Boy Scouts Could Lose Tax-Exempt Status in California Because of Gay Ban

Feb 20, 2013 Full story: www.towleroad.com 100

A new bill proposed by openly gay California state senator Ricardo Lara would strip the Boy Scouts' tax exempt status for discriminating against members and leaders on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity, LGBT POV reports

Full Story

“Luke laughs at hypocrites!”

Since: Sep 10

Palm Springs, California

#38 Feb 20, 2013
JrEsq wrote:
<quoted text>
Are all queers incable of comprehending basic English? For the umpteenth time, SCOTUS has ruled that exclusive membership is NOT discrimination. So why do you insist on using the D word. Oh, I forgot, the homosexual mind is intractable, incapable of changing thought patterns. That is one of the dangers that you present to society, among others.
Pretty fancy talk for someone whose very existence is a living hell in El Segundo.

I went on a couple of dates with someone on Maple Ave. off of Sepulveda near the 105, but he was a true jerk, who ELSE would live in such a horrible town, and I got sick of the stink of jet fuel from LAX. I wonder if it is toxic for YOU to snort day and night?

Since: May 12

Bellevue, WA

#39 Feb 20, 2013
JrEsq wrote:
SCOTUS has ruled that the BSA have a Constitutional right to exclusive membership, so there is no discrimination.
Do the queers in California not understand how the Constitution works? They sure cry Constitution when it comes to homosexual marriage.
Aaaawh... what a shame

Since: May 12

Bellevue, WA

#40 Feb 20, 2013
JrEsq wrote:
<quoted text>
Are all queers incable of comprehending basic English? For the umpteenth time, SCOTUS has ruled that exclusive membership is NOT discrimination. So why do you insist on using the D word. Oh, I forgot, the homosexual mind is intractable, incapable of changing thought patterns. That is one of the dangers that you present to society, among others.
They still have the right to discriminate stupid... just not on the tax payers dime... Ha Ha bigot cathordo... now go hug your soon to be dead pope

Since: May 12

Bellevue, WA

#41 Feb 20, 2013
JrEsq wrote:
<quoted text>
Are all queers incable of comprehending basic English? For the umpteenth time, SCOTUS has ruled that exclusive membership is NOT discrimination. So why do you insist on using the D word. Oh, I forgot, the homosexual mind is intractable, incapable of changing thought patterns. That is one of the dangers that you present to society, among others.
Guess your bigot azz will have to donate more this year... LOL... oh a fluck you

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#42 Feb 21, 2013
Happy Anniversary 1913 wrote:
Accidents and defects happen. Providing "extra space" and giving them children is even more dangerous. You people need to be institutionalized. Soon.
Take Bill Clinton with you.
White skin is a genetic defect, so should all of us white folks be considered a danger to kids as well? Asexual tendencies, as in lack of sexual desires or drives, is a genetic flaw in species like us, because we need to reproduce sexually, does that mean we're a danger to children as well? You should think before you post, lest you post more idiotic assertions.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#44 Feb 21, 2013
JrEsq wrote:
<quoted text>
Are all queers incable of comprehending basic English? For the umpteenth time, SCOTUS has ruled that exclusive membership is NOT discrimination. So why do you insist on using the D word. Oh, I forgot, the homosexual mind is intractable, incapable of changing thought patterns. That is one of the dangers that you present to society, among others.
Wrong again. The SCOTUS ruled that exclusive membership by a private organization is constitutionally ALLOWED discrimination. They NEVER said it wasn't discrimination.

I use the word discrimination, because that's what it is. In this case it happens to be constitutionally allowed discrimination; just as it's constitutionally allowed to discriminate against those under 18 in voting, or those under 21 to drink, or those under age 16 to drive, etc, etc.

There is all sorts of constitutionally allowed discrimination; that doesn't mean it not discrimination nonetheless.
JrEsq

El Segundo, CA

#45 Feb 21, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Wrong again. The SCOTUS ruled that exclusive membership by a private organization is constitutionally ALLOWED discrimination. They NEVER said it wasn't discrimination.
I use the word discrimination, because that's what it is. In this case it happens to be constitutionally allowed discrimination; just as it's constitutionally allowed to discriminate against those under 18 in voting, or those under 21 to drink, or those under age 16 to drive, etc, etc.
There is all sorts of constitutionally allowed discrimination; that doesn't mean it not discrimination nonetheless.
"constitutionally allowed discrimination"
OK moron, call it what you want. But by society ruling that a person must be 18 in order to vote, they are simply protecting society by requiring the voter to have the mental maturity to do so. Something which you seem to lack.
Again, you demonstrate incredible immaturity by implying that anyone should be able to do anything they want at any age.
The homosexual mind really is intractable.

“equality for ALL means ALL”

Since: Jan 07

Fort Lauderdale FL

#46 Feb 21, 2013
JrEsq wrote:
<quoted text>
"constitutionally allowed discrimination"
OK moron, call it what you want. But by society ruling that a person must be 18 in order to vote, they are simply protecting society by requiring the voter to have the mental maturity to do so. Something which you seem to lack.
Again, you demonstrate incredible immaturity by implying that anyone should be able to do anything they want at any age.
The homosexual mind really is intractable.
Did you have a point?

Uve

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#47 Feb 21, 2013
JrEsq wrote:
<quoted text>
"constitutionally allowed discrimination"
OK moron, call it what you want. But by society ruling that a person must be 18 in order to vote, they are simply protecting society by requiring the voter to have the mental maturity to do so. Something which you seem to lack.
Again, you demonstrate incredible immaturity by implying that anyone should be able to do anything they want at any age.
The homosexual mind really is intractable.
LOL YOU calling anyone a Moron! You just admitted it's discrimination and this has NOTHING to do with voting rights. You bigots always try to relate the actual topic to something irrelevant so your little minds can comprehend, then make up ignorant generalizations, then cry 'ad hominem' when you get called out for your bigotry. Your a total bigoted, self righteous piece of sh*t!
JrEsq

El Segundo, CA

#48 Feb 21, 2013
Tony C wrote:
<quoted text>
Did you have a point?
Have your mommy explain it to you.
JrEsq

El Segundo, CA

#49 Feb 21, 2013
Uve wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL YOU calling anyone a Moron! You just admitted it's discrimination and this has NOTHING to do with voting rights. You bigots always try to relate the actual topic to something irrelevant so your little minds can comprehend, then make up ignorant generalizations, then cry 'ad hominem' when you get called out for your bigotry. Your a total bigoted, self righteous piece of sh*t!
I "admitted it's discrimination"? By saying that a voting age is a logical requirement to ensure that the voter has the proper mental capacity? Apparently, Topix needs to have some type of protection against people of your mental capacity.

Uve

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#50 Feb 21, 2013
Tony C wrote:
<quoted text>
Did you have a point?
He's has no point, other than his bigotry, that's the point!

Uve

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#51 Feb 21, 2013
JrEsq wrote:
<quoted text>
I "admitted it's discrimination"? By saying that a voting age is a logical requirement to ensure that the voter has the proper mental capacity? Apparently, Topix needs to have some type of protection against people of your mental capacity.
Sorry stupid, won't work..Has NOTHING to do with voting rights! LOL just because I'm smarter than you is no need to cry for Mommy. POS
JrEsq

El Segundo, CA

#52 Feb 21, 2013
Uve wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry stupid, won't work..Has NOTHING to do with voting rights! LOL just because I'm smarter than you is no need to cry for Mommy. POS
I know why you queers want young children to have voting rights. Instead of cell phones, you can buy their votes with suckers and candy. A person with an undeveloped mind is a natural Democrat.

Uve

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#53 Feb 21, 2013
JrEsq wrote:
<quoted text>
I "admitted it's discrimination"? By saying that a voting age is a logical requirement to ensure that the voter has the proper mental capacity? Apparently, Topix needs to have some type of protection against people of your mental capacity.
BTW that's not what you said..try another squirm tactic POS. I told you every time I see you spouting off your bigotry, misinformation and ignorance, day after day on here, I would call you on it. Now go back to watching TV or go count the grey hairs on your ass, let somebody who actually has a valid point on here. Your a boring read.
JrEsq

El Segundo, CA

#54 Feb 21, 2013
Uve wrote:
<quoted text>
BTW that's not what you said..try another squirm tactic POS. I told you every time I see you spouting off your bigotry, misinformation and ignorance, day after day on here, I would call you on it. Now go back to watching TV or go count the grey hairs on your ass, let somebody who actually has a valid point on here. Your a boring read.
Do you have too many thread tabs open at the same time?
You don't seem to be making any sense.

Uve

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#55 Feb 21, 2013
JrEsq wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you have too many thread tabs open at the same time?
You don't seem to be making any sense.
LOL Yea, I bet I don't make any sense to you...Ignorant Bigots aren't logical.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#56 Feb 21, 2013
JrEsq wrote:
<quoted text>
"constitutionally allowed discrimination"
OK moron, call it what you want. But by society ruling that a person must be 18 in order to vote, they are simply protecting society by requiring the voter to have the mental maturity to do so. Something which you seem to lack.
Again, you demonstrate incredible immaturity by implying that anyone should be able to do anything they want at any age.
The homosexual mind really is intractable.
Is English your 2nd language?

Where did I say anyone should be able to do anything they want at any age? I support age limits on voting & driving & marrying & drinking & other activities which require a certain level of maturity.

Obviously you don't understand the definition of discrimination-

"Discriminate- to differentiate; to recognize a distinction"

So while the BSA can discriminate, the state of California can yank their tax-exempt status if they so choose.

“equality for ALL means ALL”

Since: Jan 07

Fort Lauderdale FL

#57 Feb 21, 2013
JrEsq wrote:
<quoted text>
Have your mommy explain it to you.
So, no point. Got it.

You may resume mindless ranting. I'll just skip it.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#58 Feb 21, 2013
JrEsq wrote:
<quoted text>
I "admitted it's discrimination"? By saying that a voting age is a logical requirement to ensure that the voter has the proper mental capacity? Apparently, Topix needs to have some type of protection against people of your mental capacity.
Yes, that is discriminating between those capable of making such a decision and those incapable of making such a decision.

Just as the BSA is discriminating between heterosexuals and homosexuals. They may think they have a logical reason to do so, and that's their right.

Just as the state of California can discriminate when deciding who gets tax-exempt status and who doesn't.

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.

California Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 22 min loose cannon 181,715
Judge overturns California's ban on same-sex ma... (Aug '10) 7 hr Cowobunga 201,150
Condoleezza Rice urges Republican party to be m... (Mar '14) 13 hr Swedenforever 56
Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 18 hr kal 49,174
female wants skype fun Tue DreamerToni326 1
Is CA drought God's punishment for Prop. 8 bein... Tue Xcaliber 1
Gay marriage (Mar '13) Tue Cali Girl 2014 56,690
More from around the web