Author Topic: Westboro Church - Most hated family in America (Read 7656 times)

Kumquat · May 15, 2012, 11:18:01 PM

Well goodbye hour of my life.

Ad Bot · Advertisement

uno_da_cat · May 15, 2012, 11:18:48 PM

Quote from: Daedalus on May 15, 2012, 11:15:44 PM

it's pretty hard when mass amounts of them vote for bullstuff like illegalizing gay marriage

Okay? that is their opinion. Just like it is your opinion that it should be legal.

Firecycle · May 15, 2012, 11:18:51 PM

Come on, guys. They haven't done anything illegal. Yes, it they are extremely distasteful, no, I do not condone their actions, yes, some of the things they did became illegal later, but are you really going to stoop to their level?

Daedalus · May 15, 2012, 11:30:25 PM

Quote from: uno_da_cat on May 15, 2012, 11:18:48 PM

Okay? that is their opinion. Just like it is your opinion that it should be legal.

"certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. � That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, � That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

I couldn't give less of a forget what their opinion is, if it infringes on the pursuit of happiness and life of others.
wouldn't you agree that finding a partner in life is part of the pursuit of happiness?
they should not be allowed to bring in their bullstuff opinions into the government if they destroy others' pursuits of happiness.

uno_da_cat · May 15, 2012, 11:32:26 PM

Quote from: Daedalus on May 15, 2012, 11:30:25 PM

"certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. � That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, � That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."
I couldn't give less of a forget what their opinion is, if it infringes on the pursuit of happiness and life of others.
wouldn't you agree that finding a partner in life is part of the pursuit of happiness?
they should not be allowed to bring in their bullstuff opinions into the government if they destroy others' pursuits of happiness.

I support gay marriage bro, but you aren't gonna get anything by bashing on them. That just makes gay marriage supporters look bad too.

Firecycle · May 15, 2012, 11:32:49 PM

Quote from: Daedalus on May 15, 2012, 11:30:25 PM

"certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. � That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, � That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."
I couldn't give less of a forget what their opinion is, if it infringes on the pursuit of happiness and life of others.
wouldn't you agree that finding a partner in life is part of the pursuit of happiness?
they should not be allowed to bring in their bullstuff opinions into the government if they destroy others' pursuits of happiness.

Quote

There has never been marriage discrimination against those who engage in homoloveual activity or claim homoloveual orientation. They have always been free to marry with the same rights heteroloveuals have. Any "homoloveual" man is allowed to marry any woman who acquiesces. Any "homoloveual" woman is allowed to marry any man who acquiesces. These are the exact rights heteroloveuals have, so there is no discrimination whatsoever.

This isn't a discrimination issue, because there is no discrimination. The real crux of the matter is that certain people want to change the definition of marriage and force those who oppose homoloveuality to abide by their altered definition. Force? Yes. Once a government recognizes same-love marriage as legitimate, every law that includes marriage as a factor will be enforced with same-love couples in mind, whether we like it or not.

Do you have a private business that offers benefits to spouses? If same-love marriage is approved, then you will be forced to offer the same benefits to same-love spouses. And there are many similar laws that would force everyone to abide by this altered definition, even if it violates their religious beliefs or conscience.

The homoloveual agenda isn't asking for tolerance; it is demanding that everyone surrender to its version of morality (or lack thereof) and that it be enforced by rule of law.

For Christians, the fact is that our love for homoloveuals causes us to disapprove of their choices. We don't want people we love to be trapped in behavior that will lead them to destruction. Our stand is one of love, love that compels us to exhort people to come out of their self-destructive lifestyle.

Government recognition of a homoloveual lifestyle as normal and the forcing of all to abide by that recognition will work to lock "homoloveuals" in that prison. Acceptance from others, even forced acceptance, leads to acceptance from within, and they will see no reason to try to escape from their bondage to their deviant lusts.

The ideal situation would be for the government to stay completely out of defining and enforcing marriage. In other words, the powers should have no say in the matter as long as they refrain from enforcing a definition of marriage on anyone. If I don't agree that a particular couple is really married, the law should not force me to accept it in my personal or business life. But as long as the government is enforcing a definition, it is essential that marriage remain between one man and one woman, period.

Shortcut · May 15, 2012, 11:34:15 PM

This just in: DLC for Assassins Creed 3 will feature Desmond hunting down and eliminating the Westboro Baptist Church members for associating with Templars.

Firecycle · May 15, 2012, 11:36:03 PM

Quote from: Shortcut on May 15, 2012, 11:34:15 PM

This just in: DLC for Assassins Creed 3 will feature Desmond hunting down and eliminating the Westboro Baptist Church members for associating with Templars.

I don't play Assassins Creed, but I thought the Templars had some amount of subtlety.

uno_da_cat · May 15, 2012, 11:37:28 PM

Quote from: Firecycle on May 15, 2012, 11:32:49 PM

Wall of Text

At first some of that made sense. Then the rest sounded like total bullstuff.

Daedalus · May 15, 2012, 11:38:49 PM

Quote from: Firecycle on May 15, 2012, 11:32:49 PM

"self-destructive lifestyle"?
that's disgusting.
where's that quote from?
and the government wasn't enforcing a definition of marriage in ANY country until idiots back in Rome decided to petition to ban homoloveual marriage. since then, it's been varied between countries.
our declaration of independence literally does not allow for infringement upon the pursuit of happiness.
whoever wrote that quote obviously doesn't quite understand how homoloveuality works, if they actually believe that it's fair to say that "any "homoloveual" man is allowed to marry any woman".

Destroyer · May 15, 2012, 11:40:59 PM

Quote from: uno_da_cat on May 15, 2012, 11:12:31 PM

Or you could just ignore them. Its not as hard as you think.

Imagine one of your close family members passed away. Now imagine these people showing up to the funeral celebrating it.

Qwepir · May 15, 2012, 11:42:40 PM

Quote from: Firecycle on May 15, 2012, 11:32:49 PM

Any "homoloveual" man is allowed to marry any woman who acquiesces. Any "homoloveual" woman is allowed to marry any man who acquiesces.

I take back what I said before. This is the stupidest stuff I have ever read.

Also fun fact, interfamilial marriage is legal in more states than same-love.

uno_da_cat · May 15, 2012, 11:48:29 PM

Quote from: Destroyer on May 15, 2012, 11:40:59 PM

Imagine one of your close family members passed away. Now imagine these people showing up to the funeral celebrating it.

I witnessed it already, yeah it made a lot of people angry. But if you hit any of them you're the starfish starting a fight at someone's funeral.

Qwepir · May 15, 2012, 11:49:42 PM

Quote from: uno_da_cat on May 15, 2012, 11:48:29 PM

I witnessed it already, yeah it made a lot of people angry. But if you hit any of them you're the starfish starting a fight at someone's funeral.

"sorry officer my steering locked and brakes failed"

ultimamax · May 16, 2012, 12:12:59 AM

Quote from: Firecycle on May 15, 2012, 11:32:49 PM

You are literally handicapped. I will pick that apart now. Where the forget did you get this from, Fox news?

Quote

There has never been marriage discrimination against those who engage in homoloveual activity or claim homoloveual orientation. They have always been free to marry with the same rights heteroloveuals have. Any "homoloveual" man is allowed to marry any woman who acquiesces. Any "homoloveual" woman is allowed to marry any man who acquiesces. These are the exact rights heteroloveuals have, so there is no discrimination whatsoever. Yet, heteroloveuals are allowed to marry a loveual partner, and homoloveuals are not? These are not the same rights, and you know well they aren't. They aren't allowed to marry despite being two consenting adults. The forget?

This isn't a discrimination issue, because there is no discrimination. The real crux of the matter is that certain people want to change the definition of marriage and force those who oppose homoloveuality to abide by their altered definition. Force? Yes. Once a government recognizes same-love marriage as legitimate, every law that includes marriage as a factor will be enforced with same-love couples in mind, whether we like it or not. The fact you oppose something people can't help being born with is, in fact, discrimination. They are born gay and should not be punished for that. This paragraph acts as though gay marriage somehow affects everyone, when in reality they just want the benefits that they deserve.

Do you have a private business that offers benefits to spouses? If same-love marriage is approved, then you will be forced to offer the same benefits to same-love spouses. And there are many similar laws that would force everyone to abide by this altered definition, even if it violates their religious beliefs or conscience. Marriage predates Christianity and most homophobic religion. It's been recognized in Greek and Roman mythology, and the fact that it could be against someone's conscience strikes me as odd.

The homoloveual agenda isn't asking for tolerance; it is demanding that everyone surrender to its version of morality (or lack thereof) and that it be enforced by rule of law. It's not demanding rights from anyone, it's only GIVING other people rights. You should not be affected in any way, despite knowing gay people can get married.

For Christians, the fact is that our love for homoloveuals causes us to disapprove of their choices. We don't want people we love to be trapped in behavior that will lead them to destruction. Our stand is one of love, love that compels us to exhort people to come out of their self-destructive lifestyle. Homoloveuality is something you are born with, and to claim it's destructive behavior is stupid. This is just a cover up for bigoted hate. Love is the opposite.

Government recognition of a homoloveual lifestyle as normal and the forcing of all to abide by that recognition will work to lock "homoloveuals" in that prison. Acceptance from others, even forced acceptance, leads to acceptance from within, and they will see no reason to try to escape from their bondage to their deviant lusts. It's not "forced acceptance", you can actively hate gay people all you want. You don't have to provide service for them in your stores. You can hate them. They just deserve basic human rights, one of which is marriage to your partner.

The ideal situation would be for the government to stay completely out of defining and enforcing marriage. In other words, the powers should have no say in the matter as long as they refrain from enforcing a definition of marriage on anyone. If I don't agree that a particular couple is really married, the law should not force me to accept it in my personal or business life. But as long as the government is enforcing a definition, it is essential that marriage remain between one man and one woman, period.
Marriage should be government regulated. There are 1200 rights that people get when they are married. It's very important. For example, let's say a gay couple can't get married. One of them is injured. (they will be A) The other, who is not legally a relative/partner with the person, takes them to the ER. (they will be B) The doctor doesn't have to listen to B because they are not legally related, which could have lots of results. Here's a full list of the rights they are missing.