So, What Is It That The Anti-Gay Grou...

So, What Is It That The Anti-Gay Groups Actually Fear?

There are 18008 comments on the lezgetreal.com story from Aug 17, 2012, titled So, What Is It That The Anti-Gay Groups Actually Fear?. In it, lezgetreal.com reports that:

What makes hate, well, hate? Given that today is something of a quiet news day, it may be nice to give ourselves a breather and think about some things.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at lezgetreal.com.

“Educating the uneducated”

Since: Aug 12

Montreal

#17911 Jan 10, 2013
United in faith wrote:
<quoted text>
i didn't call YOU demonic, in that post.
i said when confronted with hatemongers and demonic
that was a general statement but since you say all the stuff you do to me on here, demonic is a pretty good description of your mindset.
So while trying to say that you don't call others demonic, you called me demonic again right here...Patty, you really aren't thinking straight, are you?

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#17912 Jan 10, 2013
Peace-Love-Happiness wrote:
<quoted text>
You've said, MANY TIMES, that just because you may find personal information on someone, it doesn't mean you have the RIGHT to share it on the internet. You are the biggest hypocrite, Patty. You posted for REVENGE.
How would they (dispatch) "know" he has a mental history?
boooots did NOT report you/Patty for opposing ssm. I know that idea serves your need to become a martyr, but that is NOT what he reported. He reported potential elder abuse. Or did they not give you the actual report? Perhaps they did and you discarded it because it doesn't serve your full purpose.
As for public agencies like this, it is incorrect that the agency is allowed to provide the name of the person(s) who file a report on someone because it can become a legal liability. By sharing info from that report, you CREATED that liability for your local PD. Congrats.
Actually I kind of feel bad about that as the lady seemed like a nice lady too, on the phone. I know in small towns public officials tend to be a bit too free with personal information, but they are still legally liable if someone wants to make an issue about it.

Back somewhere between 1982 and 1986 (the period I worked at one branch of my former employer. I worked for two major Canadian banks), I had a client who I had seen before and was well known in the branch, and his family were fairly well to do and prominent farmers in the area, who came into my ofice, slammed the door shut hard, and stood over me at my desk, yelling at the top of his voice about how I had spread nasty stories around town about him, and so on and so forth. He was either drunk or on drugs or both, at the time. Becuse he was a borrowing client of mine, I would have had pesonal information from him, and he claimed that I had been telling around town about his bad record at the bank.

I had not discussed him with anyone in that town. In fact I probably didn't know anyone in that town who I would have thought might also know him, as he was from a farm, and I was new in the area and knew very few local people. Anyway, he finally picked up a very heavy rectangular shaped fancy pen holder from my desk and threw it at my desk. It put a hole right through the thick desk pad that was on my desk, and also damaged a small handheld calculator, which I still have with me in this room, though the battery is now dead. There is a groove in the outside metal covering of the calculator where the heavy object struck it. Finally hearing all the noise, the manager and the other assistance manager (I was one of the assistant managers) became frightened that I was in danger so they burst into the room and persuaded the gentleman to leave my office, but they had already call the cops whose office was only a couple doors away from the branch, and an officer came there and escorted the man out of the bank.

I think the cop explained to us later that the gentleman was known to have a rather angry side to him when inebriated.

My point is when one works in an office or a business that has personal information on other people, not only are they not permitted by law to divulge that information, but they are bound by the terms of their employment that they not do so.

Had I actually had been talking about this guy to others outside the bank, and it could be proved, I would likely have been fired. Fortunately, the only concern anyone had at that time was that he might be about to kill me.

“O'si yo!”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#17913 Jan 10, 2013
Peace-Love-Happiness wrote:
<quoted text>
If it was given to Patty and you're not her, why did YOU post it online?
WHAT? are you kidding me?

pattycake isn't posting on here.
I AM
and you and boots and hl and some others REFUSE to acknowledge UIF
so boots threats were given TO ME.
UIF.
not to pattycake

pattycake knows thru me.
are you unable to understand that?

Since: Jul 12

Daytona Beach, FL

#17914 Jan 10, 2013
United in faith wrote:
<quoted text>
SURE THEY CAN. if someone files a report against you, you have a RIGHT to know where that complaint came from.
what makes you think you can violate someones privacy, file FALSE reports based on lies, and then not have to stand accountable for it. YOU COWARD.
you think you can trash someone and hide safely while doing it?
If they believe your report was bogas and unethical, and a concern for patty's safety, they most certainly CAN give information to protect someone they feel is being stalked.
all bets are off when you are filing a false report.
what is it about your brain that keeps you from understanding that?
its against the law to file false reports on someone.
patty didn't break any laws you idiot.
what you did was WRONG and falls under the title of slander and invasion of privacy
why don't you stop this maddness.
do you want to go back to the hosp, is this why you are doing this?
LEAVE ME ALONE.
and if you think trying to get a law enforcement person in trouble will help you in anyway, then you are crazier than i thought you were.
What part of "All information will be held confidential" do you not understand? Sure, they *can* share the confidential report with people...it doesn't make it LEGAL. How would they *know* boooots was filing a "false" report unless they spent the time and effort to investigate his claim. Even mental patients can provide accurate information when filing a report. They have no right to disregard his report until they follow through and investigate.

You can't repeatedly share someone's real name on the internet, for purposes of revenge, and then tell them to leave you alone. You opened Pandora's box and are trying to blame it on others, like a fart. YOU got that police department employee in trouble...not boooots, not HL. YOU.

“Educating the uneducated”

Since: Aug 12

Montreal

#17915 Jan 10, 2013
United in faith wrote:
<quoted text>
YO DUMMY, boots BEGGED me to call them.
so i did.
HE told me to.
He didn't tell you to find out his name and post it on a public forum.
Not that it's his real name anyways, but as PLH mentioned, if your story is true, you made a bunch of people, including Amy, get into big trouble.

Since: Jul 12

Daytona Beach, FL

#17916 Jan 10, 2013
Happy Lesbo wrote:
<quoted text>
.. Patricia doesn't care who she hurts ..
.. Amy trusted her. Big mistake. Might cost her a job and Patricia will chuckle while she cleans toilets ..
.. she's sick Boooots, very, very sick, as close to evil as you can come ..
I was thinking the same thing. That poor girl probably thought Patty was the "sane" one in this situation and shared the info without realizing Patty would run as fast as she could to her computer and share it.

“O'si yo!”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#17917 Jan 10, 2013
MisterCharrington wrote:
<quoted text>
The internet has no jurisdiction...wait-what? Shall I explain the concept of extra-judicial to you...
The US government can make any law it chooses. If the US makes it illegal to chew gum in Singapore does that make it illegal to chew gum in Singapore? NO it does not because the US has no JURISDICTION in Singapore.
Does the Kentucky cyber stalking internet task force thingy(if there was such a thing) have Jurisdiction in Canada? It does not.
Where are Topix servers? They are in California, does Kentucky have jurisdiction in California? It does not. Does California have Jurisdiction in Canada? It does not.
Are you mental? Yes you are.
Take your medication and then why don't you go and file suit against booots with the clerk of the imaginary internet court.
you are mental.

the U.S law covers every state in America.
if a person from KY goes to Cal and commits a crime they will stand trial in Cal for it.
matters not where they live or lived.

and i don't believe the police lied to me.
they assured me that the state is able to deal with cyber stalking.
you can't threaten peoples lives with slander and harm, and get away with it.
you are mental if you think they can.

FYI, the police don't 'cotton to' receiving false and bogas reports either. That takes up their valuable time.

“Educating the uneducated”

Since: Aug 12

Montreal

#17918 Jan 10, 2013
United in faith wrote:
<quoted text>
SURE THEY CAN. if someone files a report against you, you have a RIGHT to know where that complaint came from.
But didn't you just say you weren't Patty? Haven't you been trying to say that this whole time (not that anyone believed you)?
The report was filed against Patty, so you just admitted to being Patty.

Since: May 11

Worksop, UK

#17919 Jan 10, 2013
Pattiecake58 wrote:
<quoted text>
NOPE. I am Patty Hadley.
nahh patty never gave her consent for her name to be used on here, not ever.

“O'si yo!”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#17920 Jan 10, 2013
Peace-Love-Happiness wrote:
<quoted text>
You could save yourself a ton of printer ink, time, energy, and sanity if you simply stop posting. If you went so long before and never posted, why can't you do it now?
of course you say that. SILENCING people is the goal of every anti-God person on topix.

I find it irratating as all get out that if you can't make a person conform to your thinking, then the next step is to run them off and shut them up.

“O'si yo!”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#17921 Jan 10, 2013
Happy Lesbo wrote:
United in faith wrote:
because she called them, after i relayed the continuous PMS from him to ME. and i was there.
speaker phones are a wonderful thing.
<quoted text>
.. read this post carefully:
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/gay/T85ELBGC7...
UIF WRITES: "YO DUMMY, boots BEGGED me to call them.
so i did. HE told me to."
.. United In Faith indicates SHE called the RS police. Once again, Patricia incriminates herself and exposes her pathological lying ..
YO dummy is right on here,
because,'calling "THEM" is not mentioning any names.

HL incriminates herself as being UUUPID.
Horatio Caine

Miami, FL

#17922 Jan 10, 2013
A childs Nightmare

Two recent government actions, one legislative and one judicial, have called into question our society’s willingness to protect its youngest and most vulnerable members.

A hate crimes bill (H.R. 1913 and S. 909), dubbed by critics the “Pedophile Protection Act,” has already passed the House and is up for vote in the Senate. The bill earned its unofficial name when Democrats rejected an amendment to exclude pedophiles from legal protection. No doubt this legislation serves as a precursor to onerous hate speech legislation in the future.
Ads by Google

On the judicial front, the Georgia Supreme Court ruled in a divorce case that two minor children must be forced to mingle against their will with their homosexual father’s “gay” and lesbian friends during visitation. Claiming the children of Eric and Sandy Mongerson will not suffer harm from this contact, Justice Robert Benham overturned an earlier lower court ruling protecting the children from exposure to “overnight company with a member of the opposite sex, or with any person deemed to be a paramour, unrelated by blood or marriage, in the presence of a child.”

Beth Littrell, an attorney for the pro-homosexual group Lambda Legal, said,“The court has done the right thing today by focusing on the needs of the children instead of perpetuating stigma on the basis of sexual orientation.”

An AP report said the mother’s attorney, Lance McMillian,“claimed the father subjected the children to an ‘array of violent, sexual, abusive and wholly inappropriate conduct’ during a trip to Arkansas and contended the father was in a series of affairs with other men while still married.”

During the trial the two oldest children expressed fear for the safety of their younger siblings due to their homosexual father’s violent outbursts. One of the girls told of finding a magazine with naked men while visiting her father.

So much for “justice” and the assertion that children’s needs are a priority.

Benham might have done his homework and discovered a plethora of reasons to block easy access to these children by the friends of their homosexual father. He could have started with the wealth of material found at the National Association for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality. Numerous scientific studies show soaring rates of violence within homosexual and lesbian relationships, shortened life spans caused by diseases influenced by their lifestyle, and a significantly higher rate of child molestation as compared with heterosexual populations.

Since: May 11

Worksop, UK

#17923 Jan 10, 2013
United in faith wrote:
<quoted text>
you are mental.
the U.S law covers every state in America.
if a person from KY goes to Cal and commits a crime they will stand trial in Cal for it.
matters not where they live or lived.
and i don't believe the police lied to me.
they assured me that the state is able to deal with cyber stalking.
you can't threaten peoples lives with slander and harm, and get away with it.
you are mental if you think they can.
FYI, the police don't 'cotton to' receiving false and bogas reports either. That takes up their valuable time.
so if the server is in california and you are accessing the server which is in california from kentucky where is the crime comitted?

If booots has an canadian isp and his isp hops onto a route through ny, ky, md, and on to ca....does he cross state lines making it a federal crime?lol

How do you prosecute boots for an alleged offence in all of those states when he lives in canada and how many years budget will russell springs pd blow trying to process such a load of crap patricia?

how come your god made you so mental?

“Educating the uneducated”

Since: Aug 12

Montreal

#17924 Jan 10, 2013
United in faith wrote:
stalkers. YES it is against the law to file false reports.
How many times do we have to tell you before you understand; it's not a false report.
He meant a report based on worry that you are not mentally stable and are unable to take care of your mother. He did not state that you are not capable, he voiced his worry that you might not be stable. The whole point of the report was to see if you were stable enough.

Something that isn't a statement, something that is a feeling, can't be false.

Patty, your understanding (if you can even call it that) words are not the REAL meanings of words.

“O'si yo!”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#17925 Jan 10, 2013
boooots wrote:
<quoted text>
Patty, in light of what you claimed here yesterday, whether it is true or not, I think it would legally be in your best interest, and in the best interest of the lady you stated you spoke to at the police station in RS, that you shut up. You have said enough just today to get both of you into some very severe hot water, and that would not have to involve me at all.
Remember that there are other people, allegedly, on this site, from RS, and any one of them could report your friend and then she would be in a hell of a lot of trouble. I just hope that doesn't happen, as I was not wanting to cause any problems for a public employee in RS; I was only attempting to get someone to act on a report that we had received here that you are not capable of caring for your mother (that still is my only concern, but you seem to be bending over backward trying to make this a criminal matter, a law suit matter, and a job loss matter).
Cyber stalking is not contacting the police, Patty. A cyber stalker, except if he was trying to play games with the police, to see if they could catch him, would never contact the police if he was stalking someone online.
None of the information I gave the police came from anything that I personally had found out about my own, but was provided to me by other people, and they did not get it by stalking you either, but mostly from you yourself, and the rest is public record.
Would this be the correct name if I was to contact the mayor there, Patty?
Mayor Hollis DeHart
It gives his email address, telephone, and fax numbers, so I could use any or all of those.
I am not threatening to do that, Patty. This is hopefully a wake up call to you that perhaps you have gone too far.
Let's put it this way. If I plan to contact anyone else, except if they contact me first, regarding you, I will tell you first on here or by PM on here. That way, as has been the case from the beginning, no secrets will be kept.
YOU mentioned the persons name.
NOT I. So it is YOU and hl who are messing in a vipers nest of thinking you can mess with someones job in that field of work.
and hey if you didn't want that person called WHY did you pm me 4 times BEGGING me to call? did you really think you could file false reports and try to trash someones character without them being informed? I think it is in YOUR best interest to leave ME alone, leave pattycake alone, and stop bothering police with your vendictive deranged delusions. It has gotten you NO where
and you have gained NOTHING. but if you continue to bother people you will wish you had of shut up when you had the chance to.

LEAVE PEOPLE ALONE.

you have no right to meddle in the lives of people on here.

Since: Jul 12

Daytona Beach, FL

#17926 Jan 10, 2013
United in faith wrote:
<quoted text>
in addition let me clue you in on something you haven't considered.
if you and boots cause that person any problems in her job, then you will not only have patty, myself to attest to your invasions on here but you will then have added a member of the law to attest to the cyber stalking on here.
so you are not helping yourself or boots at all with your sick need to hurt people.
last chance to save yourself....
You TWIT. HL mentioned a name....one that she can easily retrieve from the public FB account of the PD.

YOU publicly disclosed all the information boooots *confidentially* provided to the PD.

Since: Jul 12

Daytona Beach, FL

#17927 Jan 10, 2013
Happy Lesbo wrote:
United in faith wrote:
because she called them, after i relayed the continuous PMS from him to ME. and i was there.
speaker phones are a wonderful thing.
<quoted text>
.. read this post carefully:
http://www.topix.com/forum/news/gay/T85ELBGC7...
UIF WRITES: "YO DUMMY, boots BEGGED me to call them.
so i did. HE told me to."
.. United In Faith indicates SHE called the RS police. Once again, Patricia incriminates herself and exposes her pathological lying ..
Good catch.

“O'si yo!”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#17928 Jan 10, 2013
Peace-Love-Happiness wrote:
<quoted text>
HL AND I DID *NOT*....I REPEAT,*NOT*, EGG BOOOOTS ON ABOUT THIS SITUATION. We repeatedly DIScouraged him from doing so. STOP SAYING WE DID. This is not a request, it is a DEMAND.
I DID NOT SAY YOU DID.
i just replied to HL posts where she was urging boots to have that gal fired, PLUS try to sue........SHE IS EGGING HIM ON...to place himself in deeper trouble....... she is as SICK and dangerous as he is.

i didn't say you.
i said HL was egging him on.

you all need to LEAVE HIM ALONE, he is a NUTJOB.
and the more you all encourage him the worse he will get.
ROCCO

Twentynine Palms, CA

#17929 Jan 10, 2013
United in faith wrote:
<quoted text>
I DID read it and you are quoting me a GAYS take on it.
it was never the law in Uganda for SS or SSM to be considered legal. thats THEIR country's laws.
who are you to disrepect those man made laws you hold higher than God's laws here in America?
Uganda must work out their differences on that issue, the same way America has and is.
Then you are supporting gays being killed in Uganda.

What a bitch you are.

“O'si yo!”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#17930 Jan 10, 2013
Peace-Love-Happiness wrote:
<quoted text>
They can't "open" topix and retrieve personal data, crack-head. They aren't the FBI, they're the RSPD.
crack head is right, i never said they could, i said they could turn it over to the ones WHO CAN open it. thats what they told me.
they can turn this mess over to the STATE and they can most assuradly open topix.
and get to the bottom of 'who's who'.
and by encouraging people like boots and hl that is exactly where this is headed.

what part of STOP IT doesn't anyone understand?

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.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News A look at the judges who will rule on Trump's t... 1 hr Frankie Rizzo 167
News Tampa Teacher @LoraJane Hates Christians, Promo... 2 hr hardscrabble 362
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 2 hr Frankie Rizzo 49,183
News 'Free Kim Davis': This is just what gay rights ... (Sep '15) 4 hr Frankie Rizzo 25,591
Jade's Stink Ass Gay Cafe 4 hr Hugely Hung Hetero 6
News What would Jesus say about same-sex marriage? (Jul '15) 5 hr hardscrabble 5,939
News Middle School Gay-Straight Alliance Allowed To ... 6 hr Rev Don Wildmoan 13
News More 6 hr Little Cheerleader 15
More from around the web