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.
Really? Your conclusion is based on your experience with a gay bar?
Seriously, the complete and demonstrable lack of deeper analytical skills (or fact checking ability --- example, your 20 year old article that sampled one Canadian city), suggests that you were never actually held accountable during your stint as an "attorney" to have coherent and defensible arguments in court.
From most of the anti-homo joe bubbas and holy rollers on this thread, it is expected that it will take them longer to understand a concept, or to think critically (or for themselves and based on logic). I honestly would expect more from a so-called attorney.
Wow, they couldn't find a better lawyer? Or were you assigned to them for some reason? Seriously...what idiot chooses a homophobic lawyer to defend their gay rights?
Quote:
Originally Posted by kshe95girl
This the question that really begs an answer.....
What was the straight attorney for the gay club doing hanging out there?
I worked in a lot of bars during college, and never were the attorneys for said bars hanging out in them.
At first, I took his story seriously, but my hunch now is that he made the whole story up.
It's just too bad joe bubbas don't confine their lifestyle choice (prideful ignorance) to the privacy of their homes. They're always trying to cram their unfounded, unresearched, uneducated opinions down everyone elses' throats!
It's just too bad joe bubbas don't confine their lifestyle choice (prideful ignorance) to the privacy of their homes. They're always trying to cram their unfounded, unresearched, uneducated opinions down everyone elses' throats!
It's the Palin/Huckabee crowd: Anti-science and anti-knowledge. They think that reading the Bible and trusting their gut instincts will tell them everything they need to know.
It's the Palin/Huckabee crowd: Anti-science and anti-knowledge. They think that reading the Bible and trusting their gut instincts will tell them everything they need to know.
I swear half these people would have been happier in Tudor England.
There, they would support such scientific, faith-based scientific facts such as, "if the person we throw into the lake floats, she's a witch.... if she drowns, she wasn't a witch" or, "let's bleed away the sickness."
If a male has a sex act with another male, he is gay. I don't care what so-called experts say. Just because someone says they are an expert, doesn't make it so. That person is also a criminal and should be eradicated like the vermin they are.
So if a man is raped by another man, does that make him gay? And what if a guy tries out gay sex but really isn't into it at all? Not all sexual activity is indicative of sexual orientation.
I thought so.......also the same Bible that has been revised countless times to suit agendas........not even gonna talk about the botched translations!
So right. A person could spend a lifetime in the Vatican Library finding scrolls that were withheld as heresy, but were once part of early Christian
sects; the Albigensian Crusade comes to mind. Yes, the Gnostic Gospels exist, but the new knowledge from the Dead Sea Scrolls is growing as translations are completed. The Book of Esther is common knowledge among Christians, yet it remains outside the "canon" purely through institutionalized misogyny. Pelagius is an interesting early Christian as well.
The Pauline Gospel is questionable, as he was born long after the cruxifiction and many of his tenets disagree with the Four Gospels of the Apostles. Like Thomas Jefferson, many Christians choose to ignore his letters to other sects.
TBS, nowhere in Matthew, Mark, Luke or John does Christ denigrate or ban
homosexuality. God creates people in very different forms, and God does not make mistakes; perhaps learning to accept, tolerate and even love people who are different may be a way of testing how one's spirit is growing in that area. If you choose the scripture from the Old Testament above the teachings of Christ, you're failing to meet Christ's challenge. It's nobody's business who marries whom: Again, certain legal rights are denied to the GLB community, and that's against the Constitution.
So right. A person could spend a lifetime in the Vatican Library finding scrolls that were withheld as heresy, but were once part of early Christian
sects; the Albigensian Crusade comes to mind. Yes, the Gnostic Gospels exist, but the new knowledge from the Dead Sea Scrolls is growing as translations are completed. The Book of Esther is common knowledge among Christians, yet it remains outside the "canon" purely through institutionalized misogyny. Pelagius is an interesting early Christian as well.
The Pauline Gospel is questionable, as he was born long after the cruxifiction and many of his tenets disagree with the Four Gospels of the Apostles. Like Thomas Jefferson, many Christians choose to ignore his letters to other sects.
TBS, nowhere in Matthew, Mark, Luke or John does Christ denigrate or ban
homosexuality. God creates people in very different forms, and God does not make mistakes; perhaps learning to accept, tolerate and even love people who are different may be a way of testing how one's spirit is growing in that area. If you choose the scripture from the Old Testament above the teachings of Christ, you're failing to meet Christ's challenge. It's nobody's business who marries whom: Again, certain legal rights are denied to the GLB community, and that's against the Constitution.
Brilliant post, bravo!!!
I have heard and read everything that you have written more than once, thank you for expanding so much on my puny post.
I have been hoping someone more familiar with these Biblical writings would show up and set things to rights.
If straight women were as open to having sex as much as men wanted them to, then straight men would have sex as often as the gay single male. WOMEN are the gatekeepers of chastity. If there were sex clubs where horny women sat around willing to have sex with men, there would be hundreds of men lined up around the building every single day. If there were places where hot women sat in bathroom stalls, willing to perform oral sex on men through holes in the wall, the straight men's room would have as long a line as the women's bathroom, 24/7. We see glimpses of the possibility of straight promiscuity during events such as Mardi Gras, or college Spring Break.
Straight MEN used to be able to demand it, take it, rape it whenever they wanted (and they did) before women got enough power in society. They no longer can. Righteously indignant straight men can thank their women for keeping them honest.
But I digress.
If social conservatives actually gave a damn about what they consider to be "immoral promiscuity," then they would welcome gay marriage, because it would impose societal pressure on gay males to settle down and find a mate, much like their straight counterparts are often dragged kicking and screaming into domestic-land.
This is probably one of the most honest (and factual) posts I've read in a long, long time.
As far as gay promiscuity--you need to meet my pastor. She's been with her female partner for nearly 25 years. They were college sweethearts, and they're devoted to each other.
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.
