Woman Charged After Kissing Preacher ...

Woman Charged After Kissing Preacher at Gay Pride Rally in NC

There are 47 comments on the WGHP story from Jun 30, 2011, titled Woman Charged After Kissing Preacher at Gay Pride Rally in NC. In it, WGHP reports that:

A Bible-waving preacher protesting at a gay pride event in North Carolina turned the other cheek -- and got kissed on it by a 74-year-old female gay rights supporter who is now charged with simple assault.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at WGHP.

First Prev
of 3
Next Last

“Common courtesy, isn't”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#1 Jun 30, 2011
Of course Mr. Belcher is angry that he got kissed ... by a woman, anyway.

These Bible-thumpers are all closet cases. Since he was protesting without a permit, he should just let the whole thing drop. Or maybe that would be too Christ-like for him?
SirAndrew

United States

#2 Jun 30, 2011
A first year law student could get her off these charges. And to make it more ironic, he could quote from the very bible the so-called minister was waving in the air to do it. What a jerk this guy is. An d christians wonder why they have such a bad rep in our community, as well as the non-christian communities of the world.

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#3 Jun 30, 2011
I'm not sure how dedicated to the cause she is, nor how good a condition her body is. But maybe she should just plea guilty and request the maximum sentence.

BTW: Didn't Jesus say something about going to court against your neighbor? I seem to always be remembering things in that book that sefl-styled Christians know nothing about.
Snickers

Grove City, PA

#4 Jun 30, 2011
nhjeff wrote:
I'm not sure how dedicated to the cause she is, nor how good a condition her body is. But maybe she should just plea guilty and request the maximum sentence.
BTW: Didn't Jesus say something about going to court against your neighbor? I seem to always be remembering things in that book that sefl-styled Christians know nothing about.
When the police charge you with a crime that they witnessed, it is the police taking you to court, not your victim. Amazing how you gays jump at every chance to jab at Christians. Jab, jab, jab.
Give it a whirl

Roy, WA

#5 Jun 30, 2011
The homosexual committed a hate-crime-enhanced assault, the hate being based on the religion of the victim.
But of course hate-crime laws don't protect normal people, only the deviants.
Rainbow Kid

Alpharetta, GA

#6 Jun 30, 2011
Give it a whirl wrote:
The homosexual committed a hate-crime-enhanced assault, the hate being based on the religion of the victim.
But of course hate-crime laws don't protect normal people, only the deviants.
The religious superstition of the victim is his own fault

“Luke laughs at hypocrites!”

Since: Sep 10

Palm Springs, California

#7 Jun 30, 2011
God, I hope she got a tetanus shot and washed her face with Listerine. I'm sure that tired old geezer popped the biggest tent in his pants he has had since Carter was president.

“Luke laughs at hypocrites!”

Since: Sep 10

Palm Springs, California

#8 Jun 30, 2011
Give it a whirl wrote:
The homosexual committed a hate-crime-enhanced assault, the hate being based on the religion of the victim.
But of course hate-crime laws don't protect normal people, only the deviants.
NOW you LIKE hate crime laws and want them to be followed?

You guys SCREAM that hate crime laws "restrict Christian's freedom of speech!" (to use hate speech) So, now you WANT them to enforce the laws,huh?

This should be some trial!

"Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, surely we cannot have this rampant KISSING going on between a man and a woman on the street anymore!"

You're the one who says that you hate seeing men kissing men. Well, here was a woman kissing a man. Is THAT against your every changing rules now too?
Aida Lott

Jersey City, NJ

#9 Jun 30, 2011
Give it a whirl wrote:
The homosexual committed a hate-crime-enhanced assault, the hate being based on the religion of the victim.
But of course hate-crime laws don't protect normal people, only the deviants.
And you just committed slander.
1. She's not gay
2. Kissing is not a hate crime
3. North Carolina doesn't have hate crime laws that protect "deviants."
Rainbow Kid

Alpharetta, GA

#10 Jun 30, 2011
Give it a whirl wrote:
The homosexual committed a hate-crime-enhanced assault, the hate being based on the religion of the victim.
But of course hate-crime laws don't protect normal people, only the deviants.
No people of the Gay Master Race were involved
.
The preacher is a snarling evangelical homophobe; not gay
.
The woman who kissed his sniveling assholiness was attending the parade with her husband. She's not gay either
.
Perhaps next year; both of them should be banned from the Pride Parade so they don't give *We the People of the Gay Master race* a bad reputation

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#11 Jun 30, 2011
Snickers wrote:
When the police charge you with a crime that they witnessed, it is the police taking you to court, not your victim. Amazing how you gays jump at every chance to jab at Christians. Jab, jab, jab.
Option A) Nice job giving the finger to the whole bearing false witness commandment,'cause that ain't what the story says.

-OR-

Option B) Your reading comprehension skills need improving. Quoting from the article:
"Rory Collins, police chief in the town located about 45 miles northeast of Charlotte, said Belcher wanted to press charges, which he hadn't expected."

Which of these two options best explains your post?

"Don't turn the other cheek, have the little old lady busted for assault."

Odd, I could have sworn that verse read a little differently than that.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#12 Jun 30, 2011
Well it goes to show ya that you just can't show kindness to christian's, doesn't mix well with their hate.
SLIF

Toronto, Canada

#13 Jun 30, 2011
Just put the video on youtube.
Snickers

Grove City, PA

#14 Jun 30, 2011
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>Option A) Nice job giving the finger to the whole bearing false witness commandment,'cause that ain't what the story says.
-OR-
Option B) Your reading comprehension skills need improving. Quoting from the article:
"Rory Collins, police chief in the town located about 45 miles northeast of Charlotte, said Belcher wanted to press charges, which he hadn't expected."
Which of these two options best explains your post?
"Don't turn the other cheek, have the little old lady busted for assault."
Odd, I could have sworn that verse read a little differently than that.
You ended the quote too soon (by design or lack of reading skills). Here's the rest of it:
"Belcher contends police would have charged him if he had touched a 74-year-old woman and that he didn't personally pursue charges.
And it doesn't matter if Parker was aiming for Belcher's mouth or cheek, Collins said.
'She might disagree with this, but it wasn't done as a show of affection,' he said.'It was an unwanted touching.' "
Deuteronomy 25
1 When people have a dispute, they are to take it to court and the judges will decide the case, acquitting the innocent and condemning the guilty.
There are plenty of cases where people are punished for their wrong doings in the Bible. You must be reading only the warm and fuzzy parts.
Snickers

Grove City, PA

#15 Jun 30, 2011
Jalene in the wild wrote:
Well it goes to show ya that you just can't show kindness to christian's, doesn't mix well with their hate.
"She might disagree with this, but it wasn't done as a show of affection,' he said.'It was an unwanted touching."
SirAndrew

Kihei, HI

#16 Jun 30, 2011
Snickers wrote:
<quoted text>
When the police charge you with a crime that they witnessed, it is the police taking you to court, not your victim. Amazing how you gays jump at every chance to jab at Christians. Jab, jab, jab.
Sorry, snick, you're wrong. What she did was not an arrestable offense. It is not up to the police to determine whether the attention was undesired. It will be the people taking this to court, not the cops, and only because the idiot preacher decided to press charges. The cops will be witnesses, but nothing else.

And we only go after the members of the christian cult when they do something stupid, crazy, antigay or hypocritical. So yes, I guess we do jab them a lot. But only because they've earned it. Jab jab jab
Lupe

Lake Arrowhead, CA

#17 Jun 30, 2011
Snickers many of us Gays are Christians. We love without the prejudices and hatred. (like Jesus)

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#19 Jun 30, 2011
Snickers wrote:
You ended the quote too soon (by design or lack of reading skills). Here's the rest of it:
"Belcher contends police would have charged him if he had touched a 74-year-old woman and that he didn't personally pursue charges.
And it doesn't matter if Parker was aiming for Belcher's mouth or cheek, Collins said.
'She might disagree with this, but it wasn't done as a show of affection,' he said.'It was an unwanted touching.' "
Dear if you had worked on your reading skills, you may have noticed that while Belcher contends that he did not pursue charges, that rather dubious claim was flatly contradicted by the Police Chief in the part I did use. Tell me, what cop anywhere would see an assault in a little old lady walking up and hugging a middle aged man and kissing him on the cheek? Even under these circumstances? You have got to be kidding me if you're falling for his line of bs on this. You know damn good and well that he had to have screamed bloody murder to get them to make this arrest. If he hadn't demanded it, there wouldn't be a snowball's chance in heck that this charge would have EVER been filed and you know it.

“The Buybull is innerrrent.”

Since: Jun 08

Parksley, VA

#23 Jun 30, 2011
I think any touching like that in public without permission is risky, however harmless it apparently seemed to the gay friendly, str8 grannie.

In Philly I've seen glbt people stand amongst the protesting, uber "Christian" bigots with signs saying, "American Taliban," or "Star of 'Nasty Preacherboy Cumfest'" with an arrow pointing to the main, uber "Christian" closet case in question.

Speech is better than actually risking a tort.

Since: Feb 11

Location hidden

#24 Jul 1, 2011
Snickers wrote:
<quoted text>
"She might disagree with this, but it wasn't done as a show of affection,' he said.'It was an unwanted touching."
Of course it was unwanted touching! Like I said love doesn't mix well with his hate. You are such an idiot!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 3
Next Last

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.

Taylorsville Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Why men don't have to pay child support anymore... 7 hr Hahahaha 3
Old Stores of Valley Hills Mall (May '13) 9 hr dooscoop32 23
Vote for Donald J Trump Sun Tyler 15
outlaws mc, hickory, nc (Aug '11) Sat Bluegrass Honky 118
AA Entertainment (Mar '12) Jan 20 mmcarswell69 62
duke power bill (Jan '11) Jan 19 NCSouthernBelle 34
Police Abuse (Mar '14) Jan 19 NCSouthernBelle 47

Taylorsville Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Taylorsville Mortgages