U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 02-13-2015, 01:50 PM
 
672 posts, read 615,074 times
Reputation: 1979

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by loriinwa View Post
Oh, sorry. History of homosexuality - Conservapedia

To be clear, your issue is with the source, not the information?
My issue is that you are copying and pasting, not actively thinking or conversing or actually participating, just regurgitating information that you found somewhere, unresearched, and posted it as an argument.

I am wondering, again, just who the puppet master is.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-13-2015, 01:54 PM
 
920 posts, read 501,732 times
Reputation: 643
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjrose View Post
Then the individual running the business have to follow the laws while acting as representatives of the business. I can not open a restaurant and claim that health codes do not apply because I believe that germs are holy. I am free as a person not operating a business to eat off of the floor if I want, but I can not feed other people food off of the floor in a restaurant.

I can believe that blacks are marked by god because they are evil, but I can not refuse to serve them in a grocery store I own.

I can believe that gays are abominations, but I can not refuse to bake them a cake in my bakery.

This is not a difficult concept for most adults with an average IQ.
jjrose, if I thought this argument came from an adult with an average IQ, I would still shake my head.

You keep equating your own made up concepts to the reality that exists today when it comes to Judeo-Christian principles. You are not making anyone look ridiculous, except yourself.

You really cannot grasp the concept of religious freedom, because you do not believe that people are entitled to that constitutionally guaranteed freedom if it impacts whatever you want.

I have children. I get it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2015, 01:56 PM
 
920 posts, read 501,732 times
Reputation: 643
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buzz Bee View Post
My issue is that you are copying and pasting, not actively thinking or conversing or actually participating, just regurgitating information that you found somewhere, unresearched, and posted it as an argument.

I am wondering, again, just who the puppet master is.

You are right, and I apologize for that. I did just cut and paste those statistics from that site. I actually do have researched information that substantiates the underlying argument, but I was lazy in my response and you are clearly right to disregard it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2015, 01:57 PM
 
Location: Sunrise
10,869 posts, read 14,210,148 times
Reputation: 9011
Along with being right to disregard everything else.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2015, 01:58 PM
 
920 posts, read 501,732 times
Reputation: 643
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buzz Bee View Post
I went to Red Lobster with my husband while I had my period and ordered a BLT with a side of shellfish, AND I wore clothes made of mixed fibers. Then my husband heard a voice commanding him to sacrifice our firstborn son, which we willfully declined to do.

Livin' on the edge!
Perhaps you should seek out some professional help for your husband. My brother also hears voices. He was diagnosed as a paranoid schizophrenic when he was 20.

Don't you love those Cheddar Bay biscuits!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2015, 02:00 PM
 
920 posts, read 501,732 times
Reputation: 643
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScoopLV View Post
Along with being right to disregard everything else.

Well, no one would expect anything less or more from you Scoop - that big ole open mind of yours can't function if it had to regard anything other than what you think. Amiright???
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2015, 02:00 PM
 
3,565 posts, read 1,866,443 times
Reputation: 2263
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darrett View Post
The fear I've heard is that churches would be banned from teaching that homosexual behavior is immoral and sinful, and would be subject to arrest if they did so. That's the only situation I can think of where it could be enforced.
That's a stupid, unfounded fear. I'm sorry that education has so failed the person from which you heard it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by loriinwa View Post
Does the first Amendment restrict the right to freely express your religion to CHURCH?

No.

Thanks for playing - and it is obvious that when it comes to your understanding of the Constitution, you can do nothing more than play.
It is actually you who don't understand the First Amendment. While Americans are free to exercise religion, they do not get religious exemptions from generally applicable laws. You are free to see peyote as a sacrament, but you are not exempt from a criminal law prohibiting its possession.

Quote:
Originally Posted by loriinwa View Post
Freely exercising ones religious faith is a constitutionally guaranteed by the First Amendment which:
prohibits [unequivocally]... the making of any law.... impeding the free exercise of religion.

What part of that indicates that a private business owner's religious freedom is subservient to a state law?
See Smith v. Ames, opinion by Justice Scalia.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darrett View Post
Peyote use is legal for religious purposes, just as an FYI.
As a general matter, that's not correct, though some jurisdictions have chosen to make that distinction.

Quote:
Originally Posted by loriinwa View Post
Businesses may be regulated by certain laws, but individuals are protected from those laws when they interfere with their 1st Amendment right to freedom of religion.

You can claim anything you want, but we both know that you are grasping at straws with such a stupid argument.

Hey, you seem to think that anything that comes from religion is invalid. Guess what, "Thou shall not murder" is one of the top ten. I guess you think that you have had the law prohibiting murder shoved down your throat by killaphobe fundies, eh?
You simply don't get the 1st Amendment.

As for the prohibition on murder, we can trace farther back than Moses--the Code of Hammurabi, a Babylonian legal text.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2015, 02:00 PM
 
107 posts, read 101,953 times
Reputation: 230
Quote:
Originally Posted by loriinwa View Post
I never cited "history" as the justification for "banning same-sex marriage." I was responding to a post where someone was citing the historical prevalence of homosexual marriage in various cultures as justification for same-sex marriage. My point was, despite your dislike of the source, is that homosexuality in history was predominately a component of pederasty, and that those same cultures engaged in other debauchery (like rape of children and women) which was sanctioned by the state.

Cherry picking history to support your argument is one thing, but the reality is, there was a lot of debauchery during those historical periods. Should NAMBLA use the same argument to claim that laws that criminalize pedophilia are discriminatory and if you look at history, this has been a practice for generations?
I am not using history to support a position on LGBT marriage. I am simply refuting the claim that heterosexual marriage is the norm of human culture for the purposes of procreation. It was you who originally made that statement, and if you really want to get wrapped up in this ego debate I will dig up that post and show it to you.

Here's another point to consider: heterosexuality in history was predominately a component of pedastry, and that that those same cultures engaged in other debauchery (like rape of children and women) which was sanctioned by the state. Yes the same is true for heterosexuality. It was previously the norm for young girls to be married off to older men in an arranged marriage, where they were often forced into sex by entitled husbands, with little to no protection offered by society. This was true in Europe, the Middle East, etc. and is still true for some people. It was common in many societies for heterosexuals to engage in the same behaviour (such as in many Tibetan monasteries, which was systematic prior to the 1959 occupation- not that I am justifying the occupation either). What about the entire concept of war rape being 'okay' (especially in WWII as a recent example)? Attempting to limit 'immoral' behaviour only to homosexual 'partnerships' is completely absurd. This isn't cherry picking either. These were the established norms across vast societies.

If you really want me to go into NAMBLA, no, I do not support that because of issues relating to consent. Homosexuality must still be practised between consenting adults. That is a consistent position. History does not condemn or support a position, it simply gives another perspective on an issue.

let me just say this to tie this back to modern times: heterosexuality does not imply rape. homosexuality does not imply rape. end of. neither need to have some weird purpose attached to them like procreation either.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2015, 02:02 PM
 
920 posts, read 501,732 times
Reputation: 643
Quote:
Originally Posted by latetotheparty View Post
won't be a problem if ice cream is the only thing offered.......
So now you are defining the frozen treat you want is not ice cream? Picky, aren't you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2015, 02:04 PM
 
Location: Middle of nowhere
20,327 posts, read 10,409,885 times
Reputation: 7964
Quote:
Originally Posted by loriinwa View Post
jjrose, if I thought this argument came from an adult with an average IQ, I would still shake my head.

You keep equating your own made up concepts to the reality that exists today when it comes to Judeo-Christian principles. You are not making anyone look ridiculous, except yourself.

You really cannot grasp the concept of religious freedom, because you do not believe that people are entitled to that constitutionally guaranteed freedom if it impacts whatever you want.

I have children. I get it.
Darlin', I am not the one that can't grasp basic legal and constitutional concepts. I am also not the one that can't seem to look at judicial precedence to see how said laws are applied.

Please try actually LISTENING to the arguments you are trying to make and the legal foundation that has been shown to you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top