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.
It would seem so wouldn't it? However, too bad all those religious zealots are consistently butting in to political legislation. At least they try, they really really try don't they?
I worry less about religious zealots ( as you term them) than splinter groups who push agendas into politics: as in: gays, illegals, ecofreaks.... you get the idea? Every group from the fringe of society shoves their cause into politics and when one gets a bill passes, it all passes to activist lunatic judges ( not the people) to rule on it.
Somehow you miss the fact that that is a much bigger item in the agenda than religion.
You can't compare Illegal Immigration to Gay Marriage or the enviornment
Each topic is completely seperate from each other and classifying them into one category makes your opinion lack any valid merit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuffaloTransplant
I worry less about religious zealots ( as you term them) than splinter groups who push agendas into politics: as in: gays, illegals, ecofreaks.... you get the idea? Every group from the fringe of society shoves their cause into politics and when one gets a bill passes, it all passes to activist lunatic judges ( not the people) to rule on it.
Somehow you miss the fact that that is a much bigger item in the agenda than religion.
I get the feeling, I think you may have said in other posts, that you're against gay marriage. To me, that means you have an opinion on it, a negative opinion. That also reveals that maybe, and I'm just saying MAYBE at this point, that you would be one of a whole bunch of people denying gays the right to marry.
I've only said once that I'm a traditional person, i replied that i don't see any real benifits to marriage over civil unions because only the state allows it, not the feds, someone said it lets you leave your posessions to your partner and I said even in marriage you still need a will to guarentee who gets what and so forth, I've been married over 30 years and there no real benifit other than being able to say your married, it's no big deal to me as the topic of this thread, none destroyed that wouldn't have been anyway, it doesn't affect my marriage and as people should have noticed there was no large protests which should tell you there doesn't seem to be a whole bunch denying anyone. I haven't denied anything to anybody in my whole life even if I feel it's tradition of man and wife I'm not denying it to anybody else, it's just how i feel, I won't be out protesting it and I won't tell you that it's not your right or telling you it's wrong or calling you names. If people think being married makes you happy then go get it but I know a lot of married people who are not happy and it will be no differant if your straight or gay
I worry less about religious zealots ( as you term them) than splinter groups who push agendas into politics: as in: gays, illegals, ecofreaks.... you get the idea? Every group from the fringe of society shoves their cause into politics and when one gets a bill passes, it all passes to activist lunatic judges ( not the people) to rule on it.
Somehow you miss the fact that that is a much bigger item in the agenda than religion.
I fail to see how denying our own bill of rights constitutes a 'fringe' group. Abuses to our own foundation as a country are lunatic, and everyone participating in that lunacy is less than american.
Illegals... aren't they just that, illegal?
Ecofreak? You mean the people who kept mercury out of the seafood you eat? Those freaks?
Yes, you attacked me and referred to me as "spewing hatred" for not wanting religion in my life.
Post 333 gives a rundown of the postings.
Nope, I never said anything religious and didn't tell you to anything about wanting religion in your life, I don't care if you have religion or not. you can speak your mind but if others have a differant veiw they get told not to push their veiw on you even if they are not doing so.
He has the right to hold and state his opinion. That are the only one he has exercised. You have the right to disagree with and mock him. Hurray for you. Beyond that, nothing has been established in this area that is not subject to debate and judicial review.
Connect the dots. Or perhaps I should say learn to connect the dots. <roaddog> refers to this as his example of intolerance...
Keep your religion out of everyone else's lives. Keep your religion and religious beliefs out of my government completely.
This is an encouragement that he simply obey the law, And not just some local ordinance either, but the Constitution...the document that defines -- and also limits -- his rights. The Establishment Clause prohibits use of the government to advance religious belief, while the Free Exercise Clause protects one individual from effects of the abject zealotry of another. Since some seem to have had a little difficulty catching it the first time around, one should expect to encounter various forms of resistance when seeking to exercise rights that one DOES NOT HAVE as a means for abrogating rights that others DO HAVE. It's really a fairly simple concept...most people are able to pick up on it right away...
Connect the dots. Or perhaps I should say learn to connect the dots. <roaddog> refers to this as his example of intolerance...
Keep your religion out of everyone else's lives. Keep your religion and religious beliefs out of my government completely.
This is an encouragement that he simply obey the law, And not just some local ordinance either, but the Constitution...the document that defines -- and also limits -- his rights. The Establishment Clause prohibits use of the government to advance religious belief, while the Free Exercise Clause protects one individual from effects of the abject zealotry of another. Since some seem to have had a little difficulty catching it the first time around, one should expect to encounter various forms of resistance when seeking to exercise rights that one DOES NOT HAVE as a means for abrogating rights that others DO HAVE. It's really a fairly simple concept...most people are able to pick up on it right away...
There is nothing in any of his posts to indicate that he does not obey the law, unless you define "the law" as following your personal commands regarding one's beliefs and what constitute approved methods of expressing oneself.
To quote Mr. roaddog (boldface added for emphasis):
"I haven't denied anything to anybody in my whole life even if I feel it's tradition of man and wife I'm not denying it to anybody else, it's just how i feel, I won't be out protesting it and I won't tell you that it's not your right or telling you it's wrong or calling you names. If people think being married makes you happy then go get it but I know a lot of married people who are not happy and it will be no differant if your straight or gay"
The basic difference is intolerance....as someone stated earlier, the hysteria and mass protest heard throughout the U.S. with respect to certain issues is the benchmark.Look at the t-shirts (offensive) ..."God hates $%#@
I'm sorry but when someone puts a bumper sticker on their car saying "Marriage is only a man and woman", or "NRA, accept it or move outta my way"....... they are agenda pushing. They represent ignorance and bigotry. And that is the hallmark of incompetence.
The basic difference is intolerance....as someone stated earlier, the hysteria and mass protest heard throughout the U.S. with respect to certain issues is the benchmark.Look at the t-shirts (offensive) ..."God hates $%#@
Those people (the ones wearing hateful tee-shirts) are mentally ill. No one with any sense would do such a thing.
Quote:
I'm sorry but when someone puts a bumper sticker on their car saying "Marriage is only a man and woman", or "NRA, accept it or move outta my way"....... they are agenda pushing. They represent ignorance and bigotry. And that is the hallmark of incompetence.
I am tempted to ask you how that represents "incompetence" since it quite effectively elicited a response from you (and isn't that what bumperstickers are for?). But I wil resist that temptation...
Besides, when did it become illegal, ignorant, or bigoted to define marriage as between a man and a woman? There's a whole lot of illegal dictionaries out there, if that's the case. And the last time I checked, the NRA was a legally-constituted organization that had broken no laws and that includes among its membership many gay people....
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.
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.
