Intolerance at "The Grove"

[readymade]

I think anyone who has a problem with homosexuality needs to take a very strong and deep look at themselves (therapy?) and discover what they're trying to hide from themselves. I'm looking at you, OP.

And anyone who brings up the bible (and the ONE LINE therein which, technically, only mentions men) also needs to back up everything else in the bible and live their lives STRICTLY according to it. How come you're not campaigning for rape victims being forced into marrying their rapists? Or women who's husbands die being legally bound into marrying his brother if she has no offspring. Why aren't you more upset about prostitution? Why do you guys focus always on homosexuality?

Why is it so hard to accept that some of us don't want hate & intolerance in our lives? I wouldn't want that boxer dude at my place of work or house interacting with my daughter. I can't blame Caruso for the same thing. Would you be upset if Caruso tweeted that murderers were not welcome at The Grove? I mean, he's probably totally intolerant against murderers too! What a jerk!!

[EscapeCalifornia]

Originally Posted by VLWH

I'm sure the businesses in the grove are thrilled their landlord is asking potential patrons to stay away, especially ones with big bucks.

Yeah its not very good business to tell half of your customers to get lost, especially in a poor economy.

[HunterK]

Originally Posted by EscapeCalifornia

According to who?

Anyone with 1/2 a brain.

Originally Posted by WesternPilgrim

True. And Caruso isn't on it.

Legally, though, Caruso is fully within his rights to discriminate against anyone he likes for their public political views - pro or con, no matter the issue. The sane, traditional marriage side of this issue has no problem with the concept.
What we find amusing is the sheer hypocrisy of the other side. This thread is a good example.

Moderator cut: rude

How do you guys even know how to use a computer? To think that Caruso is a bad guy for taking a stand against backwards thinkers is a type of insanity I will never be able to understand.

[bigdumbgod]

Originally Posted by HunterK

To think that Caruso is a bad guy for taking a stand against backwards thinkers is a type of insanity I will never be able to understand.

One has to be very in touch with the "Voice in Your Head" to enter into such a zone of 'understanding'. Us mere mortals who aren't Pilgrims on a mission to cleanse the internet of Satan aren't privy to such divinations.

But that's OK - it means we don't have to bother repenting or visiting one of those weirdo priests in the habit of, uh, 'correcting' sinners' behavior.

[WesternPilgrim]

Originally Posted by readymade

Why do you guys focus always on homosexuality?

Because homosexuality is always focusing on us. I'd rather not hear about it ever again, but since y'all have launched an aggressive crusade against public decency and morality, you're going to get some push back from me. Sorry!

We're just about at the endgame of the war against marriage in what's left of Christendom. I can't speak for anyone else, but here's my take.

The first domino to fall was the permanence and indissoluability of marriage in the 16h century. Luther permited divorce and even bigamy, and this opened the floodgates. The scant, narrow reasons initially granted by protestants for divorce continued to expand, and today "no fault" divorce is the norm. The Church of England authorized contraception in 1930 or thereabouts, initially for narrow and exceptional reasons and only in the context of marriage. The rest of the protestant world followed suit, those exceptional reasons became obsolete, and today only the Catholic Church holds the line. In the '60s and '70s marriage began to be seen as superfluous and co-habitation became fashionable: today it is ubiquitous. The end result is that the natural and moral link connecting marriage, sex, and procreation has been severed in the popular mind, opening the door for homosexuality and really anything else.

The front lines today are what they are. I didn't choose them. The earlier battles have been lost. Today it's homosexuality, tomorrow it'll probably be something new and still more perverse. I predict that polygamy and polyandry will be next, with the help of domestic Muslims - mark my words. I wouldn't be surprised if consensual "intergenerational sex" is revived as a cause - all the rage in academia among sexual "progressives" in the '70s, but temporarily ditched when it became symbolically useful as the object of faux outrage during the church scandals. And why not?

[bigdumbgod]

Originally Posted by WesternPilgrim

the natural and moral link

According to...? (don't say that silly story book written by obsessed men in caves)