|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: Federal vs. Oregon...GAYS! [Re: akira_akuma]
#21909974 - 07/07/15 02:31 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
akira_akuma said: is there any pertinent literature, or anything that you signify to people to look into to become more knowledgeable of this wisdom you have shared with us to better understand it, this Racism Fades Theory?
Isn't it enough to notice that younger humans are less racist, homophobic and sexist than their elders?
-------------------- You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: Federal vs. Oregon...GAYS! [Re: Achillita]
#21909990 - 07/07/15 02:35 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Achillita said: I agree, it can stiffen the hate for people already there, but I think that it shows the children it's not okay to discriminate.
That could have been accomplished quicker without the force of stupid laws.
Quote:
And I doubt that racism would have ended much earlier! The US had over 100 years of discriminatory laws. The government pretty much demolished those laws. Expecting a group of ignorant people to change, while they preach their ignorance to their children and have laws(or lack of) laws to back them up won't work. It didn't work for so long, and that's why these laws had to be made.
We'll have to disagree. I'm well aware that force doesn't accomplish what the forcers desire.
Racism will never end. The best one can hope for is to diminish it as much as possible. The laws didn't accomplish that. People growing did.
-------------------- You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
akira_akuma
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ

Registered: 08/28/09
Posts: 82,455
Loc: Onypeirophóros
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
|
|
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said:
Quote:
akira_akuma said: is there any pertinent literature, or anything that you signify to people to look into to become more knowledgeable of this wisdom you have shared with us to better understand it, this Racism Fades Theory?
Isn't it enough to notice that younger humans are less racist, homophobic and sexist than their elders?
i guess the further back you go the harder it may be, i admittedly presuppose, but based on what i've seen....
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: Federal vs. Oregon...GAYS! [Re: akira_akuma]
#21910017 - 07/07/15 02:41 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Seeing as I'm rapidly approaching 58, I'm going by what I've seen.
The younger generation, while consisting mainly of whiny self entitled twits, is less racist, sexist and homophobic.
-------------------- You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
akira_akuma
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ

Registered: 08/28/09
Posts: 82,455
Loc: Onypeirophóros
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
|
|
now onto teh main issue, liberals.
|
Achillita
Back to the basics



Registered: 05/26/14
Posts: 4,565
Last seen: 3 years, 10 days
|
|
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said: Seeing as I'm rapidly approaching 58, I'm going by what I've seen.
The younger generation, while consisting mainly of whiny self entitled twits, is less racist, sexist and homophobic.
Almost every generation says that the younger generation is fucked, or just whiny or something. I just think it's people realizing how arrogant kids can be(I'm pretty young, and holy shit they can be arrogant). But they're probably no more arrogant then the elders where at the same age. Just different contexts.
And while I agree being racist, sexist, and homophobic is very much on the decline, it wasn't this way for a long time. For hundreds of years racism was encouraged and enforced. While the government tried to stomp it out with laws, the majority of change comes from the children. Schools were instructed to teach that racism is wrong. That's what fundamentally changed, IMO. I can see your point on why denying anyone should be acceptable, but I don't think it's so much for the adults as it is for the children to see that doing so isn't okay.
--------------------
|
greencrush420



Registered: 04/14/13
Posts: 1,014
Loc: U.S.A
|
Re: Federal vs. Oregon...GAYS! [Re: koods]
#21910117 - 07/07/15 03:06 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koods said:
Quote:
Shins said:
Quote:
greencrush420 said: That's why you have it plastered across the front door, " we have a right to refuse service to anyone". They don't have to make a fucking cake for someone of they don't want to. This is America, and they are running a business; they aren't slaves.
Not anymore
the business was ordered to pay 135, 000 $ in damages to the gay couple.
Priests now have to perform gay marriages too or else.
Why do gays get these special privileges
Special privileges? Marriage only for straight people is a special privilege. Exemption from anti-discrimination laws for religious reasons is a special privilege.
If you own a business, you must comply with the law, including ones that mandate that you cannot discriminate based on certain traits or characteristics. You are free to not operate a business if you are unwilling to comply with the law.
And you are totally full of shit about that priest thing. Source?
Marriage is a union under god, not "a privilege for straight people". If they want to be financially one and the same under the law, then fine. That does not require a pastor. The bible says that homosexuality is wrong, so why would you want to be married in a church, by a pastor, under god, when ALL OF THE ABOVE ARE AGAINST YOUR UNION? Explain that. It's nothing but a piece of paper without gods blessing. It's essentially just a legal agreement between two men/women.
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: Federal vs. Oregon...GAYS! [Re: Achillita]
#21910121 - 07/07/15 03:06 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Achillita said:
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said: Seeing as I'm rapidly approaching 58, I'm going by what I've seen.
The younger generation, while consisting mainly of whiny self entitled twits, is less racist, sexist and homophobic.
Almost every generation says that the younger generation is fucked, or just whiny or something. I just think it's people realizing how arrogant kids can be(I'm pretty young, and holy shit they can be arrogant). But they're probably no more arrogant then the elders where at the same age. Just different contexts.
And while I agree being racist, sexist, and homophobic is very much on the decline, it wasn't this way for a long time. For hundreds of years racism was encouraged and enforced. While the government tried to stomp it out with laws, the majority of change comes from the children. Schools were instructed to teach that racism is wrong. That's what fundamentally changed, IMO. I can see your point on why denying anyone should be acceptable, but I don't think it's so much for the adults as it is for the children to see that doing so isn't okay.
Actually, my point was that while they are in some ways worse, they are in some ways better.
Quote:
Schools were instructed to teach that racism is wrong.
Yup... taught. You teach, you do not force.
-------------------- You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
|
Quote:
greencrush420 said: Marriage is a union under god, not "a privilege for straight people". If they want to be financially one and the same under the law, then fine. That does not require a pastor. The bible says that homosexuality is wrong, so why would you want to be married in a church, by a pastor, under god, when ALL OF THE ABOVE ARE AGAINST YOUR UNION? Explain that. It's nothing but a piece of paper without gods blessing. It's essentially just a legal agreement between two men/women.
As long as marriage is licensed/regulated/sanctioned/permitted for straights, there is no valid reason to deny it to gays. Plus, the 14th amendment says you can't.
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Plus, it wasn't just churches where gay marriage was illegal. It was all gay marriages in states with laws against them.
-------------------- You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
akira_akuma
Φύσις κρύπτεσθαι ὕψιστος φιλεῖ

Registered: 08/28/09
Posts: 82,455
Loc: Onypeirophóros
Last seen: 4 years, 1 month
|
|
Quote:
greencrush420 said:
Marriage is a union under god, not "a privilege for straight people". If they want to be financially one and the same under the law, then fine. That does not require a pastor. The bible says that homosexuality is wrong, so why would you want to be married in a church, by a pastor, under god, when ALL OF THE ABOVE ARE AGAINST YOUR UNION? Explain that. It's nothing but a piece of paper without gods blessing. It's essentially just a legal agreement between two men/women.
this is probably only time i hope i have to say this because it's really stupid that i should have to and i don't even wanna get into the whole debacle of how the priesthood identify very lovingly about themselves and keep a lot of homosexual sex (among other's) repressed and indeed kept in the closet, as it were; there are gay Christian's and Catholic's too is basically what i'm saying.
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,062
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 6 minutes, 23 seconds
|
|
I'm sorry, the south had to be forced into not discriminating against blacks. Laws had to be passed. The national guard occasionally needed to enforce these laws. The south was not going to do this on its own.
Quote:
greencrush420 said:
Quote:
koods said:
Quote:
Shins said:
Quote:
greencrush420 said: That's why you have it plastered across the front door, " we have a right to refuse service to anyone". They don't have to make a fucking cake for someone of they don't want to. This is America, and they are running a business; they aren't slaves.
Not anymore
the business was ordered to pay 135, 000 $ in damages to the gay couple.
Priests now have to perform gay marriages too or else.
Why do gays get these special privileges
Special privileges? Marriage only for straight people is a special privilege. Exemption from anti-discrimination laws for religious reasons is a special privilege.
If you own a business, you must comply with the law, including ones that mandate that you cannot discriminate based on certain traits or characteristics. You are free to not operate a business if you are unwilling to comply with the law.
And you are totally full of shit about that priest thing. Source?
Marriage is a union under god, not "a privilege for straight people". If they want to be financially one and the same under the law, then fine. That does not require a pastor. The bible says that homosexuality is wrong, so why would you want to be married in a church, by a pastor, under god, when ALL OF THE ABOVE ARE AGAINST YOUR UNION? Explain that. It's nothing but a piece of paper without gods blessing. It's essentially just a legal agreement between two men/women.
That''s your opinion, and since it is guided by religious doctrine, it has absolutely no place in the public debate.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: Federal vs. Oregon...GAYS! [Re: koods]
#21910273 - 07/07/15 03:43 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
His opinion, though ridiculous, has as much place in the debate as yours.
Why is it that so many on the left want to stifle others? Seems rather archaic.
-------------------- You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,062
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 6 minutes, 23 seconds
|
Re: Federal vs. Oregon...GAYS! [Re: koods]
#21910281 - 07/07/15 03:46 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
And really, if saying that god made marriage for you and not me, isnt a special privilege you've claimed for yourself, I don't know what is.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,062
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 6 minutes, 23 seconds
|
Re: Federal vs. Oregon...GAYS! [Re: koods]
#21910287 - 07/07/15 03:48 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Claiming that god made marriage for man and women is not a legitimate political or legal argument against gay marriage. That's why nobody made that argument in front of the courts, even though you know they wanted to.
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: Federal vs. Oregon...GAYS! [Re: koods]
#21910301 - 07/07/15 03:52 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
He's still as entitled as you are.
-------------------- You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
Shins
Fun guy



Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
|
Everyone should sue women's only gyms for discrimination!
|
ReposadoXochipilli
Here, there, inbetween



Registered: 08/30/05
Posts: 7,501
Loc: Sand and sunshine
Last seen: 19 days, 21 hours
|
Re: Federal vs. Oregon...GAYS! [Re: koods]
#21910315 - 07/07/15 03:55 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
I love how all the tards crying special privilege have dropped out of the thread, I mean how can you get a perspective that maligned?
--------------------
|
koods
Ribbit



Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,062
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 6 minutes, 23 seconds
|
Re: Federal vs. Oregon...GAYS! [Re: Shins]
#21910328 - 07/07/15 03:58 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Shins said: Everyone should sue women's only gyms for discrimination!
You might have a case
--------------------
NotSheekle said “if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
Shins
Fun guy



Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
Re: Federal vs. Oregon...GAYS! [Re: koods]
#21910333 - 07/07/15 03:59 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Lol yeah right.
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: Federal vs. Oregon...GAYS! [Re: Shins]
#21910340 - 07/07/15 04:02 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Shins said: Everyone should sue women's only gyms for discrimination!
Everybody should point out to liberals that telling people what to believe and how to act and think, is as stupid as conservatives telling people what to believe and how to act and think.
Two sides of the same coin. The main difference seems to be liberals are more likely to resort to force.
Those telling others what to believe and how to act and think are contemptible.
-------------------- You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
|