Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: News from the Society for the Perpetually Offended


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: News from the Society for the Perpetually Offended Page: <<   < prev  15 16 [17] 18 19   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: News from the Society for the Perpetually Offended - 4/30/2015 8:56:40 AM   
Aylee


Posts: 24103
Joined: 10/14/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

You're fucking kidding, right? Tolerant of all beliefs until those beliefs are forced on others?

Tell that to the next person who thinks that its "fair" for them to decide how charitable they'll be with MY money in the never-ending "War on Poverty". I wonder...though they'll probably never say, just how many families are descended from those that were on assistance at the beginning of that "bright new day".

How about this? Next time some group at a publicly-funded university...meaning funded by CONSERVATIVE taxpayers as well as liberal taxpayers and attended by conservative students as well as liberal students...wants to impose THEIR beliefs, liberal or conservative, in shutting down a movie that NO ONE is being forced to go and watch, you and your "tolerant of other beliefs" friends show up and oppose those protesters.



You are forgetting getting speakers canceled.

And getting people kicked out of Comic Cons for their beliefs.

_____________________________

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam

I don’t always wgah’nagl fhtagn. But when I do, I ph’nglui mglw’nafh R’lyeh.

(in reply to CreativeDominant)
Profile   Post #: 321
RE: News from the Society for the Perpetually Offended - 4/30/2015 9:59:53 AM   
HunterCA


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/21/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tkman117


quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee


quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u


quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee


quote:

ORIGINAL: GoddessManko


quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee

What is this insane-vein-popping determination that we SHOULD go around tolerant of everyone's beliefs. Sheesh. There is a waste of time and life.


LOL, really Aylee? Not caring is harder than caring? Now you're yanking my chain! hehe


I said nothing about caring.

It is a waste of time and life, at least my time and my life, to try and figure out some way of being tolerant of everyone else's beliefs.

Not all beliefs are equal. I see no gain an trying to figure out ways in which they are.

Really ?
Is there a joke here I'm missing ?
That's your default setting ?



That not all beliefs are equal and it is a waste of my time to be tolerant of everyone's beliefs? Yeppers.



Yeppers, but a post modern thinker, basically the left, will fight you on that.


Wrong bub, Liberals are generally tolerant of all beliefs, except when those beliefs impact or are forced on others. There's no problem having a belief, but just make sure you keep it in your pants like all your other private stuff. Those who are religious have their churches where they can take it out and show it off, but in places like school or government, it's just inappropriate.



Did you read the link I provided? Or is it against your philosophy to read something you don't agree with?

(in reply to Tkman117)
Profile   Post #: 322
RE: News from the Society for the Perpetually Offended - 4/30/2015 11:07:06 AM   
CreativeDominant


Posts: 11032
Joined: 3/11/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tkman117


quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee


quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u


quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee


quote:

ORIGINAL: GoddessManko


quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee

What is this insane-vein-popping determination that we SHOULD go around tolerant of everyone's beliefs. Sheesh. There is a waste of time and life.


LOL, really Aylee? Not caring is harder than caring? Now you're yanking my chain! hehe


I said nothing about caring.

It is a waste of time and life, at least my time and my life, to try and figure out some way of being tolerant of everyone else's beliefs.

Not all beliefs are equal. I see no gain an trying to figure out ways in which they are.

Really ?
Is there a joke here I'm missing ?
That's your default setting ?



That not all beliefs are equal and it is a waste of my time to be tolerant of everyone's beliefs? Yeppers.



Yeppers, but a post modern thinker, basically the left, will fight you on that.


Wrong bub, Liberals are generally tolerant of all beliefs, except when those beliefs impact or are forced on others. There's no problem having a belief, but just make sure you keep it in your pants like all your other private stuff. Those who are religious have their churches where they can take it out and show it off, but in places like school or government, it's just inappropriate.



Did you read the link I provided? Or is it against your philosophy to read something you don't agree with?


Come on, Hunter...that would be intolerant...narrow-minded...And he JUST told you liberals aren't that way.

(in reply to HunterCA)
Profile   Post #: 323
RE: News from the Society for the Perpetually Offended - 4/30/2015 12:26:30 PM   
HunterCA


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/21/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

Aylee what it missing from your post is an acceptance that the law provides us with a socially agreed and acceptable list of activities that are acceptable. NAMBLA members promote pedophilia, a crime as well as being repugnant. Footballers (or any one else) who assault their partners are committing the crime of assault. Cruelty to animals is also a crime (at least it is here, I am uncertain whether it's a criminal offence in the US).

It is appropriate that we respect the lawful views of others. They have their right to their views just as you and I have a right to ours. We aren't obliged to agree with them, we can even agitate against them publicly if we so wish, but we should respect others' rights to hold them as long as they are lawful. It makes for a harmonious society but perhaps social harmony isn't your thing.





Am I missing something or is this one of the most passive aggressive things I've read?

(in reply to tweakabelle)
Profile   Post #: 324
RE: News from the Society for the Perpetually Offended - 4/30/2015 12:49:44 PM   
CreativeDominant


Posts: 11032
Joined: 3/11/2006
Status: offline
No...what you read is a "having it both ways while not seeing how hypocritical it is" philosophy.

"I respect your right to have your beliefs" (public statement of tolerance)

"I disagree with your beliefs" (polite public statement of the recognition of differences)

"Because I disagree with your beliefs and want others to know that someone has a difference from my BELIEFS that may be 'dangerous', I'm going to agitate against you". (Perhaps public condemnation of your views...you know, those differing viewpoints of yours that I 'tolerate'?...Will cause you to see the 'light')

I'm going to push for a law to make you do things MY way (public awareness and condemnation of the 'incorrect' view which, since it is not mine and I am correct and tolerant...look at all I embrace, though not your right to embrace something different...is dangerous and wrong and...And...And...intolerant)

But...I am tolerant of others' beliefs, unlike you...(As long as they fit the correct list)

(in reply to HunterCA)
Profile   Post #: 325
RE: News from the Society for the Perpetually Offended - 4/30/2015 3:57:37 PM   
HunterCA


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/21/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant

No...what you read is a "having it both ways while not seeing how hypocritical it is" philosophy.

"I respect your right to have your beliefs" (public statement of tolerance)

"I disagree with your beliefs" (polite public statement of the recognition of differences)

"Because I disagree with your beliefs and want others to know that someone has a difference from my BELIEFS that may be 'dangerous', I'm going to agitate against you". (Perhaps public condemnation of your views...you know, those differing viewpoints of yours that I 'tolerate'?...Will cause you to see the 'light')

I'm going to push for a law to make you do things MY way (public awareness and condemnation of the 'incorrect' view which, since it is not mine and I am correct and tolerant...look at all I embrace, though not your right to embrace something different...is dangerous and wrong and...And...And...intolerant)

But...I am tolerant of others' beliefs, unlike you...(As long as they fit the correct list)


Yes I agree with all of that. But the last sentence is "maybe social harmony isn't your thing". That is so passive aggressive.

(in reply to CreativeDominant)
Profile   Post #: 326
RE: News from the Society for the Perpetually Offended - 4/30/2015 4:32:29 PM   
CreativeDominant


Posts: 11032
Joined: 3/11/2006
Status: offline
"Social harmony " is achieved when we all have differing beliefs...but along the same belief spectrum and the differences are only a matter of how fully we embrace what is 'right', with no room for either rejection of the'right beliefs' or having views contrary to those that would embrace everyone...but you.

(in reply to HunterCA)
Profile   Post #: 327
RE: News from the Society for the Perpetually Offended - 5/3/2015 2:17:50 PM   
HunterCA


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/21/2007
Status: offline
https://www.commentarymagazine.com/article/the-defenestration-of-a-conservative-professor/

(in reply to CreativeDominant)
Profile   Post #: 328
RE: News from the Society for the Perpetually Offended - 5/3/2015 8:57:40 PM   
CreativeDominant


Posts: 11032
Joined: 3/11/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HunterCA

https://www.commentarymagazine.com/article/the-defenestration-of-a-conservative-professor/


I read the article. Personally, I feel that it will go well in the education thread.

(in reply to HunterCA)
Profile   Post #: 329
RE: News from the Society for the Perpetually Offended - 5/6/2015 9:13:36 AM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline
An Auburn woman calling herself an ambassador for God and his son, Jesus Christ, filed a federal lawsuit Friday against all homosexuals.

Sylvia Driskell, 66, said in the suit that she is petitioning the U.S. District Court of Omaha to be heard "in the matter of homosexuality. Is homosexuality a sin, or not a sin?"

In a seven-page letter framed as a lawsuit, she cited Bible passages that described homosexuality as an abomination and against nature, and she said never before has the nation or the state been "besiege(d) by sin."

"Will all the judges of this nation judge God to be a lier [sic]?" Driskell asked.

She said she petitioned the court because she feels it imperative to stand up for the moral principles on which the nation was founded.

http://journalstar.com/news/state-and-regional/auburn-woman-files-federal-case-against-homosexuals/article_fcf1e8b6-5744-5579-ac38-b19b427b8492.html

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to CreativeDominant)
Profile   Post #: 330
RE: News from the Society for the Perpetually Offended - 5/6/2015 10:26:18 AM   
HunterCA


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/21/2007
Status: offline
http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2015/05/05/sommers-women-feminism-lecture-college-column/26923945/

My comment regards mainstream leftist loonies, rather than loonies.

< Message edited by HunterCA -- 5/6/2015 10:29:23 AM >

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 331
RE: News from the Society for the Perpetually Offended - 5/6/2015 11:52:52 AM   
bounty44


Posts: 6374
Joined: 11/1/2014
Status: offline
whats particularly nice about that piece is, it was written by Kirsten powers, a democratic strategist who appears on fox news frequently (notice the effort towards "fair and balanced" comrades?) and there is this:

quote:

Kirsten Powers writes weekly for USA TODAY and is author of the upcoming The Silencing: How the Left is Killing Free Speech




< Message edited by bounty44 -- 5/6/2015 11:53:47 AM >

(in reply to HunterCA)
Profile   Post #: 332
RE: News from the Society for the Perpetually Offended - 5/6/2015 12:16:10 PM   
CreativeDominant


Posts: 11032
Joined: 3/11/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

An Auburn woman calling herself an ambassador for God and his son, Jesus Christ, filed a federal lawsuit Friday against all homosexuals.

Sylvia Driskell, 66, said in the suit that she is petitioning the U.S. District Court of Omaha to be heard "in the matter of homosexuality. Is homosexuality a sin, or not a sin?"

In a seven-page letter framed as a lawsuit, she cited Bible passages that described homosexuality as an abomination and against nature, and she said never before has the nation or the state been "besiege(d) by sin."

"Will all the judges of this nation judge God to be a lier [sic]?" Driskell asked.

She said she petitioned the court because she feels it imperative to stand up for the moral principles on which the nation was founded.

http://journalstar.com/news/state-and-regional/auburn-woman-files-federal-case-against-homosexuals/article_fcf1e8b6-5744-5579-ac38-b19b427b8492.html
Another religious person guided by her beliefs that the Bible is to be taken as the literal word of God. Other than fundamentalists, I don't think there's all that many of us that view it that way. It's a waste of time.

Hey...speaking of time-wasters when it comes to religion:

1. A 'Church Bulletin Discount' From a Pennsylvania Restaurant


(PHOTO: JONATHAN FOSTER / LANCASTER NEWSPAPERS)
Sharon Prudhomme, co-owner of the Lost Cajun Kitchen in Columbia, Pa.


Not so long ago Prudhomme's Lost Cajun Kitchen of Columbia, Pennsylvania, thought that a good way to encourage business was to have a "church bulletin" discount.

If a patron brought in a church bulletin on Sunday, they could get a 10 percent discount on their bill. One did not have to be Christian to take advantage of the bargain. Just bring in a bulletin and show it to the waiter.

However, John Wolff of the group Pennsylvania Nonbelievers saw things differently and filed a complaint against Prudhomme's to the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission in the summer of 2012.

"I was a little taken aback because they provide a discount for churchgoers," said Wolff in an interview with Lancaster Online.

"That rubbed me a bit the wrong way. It's not a big deal in itself and I have no animosity towards Prudhomme's, but I do bear a grudge against a religious right that seems to intrude on our civil rights."

Wolff's complaint garnered backlash from across the country and reportedly helped boost business for the Columbia restaurant.

In November 2012, a settlement was reached between the two parties in which Lost Cajun Kitchen was allowed to continue having the 10 percent discount, albeit they were encouraged by the Commission to omit the word "church" from its title.

2. Praying in Public Restaurant Discount


(PHOTO: FACEBOOK/MARY'S GOURMET DINER)
Mary's Gourmet Diner


Speaking of restaurants in trouble, in the summer of 2014 Mary's Gourmet Diner of Winston-Salem, North Carolina, found itself threatened with legal action over a 15 percent discount on "praying in public."

The Freedom From Religion Foundation of Madison, Wisconsin, sent a letter to the diner, arguing that the "praying in public" discount was discriminatory.

Again, the discount was broadly defined and reportedly could be gotten with doing something as simple as closing eyes and taking a deep breath.

Nevertheless, the threat of legal action prompted Mary's Gourmet to discontinue the discount in August, with a manager at the restaurant conveying sadness over the matter.

"We have done away with the discount and Mary and her daughter, Shama, are very saddened by this; this is a gift that we gave to our customers — this is a gift that has been taken from us," a manager at the Diner told The Christian Post back in August.

"The gift of giving is just as important as receiving the gift. These individuals are very hurt, but it has made our community stronger. There's always good things that come out of the bad, and unfortunately, we will see it in time, but we are not seeing it yet."

FFRF did not come out the legal battle unscathed, however, as the satirical program "The Daily Show" had a segment lampooning the Wisconsin-based group for their actions and calling for them to "lighten ... up."

The segment had FFRF Co-President Dan Barker admitting that he had not gone to the diner and two local atheists saying they did not feel discriminated against.

When "Daily Show" correspondent Jordan Klepper noted that an atheist could always pretend to pray and get the discount, Barker replied that such an act would make a person "a hypocrite atheist."

"What's going to happen if you're a hypocrite atheist?" responded Klepper, "you're going to go to not hell?"

"Look, I'm an atheist, alright? I get it," Klepper continued. "We need somebody fighting the good fight. Is this a good fight?"

3. A Holocaust Memorial in Ohio


(PHOTO: STUDIO DANIEL LIBESKIND)
A graphic rendering of the proposed Holocaust Memorial for the Ohio Statehouse in Columbus, Ohio.


Columbus, Ohio, faced atheist litigation when its Capitol Square Review and Advisory Board approved a design for a Holocaust Memorial in July 2013.

Daniel Libeskind, the architect behind the new World Trade Center building and himself the offpsring of Holocaust survivors, made the winning design.

So what prompted a letter from the Freedom From Religion Foundation this time? Libeskind's inclusion of a Star of David in the plans.

"I think that the Star of David is a religious symbol, and religious symbols, we have been told on several occasions, are not permissible on Statehouse grounds," wrote FFRF co-presidents Dan Barker and Annie Laurie Gaylor.

"To align the State of Ohio with one religion and its sacred symbol - even a minority religion for a worthy memorial - would dishonor the truest protection our country has against a similar Holocaust on our shores: the precious constitutional principle separating religion from government."

The FFRF suit garnered outrage from Christian and Jewish groups alike, with one online petition calling for them to halt their threat of legal action getting over 39,000 signatures.

Later that summer, the FFRF decided to back down from their hostile stance against the planned Holocaust Memorial.

4. 9/11 Memorial's World Trade Center Cross


(PHOTO: REUTERS /PETER MORGAN)
The American Center for Law and Justice said it will file an amicus brief in support of the World Trade Center cross display at the 9/11 Memorial and Museum. American Atheists has filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the cross.


Speaking of memorials, the National September 11 Museum found itself the target of an atheist lawsuit a few years before it opened.

In 2011, the New Jersey-based group American Atheists filed a lawsuit against the museum for deciding to include a relic from that tragic day known as the World Trade Center Cross.
Comprised of two intersecting beams from one of the WTC buildings, the cross was to be included in the museum, much to the chagrin of AA.

"They're trying to Christianize 9/11 with this cross and it's not American and it's not fair," stated David Silverman, president of American Atheists.

The move was an unpopular one, with many including atheist author Susan Jacoby denouncing the lawsuit as one of those things that "confirm negative stereotypes about atheists."

"What I find dismaying about lawsuits of this kind is that they make it more difficult to focus public attention on real and serious violations of the separation of church and state," wrote Jacoby.

Even The Washington Post's editorial board, seldom a friend to the Religious Right, expressed opposition to the AA lawsuit.

"[AA] argues that the cross, a symbol of Christianity, has no place in a museum that is on government property and receives some government support, though it is run by a private foundation," read the editorial.

"Under that logic, it would seem the National Gallery of Art would have to banish its religious art — or that any group that receives government help must forfeit First Amendment rights of expression in choosing what to exhibit."

The legal system has also thus far given the effort a no vote, with U.S. District Judge Deborah Batts ruling against the suit in March 2013 and the Second Circuit Court of Appeals upholding the Batts decision in July 2014.

5. Mother Teresa Commemorative Stamp


(PHOTO: AP PHOTO / BIKAS DAS)


Size does not appear to matter for some atheist groups when it comes to what they will denounce as violating the separation of church and state.

In 2010, the Freedom From Religion Foundation sent a letter of complaint to the U.S. Postal Service for issuing a commemorative stamp of Mother Teresa.

Apparently, FFRF took issue with the Nobel Prize–winning philanthropist being given a stamp due to her strong association with the Roman Catholic Church.

Never mind that the Post Office has had stamps commemorating various religious holidays and figures from diverse backgrounds for years now.

In an interview with Fox News, atheist writer Bruce Sheiman denounced the FFRF's efforts as "hypocritical" and "stepping over the line."

"Clearly there are a number of things that you can point to and say it's religious and a number of things you can point to and say that it's areligious … So it really doesn't make sense to protest it," continued Sheiman.

The FFRF's efforts also caught the attention of "The Daily Show," which made fun of the atheist group's letter writing campaign in a segment titled "Mail Mary."

"So just to be clear," said "Daily Show" correspondent Jason Jones to FFRF leader Dan Barker while holding up a picture of a smiling Mother Teresa, "this is the fight you are picking?"

That phrase is worth repeating for all the entries in this brief list and those that did not make the cut: "this is the fight you are picking?"

http://m.christianpost.com/news/five-ridiculous-targets-of-atheist-groups--131799/

Just gotta LOVE all these nut jobs involved in religion in one way or another, don't you? Although you have to admit, the FFR tends to come across as leaning more towards the "Perpetually Offended" than this one lone woman.

< Message edited by CreativeDominant -- 5/6/2015 12:20:21 PM >

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 333
RE: News from the Society for the Perpetually Offended - 5/6/2015 3:29:26 PM   
CreativeDominant


Posts: 11032
Joined: 3/11/2006
Status: offline
I don't know how I missed this one...out of my own state:

Out Boulder, an LGBTQ advocacy group, has launched an online petition seeking to pressure organizers of the Bolder Boulder to drop their slogan "Sea Level is for Sissies" because they say the word "sissies" is derogatory.

But race organizers say they have no plans to retire the slogan.

The Change.org petition was posted Wednesday by Out Boulder's executive director, Mardi Moore, and by the evening it had 25 signatures.

"The word is used to (demean) traits that are problematically and stereotypically associated with women," the petition reads. "Traits that all genders have but are not valued because they are associated with women. ... All genders express emotions and they should be embraced when they do.

"It's past due that the Bolder Boulder retire this slogan. Make your voice heard."


Special Headline: Guess Who’s About To Go Bankrupt in America will Shock you 

Moore said the slogan is "harmful" and leads to further misunderstanding about gender.

"This has been a longstanding issue for us in the LGBT community," Moore said. "When somebody calls you a sissy, it is not positive. ... That word continues the incorrect thinking that having emotions or expressing something in a stereotypically female way is somehow wrong in society."

Moore said she was motivated to put up the petition after a letter to the editor by Debbie Ramirez appeared in the Daily Camera on April 21 calling the T-shirt "highly offensive."

"I am a women who runs, rock climbs and performs well athletically. I also have the traits associated with someone who is called a sissy," Ramirez wrote. "I cry, I get hurt and I express my emotions. If this is what a sissy is, I am proud to be a sissy and would never wear a T-shirt that does not value these traits in all genders."

But Bolder Boulder race director Cliff Bosley said organizers of the Memorial Day 10K had a meeting about three years ago with Cathy Busha, then-director of Out Boulder, about the slogan and said he thought they came to an understanding that the slogan was not intended to put anyone down.

"While it was not their preference we continue to use it, they understood that it wasn't singling out their organization," Bosley said.

Bosley said Bolder Boulder will not retire the slogan.

He added that "Sea Level is for Sissies" has been one of the race's slogans for more than six years, and, along with others like "Altitude Adjustment" and "Run with Altitude," references the elevation of the annual race.

"This is in keeping with that spirit," Bosley said.

He said the T-shirt with the slogan has been one of Bolder Boulder's most popular sale items, and after the letter to the editor appeared in the Camera, he received numerous calls urging him not to do away with it.

Moore said she understands the slogan might be popular, but there are better ways to promote the race.

http://www.gopusa.com/freshink/2014/05/10/when-will-people-tire-of-the-perpetually-offended/
"It's a great race, and we're glad it's successful, but there have to be other ways to promote it," Moore said.

(in reply to CreativeDominant)
Profile   Post #: 334
RE: News from the Society for the Perpetually Offended - 5/7/2015 9:24:23 AM   
HunterCA


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/21/2007
Status: offline
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/05/07/the_lefts_imaginary_monsters_126516.html

(in reply to CreativeDominant)
Profile   Post #: 335
RE: News from the Society for the Perpetually Offended - 5/8/2015 5:17:47 PM   
HunterCA


Posts: 2343
Joined: 6/21/2007
Status: offline
http://reason.com/archives/2015/05/08/chipotle-claims-integrity-but-is-actuall#.ha8zkx:13My


(in reply to HunterCA)
Profile   Post #: 336
RE: News from the Society for the Perpetually Offended - 5/8/2015 8:27:22 PM   
CreativeDominant


Posts: 11032
Joined: 3/11/2006
Status: offline
Yeah...I don't know as I'd see that as a case of being offended. Certainly a case of pandering to the anti-GMO crowd and therefore being politically correct.

(in reply to HunterCA)
Profile   Post #: 337
RE: News from the Society for the Perpetually Offended - 5/9/2015 8:34:13 AM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline
Last October, Kansas couple Philip and Sandra Unruh accused gay couples of trying to literally steal their marriage. In a motion to intervene in an unfolding case challenging their state’s ban on same-sex marriage, they referred to their marriage as property, and argued that if the state changes the definition of marriage to include same-sex couples, it would be tantamount to taking that property away. “A ruling extending marriage to same sex relationships would deprive the Unruhs of a property right without due process of law,” the motion read.
http://www.towleroad.com/2014/10/kansas.html
brief at http://www.scribd.com/doc/244022349/2-14-cv-02518-13

A month later, Don Boyd, a man from South Carolina, went one step further. If his state legalized same-sex marriage, Boyd argued in a similar motion to intervene in his state’s marriage case, it would steal away his ability to worship God. In the motion, Boyd described himself as an appointed “Watchmen of the souls of the people errantly calling themselves lesbian and gay” and made clear that he did not plan to stand by and do nothing if gays and lesbians began to wed. “Any ratifying of gay 'marriage,'" he wrote, “would compel me to leave off worshipping THE LORD with music and psalms -- free exercise of my religion -- to assume the life of a protester and wedding crasher.”
http://www.scribd.com/doc/245406042/3-13-cv-02351-83

Last week, Sylvia Ann Driskell, a 66-year-old from Auburn, Nebraska, outdid both Boyd and the Unruhs. In a seven-page handwritten complaint, rife with misspellings, delivered to a federal court in Omaha, Driskell brought suit against all homosexuals in the world. The matter Driskell hopes the court will decide is whether homosexuality is a sin. (Her own view on the matter is clear: It is "an abomination,” she wrote.)

Driskell was not acting alone, according to her complaint, but serving as the appointed “ambassador” for “plaintiffs God and His Son, Jesus Christ.” Driskell does not cite case law or legal precedent, but instead relies heavily on biblical citations and her own views.

"I’m sixty six years old an I never thought that I would see the day in which our Great Nation or Our Great State of Nebraska would become so compliant to the complicity of some peoples lewd behavior,” Driskell wrote. “Look what happen to Sodom and Gomorrah two city because of the same immoral behavior thats present in Our Nation, in Our States, and our Cities; God destroy them.”

The idea of filing a suit against homosexuality itself is a strange one, but it is not new. Back in 2013, anti-gay activist Peter LaBarbera mused on a radio show about the possibility of a class action lawsuit against the sexual orientation. “We always wanted to see one of the kid in high school who was counseled by the official school counselor to just be gay, then he comes down with HIV,” he said. “But we never really got the client for that.”
http://www.bilerico.com/2013/10/this_week_in_christian_privilege_tantrums_vol_2.php#Q7BZCKfLWjuYbS2A.99

As opponents of same-sex marriage have suffered loss after loss in the courts and in public opinion, activists have struggled to explain to Americans why they should continue to care about same-sex marriage. All three suits seek to answer a basic question: How, exactly, does legalizing same-sex marriage affect anyone who isn’t gay? Or, as Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan put it in oral arguments over California’s ban on same-sex marriage in 2013, “How does this cause and effect work?”

The documents recall a time when it was enough to simply quote the Bible. Looking over Driskell’s complaint, Jennifer Pizer, a lawyer with LGBT advocacy group Lambda Legal, reflected, “I see it as a marker of a shift from a time when judges, including justices of the Supreme Court, referenced the Bible in denying gay people equal rights, to a time when a case like Driskell’s, while based on some similar views, is seen as a bizarre outlier.”

In 1986, when Pizer was a law student, the Supreme Court ruled in Bowers v. Hardwick that laws banning sodomy were constitutional. Chief Justice Warren E. Burger wrote that the decision was based on “Judeo-Christian moral and ethical standards” and that affirming a constitutional right to sodomy "would be to cast aside millennia of moral teaching." This decision was reversed in 2003.

No matter how outlandish Driskell, Boyd and the Unruh’s complaints seem today, Pizer added, the views are not unique. Since the Supreme Court struck down the federal government’s ban on recognizing same-sex marriage in 2013, religious conservatives around the country have ramped up efforts to pass laws that protect religious people from participating in same-sex marriages. “I see these lawsuits as an outlier manifestation of a view that too many people in this country do still have, and you see those views reflected in state legislation,” Pizer said.

It is exceedingly unlikely that Driskel’s suit will be a win of any kind for opponents of same-sex marriage. Driskell did not respond to request for comment, and same-sex marriage opponents seem wary of associating themselves with her cause. As Horatio G. Mihet, a lawyer with the conservative religious legal group Liberty Counsel put it in an email, “As you know, Liberty Counsel strongly supports natural marriage, and the right of every child to have both, a mom and dad. That said, we have no comment on this particular story.”

On Wednesday, John M. Gerrard of the United States District Court in Omaha dismissed the case. “To the extent that she asks for anything from the Court, it is a declaration that homosexuality is sinful -- a question that the Court cannot answer,” the memorandum reads. “The Court may decide what is lawful, not what is sinful.”

Pizer, for her part, was pleased. “Her complaint tried to pull back the tide of history, and the court has neither the ability nor the authority to do that.”

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to CreativeDominant)
Profile   Post #: 338
RE: News from the Society for the Perpetually Offended - 5/9/2015 9:03:13 AM   
CreativeDominant


Posts: 11032
Joined: 3/11/2006
Status: offline
Very good, Lucy...you managed to find 4 isolated cases of people whose radical beliefs are not backed by any group that stood beside them.

And the attempt to correlate these people views with the views of those who do not want to be FORCED into participating in a gay wedding is laughable. They're not the same thing...even Pizer has to admit that the views seen above are a "bizarre outlier" rather than the prevalent view even as she tries to correlate the two views.

BTW...wasn't the whole idea of trampling on religious beliefs on another thread? I believe it was.

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 339
RE: News from the Society for the Perpetually Offended - 5/9/2015 1:24:00 PM   
Politesub53


Posts: 14862
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline
Its laughable that all those moaning about the killing of free speech are happy doing just that to others.

(in reply to CreativeDominant)
Profile   Post #: 340
Page:   <<   < prev  15 16 [17] 18 19   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: News from the Society for the Perpetually Offended Page: <<   < prev  15 16 [17] 18 19   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109