrote:

<quoted text>So which ancestors are you talking about? The lost Virginia Colony, first, or the Pilgram colony at Plymouth?
Most likely you were referring to the Pilgrams who were a seperatist religious group (from the Church of England) who came here to get away from that domineering.
You might want to read a little history, more than a webpage. BTW, you can start with wikipedia as all the information is readily available.
Our ancestors didn't just come here in search of freedom from the oppression of the Church of England, but there were those who did.

Oh, the Pilgrims. The Quakers. The Jews. No, not all. Many came for a life free of other oppressions. What gives you the right to oppress gay people????

[nhjeff]

Imprtnrd wrote:

<quoted text>I know what your saying is true, but I would like to know if my state is one of them. Are they listed anywhere?

I'm sure you will be unsurprised that the short answer is NO! No protections for GLBT's in Missouri. Here's more info:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employment_Non-D...

[DustyShadow]

Josh in New Orleans wrote:

<quoted text>
Then with compassion, you have understanding, but yet you would fight against our inclusion to society and for what? Nothing more than some f****d up notion that it's the right thing to do? It is not so difficult to understand once you have put yourself in someone else's shoes, and yet you can comprehend but cannot understand or accept that gay people are God's children as well? Seriously, what is up with that? Aren't Christians supposed to bind themselves to the Good Word rather than the Law? You are right in respect to mankind being fallible, however you neglect that everything you know about God is through man, and about the only clue God's given us is an innate sense knowing the difference of good and evil; something your faith calls original sin. Which side are you on in this whole "gay" debate? How can you be sure given how convoluted your understanding of it is, how you condemn while at the same time are tempted to apologize for your own actions? I don't want to you feel sorry for me, I want you to understand me, and respect that.

God has given us way more than a clue. He's given us an instruction manual. Now imagine if people reading an instruction manual for a VCR decide that "fallible man" wrote it and it cannot be believed. They decide that all the instructions for making a video are only for certain times and circumstances and shouldn't be followed, and they make up their own instructions as they go. They look at the long list of "Do nots," decide that some paranoid fool wrote it and then just do the very things it says not to do. Does that make sense?

Yes, gay people are God's children, too. Absolutely. But straight people who are God's children don't have a free license to do whatever they please without consequences either.

You misunderstand me. I wasn't apologizing for my own actions. I was saying that I find it very unfortunate that gay people have taken so many options taken away from them, that you are left with what amounts to little help dealing with your situation, which can't be fun.

[DustyShadow]

I'm sorry, someone interrupted me and I lost my place. I meant to say "that gay people have had so many options taken away from them."

[nhjeff]

DustyShadow wrote:

I'm sorry, someone interrupted me and I lost my place. I meant to say "that gay people have had so many options taken away from them."

And you are doing your best to withhold those options from us.

[Rick in Kansas]

DustyShadow wrote:

<quoted text>
God has given us way more than a clue. He's given us an instruction manual. Now imagine if people reading an instruction manual for a VCR decide that "fallible man" wrote it and it cannot be believed. They decide that all the instructions for making a video are only for certain times and circumstances and shouldn't be followed, and they make up their own instructions as they go. They look at the long list of "Do nots," decide that some paranoid fool wrote it and then just do the very things it says not to do. Does that make sense?
Yes, gay people are God's children, too. Absolutely. But straight people who are God's children don't have a free license to do whatever they please without consequences either.
You misunderstand me. I wasn't apologizing for my own actions. I was saying that I find it very unfortunate that gay people have taken so many options taken away from them, that you are left with what amounts to little help dealing with your situation, which can't be fun.

What you don't seem to realize is that your so-called instruction manual has been used to instruct people to do all sorts of things which are no longer acceptable. In this country alone it has been used as an instruction manual for slavery, the killing of "witches", the oppression of racial and religious minorities, the oppression of women, the oppression and forced conversion of Native Americans and that's just the short list of bad acts committed because the Bible tells us so. While you are free to believe that the Bible is instructing you to deny the civil rights of people who are Lesbian and Gay, you need to grasp the reality that your interpretation is far from universal, nor has it ever been. You may be in the "mainstream" at the moment, but the tide is working against you and before you know it, you will find yourself listed among those who believed that the Bible justified slavery, the killing of witches and so forth, with history wondering what in the heck was wrong with you...

[Jerald]

Rick in Kansas wrote:

<quoted text>
...You may be in the "mainstream" at the moment, but the tide is working against you and before you know it, you will find yourself listed among those who believed that the Bible justified slavery, the killing of witches and so forth, with history wondering what in the heck was wrong with you...

In the meantime, rational people who don't believe in superstition and an unproven and conveniently unprovable myth wonder what the heck is wrong with him right now.

[Inquisitarian]

Bruce wrote:

<quoted text>
Can you be more of a stereotype?

Where did you get the idea that saying "what a load!" in response to an obvious lie equates to being a stereotype?

Bruce wrote:

The shrill, self hating gay man with a Secular Humanist fetish. You make us all look like a bunch of mincing fairies. Cowboy up!

If you picture me as a shrill mincing fairy, that's the product of your own imagination, and has nothing at all to do with reality.

Now, unless you have something more pertinent to say than merely hurling pointless insults for no apparent reason, you're welcome to shut up as far as I'm concerned.

[Inquisitarian]

Bruce wrote:

<quoted text>
Can you be more of a stereotype? The shrill, self hating gay man with a Secular Humanist fetish. You make us all look like a bunch of mincing fairies. Cowboy up!

And where did you get the idea that I'm self-hating? You clearly know nothing about me at all.

As for a "secular humanist fetish", I'm not even sure what you mean by that, or where you came up with the idea that this describes me, either.

[Inquisitarian]

RHill wrote:

<quoted text>
There are too many people to consider each on on their individual merits ... we HAVE to categorize and generalize when we look outside of our small circle of friends, family and associates.

That's nothing more than a lame attempt to excuse your prejudice.

[GJFlash]

FYI, bigotry towards Christians is still bigotry.

Many Christians are bigoted towards homosexuals, and many homosexuals are bigoted towards Christians.

Perpetuating the circle of bigotry doesn't solve any problems, now does it? If you don't want any bigotry directed at you, try setting an example first.

[fuzi]

RHill wrote:

<quoted text>
the "excepted standard" of the majority is a pretty clear wall against which you dash justifications for your bizarre preferences.

By your standard, people like you made slavery "moral" for a very long time. But that changed.

Your immorality shows with every post you make.

[RHill]

fuzi wrote:

<quoted text>By your standard, people like you made slavery "moral" for a very long time. But that changed.
Your immorality shows with every post you make.

You are right, I am immoral ... along with ignorant, stupid, a hater, a bigot, a liar ... I believe the strongest invective I've used in any of my posts is "buttercup" (against you my FUZI friend ... I apologize). So, are gay activist even now mulling terrorism in some hidden (but comfortable) lair ... no doubt. Will reasonable arguments or discourse alter you away from your evil deeds ... don't think so. Do I really care ... nope. Warning though ... if anyone I know is injured by an exploding glitter bomb ... I'm tak'n the gloves OFF!!!!

[RHill]

Mona Lott wrote:

<quoted text>
That is the stupidest thing I've read today! You are just too lazy to take the time to get to know each individual BEFORE you pass judgement on them.

It would be very difficult to "get to know" each of the millions of gay people before passing judgment ... I simply do not have the time or the inclination. I've mentioned in a previous post knowing a few gay's in the USN, we all lived together in peace. Of course, they weren't trying to marry each other and have the Navy recognize them as "married" and get the additional benefits they would then have been entitled to. I guess people just had more sense back then.

[RnL_4EVR_MARRIED]

RHill wrote:

<quoted text>
It would be very difficult to "get to know" each of the millions of gay people before passing judgment ... I simply do not have the time or the inclination. I've mentioned in a previous post knowing a few gay's in the USN, we all lived together in peace. Of course, they weren't trying to marry each other and have the Navy recognize them as "married" and get the additional benefits they would then have been entitled to. I guess people just had more sense back then.

So, Gays and Lesbians are fine to co-exist with just as long as they don't want to get married or insist on rights and benefits that you have........my how mighty nice of you.

See, in my opinion....if you are old enough to die for your country......then you should be able to drink........and if one is willing to die for their country.......they should be able to marry the person of their choosing.

When I served in the Navy......we had Gays and Lesbians in our squadron......we all got along just fine......but I also believe that we should have the same rights, benefits and privileges that we are fighting for.

See, if you have the right to marry the person of your choice.....and I had the right to marry the woman of my choice........then every other American should too.

[nhjeff]

RHill wrote:

<quoted text>
It would be very difficult to "get to know" each of the millions of gay people before passing judgment ... I simply do not have the time or the inclination. I've mentioned in a previous post knowing a few gay's in the USN, we all lived together in peace. Of course, they weren't trying to marry each other and have the Navy recognize them as "married" and get the additional benefits they would then have been entitled to. I guess people just had more sense back then.

Or maybe they were just more closeted. Maybe they have better sense today.

[RHill]

RnL_4EVR_MARRIED wrote:

<quoted text>
So, Gays and Lesbians are fine to co-exist with just as long as they don't want to get married or insist on rights and benefits that you have........my how mighty nice of you.
See, in my opinion....if you are old enough to die for your country......then you should be able to drink........and if one is willing to die for their country.......they should be able to marry the person of their choosing.
When I served in the Navy......we had Gays and Lesbians in our squadron......we all got along just fine......but I also believe that we should have the same rights, benefits and privileges that we are fighting for.
See, if you have the right to marry the person of your choice.....and I had the right to marry the woman of my choice........then every other American should too.

Nah, not saying that at all ... guys I knew had enough sense to accurately assess their situation and didn't rock the boat. I find y'all (gays) neither more or less desirable as neighbors because of wanting to get married and stuff. I simply don't care what my neighbors are doing (so long as it don't effect ... blah, blah, blah). What drew me to this Topix forum was that y'all might be "mulling terrorism" to achieve your goals ... a foolish recourse as I am sure you will get what you want without ever firing a shot. Hell, half the law makers in AC-DC make y'all look like, well, normal people. PLUS ... another reason to feel "terror" ain't gonna help your cause in my book. Has my participation in this thread convinced me that "gay terrorism" (do those two words even BELONG together??) is out of the question?? Nope, seems some awful big chips are riding precariously on a lot of crazy-ass shoulders!! Stick with a Ghandi-ish approach - nobody hates Ghandi!!

[Jerald]

RHill wrote:

<quoted text>...Stick with a Ghandi-ish approach - nobody hates Ghandi!!

Except maybe Nathuram Godse, the Hindu nationalist who assassinated him.

Historically, it's the religionists people need to be concerned about. And if you were drawn to this thread because of what some spokesman for the Liberty Counsel has to say, well, just consider the source.

[RnL_4EVR_MARRIED]

RHill wrote:

<quoted text>
Nah, not saying that at all ... guys I knew had enough sense to accurately assess their situation and didn't rock the boat. I find y'all (gays) neither more or less desirable as neighbors because of wanting to get married and stuff. I simply don't care what my neighbors are doing (so long as it don't effect ... blah, blah, blah). What drew me to this Topix forum was that y'all might be "mulling terrorism" to achieve your goals ... a foolish recourse as I am sure you will get what you want without ever firing a shot. Hell, half the law makers in AC-DC make y'all look like, well, normal people. PLUS ... another reason to feel "terror" ain't gonna help your cause in my book. Has my participation in this thread convinced me that "gay terrorism" (do those two words even BELONG together??) is out of the question?? Nope, seems some awful big chips are riding precariously on a lot of crazy-ass shoulders!! Stick with a Ghandi-ish approach - nobody hates Ghandi!!

Nobody is committing Terrorism of any kind......and to even accuse Gays and Lesbians of that was as is wrong from the Religious Fanatics.

JMHO

[Inquisitarian]

Bruce wrote:

<quoted text>
You're getting shrill right NOW!

Because I dared to disagree with you and call you out on your BS?

Hmmm...you're the one using both all caps and an exclamation point - I think that makes you the shrill one.