The Perils of Political Propaganda: Mass Hysteria over Indiana

Nazaroo

New member
It's impossible to explain the principal and importance of equality under the law, to bigots, because they fundamentally do not believe in it. They believe they should have the right to mistreat others according to their liking, because they believe they are the superior beings, and as the superior beings, they have the right to do as they please to their inferiors. And what's surprising is that they don't even see this in themselves. The presumption of their own superiority is so complete that it's invisible to them, like the air they breath.


Once again you have it upside down and backwards.

There IS no equality possible except under the system of Christianity.

The fact that even Christian denominations and cults often fail to achieve this perfection
just shows how difficult it is.

Why?

Because sin is involved, not bigotry.


You can't have "equality" for lawbreakers, such as murderers or rapists.

Equality only applies to law abiding citizens,
and for it to work, we have to agree on what the law is.

The reason there is a controversy over equality for homosexuals,
is that a large part of the population regards homosexuality as a crime.

One thing 'law abiding' homosexuals and Christians can agree upon,
if they are truly 'pro-community' and pro-rights of children,
is that pedophilia and child molestation and the attempt to brainwash children
to accept molestation by adults is still a crime under ANY system.

In that case, pedophiles and 'educators' like the NAMBLA group are still criminals,
and so have sacrificed their "equal rights" under the law when found guilty,
whether they are homosexuals or not.

There is a fundamental difference between arguing for 'equality' for
racial groups or gender, and arguing for 'freedom to pursue sexual deviancy'.

No one can effectively choose their ethnic origin or sex,
and even if this can be medically 'modified' its too expensive for 99.9% of the population.

Thus its wrong to solve the problem of racism or gender-bias by simply
altering someone's race or gender, because you can't provide EQUALITY,
due to economic restraints. The best way then, is for people to simply
accept race and gender as legitimate categories for pursuing equality
in some other way, such as social acceptance.

The problem with 'Equality' for sexual preference, is that it involves criminal law.

Those who oppose the criminalization of sexual perversion already
a priori reject that the law and moral and ethical standards are sourced
from and imposed by God. Instead, they deny there is a God who cares
and imposes morality upon humankind, and they reject laws and criminal codes
which the majority of humankind accepts.

Thus there is a fundamental division between people:

Those who believe in a moral and ethical God who teaches moral behaviour
and imposes laws and obligations upon us,

and those who do not accept the existance and ethical standards of
a God who interferes in history.

There can be no equality as long as these two parties exist,
because they fundamentally embrace different legal and criminal codes.

Homosexuals cannot find "equality" in the criminal code of God-believers,
and God-believers find an EQUAL amount of bigotry, prejudice and hostility
from unbelievers who want to impose a radically more lax legal and criminal code upon everyone.

The end result is that
where non-believers have more power,

they interfere with believers' rights to raise and educate their own children,
and their rights to practice their religion and have their own criminal code,
and legal code.

Where believers have more power,
they will interfere with non-believers' "rights" to engage in activities
which are crimes under the believers' criminal code and legal laws.

There can never be a system which actually embraces both groups,
and provides equality between them.


In every case, someone must ultimately choose which laws or criminal code
will be enforced, and which one will not be enforced.

Mixed criminal codes and legal codes do not and cannot provide "equality" either
between groups of different sexual preference, because the two groups
have fundamentally opposing criminal codes.

This is not a question of bigotry, or lack of education, or confusion,
or ignorance, but a question of conflicting ideologies,
and branding either group as 'bigots' is a disengenious falsehood, and slander,
under BOTH criminal codes.
 

shagster01

New member
The reason there is a controversy over equality for homosexuals,
is that a large part of the population regards homosexuality as a crime.


This is simply not true. A large amount may find it gross. Certainly a large amount don't support same sex marriage.

But only a very small amount think homosexuality is criminal.
 

Town Heretic

Out of Order
Hall of Fame
Does anyone want to actually read SB 101?
I did. Did you read the part where corporations can have religious views? :plain: Should those corporations have to go to church and pay tithes?


OK, but as gays are so favored now on a huge, massive, corporate and cultural scale, these provisions are needed. :jawdrop:
Favored in what practical, meaningful sense? I'm curious about where that comes from and what it means to you.
 

Quincy

New member
So, basically, this law is about giving people the liberty to avoid having to do something they don't want to do based on faith, which happens to includes providing services to homosexuals (or abortionists, Muslims, or the opposite since the law would go both ways and isn't just for Christians) .

The fact that it goes both ways is what interest me. I would love to see a business have the bravery to turn it around and say along the lines of "I refuse to serve socially conservative Christians, Catholics, opposite-sex couples, vegetarians, meat eaters, etc etc."

I find it peculiar that with a law so board in definition and scope, that the only thing people care about is gay marriage, at least as far as media coverage goes. Of all the things that this would enable people to refuse service over, it all goes ignored besides the SCCs vs. Gays battle.

Imagine if you went into a store and someone declined your patronage because their religion speaks against graven images and you have a few tattoos? It could happen under these laws but no one would do it. Yet, with homosexuals, it's a big damn thing. Very interesting and telling of how people obsess over one thing.
 

Town Heretic

Out of Order
Hall of Fame
So, basically, this law is about giving people the liberty to avoid having to do something they don't want to do based on faith, which happens to includes providing services to homosexuals (or abortionists, Muslims, or the opposite since the law would go both ways and isn't just for Christians) .

The fact that it goes both ways is what interest me. I would love to see a business have the bravery to turn it around and say along the lines of "I refuse to serve socially conservative Christians, Catholics, opposite-sex couples, vegetarians, meat eaters, etc etc."

Imagine if you went into a store and someone declined your patronage because their religion speaks against graven images and you have a few tattoos? .
And so it came to pass: ex uno plures. :plain:
 

PureX

Well-known member
So, basically, this law is about giving people the liberty to avoid having to do something they don't want to do based on faith, which happens to includes providing services to homosexuals (or abortionists, Muslims, or the opposite since the law would go both ways and isn't just for Christians) .

The fact that it goes both ways is what interest me. I would love to see a business have the bravery to turn it around and say along the lines of "I refuse to serve socially conservative Christians, Catholics, opposite-sex couples, vegetarians, meat eaters, etc etc."

I find it peculiar that with a law so board in definition and scope, that the only thing people care about is gay marriage, at least as far as media coverage goes. Of all the things that this would enable people to refuse service over, it all goes ignored besides the SCCs vs. Gays battle.

Imagine if you went into a store and someone declined your patronage because their religion speaks against graven images and you have a few tattoos? It could happen under these laws but no one would do it. Yet, with homosexuals, it's a big damn thing. Very interesting and telling of how people obsess over one thing.
Gays are the 'bogey-man du jure' of 2015 for conservative Christians. It could just as easily have been blacks, or Jews, or Muslims, or atheists, or satanists, or even each other. As it has been in the past and very likely will be again. But for today, it's the gays. Because there always has to be a bogey-man: a scape-goat to blame and be better than.
 

The Barbarian

BANNED
Banned
Christians vastly outnumber people of any other pesuasion. Moreover, a large number of homosexuals are Christians.

It would be an historic first, if the people holding all the power in a society were persecuted by a minority not holding all the power.

Some people desperately need to feel that they are being persecuted. Segregationists used to claim they were being persecuted when they could no longer abuse black people, which they claimed was their historic right.

No one actually believes that kind of thing; it's just a way of trying to derail the conversation.
 

GFR7

New member
Favored in what practical, meaningful sense? I'm curious about where that comes from and what it means to you.
In the sense that gays and gay marriage enjoy massive popular support, according to the polls; in the sense that media, sports, and entertainment increasingly celebrate them; in the sense that over 400 mega corporations wrote to the Supreme Court justices indicating that same sex marriage should be made legal in all 50 states; in the sense that public schools and Universities have programs and campaigns which fully support gay rights on all levels; in the sense that the President and his Administration speak out to the public and SCOTUS in favor of gay rights; in the sense that many churches and religious leaders have become pro-LGBTQ; in the sense that those who favor traditional marriage and morality are openly labeled as haters, hate groups, and bigots.
 

The Barbarian

BANNED
Banned
In the sense that gays and gay marriage enjoy massive popular support, according to the polls; in the sense that media, sports, and entertainment increasingly celebrate them; in the sense that over 400 mega corporations wrote to the Supreme Court justices indicating that same sex marriage should be made legal in all 50 states; in the sense that public schools and Universities have programs and campaigns which fully support gay rights on all levels; in the sense that the President and his Administration speak out to the public and SCOTUS in favor of gay rights; in the sense that many churches and religious leaders have become pro-LGBTQ; in the sense that those who favor traditional marriage and morality are openly labeled as haters, hate groups, and bigots.

Well, let's take a look...

In the sense that Jewish people and Jewish marriage enjoy massive popular support, according to the polls; in the sense that media, sports, and entertainment increasingly celebrate them; in the sense that over 400 mega corporations wrote to the Supreme Court justices indicating that same Jewish marriage should be made legal in all 50 states; in the sense that public schools and Universities have programs and campaigns which fully support Jewish rights on all levels; in the sense that the President and his Administration speak out to the public and SCOTUS in favor of Jewish rights; in the sense that many churches and religious leaders have become pro-Israel; in the sense that those who favor Christians are openly labeled as haters, hate groups, and bigots.

Do you see anything enlightening in this?
 

GFR7

New member
Well, let's take a look...

In the sense that Jewish people and Jewish marriage enjoy massive popular support, according to the polls; in the sense that media, sports, and entertainment increasingly celebrate them; in the sense that over 400 mega corporations wrote to the Supreme Court justices indicating that same Jewish marriage should be made legal in all 50 states; in the sense that public schools and Universities have programs and campaigns which fully support Jewish rights on all levels; in the sense that the President and his Administration speak out to the public and SCOTUS in favor of Jewish rights; in the sense that many churches and religious leaders have become pro-Israel; in the sense that those who favor Christians are openly labeled as haters, hate groups, and bigots.

Do you see anything enlightening in this?
No. I don't. Gays are not a suspect class and need no special protections.
 

annabenedetti

like marbles on glass
In the sense that gays and gay marriage enjoy massive popular support, according to the polls; in the sense that media, sports, and entertainment increasingly celebrate them; in the sense that over 400 mega corporations wrote to the Supreme Court justices indicating that same sex marriage should be made legal in all 50 states; in the sense that public schools and Universities have programs and campaigns which fully support gay rights on all levels; in the sense that the President and his Administration speak out to the public and SCOTUS in favor of gay rights;

And?

in the sense that many churches and religious leaders have become pro-LGBTQ
If you attend church, it makes sense to go to a church that matches your beliefs.

in the sense that those who favor traditional marriage and morality are openly labeled as haters, hate groups, and bigots.
You can favor traditional marriage all you want, but if you're going to do it while or by being a bigot, expect to be called out on your bigotry.
 

shagster01

New member
In the sense that gays and gay marriage enjoy massive popular support...

Naz just said the opposite.

He said massive amounts of people view homosexuality as a crime.


The anti-gay crowd says whatever makes their argument better at the time.
 

The Barbarian

BANNED
Banned
No. I don't. Gays are not a suspect class and need no special protections.

They certainly deserve the same protections as others. Seems as though a huge number of homosexual people are being attacked for no other reason than they are homosexual. And Jews are really no different than people of any other sort; they deserve the same rights and respect as anyone else.

One of the keys to a free society is that you can't take away rights and dignity from any group without taking it away from everyone. If any institution in that society is able to impose that on any group, then it has the same power to take your freedom as well.
 

PureX

Well-known member
Christians vastly outnumber people of any other pesuasion. Moreover, a large number of homosexuals are Christians.

It would be an historic first, if the people holding all the power in a society were persecuted by a minority not holding all the power.

Some people desperately need to feel that they are being persecuted. Segregationists used to claim they were being persecuted when they could no longer abuse black people, which they claimed was their historic right.

No one actually believes that kind of thing; it's just a way of trying to derail the conversation.
Actually, I think they really do believe it. I think they really do believe they are the one's being persecuted when they are being denied their traditional "right" and habit of persecuting others. Such is the depth of blindness caused by a damaged ego when it's seeking redress.

And I have no idea how to deal with this phenomena except to 'call it out' for what it is. Even though I know that rarely has any meaningful effect.
 

zoo22

Well-known member
I don't know. I for one, think it's too bad the homosexuals are keeping Christians from getting married. Is that even legal?

Plus, if the good and loving Christian folks like Stripe, aCW and Truster didn't have to spend so much of their time and energy not baking gay cakes and constantly explaining in detail to hellhound pervert pigs all about exactly what's in a homosexual's mind or what's happening in public restrooms, they could be enjoying life with their families or their dogs or rejoicing about folks suffering an eternity of damnation or whatnot. It's a real shame.
 
Last edited:

TracerBullet

New member
In the sense that gays and gay marriage enjoy massive popular support, according to the polls; in the sense that media, sports, and entertainment increasingly celebrate them; in the sense that over 400 mega corporations wrote to the Supreme Court justices indicating that same sex marriage should be made legal in all 50 states; in the sense that public schools and Universities have programs and campaigns which fully support gay rights on all levels; in the sense that the President and his Administration speak out to the public and SCOTUS in favor of gay rights; in the sense that many churches and religious leaders have become pro-LGBTQ; in the sense that those who favor traditional marriage and morality are openly labeled as haters, hate groups, and bigots.

Many are haters, hate groups, and/or bigots.When you campaign to prevent a minority from having eh same rights as you do, or work to vilify a minority, or complain that others aren't sharing in your prejudice then those labels fit
 

jgarden

BANNED
Banned
Let those in Indiana and Arkansas who don't want to serve "gays" in religious grounds take their case to the Supreme Court like other groups in the past who were willing to defy the law and had the courage of their convictions.
 
Top