Now Is The Time To Switch Back To Firefox

griff30

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 15, 2000
Messages
6,263
The point is the "changing the definition of marriage" argument is bullshit because there is no standard definition of marriage, not even in the bible. We choose what words mean.

We chose what words mean?
Just to use your own tactics against you, should we keep calling black people.. Ni66@rs and simply say that "it has a different meaning now!"?

I mean using the race card seems fine for your guys and you want to keep "same words, different meanings"

I am saying that if you guys want to suck cock fine.

Just quit trying to force the view on everyone 9who may find it uncomfortable or even disgusting) and their churches.
Every fucking month, some LGBTARD from the Velvet Mafia goes up to the Pope and begs him to change cannon. They cannot. That is why it's called CANNON.

If you want a religion to accept it, create your own damn religion. People do it all the damn time.
You want to call a Civil Union a marriage, great. Just don't try to force people who don't believe in it to accept it.
How fucking hard is that to understand?
 

griff30

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 15, 2000
Messages
6,263
So are lesbians okay? If so, that's a very good start to being more open minded.

I'm plenty open minded newb. I've said before that I could care less if someone is gay. I don't think it's YOUR GODDAMNED JOB to FORCE others to see things the way YOU or YOUR party wants.

I thinks it great that you're gay. That's fine. If you want a man inside you, fine. Im okay with that.
I do not think it's OKAY with everyone and I defend my stance that I don't think it should forced to be a view accepted as NORMAL for everyone.
 

CreepyUncleGoogle

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 10, 2013
Messages
6,871
I'm plenty open minded newb. I've said before that I could care less if someone is gay. I don't think it's YOUR GODDAMNED JOB to FORCE others to see things the way YOU or YOUR party wants.

I thinks it great that you're gay. That's fine. If you want a man inside you, fine. Im okay with that.
I do not think it's OKAY with everyone and I defend my stance that I don't think it should forced to be a view accepted as NORMAL for everyone.

And its called a cellphone with autocorrect, Nazi.

You're doing an awful lot of name calling. :( Are you sure that's a good idea?
 

Zarathustra[H]

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
31,162
Just quit trying to force the view on everyone 9who may find it uncomfortable or even disgusting) and their churches.
Every fucking month, some LGBTARD from the Velvet Mafia goes up to the Pope and begs him to change cannon. They cannot. That is why it's called CANNON.

Tell that to the members of the second Vatican council.

Things can change as our understanding of the world does, and it must, or else the church becomes irrelevant in the modern world.

There's at least one major spiritual leader who seems to get this:



The church needs to realize that people are no longer willing to put up with any discrimination. All people must be treated equally, regardless of gender, race, sexuality or any other attribute. The current pope is the best to date, but even he is unwilling to go far enough.

What we need is a third Vatican council.

None of the discriminatory practices the church (or anyone else) preaches have a basis in the gospel. Sure if you dig through the old testament and some of the letters you can find evidence of discrimination, but this is not the "word of the lord" as the church believes it. The New Testament overturns and makes the old testament obsolete, so none of it matters, and in the New Testament the gospel is the only word of god.

Essentially, all I am saying is most of church canon is based on human philosophy within the church, not on the "word of god" himself if you believe in such things, and as such, it can change.
 

griff30

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 15, 2000
Messages
6,263
I'm agreeing with you. I just think gay sex and interracial sex is gross and we should make them illegal.

You are not agreeing with me.
You are using straw man arguments or poorly performed sarcasm to further your point.

Interracial sex should be illegal?. So you think I should be outlawed as a mixbreed or mongrel?
Are you saying you think I am gross?
Fine Im cool with that. Its your opinion. You may seriously think its not racist. I could care less.

You think gay sex should be illegal? You may seriously think that, I could care less.

I am NOT going to try to force my opinion on you and I don't think others should either. I am defending you, however I don't agree with your opinion.

I do not think others who think gay marriage is normal should force you to accept that.
Its probably against your religious upbringing or something.
 

griff30

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 15, 2000
Messages
6,263
Zarathustra[H];1040790444 said:
What we need is a third Vatican council.

Okay, are you Roman Catholic? Then that argument is relevant.

If not then Buddhism, as you pointed out, might just be for you.

If The Dalai Lama changes his rules and is allowed, fine. DONT TRY TO FORCE HIM.
How hard is it for you guys to understand?

You cannot force your view on others just because it "feels right" or it's politically correct.
 

jimmyb

2[H]4U
Joined
May 24, 2006
Messages
3,165
You cannot force your view on others just because it "feels right" or it's politically correct.

Yes you can. All the following were "forced" on vocal opponents quite successfully through very public protest and demonstration:
* End of prohibition
* End of slavery
* Universal suffrage
* Civil rights

The list goes on
 

maverikv

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 31, 2003
Messages
1,992
Okay, are you Roman Catholic? Then that argument is relevant.

If not then Buddhism, as you pointed out, might just be for you.

If The Dalai Lama changes his rules and is allowed, fine. DONT TRY TO FORCE HIM.
How hard is it for you guys to understand?

You cannot force your view on others just because it "feels right" or it's politically correct.

Don't you see how paying money to make gay marriage illegal is forcing your view on others?
 

Stiletto

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 13, 2008
Messages
6,433
Don't you see how paying money to make gay marriage illegal is forcing your view on others?

Don't you see that, by your logic, paying money to make gay marriage legal is forcing your view on others? The ol' lie of omission. Accuse your opponent of that which you know you do yourself, but keep the focus on them because fuck them. Yeah, that's how peaceful society and rational debate are achieved.
 
Joined
Jul 3, 2013
Messages
14
I once wondered that if the government came out today and said "no more gov benefits just for being married" what the decline rate of people getting married would be?

I just don't see why the government doesn't rename their "Marriage" benefits to "2 consenting humans in a legal contract with one another" benefits.

Boom, you get to keep your "marriage" word and everyone that doesn't care about the word "marriage" can still get government benefits..



On a more related note, doesn't the U.S. see a corporation as a person? If so, if the collective of said corporation disagrees with an employee's stance, wouldn't that be the corporations right to "free speech" and choose not to employ someone with those beliefs? Much like any person can choose to like or not like people with different views? I type that and feel like I am missing a higher point though..
 

maverikv

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 31, 2003
Messages
1,992
Don't you see that, by your logic, paying money to make gay marriage legal is forcing your view on others? The ol' lie of omission. Accuse your opponent of that which you know you do yourself, but keep the focus on them because fuck them. Yeah, that's how peaceful society and rational debate are achieved.

You sound tired
 

jimmyb

2[H]4U
Joined
May 24, 2006
Messages
3,165
Don't you see that, by your logic, paying money to make gay marriage legal is forcing your view on others?
At most it's forcing a "view" (whatever that means); it does not compel anyone to believe or do anything. Whereas if it's illegal it restricts the ability of people to do something they want to do.
 

InternationalHat

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 13, 2004
Messages
1,481
What a monumental who gives a shit moment in time. I'm going to celebrate by not reading the article.

I was slightly curious why this thread was 13 pages and then saw it was the usual suspects arguing about gays. Awesome job guys.
 

griff30

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 15, 2000
Messages
6,263
Don't you see how paying money to make gay marriage illegal is forcing your view on others?

You are now talking about proposition 8? From nearly a decade ago? that was overturned? As in, it is HISTORY?
Someone had an opinion of this (closely divided) proposition and we should deport or send to jail half of those who voted or supported this?

Because they supported something that eventually went the way you wanted and is no longer law?
Are you from California?
Do you even lift bro?
 

maverikv

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 31, 2003
Messages
1,992
You are now talking about proposition 8? From nearly a decade ago? that was overturned? As in, it is HISTORY?
Someone had an opinion of this (closely divided) proposition and we should deport or send to jail half of those who voted or supported this?

Because they supported something that eventually went the way you wanted and is no longer law?
Are you from California?
Do you even lift bro?

Deport / Send to Jail? WTF are you smoking?
 

CreepyUncleGoogle

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Mar 10, 2013
Messages
6,871
Preferred browser arguments are a lot more interesting than they used to be now that political discussions are a super important part of the discussion here. :D

It's really amazing to see people blow gaskets about their penis in a thread about Firefox.
 

griff30

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 15, 2000
Messages
6,263
I like how those of the "party of progress" on here seem to think it's "freedom of speech" as long as your opinion coincides with them.
If you're opinion is contrary, your opinions are "racist", "bigoted", "treasonous" or even "tired".

Next will be a Mr straw man argument or he will say I'm a stupid, "gross" mulatto because I don't think others opinions should be shoved down someone's throat. Like religions.
 

griff30

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 15, 2000
Messages
6,263
Zarathustra[H];1040790444 said:
What we need is a third Vatican council.
.

Once again, I ask, are you Roman Catholic?
Is that even relevant to you?
That would be a fine thing if you were. But I am now doubting that you are.

So you would think the Pope needs to answer to YOU? Who may not even be Roman catholic?

Nice.

Once again people feel they are entitled to force views on someone.
 

Zarathustra[H]

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
31,162
Once again, I ask, are you Roman Catholic?
Is that even relevant to you?
That would be a fine thing if you were. But I am now doubting that you are.

So you would think the Pope needs to answer to YOU? Who may not even be Roman catholic?

Nice.

Once again people feel they are entitled to force views on someone.

Born and raised catholic. Not necessarily very active anymore due to my many disagreements with the church.

I'm exactly the type of person they need to not drive away. :p
 

maverikv

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 31, 2003
Messages
1,992
I like how those of the "party of progress" on here seem to think it's "freedom of speech" as long as your opinion coincides with them.
If you're opinion is contrary, your opinions are "racist", "bigoted", "treasonous" or even "tired".

Next will be a Mr straw man argument or he will say I'm a stupid, "gross" mulatto because I don't think others opinions should be shoved down someone's throat. Like religions.

This has nothing to do with freedom of speech. This is about the free market. The free market reacted to what Eich chose to freely do. Eich is not in prison for what he did. If you don't like the free market that's your own problem, commie.
 

Zarathustra[H]

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
31,162
Don't you see that, by your logic, paying money to make gay marriage legal is forcing your view on others? The ol' lie of omission. Accuse your opponent of that which you know you do yourself, but keep the focus on them because fuck them. Yeah, that's how peaceful society and rational debate are achieved.

Not really.

By paying money to support making gay marriage illegal, you are discriminating against and hurting millions of Americans.

By supporting the effort to make gay marriage legal, you are having no direct impact on those who don't support it. No one is forcing them to marry someone of the same sex.

One is a policy of treating people you disagree with as second class citizens, and is not acceptable in the modern world. The other does not impact people at all.

The fact that gay people are allowed to marry, has no impact what so ever on straight marriage. It's a ridiculous argument.
 

griff30

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 15, 2000
Messages
6,263
This has nothing to do with freedom of speech. This is about the free market. The free market reacted to what Eich chose to freely do. Eich is not in prison for what he did. If you don't like the free market that's your own problem, commie.

Free market capitalism with an open source browser? I think you need to go back to school.

On the other hand.
Now Im a gross, bigoted, racist mulatto, and now a commie.
You "guys" are good. Keep it coming.
 

Zarathustra[H]

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
31,162
I like how those of the "party of progress" on here seem to think it's "freedom of speech" as long as your opinion coincides with them.
If you're opinion is contrary, your opinions are "racist", "bigoted", "treasonous" or even "tired".

Next will be a Mr straw man argument or he will say I'm a stupid, "gross" mulatto because I don't think others opinions should be shoved down someone's throat. Like religions.

For the 20th time in this thread, let's discuss what "Freedom of Speech" as documented by the first amendment to the constitution really is.

It protects you from the government persecuting you for your speech. It DOES NOT protect you from any other consequences of your speech. If you say shit your employer dislikes, especially if you are in a prominent visible position and said opinion may hurt the organization it is perfectly legal and constitutional for them to fire you.

It's similar to if you were walking around spouting off shit about women belonging in the kitchen in a work environment, or not liking black people, you would probably be canned.

The first amendment ONLY applies to government/legal persecution. NOTHING ELSE.
 

Zarathustra[H]

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 29, 2000
Messages
31,162
Free market capitalism with an open source browser? I think you need to go back to school.

Just because the supporters of an open source project donate their time, doesn't mean it operates in any less of a free market. In a free market, people are free to ask what they want for their services, including nothing at all :p
 

maverikv

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 31, 2003
Messages
1,992
Zarathustra[H];1040790617 said:
Just because the supporters of an open source project donate their time, doesn't mean it operates in any less of a free market. In a free market, people are free to ask what they want for their services, including nothing at all :p

Conservatives aren't mad because of freedom of speech. They are mad because its becoming less socially acceptable to be a bigot. If this was a story about a CEO resigning for donating to planned parenthood, nobody would care, including me. But my brain isn't powerd by quantum hypocrisy, so I guess that makes sense.
 

griff30

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 15, 2000
Messages
6,263
Zarathustra[H];1040790592 said:
Born and raised catholic. Not necessarily very active anymore due to my many disagreements with the church.

I'm exactly the type of person they need to not drive away. :p
Then I apologize and your comment is relevant.

Zarathustra[H];1040790602 said:
By supporting the effort to make gay marriage legal, you are having no direct impact on those who don't support it. No one is forcing them to marry someone of the same sex.
snip'd
The fact that gay people are allowed to marry, has no impact what so ever on straight marriage. It's a ridiculous argument.

Not here yet, but it has in the UK and in Canada.

Do you think it won't happen here?
That's funny. That's like thinking all politicians are honest and would never go astray.

I can agree that gay marriage has NO impact on straight marriage what so ever.. It WILL be open to a matter of time before churches here, are sued if they don't allow a gay marriage.
 

griff30

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 15, 2000
Messages
6,263
Conservatives aren't mad because of freedom of speech. They are mad because its becoming less socially acceptable to be a bigot. If this was a story about a CEO resigning for donating to planned parenthood, nobody would care, including me. But my brain isn't powerd by quantum hypocrisy, so I guess that makes sense.

Once again.

Blah, blah, blah BIGOT!

If it were a story of the CEO resigning for donating to a Right to Life, he would be shot in the street or senator give him a laborious 18 hour speech on why he is anti-woman's liberation.
 

Krenum

Fully [H]
Joined
Apr 29, 2005
Messages
16,402
Whatever, let people fuck each other in the ass or eat each others taco.

But don't fire a guy because he opposes it just because you think its kinky.
 

maverikv

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 31, 2003
Messages
1,992
Once again.

Blah, blah, blah BIGOT!

If it were a story of the CEO resigning for donating to a Right to Life, he would be shot in the street or senator give him a laborious 18 hour speech on why he is anti-woman's liberation.

The pro-choice people are the ones who get shot, friendo

And yes, if you support legislation to treat a group of people like second class citizens, you are a bigot. I'm sorry if that makes you uncomfortable, but if you don't want to be uncomfortable, you should maybe consider being less of a bigot.
 

Tawnos

2[H]4U
Joined
Sep 9, 2001
Messages
3,807
Whatever, let people fuck each other in the ass or eat each others taco.

But don't fire a guy because he opposes it just because you think its kinky.

He wasn't fired. He stepped down, likely under pressure from the board of directors. As a CEO, you are the face of the company. Acting in a manner that seeks to deny legal equality to a group of your employees can have consequences, like it did in this case. The government didn't come in and shut him down for his speech, others simply spoke up against him, saying that they do not support the products of a company led by a person who would use the law to discriminate against people.
 

griff30

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Jul 15, 2000
Messages
6,263
The government didn't come in and shut him down for his speech, others simply spoke up against him, saying that they do not support the products of a company led by a person who would use the law to discriminate against people.

Someone in the IRS (Government) outted him as a supporter.
Then the Velvet Mafia stepped in to bully and THEN he resigned.

So yes, the government came into the picture.
 
Top