Gay Pride flag flown from embassy

[breakingcontact]

So back to our embassy employees choosing to flaunt a particular perversion in the face of another nation...

Radical Mormon can raise the "polygamist" flag next I guess?

Not sure why some folks have a hard time determining that all lifestyles aren't ones to be proud of. Some are better and more worthy of respect than others.

 

[sonuvaTXgun]

Not sure why some folks have a hard time determining that all lifestyles aren't ones to be proud of. Some are better and more worthy of respect than others.

Example?

 

[franzas]

Example?

Being straight.

 

[azkcr]

Being straight.

Whoop

 

[sonuvaTXgun]

Being straight.

Whoop

I second that motion.

 

[Mreed911]

Not sure why some folks have a hard time determining that all lifestyles aren't ones to be proud of. Some are better and more worthy of respect than others.

Absent a religious imperative, what makes a loving and committed homosexual relationship less respectful than a heterosexual one? Or an abusive heterosexual relationship?

If we're going to base the argument on an inclusion of a particular religion, we need to account for ALL religions (and NO religion), too.

 

[NavyVet1959]

So back to our embassy employees choosing to flaunt a particular perversion in the face of another nation...

Radical Mormon can raise the "polygamist" flag next I guess?

Not sure why some folks have a hard time determining that all lifestyles aren't ones to be proud of. Some are better and more worthy of respect than others.

I actually do not have a problem with "plural marriages". Well, other than the fact that a guy has to be crazy to want to associate with more than one woman. It's a bad enough stress on your brain just trying to make sense of ONE woman, I'm pretty sure having to deal with multiple would cause me to go crazy. But, we should not outlaw "crazy".

But for the perversion that we're speaking about in this topic, I have a problem with it and it is not because I'm a religious person (I'm not).

 

[breakingcontact]

Absent a religious imperative, what makes a loving and committed homosexual relationship less respectful than a heterosexual one? Or an abusive heterosexual relationship?

If we're going to base the argument on an inclusion of a particular religion, we need to account for ALL religions (and NO religion), too.

Not arguing to argue. It never ends. Not wasting my time with it. If you cant discern right from wrong and good from bad, thats on you.

Im not afraid of choosing sides and im sick of this milquetoast business.

 

[sonuvaTXgun]

if you cant discern right from wrong and good from bad, thats on you.

this.

-pak-

 

[Mreed911]

Not arguing to argue. It never ends. Not wasting my time with it. If you cant discern right from wrong and good from bad, thats on you.

Im not afraid of choosing sides and im sick of this milquetoast business.

But that's exactly my point. We get upset about "milquetoast" approaches to "sensible gun control" from some, yet we take the same hardline position they do on a different issue that's also constitutionally protected. You don't have to agree with it or like it to understand that from a personal rights and freedoms position it's the right position to have.

"Right and wrong" are subjective - exactly the reason there's not a delineation provided. I have my own beliefs on what practicing satanism will lead to after death... but those beliefs don't trump a satanist's right to practice their religion the same way I'm allowed to practice mine (and others are allowed to decline to practice).

I have no interest in homosexual sex or a homosexual relationship. I might even believe it's immoral, "sinful" or something else... but that belief doesn't trump their Constitutional right to liberty and the pursuit of happiness and equal protection under the law as heterosexual couples since we've in effect transformed marriage from a religious ceremony to a government-licensed function with special benefits and treatments.

Just as there is no right to gay marriage in the Constitution, there's no right to marriage, period, explicitly. Aside from a religious ceremony, marriage is now a contractual event presided over by an official licensed by a state to oversee those contract acceptances and the courts are set up to dissolve those contracts. Once it becomes a government function all bets are off.

Just like you don't like gay marriage, others don't like your ability to own guns. Each side has the right to not like it... and nothing more.

 

[azkcr]

Saying that I have a hard stance on gay marriage is similar to them having a hard stance on gun control is not similar.
Gun ownership is constitutionally protected.
Marriage is not and (originally) the government had nothing to do with it.

Is it their right to do what they want with their corn hole? Sure, I'd rather they didn't. But it's their life and right to it.
The marriage part is where you lose me...

 

[Mreed911]

Now that marriage is a government function it's open to all. Had it remained just "a church thing" it would be up to each individual congregation. When elected judges can marry folks, different story.

 

[AcidFlashGordon]

Better add Dearborn Michigan to that list. Supposedly the largest concentration of Muslims outside the sandbox/Middle East there - or maybe it's just in America, I'll have to check. Either way there's a -lot- of 'em up there, and it shows.

Yep. Dearborn is close to going over to the dark side.

Muslims Demanding Their Own Sharia Patrols in Michigan | Wizbang

 

[Sapper740]

Not arguing to argue. It never ends. Not wasting my time with it. If you cant discern right from wrong and good from bad, thats on you.

Im not afraid of choosing sides and im sick of this milquetoast business.

Well said BC. There are lots of thing in this world to expend one's energy on promoting. I'll expend a lot of my energy on promoting God and the Constitution. Whether or not two felchers can have a state sanctioned marriage is WAAAAAAY down on my list of priorities.

 

[sonuvaTXgun]

Whether or not two felchers can have a state sanctioned marriage is WAAAAAAY down on my list of priorities.

Agreed. We have far more pressing, tangible issues to worry about at the moment.

 

[NavyVet1959]

This particular perversion's activists are trying to get society to accept it. What makes people think that it will end there? What will be the next perversion that the leftist media will try to make us accept? Will it be pedophilia? Will it be bestiality? What about necrophilia? Where do we stop? There's a lot of different perversions out there and given time, I suspect that they all will want to be "accepted".

List of paraphilias - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[sonuvaTXgun]

This particular perversion's activists are trying to get society to accept it. What makes people think that it will end there? What will be the next perversion that the leftist media will try to make us accept? Will it be pedophilia? Will it be bestiality? What about necrophilia? Where do we stop? There's a lot of different perversions out there and given time, I suspect that they all will want to be "accepted".

List of paraphilias - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

After homosexuality comes polygamy. The progressives are hard are work.

 

[Mreed911]

After homosexuality comes polygamy. The progressives are hard are work.

Wait, I'm confused. Polygamy is biblical. Abraham? David? Solomon?

 

[azkcr]

That's old testament. Not new

 

[sonuvaTXgun]

Wait, I'm confused. Polygamy is biblical. Abraham? David? Solomon?

I never said it was right. Most of the stories in the Bible, especially old testament are shared to teach a lesson. Not to promote those atrocities. Also, those kind of acts occurred before Jesus' time and were much more prevalent. The old testament was full of rough times all around.