RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi?

RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

thompsonx -> RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (4/10/2016 1:47:36 PM)
ORIGINAL: Real0ne so then you also feel that the best way to promote peaceful relations is to jam gay down everyones throat as if the therapist could not legally do just short of what I said and not a damn thing butch could do about it? You got "sittin' on the back of the bus" jammed down your throat and up your ass. How does it feel to have your white male priviledge slip through your pudgy little fingers?

thompsonx -> RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (4/10/2016 1:48:57 PM)
ORIGINAL: WinsomeDefiance Yes, I know and I know my idealistic approach isn't realistic and the situation for many is awful. I've really no business debating politics or religion because I find the extreme views on both sides disturbing and have no real argument to make but to be kinder, better human beings who take more responsibility for their own behaviors and stop putting people into the U.S. Vs Them categories. Jesus you are phoquing rational.[;)]

thompsonx -> RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (4/10/2016 1:52:34 PM)
ORIGINAL: ifmaz If one is required, one is forced. Suppose for a moment the Civil Rights Act was to expire, what do you think would happen? Would it be business as usual or would we suddenly revert to 1960s-era thinking? We have already seen that it would. Have you not been paying attention? So again, a Jewish shop would be forced/required to cater to Nazis, a gay shop would be forced to cater to the Westboro Baptist Church, etc. This is the society you are advocating for? yup...it is called justice for all...not just the ones you like. Remember it was the aclu who went to court to argue for the right of the nazis to march in skokie.

thompsonx -> RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (4/10/2016 1:56:48 PM)
ORIGINAL: ifmaz By walking in and trying to buy something? Lets assume the example of a cake maker. A couple enters and wants to buy a rather expensive cake. The baker must decide if their religious convictions outweigh their desire to keep the lights on. Now imagine gay couples lined up around the block to enter this baker's shop, all wanting to buy expensive cakes. A fairly loud message, yes? Perhaps a person, seeing the sudden need for an all-inclusive bakery, opens their own bakery and caters to everyone. Do you think those gay couples who all want expensive cakes (or any baked good) would patron the religious bakery? Do you think friends of the gay couples would? Did the government need to become involved or did the free market work as expected? For 80 years blacks tried that to no avail. The government (yes I was part of that government that told ross barnet that this was the united states of amerika and not the united states of mississippi) stepped in and changed it for the better of the people of amerika to the disdane of you and the punkassmotherfuckers like you who think the color of your skin gives you special priviledges.

thompsonx -> RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (4/10/2016 2:03:00 PM)
ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr seem to be arguing out of both sides of your mouth. Only to a morron Do *you* want the counselor to be forced to counsel the patient? Yes Wait! let's turn that around: Do you want to subject a gay person to be counseled by someone who can't really help them? Why do you think this particular therapist can't help them? Do you want the law to force counselors to "smile and wave" and hide their true feelings while counseling that gay person? Yup...that is their job Do you think that someone who thinks that the crux of a person's problem is their sexual identity will find some way to help that person that doesn't amount to (what did they used to call it? Where Christian groups forced "straight counseling" on gays?) making them straight? "There you go, now you are attracted to the opposite gender! Problems solved!" i Only in that empty space between your ears. The law mandates that the therapist MUST COORDINATE a referral to a more compassionate therapist. No one's going without therapy and the onus is on the Christian therapist to find a new therapist for the client. Since he feels imcompetant to do his job it is incumbant on him to find someone who will. Do you think forcing that therapist to give some sort of half-hearted counseling is going to *benefit* the client? No one is forcing the therapist to give half-hearted counseling. He is being forced to do his job. I think you should try to float that law that a counselor should be forced to treat someone that they believe can only be truly "cured" by becoming "straight". I'll bet the LGBT community will line up to thank you for it. I think you are trying to float a false analogy without much success. Jesus you are phoquing stupid.

thompsonx -> RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (4/10/2016 2:07:20 PM)
ORIGINAL: Nnanji When I read it, I guessed communism. I don't know though. Your every post validates that.

thompsonx -> RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (4/10/2016 2:08:36 PM)
ORIGINAL: Real0ne and atheists have over 100 million on their hands, most would choose to live with the one who is least likely to kill them. Cite please

thompsonx -> RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (4/10/2016 2:10:15 PM)
ORIGINAL: Real0ne Now that is precious! From a nonjudgemental gay we presume? and Ford should stock and sell GM parts too! Guess where ford got the name "falcon" When I see someone these wacked out arguments its like wtf????? Something we all feel when you post.

thompsonx -> RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (4/10/2016 2:11:20 PM)
ORIGINAL: Real0ne yeh lots of atheists have become militant against theists in attempts to establish their own flavor of religious supremacy. Cite please

thompsonx -> RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (4/10/2016 2:13:11 PM)
ORIGINAL: Real0ne and atheists have over 100 million on their hands, most would choose to live with the one who is least likely to kill them. why not simply elect another stalin and he can line you all up and simply shoot you, atheists supporting atheists. Millions strong! (in the grave that is) [8\|] Still waiting for some sort of validation for this drivel

thompsonx -> RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (4/10/2016 2:15:52 PM)
ORIGINAL: ifmaz So you want legislation based on feelings? What else is legislation based on? What was the declaration of independence based on but feelings? So your argument comes down to being too lazy to have a peaceful demonstration/boycott, instead wanting Big Daddy Government to force people? A peaceful demonstration is called legislation. Remember this country was founded by a violent riot.

Nnanji -> RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (4/10/2016 2:17:04 PM)
Gnats here too. Hum. Indiscriminate buzzing to no seeming purpose.

thompsonx -> RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (4/10/2016 2:18:06 PM)
ORIGINAL: Real0ne Lets start with the gubblemint, they should have the same requirements, that will be repealed before the fucking ink is dry. The rules say we can vote them out if we choose. Now if you do not like that your options are limited.

thompsonx -> RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (4/10/2016 2:20:14 PM)
ORIGINAL: Real0ne case in point: the kliens right to exercise their religion was violated by the atheist infiltrated gubblemint. The constitution kinda says that is ok. Too bad for you.

thompsonx -> RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (4/10/2016 2:23:25 PM)
ORIGINAL: ifmaz Everyone else is doing it so that makes it ok? It's a private relationship, why does government need to sanction it? Without government sanction how would inhearatance work? Without government sanction how would legitimacy of hiers work? Without government sanction how would resposibility for offspring work?

thompsonx -> RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (4/10/2016 2:25:19 PM)
ORIGINAL: Nnanji I agree that I wonder why government is interested. In marriages at all. I wonder if Lucy would agree that since most governments in the world ban same sex marriage that should be the law of the land here? I don't understand her arguement. Most governments ban murder would you change that? Most governments ban theft would you change that?

thompsonx -> RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (4/10/2016 2:26:59 PM)
ORIGINAL: Real0ne how about all the HUNDREDS of MILLIONS of people who died at the hands of atheists We are still waiting for you to validate this foolishness compared to a mere hundred thousand at the hands of theists? Why should anyone support atheists who have no moral compass? Do you have some validation for your belief that athiest have no moral compas?

thompsonx -> RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (4/10/2016 2:28:04 PM)
ORIGINAL: Real0ne We have several people who believed the MSM mantra that this is a democracy and that legislated democracy somehow voids the individual rights reserved by the very people who created them in the first place. You have no rights unless the government says it will assure them.

thompsonx -> RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (4/10/2016 2:29:17 PM)
ORIGINAL: Nnanji Dude...or sorry, young sir, you've been googling your own made up facts for, as you say, ten years now. You also never provide citations. Nobody is going to respect your demand for a citation. I provided citations that proved you are both ignorant and a liar. Is your little tailpipe sore?[8\|]

TheCabal -> RE: Thoughts about backwoods Mississippi? (4/10/2016 2:34:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: ifmaz Everyone else is doing it so that makes it ok? It's a private relationship, why does government need to sanction it? Without government sanction how would inhearatance work? Without government sanction how would legitimacy of hiers work? Without government sanction how would resposibility for offspring work? The same way it did before government sanction... which has only existed for a little less than a century, and came about for strictly bigoted reasons. Hell, none of those things work well WITH government sanction in the first place. If you have a large, complicated estate, you NEED a will. If you have a moderately sized estate, and you don't have a will, your inheritors are going to squabble over it regardless. If you don't have any significant wealth, no one cares. In any event, a will costs less than a wedding. No one cares about 'legitimacy' anymore anyway. And YOU are always responsible for your offspring, with or without government sanction.

Page: << < prev 11 12 [13] 14 15 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

5.859375E-02