If a bill approved by the Kansas House Committee on Federal and State Affairs Thursday becomes law, businesses and government employees could legally refuse service to citizens because of their sexual orientation or marital status, claiming it violates their religious beliefs.
Thats alJazeera.....and Pravda's on the case too.
USA goes anti gay....a bit
USA goes anti gay....a bit
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
USA goes anti gay....a bit
Yup. This seems to be the latest trend. Next you'll see businesses like Chick Fil A and Hobby Lobby putting up signs saying No LBGT allowed, or something like that.
Damned country is going nuts.
You'd think we had nothing better to fret over.
Damned country is going nuts.
You'd think we had nothing better to fret over.
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
- DH Lawrence
USA goes anti gay....a bit
So, a cop or a DMV employee could refuse to help a citizen if they had some slight suspicion that the citizen might be gay? Yet the citizen would still have to pay taxes for those services? Nuts!
USA goes anti gay....a bit
What a back ass state I live in. Although it's a great place to live and rear a family, so long as your a straight, christian,non drinking, non smoking, non marijuana user. UH OH!!
USA goes anti gay....a bit
Wandrin;1448607 wrote: So, a cop or a DMV employee could refuse to help a citizen if they had some slight suspicion that the citizen might be gay? Yet the citizen would still have to pay taxes for those services? Nuts!
Yes, as long as an alternate employee was available, which might be a problem for a small business.
Yes, as long as an alternate employee was available, which might be a problem for a small business.
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
-
fuzzywuzzy
- Posts: 6596
- Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 5:35 pm
USA goes anti gay....a bit
Religious organisations are allowed to do it here. Some won't hire single mothers for the very reason of their beliefs. Go figure.
-
fuzzywuzzy
- Posts: 6596
- Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 5:35 pm
USA goes anti gay....a bit
“As far as I am concerned, LGBT can only stand for Leprosy, Gonorrhoea, Bacteria and Tuberculosis; all of which are detrimental to human existence, he added.
well that's a relief ........good thing I'll never catch those things during hetrosexual sex. Missed that bullet!!!! Let's party!!!
but just a question what have any of those things have to do with being gay?
well that's a relief ........good thing I'll never catch those things during hetrosexual sex. Missed that bullet!!!! Let's party!!!
but just a question what have any of those things have to do with being gay?
USA goes anti gay....a bit
Bruv;1448644 wrote: Gambia style ?
I like his chef outfit.
I like his chef outfit.
-
fuzzywuzzy
- Posts: 6596
- Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 5:35 pm
USA goes anti gay....a bit
pastry chef..........a big puff pastry
USA goes anti gay....a bit
How about a punch a bigot bill. Same idea as the stand your ground laws if you come across a bigot you can punch them if they annoy you - being america maybe you can get to shoot them:sneaky:.
-
AnneBoleyn
- Posts: 6631
- Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:17 pm
USA goes anti gay....a bit
gmc;1448657 wrote: How about a punch a bigot bill. Same idea as the stand your ground laws if you come across a bigot you can punch them if they annoy you - being america maybe you can get to shoot them:sneaky:.
Too many in this country are Not Anti-Bigot. Anyway, Free speech. Allowed to be as repulsive as they want to be.
Too many in this country are Not Anti-Bigot. Anyway, Free speech. Allowed to be as repulsive as they want to be.
USA goes anti gay....a bit
It seems sometimes that you have free speech so long as you don't criticise religion.
Logically they should also allow people who don't believe that the races should mix the right to refuse to serve mixed race couples or have the particular race they don't like in their stores or whatever. Say for instance p p-diddy could refuse to allow white people to attend his concerts. That would be fun.
Jesus had two dads and he turned out OK. (just watch who you say that to)
Logically they should also allow people who don't believe that the races should mix the right to refuse to serve mixed race couples or have the particular race they don't like in their stores or whatever. Say for instance p p-diddy could refuse to allow white people to attend his concerts. That would be fun.
Jesus had two dads and he turned out OK. (just watch who you say that to)
USA goes anti gay....a bit
gmc;1448756 wrote: It seems sometimes that you have free speech so long as you don't criticise religion.
Logically they should also allow people who don't believe that the races should mix the right to refuse to serve mixed race couples or have the particular race they don't like in their stores or whatever. Say for instance p p-diddy could refuse to allow white people to attend his concerts. That would be fun.
Jesus had two dads and he turned out OK. (just watch who you say that to)
Your bigotry is showing, my friend.
Not all people who are religious are bigoted. Even many Jews, Christians, and Muslims have been known to have a relatively open mind.
And I have met many an Atheist who could stand to loosen up a bit.
People who want their way about things will use whatever tools are at their disposal to get it. Religion is often just a convenient prop for many self-serving bigots.
A bill being introduced in the legislature is one thing. Getting it through the assembly and put into the Book is quite another.
I would wait and see where these bills go. I suspect many of them will end up on the Cutting Room Floor.
Should they pass must in their respective state, they will surely be challenged in the Federal Court system.
Logically they should also allow people who don't believe that the races should mix the right to refuse to serve mixed race couples or have the particular race they don't like in their stores or whatever. Say for instance p p-diddy could refuse to allow white people to attend his concerts. That would be fun.
Jesus had two dads and he turned out OK. (just watch who you say that to)
Your bigotry is showing, my friend.
Not all people who are religious are bigoted. Even many Jews, Christians, and Muslims have been known to have a relatively open mind.
And I have met many an Atheist who could stand to loosen up a bit.
People who want their way about things will use whatever tools are at their disposal to get it. Religion is often just a convenient prop for many self-serving bigots.
A bill being introduced in the legislature is one thing. Getting it through the assembly and put into the Book is quite another.
I would wait and see where these bills go. I suspect many of them will end up on the Cutting Room Floor.
Should they pass must in their respective state, they will surely be challenged in the Federal Court system.
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
- DH Lawrence
USA goes anti gay....a bit
LarsMac;1448762 wrote: Your bigotry is showing, my friend.
Not all people who are religious are bigoted. Even many Jews, Christians, and Muslims have been known to have a relatively open mind.
And I have met many an Atheist who could stand to loosen up a bit.
People who want their way about things will use whatever tools are at their disposal to get it. Religion is often just a convenient prop for many self-serving bigots.
A bill being introduced in the legislature is one thing. Getting it through the assembly and put into the Book is quite another.
I would wait and see where these bills go. I suspect many of them will end up on the Cutting Room Floor.
Should they pass must in their respective state, they will surely be challenged in the Federal Court system.
Actually you read too much in to what I am saying. It's a thread about bigots that is whom I am talking about in no way does it imply that I assume all religious people are bigots. Don't know why you read that in to what I have said although I freely confess to being bigoted towards bigots.
Or perhaps you are just adopting the sometimes tactic of the religious when faced with criticism of crying prejudice as a way of avoiding dealing with the issues raised. The simple fact of the matter is that most of the active opposition for gay rights comes from the religious right
Like you I also know a few atheists who could stand to loosen up a bit on the other hand for real bigots you need someone who is religious although I sometimes suspect religion and faith are not necessarily synonymous.
The "logic" of prejudice against gays also applies to race relations and the biblical justification for black slavery was used rather cynically by those who benefited long before social darwinism came in to it. Come to think of it wonder if any of them use the argument that ham was a homosexual to justify their attitude, can't say i have looked in to it that much. Life can be complicated if you read too much in to the bible.
Not all people who are religious are bigoted. Even many Jews, Christians, and Muslims have been known to have a relatively open mind.
And I have met many an Atheist who could stand to loosen up a bit.
People who want their way about things will use whatever tools are at their disposal to get it. Religion is often just a convenient prop for many self-serving bigots.
A bill being introduced in the legislature is one thing. Getting it through the assembly and put into the Book is quite another.
I would wait and see where these bills go. I suspect many of them will end up on the Cutting Room Floor.
Should they pass must in their respective state, they will surely be challenged in the Federal Court system.
Actually you read too much in to what I am saying. It's a thread about bigots that is whom I am talking about in no way does it imply that I assume all religious people are bigots. Don't know why you read that in to what I have said although I freely confess to being bigoted towards bigots.
Or perhaps you are just adopting the sometimes tactic of the religious when faced with criticism of crying prejudice as a way of avoiding dealing with the issues raised. The simple fact of the matter is that most of the active opposition for gay rights comes from the religious right
Like you I also know a few atheists who could stand to loosen up a bit on the other hand for real bigots you need someone who is religious although I sometimes suspect religion and faith are not necessarily synonymous.
The "logic" of prejudice against gays also applies to race relations and the biblical justification for black slavery was used rather cynically by those who benefited long before social darwinism came in to it. Come to think of it wonder if any of them use the argument that ham was a homosexual to justify their attitude, can't say i have looked in to it that much. Life can be complicated if you read too much in to the bible.
USA goes anti gay....a bit
gmc;1448766 wrote: Actually you read too much in to what I am saying. It's a thread about bigots that is whom I am talking about in no way does it imply that I assume all religious people are bigots. Don't know why you read that in to what I have said although I freely confess to being bigoted towards bigots.
Or perhaps you are just adopting the sometimes tactic of the religious when faced with criticism of crying prejudice as a way of avoiding dealing with the issues raised. The simple fact of the matter is that most of the active opposition for gay rights comes from the religious right
Like you I also know a few atheists who could stand to loosen up a bit on the other hand for real bigots you need someone who is religious although I sometimes suspect religion and faith are not necessarily synonymous.
The "logic" of prejudice against gays also applies to race relations and the biblical justification for black slavery was used rather cynically by those who benefited long before social darwinism came in to it. Come to think of it wonder if any of them use the argument that ham was a homosexual to justify their attitude, can't say i have looked in to it that much. Life can be complicated if you read too much in to the bible.
Well, you got THAT right.
Actually the homophobia thing is much more cut and dried than the slavery issue. There are several passages in the Bible that pretty well spell out that same-sex stuff is a dasn't-do.
Of course it also points out a few other Dasn't-do's that get conveniently forgot.
Like you ain't supposed to eat Crawfish, Shrimp, Clams, and critters like that. You also supposed to not eat pork, or cheat on your spouse. Somehow, a lot of good Bible-thumpin' folk seem to be able to overlook most of those, and get all wrapped around the axle over one thing.
Me, I figure that if I don't Cheat on the wife, whether it be with a him or a her, maybe the Good Lord will kinda overlook that Bacon-wrapped Shrimp I had for Lunch.
I am sure the wife will go along with that philosophy.
Or perhaps you are just adopting the sometimes tactic of the religious when faced with criticism of crying prejudice as a way of avoiding dealing with the issues raised. The simple fact of the matter is that most of the active opposition for gay rights comes from the religious right
Like you I also know a few atheists who could stand to loosen up a bit on the other hand for real bigots you need someone who is religious although I sometimes suspect religion and faith are not necessarily synonymous.
The "logic" of prejudice against gays also applies to race relations and the biblical justification for black slavery was used rather cynically by those who benefited long before social darwinism came in to it. Come to think of it wonder if any of them use the argument that ham was a homosexual to justify their attitude, can't say i have looked in to it that much. Life can be complicated if you read too much in to the bible.
Well, you got THAT right.
Actually the homophobia thing is much more cut and dried than the slavery issue. There are several passages in the Bible that pretty well spell out that same-sex stuff is a dasn't-do.
Of course it also points out a few other Dasn't-do's that get conveniently forgot.
Like you ain't supposed to eat Crawfish, Shrimp, Clams, and critters like that. You also supposed to not eat pork, or cheat on your spouse. Somehow, a lot of good Bible-thumpin' folk seem to be able to overlook most of those, and get all wrapped around the axle over one thing.
Me, I figure that if I don't Cheat on the wife, whether it be with a him or a her, maybe the Good Lord will kinda overlook that Bacon-wrapped Shrimp I had for Lunch.
I am sure the wife will go along with that philosophy.
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
- DH Lawrence
USA goes anti gay....a bit
LarsMac;1448788 wrote: Well, you got THAT right.
Actually the homophobia thing is much more cut and dried than the slavery issue. There are several passages in the Bible that pretty well spell out that same-sex stuff is a dasn't-do.
Of course it also points out a few other Dasn't-do's that get conveniently forgot.
Like you ain't supposed to eat Crawfish, Shrimp, Clams, and critters like that. You also supposed to not eat pork, or cheat on your spouse. Somehow, a lot of good Bible-thumpin' folk seem to be able to overlook most of those, and get all wrapped around the axle over one thing.
Me, I figure that if I don't Cheat on the wife, whether it be with a him or a her, maybe the Good Lord will kinda overlook that Bacon-wrapped Shrimp I had for Lunch.
I am sure the wife will go along with that philosophy.
Then again a very large number of christians also worship idols and pray to them which is a protestant point of view that started wars and killed millions in europe.
Can't say I would agree with you. There have always been those who opposed slavery but it wasn't until the enlightenment that human rights equal for all really became a concept that could be articulated and appeal to the masses. Or more cynically the economic conditions that permitted slavery changed and the ruling elites that favoured it lost their power.
Slavery was generally accepted as the norm which is why it features in the new testament the writers of it had no incentive to remove it's justification, being really cynical the early church owned slaves as did the emperors who were using the church for their own ends. Not believing the bible is the world of god (don;t know your view on the matter so no offence intended ) I possibly have a different way of looking at things.
It's less clear about homosexuality in the new testament, jesus never explicitly condemns it and was snogging judas when he was captured by the romans. Though I accept that may may be a controversial way of looking at it. Why didn't jesus have a girlfriend was always a good question to ask at bible class (yes I did go till I got old enough and big enough to refuse)
Could never understand why followers of jesus paid so much attention to the old nasty vindictive version of god when the way to redemption was supposedly through the new one. being cynical I suspect it's because they can find excuses for prejudice rather than making the effort to accept people who are different.
It is not logically possible to argue these words apply to yourself
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. etc etc
Then say you are justified in depriving others of the same rights because you have the god given right to do so. Logic doesn't really come in to it does it?
Actually the homophobia thing is much more cut and dried than the slavery issue. There are several passages in the Bible that pretty well spell out that same-sex stuff is a dasn't-do.
Of course it also points out a few other Dasn't-do's that get conveniently forgot.
Like you ain't supposed to eat Crawfish, Shrimp, Clams, and critters like that. You also supposed to not eat pork, or cheat on your spouse. Somehow, a lot of good Bible-thumpin' folk seem to be able to overlook most of those, and get all wrapped around the axle over one thing.
Me, I figure that if I don't Cheat on the wife, whether it be with a him or a her, maybe the Good Lord will kinda overlook that Bacon-wrapped Shrimp I had for Lunch.
I am sure the wife will go along with that philosophy.
Then again a very large number of christians also worship idols and pray to them which is a protestant point of view that started wars and killed millions in europe.
Can't say I would agree with you. There have always been those who opposed slavery but it wasn't until the enlightenment that human rights equal for all really became a concept that could be articulated and appeal to the masses. Or more cynically the economic conditions that permitted slavery changed and the ruling elites that favoured it lost their power.
Slavery was generally accepted as the norm which is why it features in the new testament the writers of it had no incentive to remove it's justification, being really cynical the early church owned slaves as did the emperors who were using the church for their own ends. Not believing the bible is the world of god (don;t know your view on the matter so no offence intended ) I possibly have a different way of looking at things.
It's less clear about homosexuality in the new testament, jesus never explicitly condemns it and was snogging judas when he was captured by the romans. Though I accept that may may be a controversial way of looking at it. Why didn't jesus have a girlfriend was always a good question to ask at bible class (yes I did go till I got old enough and big enough to refuse)
Could never understand why followers of jesus paid so much attention to the old nasty vindictive version of god when the way to redemption was supposedly through the new one. being cynical I suspect it's because they can find excuses for prejudice rather than making the effort to accept people who are different.
It is not logically possible to argue these words apply to yourself
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. etc etc
Then say you are justified in depriving others of the same rights because you have the god given right to do so. Logic doesn't really come in to it does it?
USA goes anti gay....a bit
gmc;1448835 wrote: Then again a very large number of christians also worship idols and pray to them which is a protestant point of view that started wars and killed millions in europe.
Can't say I would agree with you. There have always been those who opposed slavery but it wasn't until the enlightenment that human rights equal for all really became a concept that could be articulated and appeal to the masses. Or more cynically the economic conditions that permitted slavery changed and the ruling elites that favoured it lost their power.
Slavery was generally accepted as the norm which is why it features in the new testament the writers of it had no incentive to remove it's justification, being really cynical the early church owned slaves as did the emperors who were using the church for their own ends. Not believing the bible is the world of god (don;t know your view on the matter so no offence intended ) I possibly have a different way of looking at things.
It's less clear about homosexuality in the new testament, jesus never explicitly condemns it and was snogging judas when he was captured by the romans. Though I accept that may may be a controversial way of looking at it. Why didn't jesus have a girlfriend was always a good question to ask at bible class (yes I did go till I got old enough and big enough to refuse)
Could never understand why followers of jesus paid so much attention to the old nasty vindictive version of god when the way to redemption was supposedly through the new one. being cynical I suspect it's because they can find excuses for prejudice rather than making the effort to accept people who are different.
It is not logically possible to argue these words apply to yourself
etc etc
Then say you are justified in depriving others of the same rights because you have the god given right to do so. Logic doesn't really come in to it does it?
I do not believe that Jesus ever had anything to say about homosexuality.
It was Paul who brought it up in his letters to several of the churches of his day.
Such behavior was quite common in the Roman Empire, and I can imagine quite a few arguments between the Jewish members of the Church, and the Gentile members over such things. Similar arguments flared up over eating various sorts of food.
Paul's focus seemed to be on the the behavior of the members and how it might reflect upon the image of the movement.
There are plenty of evils that today's Christians could spend their energies trying to stop. Somehow, what kind of relationships other people want to have, in my not-so-humble opinion, doesn't even make the top one hundred list.
For example, back to slavery. Anyone who thinks slavery is gone and forgotten needs to think again. There are more slaves in today's world than the entire population of the United States at the time of the US Civil War, supposedly fought to end slavery.
Can't say I would agree with you. There have always been those who opposed slavery but it wasn't until the enlightenment that human rights equal for all really became a concept that could be articulated and appeal to the masses. Or more cynically the economic conditions that permitted slavery changed and the ruling elites that favoured it lost their power.
Slavery was generally accepted as the norm which is why it features in the new testament the writers of it had no incentive to remove it's justification, being really cynical the early church owned slaves as did the emperors who were using the church for their own ends. Not believing the bible is the world of god (don;t know your view on the matter so no offence intended ) I possibly have a different way of looking at things.
It's less clear about homosexuality in the new testament, jesus never explicitly condemns it and was snogging judas when he was captured by the romans. Though I accept that may may be a controversial way of looking at it. Why didn't jesus have a girlfriend was always a good question to ask at bible class (yes I did go till I got old enough and big enough to refuse)
Could never understand why followers of jesus paid so much attention to the old nasty vindictive version of god when the way to redemption was supposedly through the new one. being cynical I suspect it's because they can find excuses for prejudice rather than making the effort to accept people who are different.
It is not logically possible to argue these words apply to yourself
etc etc
Then say you are justified in depriving others of the same rights because you have the god given right to do so. Logic doesn't really come in to it does it?
I do not believe that Jesus ever had anything to say about homosexuality.
It was Paul who brought it up in his letters to several of the churches of his day.
Such behavior was quite common in the Roman Empire, and I can imagine quite a few arguments between the Jewish members of the Church, and the Gentile members over such things. Similar arguments flared up over eating various sorts of food.
Paul's focus seemed to be on the the behavior of the members and how it might reflect upon the image of the movement.
There are plenty of evils that today's Christians could spend their energies trying to stop. Somehow, what kind of relationships other people want to have, in my not-so-humble opinion, doesn't even make the top one hundred list.
For example, back to slavery. Anyone who thinks slavery is gone and forgotten needs to think again. There are more slaves in today's world than the entire population of the United States at the time of the US Civil War, supposedly fought to end slavery.
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
- DH Lawrence
USA goes anti gay....a bit
LarsMac;1448846 wrote: I do not believe that Jesus ever had anything to say about homosexuality.
It was Paul who brought it up in his letters to several of the churches of his day.
Such behavior was quite common in the Roman Empire, and I can imagine quite a few arguments between the Jewish members of the Church, and the Gentile members over such things. Similar arguments flared up over eating various sorts of food.
Paul's focus seemed to be on the the behavior of the members and how it might reflect upon the image of the movement.
There are plenty of evils that today's Christians could spend their energies trying to stop. Somehow, what kind of relationships other people want to have, in my not-so-humble opinion, doesn't even make the top one hundred list.
For example, back to slavery. Anyone who thinks slavery is gone and forgotten needs to think again. There are more slaves in today's world than the entire population of the United States at the time of the US Civil War, supposedly fought to end slavery.
That was about slavery in the US not the rest of the world, it has never stopped in a lot of places around the world we just like to kid ourselves it doesn't exist.
It was Paul who brought it up in his letters to several of the churches of his day.
Such behavior was quite common in the Roman Empire, and I can imagine quite a few arguments between the Jewish members of the Church, and the Gentile members over such things. Similar arguments flared up over eating various sorts of food.
Paul's focus seemed to be on the the behavior of the members and how it might reflect upon the image of the movement.
There are plenty of evils that today's Christians could spend their energies trying to stop. Somehow, what kind of relationships other people want to have, in my not-so-humble opinion, doesn't even make the top one hundred list.
For example, back to slavery. Anyone who thinks slavery is gone and forgotten needs to think again. There are more slaves in today's world than the entire population of the United States at the time of the US Civil War, supposedly fought to end slavery.
That was about slavery in the US not the rest of the world, it has never stopped in a lot of places around the world we just like to kid ourselves it doesn't exist.
USA goes anti gay....a bit
Well, Arizona beat Kansas out on getting that done.
Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill - CNN.com
Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill - CNN.com
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
- DH Lawrence
USA goes anti gay....a bit
How on earth would anyone know for sure that someone is gay ?
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
USA goes anti gay....a bit
Bruv;1448926 wrote: How on earth would anyone know for sure that someone is gay ?
The wording of the law is more about, "If they suspect a person of being gay"
So that leaves them quite a bit of latitude.
The wording of the law is more about, "If they suspect a person of being gay"
So that leaves them quite a bit of latitude.
The home of the soul is the Open Road.
- DH Lawrence
- DH Lawrence
USA goes anti gay....a bit
LarsMac;1448936 wrote: The wording of the law is more about, "If they suspect a person of being gay"
So that leaves them quite a bit of latitude.
More leeway with Attitude than Latitude ?
Basically anyone you don't like the look of?
So that leaves them quite a bit of latitude.
More leeway with Attitude than Latitude ?
Basically anyone you don't like the look of?
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
USA goes anti gay....a bit
Bruv;1448926 wrote: How on earth would anyone know for sure that someone is gay ?
I reckon by the smile on their face.I say let em marry, that'd fix that smile.
I reckon by the smile on their face.I say let em marry, that'd fix that smile.
USA goes anti gay....a bit
YZGI;1448952 wrote: I reckon by the smile on their face.I say let em marry, that'd fix that smile.
They can marry, but where do they get the shopping?
They can marry, but where do they get the shopping?
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
USA goes anti gay....a bit
LarsMac;1448788 wrote: Well, you got THAT right.
Actually the homophobia thing is much more cut and dried than the slavery issue. There are several passages in the Bible that pretty well spell out that same-sex stuff is a dasn't-do.
Of course it also points out a few other Dasn't-do's that get conveniently forgot.
Like you ain't supposed to eat Crawfish, Shrimp, Clams, and critters like that. You also supposed to not eat pork, or cheat on your spouse. Somehow, a lot of good Bible-thumpin' folk seem to be able to overlook most of those, and get all wrapped around the axle over one thing.
Me, I figure that if I don't Cheat on the wife, whether it be with a him or a her, maybe the Good Lord will kinda overlook that Bacon-wrapped Shrimp I had for Lunch.
I am sure the wife will go along with that philosophy.
Hate to take this too very far off topic, but as a person who does not know
the Bible, curious what part says that you "dasn't" (cute, Lars!) eat those
things, especially pork?
Actually the homophobia thing is much more cut and dried than the slavery issue. There are several passages in the Bible that pretty well spell out that same-sex stuff is a dasn't-do.
Of course it also points out a few other Dasn't-do's that get conveniently forgot.
Like you ain't supposed to eat Crawfish, Shrimp, Clams, and critters like that. You also supposed to not eat pork, or cheat on your spouse. Somehow, a lot of good Bible-thumpin' folk seem to be able to overlook most of those, and get all wrapped around the axle over one thing.
Me, I figure that if I don't Cheat on the wife, whether it be with a him or a her, maybe the Good Lord will kinda overlook that Bacon-wrapped Shrimp I had for Lunch.
I am sure the wife will go along with that philosophy.
Hate to take this too very far off topic, but as a person who does not know
the Bible, curious what part says that you "dasn't" (cute, Lars!) eat those
things, especially pork?
USA goes anti gay....a bit
valerie;1448957 wrote: Hate to take this too very far off topic, but as a person who does not know
the Bible, curious what part says that you "dasn't" (cute, Lars!) eat those
things, especially pork?
11 things the Bible bans.
11 Things The Bible Bans, But You Do Anyway - 11 Points
the Bible, curious what part says that you "dasn't" (cute, Lars!) eat those
things, especially pork?
11 things the Bible bans.
11 Things The Bible Bans, But You Do Anyway - 11 Points
USA goes anti gay....a bit
Wow, absolutely great, Wisey, thank you so much!
USA goes anti gay....a bit
YZGI;1448960 wrote: 11 things the Bible bans.
11 Things The Bible Bans, But You Do Anyway - 11 Points
They are random passages, without context they don't mean a thing.
Just saying.
11 Things The Bible Bans, But You Do Anyway - 11 Points
They are random passages, without context they don't mean a thing.
Just saying.
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
USA goes anti gay....a bit
Bruv;1448976 wrote: They are random passages, without context they don't mean a thing.
Just saying.
There is nothing stopping anyone from looking up the passages and reading them in context.
Just saying.
There is nothing stopping anyone from looking up the passages and reading them in context.
USA goes anti gay....a bit
YZGI;1448977 wrote: There is nothing stopping anyone from looking up the passages and reading them in context.
Fair enough, as long as it's not me.
If I was putting across the argument.....I would give the background, I suspect there might be a good reason if it's not given in this instance.
Fair enough, as long as it's not me.
If I was putting across the argument.....I would give the background, I suspect there might be a good reason if it's not given in this instance.
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
USA goes anti gay....a bit
Bruv;1448979 wrote: Fair enough, as long as it's not me.
If I was putting across the argument.....I would give the background, I suspect there might be a good reason if it's not given in this instance.
I wasn't putting across any argument, I was just trying to give information.
If I were going to put out an argument, I would say that a father shouldn't be able to sell his daughter, and we can eat shrimp while wearing polyester underwear.
If I was putting across the argument.....I would give the background, I suspect there might be a good reason if it's not given in this instance.
I wasn't putting across any argument, I was just trying to give information.
If I were going to put out an argument, I would say that a father shouldn't be able to sell his daughter, and we can eat shrimp while wearing polyester underwear.
USA goes anti gay....a bit
YZGI;1448980 wrote: I wasn't putting across any argument, I was just trying to give information.
The person that composed the article was building an argument that people might use, thats why he didn't feel the need to add context, it might defeat the object.
The person that composed the article was building an argument that people might use, thats why he didn't feel the need to add context, it might defeat the object.
I thought I knew more than this until I opened my mouth
USA goes anti gay....a bit
AnneBoleyn;1448661 wrote: Too many in this country are Not Anti-Bigot. Anyway, Free speech. Allowed to be as repulsive as they want to be.
And I'm all for it. Ridiculous and mean-spirited bills by neocons, that is. The more stupid things they do, the better I like it. It'll be a cold day in Hell before we elect a republican President again. I'd like to see that party self-destruct completely.
And I'm all for it. Ridiculous and mean-spirited bills by neocons, that is. The more stupid things they do, the better I like it. It'll be a cold day in Hell before we elect a republican President again. I'd like to see that party self-destruct completely.
USA goes anti gay....a bit
I'm sorry maybe it's a UK point of view from someone brought up on the carry on films.
I note this is the kansas state legislature
Title of another thread
Kansas goes pro spanking.
Maybe they could invite all the gays round. for a thoroughly good spanking:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl
I note this is the kansas state legislature
Title of another thread
Kansas goes pro spanking.
Maybe they could invite all the gays round. for a thoroughly good spanking:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl