Amazon 7 #101 February 25, 2014 quade***Why is one sexual perversion ok but not all? You mean like that totally hetro thing described in the Bible where a dude jerks a chick off so hard she craps? Completely God approved! I'm serious. It's in there and very few people I know have a problem with it. Song of Solomon 5:4 So yeah, I have no idea why some factions of religion have an issue with some things but not others. There were lots of things in the Old Testament that were God and Levitican Priest Class approved that are not exactly treated with the same amount of existence today. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jclalor 12 #102 February 25, 2014 quade***Why is one sexual perversion ok but not all? You mean like that totally hetro thing described in the Bible where a dude jerks a chick off so hard she craps? Completely God approved! I'm serious. It's in there and very few people I know have a problem with it. Song of Solomon 5:4 So yeah, I have no idea why some factions of religion have an issue with some things but not others. My personnal favorite bible verse is Ezekiel 23:11-21, describing the lovers of a permiscuos prostitute as beng hung like donkeys and able to cum like horses. That would make for an interesting animated children's bible story. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Stumpy 284 #103 February 25, 2014 jclalor ******Why is one sexual perversion ok but not all? You mean like that totally hetro thing described in the Bible where a dude jerks a chick off so hard she craps? Completely God approved! I'm serious. It's in there and very few people I know have a problem with it. Song of Solomon 5:4 So yeah, I have no idea why some factions of religion have an issue with some things but not others. My personnal favorite bible verse is Ezekiel 23:11-21, describing the lovers of a permiscuos prostitute as beng hung like donkeys and able to cum like horses. That would make for an interesting animated children's bible story. I actually had to look it up because I wasn't sure I believed you. Never try to eat more than you can lift Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #104 February 25, 2014 quade If a business is open to the public, then it should be open to the entirety of it. Absolutely (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #105 February 25, 2014 catfishhunterWhy is one sexual perversion ok but not all? . And there you go again ..that's your bigotry coming out again .. WHY do you think that they are perverted? because they don't meet YOUR strict, narrow minded view of what is 'normal' QuoteBigotry is the state of mind of a bigot: someone who, as a result of their prejudices, treats or views other people with fear, distrust, hatred, contempt, or intolerance on the basis of a person's opinion, ethnicity, race, religion, national origin, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, disability, socioeconomic status, or other characteristics. (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CornishChris 5 #106 February 25, 2014 QuoteI don't have any issue with what consenting adults due in the bedroom. I do not subscribe to the special treatment and trampling on others beliefs for the sake of sexual perversion. You state that you have no issue but then use the inflammatory expression 'sexual perversion'. I can guarantee there is a lot more anal sex between men and women than between men and men - is that perversion? Should anyone who has partaken in anal sex have to wear a badge so that the unadventurous people can discriminate against them too? The broader issue here is the one where you seem to believe the rights granted by a choice to believe in one of the many nonsensical religions in the world trumps the rights to be who you are and love who you love. It does not. It is hard enough for many gay people to come to terms with who they are and receive acceptance in their community without the likes of Arizona lagalising discrimination against them. CJP Gods don't kill people. People with Gods kill people Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lefty 0 #107 February 25, 2014 labrysQuoteAlmost every private citizen receives those things. We don't, as a rule, get to make use of business tax breaks and incentives unless we're running a business... and if you're using commercially zoned resources in a community, you actually *are* expected to make the property and services available to the community. Yes, that is the law. We were discussing what the law should or shouldn't be, I thought. That's how the thread started.Provoking a reaction isn't the same thing as saying something meaningful. -Calvin Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Stumpy 284 #108 February 25, 2014 It seems that you think Equality = allowing businesses to discriminate against those they don't like/ agree with (in this case consenting adults who love other consenting adults of the same sex) I can assure you, this is not the case. If, say, your local starbucks wanted to discriminate against black people, do you think that would be OK? Do you think Lincoln was a bigot because he pushed for the end of slavery? After all, the beliefs of the people of that day were that slavery was OK because black people were sub human. Do you think their beliefs were trampled on unfairly? if so i think we are done here.Never try to eat more than you can lift Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tkhayes 348 #109 February 25, 2014 QuoteI re read everything I posted and I do not see whee I labeled anyone. You called it a sin. That is labeling people as doing something wrong based on something they do. Something that has (as I said) ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with you nor does it ever affect your life. And then you just called it a perversion (again). that is called hate-mongering (again) QuoteI don't have any issue with what consenting adults due in the bedroom. QuoteWhy is one sexual perversion ok but not all? Your one statement contradicts the second in context. You have no problem with the 'perversion'. It's kinda like saying - "I ain't racist, I just don't like niggers" And knock off the slippery slope argument of 'all perversions'. Consenting adults, versus say, child molesters. One brings harm to another person. One does not. I can see the difference. Too bad you cannot. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #110 February 25, 2014 (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LyraM45 0 #111 February 25, 2014 QuoteI re read everything I posted and I do not see whee I labeled anyone. Behaviors yes but not people. But you did label them. You keep saying "perverted." But you mask the fact that you're labeling somebody by saying that you're labeling their behavior. If a child acts out, they are choosing to behave bad. If somebody breaks into a house and steals something, they choose to behave badly. It might be a moot point to argue this because you may not see it as a choice, but gay people are not choosing to be gay. Being gay is not a behavior. If being gay is a choice and a behavior, I guess the rest of us hetero's must really stress ourselves out with the battle every day to choose to be straight and choose to behave "un-perverted." How's that struggle going for you every day? Personally I don't even think about it because I am naturally attracted to men. I was born that way and it's a part of my being! How is that not the same for another human being? QuoteHow about you start by answering my questions I asked before. Why is one sexual perversion ok but not all? Will you be ok when the time comes to accept those whose perversions you find vile? After all they where born that way. Or will you be the hate monger? I think I've made it clear that I don't consider loving who you love, whether same sex or not, perverted. But, for the sake of arguing and making this next point, lets consider it perverted and vile. Even if I did find it perverted and vile, I can go on living my life having an opinion like that, but not impact my beliefs on those people by restricting what they can do and limiting how they are treated because of my beliefs. If I didn't like black people (totally theoretical here), my opinion/belief is not being taken away if they are allowed to sit at the diner counter and get the same service I have. Why does my opinion of their (homosexuals) morality have to legally restrict them from the same rights I have as a citizen? I'm not Muslim and I don't agree with everything Muslims do as part of their beliefs under strict Islamic law, but I'm not creating laws that say Muslims can't get the same service I can or be treated the same and legally have the same rights I have. QuoteI do not subscribe to the special treatment and trampling on others beliefs for the sake of sexual perversion. If I am turned away from a business because I am white and the owner doesn't like serving whites because it has something to do with his beliefs/opinions, is it special treatment if all I want is to be served just like every other race that gets service there? Please explain to me how this is special treatment. I really want to understand what you mean. QuoteI find it really amusing how those of you claiming to be tolerant and wanting equality fight so hard to take it away from those who do not believe as you. . Again, person A walks into Starbucks and wants the same service person B got. Lets say person A is white, and person B is black. I believe the white customer should be served like the black customer and vice versa. Both equally. You believe one of them should get lesser or no service. Tell me who at that point is getting special treatment? Tell me who at that point is getting something taken from them for not believing the same as you do? Apologies for the long post. I'm not asking these questions in a rhetorical sense. I'd actually appreciate your response and a polite conversation.Apologies for the spelling (and grammar).... I got a B.S, not a B.A. :) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
grimmie 186 #112 February 25, 2014 Sin didn't exist at the beginning of time. Sin was only invented when the bible was written. The Christian Right Wingers are so afraid of the Muslims and Sharia Law. How does this proposed law differ? Making laws, based on the religious beliefs of a certain sect or religion, to discriminate against any group of defined people, is a REALLY, REALLY bad idea. And a final note. I own a pink skydiving shirt. Will that get me banned from jumping in AZ? If only these legislators knew their "Gaydar" detectors are very flawed... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Remster 30 #113 February 25, 2014 Quote And a final note. I own a pink skydiving shirt. Will that get me banned from jumping in AZ? No. Your questionable skydiving skills will. Robo-Gov has 3 more days to sign or veto that bill... Tic toc... Support for it is, thankfully, eroding from all sides.Remster Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,500 #114 February 25, 2014 QuoteI re read everything I posted and I do not see whee I labeled anyone. Oh, of course! You only compared gay people goat fuckers and pedophiles and called them perverts committing vile sins... but seriously, how thin skinned would you need to be to take offense to that? QuoteWhy is one sexual perversion ok but not all? Why is your sexual perversion ok?Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JerryBaumchen 1,371 #115 February 25, 2014 Hi catfish, QuoteWhy is one sexual perversion ok but not all? Because society defines it that way. Not all states have the same laws. I'm from Oregon, where the cake sale debacle stated. Oregon has a law that says sexual orientation is a protected class. If anyone does not like that, then they should try to change the law. Personally, I agree with the law here in Oregon & strongly disagree with this proposed law in Arizona. I grew up despising gay people; that's how the crowd I ran with thought. I have learned, over the years, that our sexual orientation is not a choice, it is how we are. You may have your sins but I prefer to disagree. JerryBaumchen PS) And to GRIMMIE) I could not agree more. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #116 February 25, 2014 I hope Arizona is proud of itself. It has now joined other enlightened places like Uganda and Sudan. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JerryBaumchen 1,371 #117 February 26, 2014 Hi Andy, QuoteI hope Arizona is proud of itself. I just spent a week in AZ and have been following this. It looks to me that a whole bunch of Republicans are now calling for Gov. Brewer to veto it. Might just be hope out there after all, JerryBaumchen PS) My money says that she vetoes it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,027 #118 February 26, 2014 JerryBaumchenHi Andy, QuoteI hope Arizona is proud of itself. I just spent a week in AZ and have been following this. It looks to me that a whole bunch of Republicans are now calling for Gov. Brewer to veto it. . Newt is, but not Rush Limbaugh.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #119 February 26, 2014 kallend ***Hi Andy, Quote I hope Arizona is proud of itself. I just spent a week in AZ and have been following this. It looks to me that a whole bunch of Republicans are now calling for Gov. Brewer to veto it. . Newt is, but not Rush Limbaugh. Like that would ever happen.... ole Jeff Christie will be deep in his self loathing closet till the day he dies. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jclalor 12 #120 February 26, 2014 Andy9o8I hope Arizona is proud of itself. It has now joined other enlightened places like Uganda and Sudan. I heard Tucson is receiving lots of letters of support from their "sister city" Kampala. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LyraM45 0 #121 February 26, 2014 Oh my... I don't even know what to say about this AZ representative! http://www.upworthy.com/state-senator-who-supports-anti-gay-law-spends-10-minutes-proving-he-has-no-idea-how-the-law-works-4?g=2&c=ufb1Apologies for the spelling (and grammar).... I got a B.S, not a B.A. :) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SivaGanesha 2 #122 February 26, 2014 quadeIf a business is open to the public, then it should be open to the entirety of it. Many businesses already discriminate on the basis of age. Should this be legal? What I mean is this: the LAW only requires that someone be 21 or older in order to drink. However, many businesses that sell alcohol will set a higher threshold (say, 30, or whatever) such that if someone appears to be under 30, they have to produce ID to be able to buy alcohol. Now it is true than anyone over the age of 21 can buy alcohol after producing ID. But this seems to me to be clear discrimination against the young (or those who appear young), as those who appear to be older than 30 are allowed to purchase alcohol without the burden of showing ID. Should this be legal? The business is discriminating not only against those under 21--this is mandated under law--but also against those who appear to be under 30--and this is NOT sanctioned by law."It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #123 February 26, 2014 SivaGaneshaWhat I mean is this: the LAW only requires that someone be 21 or older in order to drink. However, many businesses that sell alcohol will set a higher threshold (say, 30, or whatever) such that if someone appears to be under 30, they have to produce ID to be able to buy alcohol. That, my friend, isn't discrimination. That is complying with the law to ensure they don't sell to people under 21. Geebus. Next somebody is going to say businesses discriminate against people with shit on their hands because they post signs in the restrooms that tell employees to wash their hands. Get a grip folks.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SivaGanesha 2 #124 February 26, 2014 quadeThat, my friend, isn't discrimination. That is complying with the law to ensure they don't sell to people under 21. No it is clearly discrimination. It is possible to comply with the law without discriminating simply by requiring ID of EVERYONE purchasing alcohol--even the elderly--and there ARE places that sell alcohol that do just this to avoid discrimination. To do anything else is discrimination IMHO."It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SivaGanesha 2 #125 February 26, 2014 quadeNext somebody is going to say businesses discriminate against people with shit on their hands because they post signs in the restrooms that tell employees to wash their hands. There is no discrimination here because EVERYONE should wash their hands whether they shit on their hands or not."It's hard to have fun at 4-way unless your whole team gets down to the ground safely to do it again!"--Northern California Skydiving League re USPA Safety Day, March 8, 2014 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
