Anti-War Protest ~

ChrryBlstr

Registered User
Forum Member
Feb 11, 2002
7,407
54
48
Hoosier country
Not to me and millions of other normal people, it doesn't.

It obliterates the boundaries of right and wrong, acceptable and unacceptable and shameful and shameless. It's an affront to human decency.

It's lipstick on a filthy, ugly pig.

RESPECT?

Nice try.


And this is where you lose me. What exactly is normal? And who gets to define what normal is? Traditionally, it has been (fortunately or unfortunately depending on one's point of view) that of heteronormative old white fuckers in positions of power. Why do they get to discount dissenting opinions? And their descendants are those you just railed about previously as being the "higher ups."

The world has never been black or white. Literally.

Peace! :)
 

buddy

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 21, 2000
10,897
85
0
Pittsburgh, Pa.
And this is where you lose me. What exactly is normal? And who gets to define what normal is? Traditionally, it has been (fortunately or unfortunately depending on one's point of view) that of heteronormative old white fuckers in positions of power. Why do they get to discount dissenting opinions? And their descendants are those you just railed about previously as being the "higher ups."

The world has never been black or white. Literally.

Peace! :)

Okay. Some would say there are "norms" in our society, but that's a discussion for another time. To make you happy, change it to
"Not to me and millions of others, it doesn't."

Feel better?
 

ChrryBlstr

Registered User
Forum Member
Feb 11, 2002
7,407
54
48
Hoosier country
Okay. Some would say there are "norms" in our society, but that's a discussion for another time. To make you happy, change it to
"Not to me and millions of others, it doesn't."

Feel better?

OK, but where does this open hostility towards homosexuals stem from?

Peace! :)
 

ImFeklhr

Raconteur
Forum Member
Oct 3, 2005
4,585
129
0
San Francisco
Not to me and millions of other normal people, it doesn't.

It obliterates the boundaries of right and wrong, acceptable and unacceptable and shameful and shameless. It's an affront to human decency.

It's lipstick on a filthy, ugly pig.

RESPECT?

Nice try.

I hear you. And that's pretty much how a lot of people 'on the other side' have been feeling for a long time. That the folks deciding on social norms have acted shamefully, indecently, and wrongly.
And now, as our culture becomes more varied in its sensibilities, people who think outside the old norm are rubbing the old guard the wrong way. It was bound to happen. Sorry.
I am a big believer in private education and home schooling for people who want to raise their kids their own way. I hope we can find ways of coming together as citizens of the same country, but one style of instruction at public schools is never going to please everyone.
 

buddy

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 21, 2000
10,897
85
0
Pittsburgh, Pa.
OK, but where does this open hostility towards homosexuals stem from?

Peace! :)

I'm not hostile toward homosexuals. But as Christian, I am firmly opposed to the sin of homosexuality and what some public schools are teaching children about their lifestyle. I believe it is a blatant insult to anything that is considered morally right and good in our society.

But that's just me and several million others.
 

ImFeklhr

Raconteur
Forum Member
Oct 3, 2005
4,585
129
0
San Francisco
OK, but where does this open hostility towards homosexuals stem from?

Peace! :)

It's a religious thing man, that's not an issue he is going to budge on (do any of us ever budge on our opinions?).
I try not to approach these debates in a manner such that I am trying to change someone's mind, but rather just express myself, and share my thoughts and feelings with someone I have gathered together with for another reason (nominally sports gambling).
 

buddy

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 21, 2000
10,897
85
0
Pittsburgh, Pa.
I hear you. And that's pretty much how a lot of people 'on the other side' have been feeling for a long time. That the folks deciding on social norms have acted shamefully, indecently, and wrongly.
And now, as our culture becomes more varied in its sensibilities, people who think outside the old norm are rubbing the old guard the wrong way. It was bound to happen. Sorry.
I am a big believer in private education and home schooling for people who want to raise their kids their own way. I hope we can find ways of coming together as citizens of the same country, but one style of instruction at public schools is never going to please everyone.

Do your varied sensibilities regarding sexual orientation and sexual practices have any boundaries? Or is everything okay just as long as no one else is physically harmed? What are your thoughts on NAMBLA?
 

ImFeklhr

Raconteur
Forum Member
Oct 3, 2005
4,585
129
0
San Francisco
Do your varied sensibilities regarding sexual orientation and sexual practices have any boundaries? Or is everything okay just as long as no one else is physically harmed? What are your thoughts on NAMBLA?


Personally I have a lot of boundaries, though I largely keep them to myself. But yes generally I believe consenting adults can engage in whatever sexual practices they want. At least as far as the law goes. Everyone is welcome to have their own sensibilities and surround themselves with like-minded individuals if they prefer something else.

I'm embarrassed to admit I don't know anything about NAMBLA beyond knowing what the acronym stands for. I assume it is akin to the Westboro Church, it gets more attention than it's membership size ought to warrant.
I don't have much of a strong opinion on what the specific age of consent should be (16 18 in various states/countries?), but anyone below that age cannot realistically give consent to someone above it. And anyone not giving consent is essentially being harmed.
 

JT

Degenerate
Forum Member
Mar 28, 2000
3,597
81
48
61
Ventura, Ca.
I hate to break it to some of you but despite whoever resides in the white house this country will overall be solid long after some of us older folks are gone. Relative to other countries in the world even better then now. Short term I am not really optimistic but long term I am. We have too many built in advantages that it will be hard to fuck up.
As for homosexuality, do I think it is normal? No, but it doesn't affect me so I don't care. Also, for the 100th time, equal rights before the law for all human beings. Wasting your time fighting it buddy, sorry.
 

buddy

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 21, 2000
10,897
85
0
Pittsburgh, Pa.
I hate to break it to some of you but despite whoever resides in the white house this country will overall be solid long after some of us older folks are gone. Relative to other countries in the world even better then now. Short term I am not really optimistic but long term I am. We have too many built in advantages that it will be hard to fuck up.
As for homosexuality, do I think it is normal? No, but it doesn't affect me so I don't care. Also, for the 100th time, equal rights before the law for all human beings. Wasting your time fighting it buddy, sorry.

I'm not on one man crusade against homosexuality. There are many others who feel as I do. It may appear that way in this forum because no one else is as vocal about their opposition as I am.

And JT, I also understand your apathy. There are a lot like you. Just remember, when it does affect you or those you care for, it may well be too late. If you had a school age daughter and were told that boys were allowed to use her restroom, would you still be apathetic and just wait for someone else to raise their voice?

Also, I don't really understand your first paragraph --- "Overall be solid?" Economically? Militarily? "Relative to other countries? What countries? China, Russia or Haiti? What are you talking about? And what do you mean by "too many built in advantages?"
 

JT

Degenerate
Forum Member
Mar 28, 2000
3,597
81
48
61
Ventura, Ca.
Doesn't matter if a majority feel as if you do buddy, equal rights for human beings before the law.
As for our advantages, still by far the largest military. natural resourses, geography. What other country has the abundance of rivers we have? Ports? This is very underestimated in the scheme of things. Millenials will help balance the aging population. Long term I am bullish.
 

buddy

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 21, 2000
10,897
85
0
Pittsburgh, Pa.
I'd like to be bullish also. But truth be told, I believe the body suffers when the head is deranged and that's the way I see our nation. Our leaders, including the supreme court, are deluded.
I see us heading in the direction of the Roman Empire.

"Equal rights for human beings before the law?".
Sure sounds nice.
But scripture states, "Shall the throne of iniquity have fellowship with thee, which frameth mischief by a law?

Case in point: Supreme Courts landmark 5-4 decision to approve gay marriage.

I have to live with it, but I don't have to respect what they think and do. They are not above reproach.

I subscribe to a higher authority.
 

ImFeklhr

Raconteur
Forum Member
Oct 3, 2005
4,585
129
0
San Francisco
I'd like to be bullish also. But truth be told, I believe the body suffers when the head is deranged and that's the way I see our nation. Our leaders, including the supreme court, are deluded.
I see us heading in the direction of the Roman Empire.

"Equal rights for human beings before the law?".
Sure sounds nice.
But scripture states, "Shall the throne of iniquity have fellowship with thee, which frameth mischief by a law?

Case in point: Supreme Courts landmark 5-4 decision to approve gay marriage.

I have to live with it, but I don't have to respect what they think and do. They are not above reproach.

I subscribe to a higher authority.

If this country can survive its 'head' allowing slavery and all other forms of 'mischief' over the years, I wonder if it might survive gay marriage. Time will tell how God rates government derangement; there has always been plenty.
 

buddy

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 21, 2000
10,897
85
0
Pittsburgh, Pa.
If this country can survive its 'head' allowing slavery and all other forms of 'mischief' over the years, I wonder if it might survive gay marriage. Time will tell how God rates government derangement; there has always been plenty.

The Dangers Of American Liberty
By Fisher Ames (1758 - 1808)

"There is of course a large portion of our citizens who will not believe, even on the evidence of facts, that any public evils exist, or are impending.

They deride the apprehensions of those who foresee that licentiousness will prove, as it ever has proved, fatal to liberty.

They consider her as a nymph, who need not be coy to keep herself pure, but that on the contrary, her chastity will grow robust by frequent scuffles with her seducers.

They say, while a faction is a minority it will remain harmless by being outvoted; and if it should become a majority, all its acts, however profligate or violent, are then legitimate.

For with the democrats the people is a sovereign who can do no wrong, even when he respects and spares no existing right, and whose voice, however obtained or however counterfeited, bears all the sanctity and all the force of a living divinity.

The clamors of party are so loud, and the resistance of national vanity is so stubborn, it will be impossible to convince any but the very wise (and in every state they are the very few), that our democratic liberty is utterly untenable; that we are devoted to the successive struggles of factions, who will rule by turns, the worst of whom will rule last and triumph by the sword. But for the wise this unwelcome task is, perhaps, superfluous: they, possibly, are already convinced."
 

JT

Degenerate
Forum Member
Mar 28, 2000
3,597
81
48
61
Ventura, Ca.
I'd like to be bullish also. But truth be told, I believe the body suffers when the head is deranged and that's the way I see our nation. Our leaders, including the supreme court, are deluded.
I see us heading in the direction of the Roman Empire.

"Equal rights for human beings before the law?".
Sure sounds nice.
But scripture states, "Shall the throne of iniquity have fellowship with thee, which frameth mischief by a law?

Case in point: Supreme Courts landmark 5-4 decision to approve gay marriage.

I have to live with it, but I don't have to respect what they think and do. They are not above reproach.

I subscribe to a higher authority.

Well of course the Supreme Court is not above reporoach. Of course I would much rather see Citizens United overturned. As for it sounding nice, there is seperation of church and state. For good reason and that law was not landmark to me. The radicals are the ones who deny equal rights to all humans.
 

buddy

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 21, 2000
10,897
85
0
Pittsburgh, Pa.
Separation of church and state is a man-made law. But, I believe there are man-made laws and the laws of God. I've posted before that the bible states "Shall the throne of iniquity have fellowship with thee, which frameth mischief by a law?" That changes things for me. I try to live as best I can within the framework of man-made laws. Like others, I don't like legal entanglements. But, I am a follower of Jesus Christ. I will not march lock-step according to everything and anything that comes from the mind of man. Ain't happenin'. Gender-neutral bathrooms may cause a stir.
 

buddy

Registered User
Forum Member
Nov 21, 2000
10,897
85
0
Pittsburgh, Pa.
From Wikipedia -

"Separation of church and state" is a phrase used by Thomas Jefferson and others expressing an understanding of the intent and function of the Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States which reads: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..."

The intent of this clause was to limit the power of the Federal Government in regard to religion thus ensuring freedom of religion in the United States of America.

The phrase "separation of church and state" is generally traced to a January 1, 1802 letter by Thomas Jefferson, addressed to the Danbury Baptist Association in Connecticut, and published in a Massachusetts newspaper. Jefferson wrote,
? "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church & State."[1] ?

Jefferson was echoing the language of the founder of the first Baptist church in America, Roger Williams who had written in 1644 of "[A] hedge or wall of separation between the garden of the church and the wilderness of the world."Article Six of the United States Constitution also specifies that "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."

Jefferson's metaphor of a wall of separation has been cited repeatedly by the U.S. Supreme Court.

In Reynolds v. United States (1879) the Court wrote that Jefferson's comments "may be accepted almost as an authoritative declaration of the scope and effect of the [First] Amendment."

In Everson v. Board of Education (1947), Justice Hugo Black wrote: "In the words of Thomas Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect a wall of separation between church and state."[2]

However, the Court has not always interpreted the constitutional principle as absolute, and the proper extent of separation between government and religion in the U.S. remains an ongoing subject of impassioned debate.
 

JT

Degenerate
Forum Member
Mar 28, 2000
3,597
81
48
61
Ventura, Ca.
Well I choose not to walk lockstep with ancient texts. To each their own. Most morality is based in common sense anyway, don't need religion for that. As for common sense, I don't even know why I am wasting time trying to debate someone who believes like you do or anyone who demonstrates slavish faith in things be they religious beliefs, politics, or even ways of doing things at a job. Silly of me.
 
Bet on MyBookie
Top