Collarchat.com

Join Our Community
Collarchat.com

Home  Login  Search 

RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone Page: <<   < prev  44 45 [46] 47 48   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone - 4/8/2015 2:47:25 PM   
kdsub


Posts: 12180
Joined: 8/16/2007
Status: offline
Kirata to me voting to allow gambling is not targeting one group of people as this law did... there is a difference.

Butch

_____________________________

Mark Twain:

I don't see any use in having a uniform and arbitrary way of spelling words. We might as well make all clothes alike and cook all dishes alike. Sameness is tiresome; variety is pleasing

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 901
RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone - 4/8/2015 2:55:02 PM   
joether


Posts: 5195
Joined: 7/24/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata
quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub
Those that support a law that not only allows but encourages discrimination by sexual orientation can only be described as having an intense or passionate disliking of a group of people... the very definition of hate in my book...

I'm not entirely comfortable with your reasoning here. Legalized gambling can be and has been criticized for destroying lives, bank accounts, and families. Could people who vote to allow gambling in their state be accused of "hating families"? Can all the poor people in line to buy lottery tickets with money better spent on food and clothing for their kids be accused of "hating" their children?


What does gambling have to do with sexual orientation?

Or are you trying to have us believe that like gambling, sexual orientation that is non-heterosexual destroys lives, bank accounts, and families? NEWS FLASH: Same thing happens to heterosexuals. In fact, more often!

Why do poor people buy lottery tickets, Kirata? Did you ever spend time thinking on that one? The answer is 'No'. I can understand why a pseudo-Christian would have a hard time understanding the concept. Being selfish is a virtue to pseudo-Christians, but for everyone else, its a distasteful existence!

Poor people understand that there is little to no chance of improving their economic conditions in the immediate or long term struggle. That 'breaking even' is just a pairing of words that mean nothing to them. Yet, to live in a moment where they don't have to scrap nickles together to buy bread; instead haul off to the movies and buy their children food and drink.....would be amazing. To own a brand new car; paying cash for it; rather than a loan for a clunker that's 11 years old already. To live in a nice house, in a nice neighborhood, sending kids to a nice school, and relaxing alittle bit during the week....is something most poor people know of only in TV shows and movies.

They buy the lottery tickets in the hope things will change in their favor. They have the same hope of becoming rich as pseudo-Christians do of getting into Heaven. The difference is the poor are more likely to have their hopes realized by a wide margin!

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 902
RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone - 4/8/2015 3:09:27 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

Kirata to me voting to allow gambling is not targeting one group of people as this law did... there is a difference.

Gambling operations target the naive and the gullible. Are they irrelevant in your world?

K.


(in reply to kdsub)
Profile   Post #: 903
RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone - 4/8/2015 3:11:10 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

Did you ever spend time thinking on that one? The answer is 'No'. I can understand why a pseudo-Christian would have a hard time understanding the concept. Being selfish is a virtue to pseudo-Christians, but for everyone else, its a distasteful existence!

What the fuck is with this "Christian" theme you keep throwing at me?

K.





< Message edited by Kirata -- 4/8/2015 3:13:15 PM >

(in reply to joether)
Profile   Post #: 904
RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone - 4/8/2015 3:11:39 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
Anything else about me, besides being right all the time, that you find "fucking annoying"?

(in reply to joether)
Profile   Post #: 905
RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone - 4/8/2015 3:57:45 PM   
Politesub53


Posts: 14862
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53
quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata

Try me, bozo. Spell it out. Let's see what you've got.

I have already tried to educate you, not once not twice but over and over. You either dont get it or dont want to get it, either way you are arguing that a word, with meaning, has no meaning.

Read the top line of the link and educate yourself.

http://definitions.uslegal.com/h/homophobia/

Again you trot out a single source...

Homophobia includes hatred or fear of homosexuality. It is also defined as a desire or attempt to discriminate homosexuals.

But it also includes mere dislike, aversion, prejudice without discrimination, or see here for a full list. If it "can" mean any of a basket of things, how is anyone to judge whether or not it actually applies in a given instance? Or is the point to make it apply in any instance where somebody decides they want to use it?

Nor is there any comparison to the word "marriage," which has had a stable definition in the United States for centuries. Or is the point to make it apply in any instance where somebody decides they want to use it?

And just to be clear, my views on the subject have focused on the degree to which argument over the word marriage has in my opinion delayed gay rights, see here for example. Frankly, I think that holds true for both words. Because people who have not a shred of ill-will toward gays, and who supported legal recognition of gay unions with full rights a decade ago, have seen their views branded as hatred, fear, and prejudice (i.e., "homophobic") for the sole cause of their desire to preserve the cultural definition of marriage. Really?

And if you don't mind me responding to two posts in one...

quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

Read the following for the correct use of the word "homophobic"

I am sure those who say there is no such thing as gay hatred when talking about homophobia will have a fit.

http://www.collarchat.com/m_4106986/mpage_1/key_homophobic/tm.htm#

Well thanks, because I'm using the word there in the context of what I would judge to be a true phobia. My objection remains the way the word has been indiscriminately bandied as an accusation of hatred and intolerance when not everyone who ends up being beaten over the head with a charge of "homophobia" hates or fears gays or wishes them harm.

K.




Every source I have posted has been a single source, try adding them together and you will see they now become multiple..

Your objection is crass, considering we are talking about hatred of a certain group. That is wtf you should be offended about, hate filled bigotry.

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 906
RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone - 4/8/2015 5:47:51 PM   
kdsub


Posts: 12180
Joined: 8/16/2007
Status: offline
quote:

Gambling operations target the naive and the gullible. Are they irrelevant in your world?


Not if a casino owner decides gays cannot gamble because it is against his or hers religion.... Ridiculous... yes...just like your argument. The Gambling business targets all equally. You can use your argument for all business...for instance... The St. Louis Rams target the naive and gullible when they buy tickets to their games.... The same goes for the Chicago Cubs.

Butch

< Message edited by kdsub -- 4/8/2015 6:18:28 PM >


_____________________________

Mark Twain:

I don't see any use in having a uniform and arbitrary way of spelling words. We might as well make all clothes alike and cook all dishes alike. Sameness is tiresome; variety is pleasing

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 907
RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone - 4/8/2015 6:31:48 PM   
PeonForHer


Posts: 19612
Joined: 9/27/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

FR

For peon, who called this first.





I think that certain Christian church types are just demonstrating their compassion on this one, DC. After all, as someone has warmly and lovingly pointed out on this thread, being homosexual is a "lifestyle choice" - if you're gay, you could change and become heterosexual overnight *if you wanted to*. On the other hand - if you're fat, that's quite different. You are fat for life and fighting that is like fighting All the Forces of Satan. It can't be done. And this, you see, is why the Church is gentle on the sin of gluttony, whereas it comes down heavily and with nostrils breathing righteous frigging sulphorous fire on homosexuals.

Lordy, DC, how do you put up with these right wing Christians and their never ending self-serving flatulence and still remain a Christian? You have way more staying power than I.

_____________________________

http://www.domme-chronicles.com


(in reply to dcnovice)
Profile   Post #: 908
RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone - 4/8/2015 6:35:36 PM   
Kirata


Posts: 15477
Joined: 2/11/2006
From: USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

The St. Louis Rams target the naive and gullible when they buy tickets to their games.... The same goes for the Chicago Cubs.




(in reply to kdsub)
Profile   Post #: 909
RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone - 4/8/2015 6:41:12 PM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
The rams, yes. The cubs, that comes under the heading of kicking crippled beggars and taking their money.

(in reply to Kirata)
Profile   Post #: 910
RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone - 4/9/2015 4:33:47 AM   
tweakabelle


Posts: 7522
Joined: 10/16/2007
From: Sydney Australia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

Lordy, DC, how do you put up with these right wing Christians and their never ending self-serving flatulence and still remain a Christian? You have way more staying power than I.

But Peon they tell us they don't hate homosexuals at all. They insist that they love homosexuals, that they "love the sinner but hate the sin".

Of course refusing to serve perceived or genuine homosexuals is hating the sinner because the discriminator hasn't the foggiest idea of what sins they may or may not have committed. When they discriminate, all they have to go on is the evidence in front of their eyes which normally wouldn't include a vision into what goes on in that person's bedroom. It's all about the sinner - it can't be anything else.

But, where sinners and/or sin is involved, it's best not to take chances isn't it? Nothing wrong with erring on the side of safety is there? Just a shame that perceived or genuine gays aren't granted the same margin of graceerror. That would be erring on the side of compassion. And that would be so unChristian ......

< Message edited by tweakabelle -- 4/9/2015 4:39:20 AM >


_____________________________



(in reply to PeonForHer)
Profile   Post #: 911
RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone - 4/9/2015 7:05:15 AM   
CreativeDominant


Posts: 11032
Joined: 3/11/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

Lordy, DC, how do you put up with these right wing Christians and their never ending self-serving flatulence and still remain a Christian? You have way more staying power than I.

But Peon they tell us they don't hate homosexuals at all. They insist that they love homosexuals, that they "love the sinner but hate the sin".

Of course refusing to serve perceived or genuine homosexuals is hating the sinner because the discriminator hasn't the foggiest idea of what sins they may or may not have committed. When they discriminate, all they have to go on is the evidence in front of their eyes which normally wouldn't include a vision into what goes on in that person's bedroom. It's all about the sinner - it can't be anything else.

But, where sinners and/or sin is involved, it's best not to take chances isn't it? Nothing wrong with erring on the side of safety is there? Just a shame that perceived or genuine gays aren't granted the same margin of graceerror. That would be erring on the side of compassion. And that would be so unChristian ......

Talk about asswipe...

No one in this story, including the pizza owner, made any sort of judgement based on the way someone looked. Their decision was based on what they were told. But that doesn't fit the nice little narrative you've got going does it, tweak?



(in reply to tweakabelle)
Profile   Post #: 912
RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone - 4/9/2015 7:13:51 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
What the top of the wedding cake looked like was not important?

(in reply to CreativeDominant)
Profile   Post #: 913
RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone - 4/9/2015 7:17:40 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant


quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

Lordy, DC, how do you put up with these right wing Christians and their never ending self-serving flatulence and still remain a Christian? You have way more staying power than I.

But Peon they tell us they don't hate homosexuals at all. They insist that they love homosexuals, that they "love the sinner but hate the sin".

Of course refusing to serve perceived or genuine homosexuals is hating the sinner because the discriminator hasn't the foggiest idea of what sins they may or may not have committed. When they discriminate, all they have to go on is the evidence in front of their eyes which normally wouldn't include a vision into what goes on in that person's bedroom. It's all about the sinner - it can't be anything else.

But, where sinners and/or sin is involved, it's best not to take chances isn't it? Nothing wrong with erring on the side of safety is there? Just a shame that perceived or genuine gays aren't granted the same margin of graceerror. That would be erring on the side of compassion. And that would be so unChristian ......

Talk about asswipe...

No one in this story, including the pizza owner, made any sort of judgement based on the way someone looked. Their decision was based on what they were told. But that doesn't fit the nice little narrative you've got going does it, tweak?






Talk about asswipe, how do you know they are not saving themselves for after the marriage?

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to CreativeDominant)
Profile   Post #: 914
RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone - 4/9/2015 7:37:04 AM   
thishereboi


Posts: 14463
Joined: 6/19/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer


Lordy, DC, how do you put up with these right wing Christians and their never ending self-serving flatulence and still remain a Christian? You have way more staying power than I.



I can't speak for DC but for me it's easy. I simply look around, realize that those asswipes comprise a very small part of all christians, then stay away from them.

Kinda the same way I can still be friends with muslims despite the terrorists who kill anyone who disagrees with them.

_____________________________

"Sweetie, you're wasting your gum" .. Albert


This here is the boi formerly known as orfunboi


(in reply to PeonForHer)
Profile   Post #: 915
RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone - 4/9/2015 7:39:43 AM   
thishereboi


Posts: 14463
Joined: 6/19/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant


quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

Lordy, DC, how do you put up with these right wing Christians and their never ending self-serving flatulence and still remain a Christian? You have way more staying power than I.

But Peon they tell us they don't hate homosexuals at all. They insist that they love homosexuals, that they "love the sinner but hate the sin".

Of course refusing to serve perceived or genuine homosexuals is hating the sinner because the discriminator hasn't the foggiest idea of what sins they may or may not have committed. When they discriminate, all they have to go on is the evidence in front of their eyes which normally wouldn't include a vision into what goes on in that person's bedroom. It's all about the sinner - it can't be anything else.

But, where sinners and/or sin is involved, it's best not to take chances isn't it? Nothing wrong with erring on the side of safety is there? Just a shame that perceived or genuine gays aren't granted the same margin of graceerror. That would be erring on the side of compassion. And that would be so unChristian ......

Talk about asswipe...

No one in this story, including the pizza owner, made any sort of judgement based on the way someone looked. Their decision was based on what they were told. But that doesn't fit the nice little narrative you've got going does it, tweak?






If it's the same place I am thinking of, all they did was state they wouldn't cater a gay wedding. They also added that they would not refuse to serve anyone who came to the restaurant to eat.

_____________________________

"Sweetie, you're wasting your gum" .. Albert


This here is the boi formerly known as orfunboi


(in reply to CreativeDominant)
Profile   Post #: 916
RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone - 4/9/2015 7:59:53 AM   
CreativeDominant


Posts: 11032
Joined: 3/11/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi


quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant


quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

Lordy, DC, how do you put up with these right wing Christians and their never ending self-serving flatulence and still remain a Christian? You have way more staying power than I.

But Peon they tell us they don't hate homosexuals at all. They insist that they love homosexuals, that they "love the sinner but hate the sin".

Of course refusing to serve perceived or genuine homosexuals is hating the sinner because the discriminator hasn't the foggiest idea of what sins they may or may not have committed. When they discriminate, all they have to go on is the evidence in front of their eyes which normally wouldn't include a vision into what goes on in that person's bedroom. It's all about the sinner - it can't be anything else.

But, where sinners and/or sin is involved, it's best not to take chances isn't it? Nothing wrong with erring on the side of safety is there? Just a shame that perceived or genuine gays aren't granted the same margin of graceerror. That would be erring on the side of compassion. And that would be so unChristian ......

Talk about asswipe...

No one in this story, including the pizza owner, made any sort of judgement based on the way someone looked. Their decision was based on what they were told. But that doesn't fit the nice little narrative you've got going does it, tweak?






If it's the same place I am thinking of, all they did was state they wouldn't cater a gay wedding. They also added that they would not refuse to serve anyone who came to the restaurant to eat.

Shhhhh boi...they want you to forget that the owner also stated that last part. It doesn't fit the narrative.

(in reply to thishereboi)
Profile   Post #: 917
RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone - 4/9/2015 8:31:50 AM   
tweakabelle


Posts: 7522
Joined: 10/16/2007
From: Sydney Australia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant


quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

Lordy, DC, how do you put up with these right wing Christians and their never ending self-serving flatulence and still remain a Christian? You have way more staying power than I.

But Peon they tell us they don't hate homosexuals at all. They insist that they love homosexuals, that they "love the sinner but hate the sin".

Of course refusing to serve perceived or genuine homosexuals is hating the sinner because the discriminator hasn't the foggiest idea of what sins they may or may not have committed. When they discriminate, all they have to go on is the evidence in front of their eyes which normally wouldn't include a vision into what goes on in that person's bedroom. It's all about the sinner - it can't be anything else.

But, where sinners and/or sin is involved, it's best not to take chances isn't it? Nothing wrong with erring on the side of safety is there? Just a shame that perceived or genuine gays aren't granted the same margin of graceerror. That would be erring on the side of compassion. And that would be so unChristian ......

Talk about asswipe...

No one in this story, including the pizza owner, made any sort of judgement based on the way someone looked. Their decision was based on what they were told. But that doesn't fit the nice little narrative you've got going does it, tweak?

When I wrote that post, I didn't have this particular case in mind but was speaking generally about typical cases of discrimination, as ought to be clear from the text itself which doesn't refer to any one case - rather it speaks about discrimination generally.

It's your mistaken assumption that I had this particular case in mind. So the asswipe, as you so charmingly chose to term it, is all yours. Own it.

< Message edited by tweakabelle -- 4/9/2015 8:32:59 AM >


_____________________________



(in reply to CreativeDominant)
Profile   Post #: 918
RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone - 4/9/2015 8:46:28 AM   
dcnovice


Posts: 37282
Joined: 8/2/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer
<snip>

I think that certain Christian church types are just demonstrating their compassion on this one, DC. After all, as someone has warmly and lovingly pointed out on this thread, being homosexual is a "lifestyle choice" - if you're gay, you could change and become heterosexual overnight *if you wanted to*. On the other hand - if you're fat, that's quite different. You are fat for life and fighting that is like fighting All the Forces of Satan. It can't be done. And this, you see, is why the Church is gentle on the sin of gluttony, whereas it comes down heavily and with nostrils breathing righteous frigging sulphorous fire on homosexuals.

Ironically enough, my gluttony has wounded my life far more than my sexual orientation ever did.


quote:

Lordy, DC, how do you put up with these right wing Christians and their never ending self-serving flatulence and still remain a Christian? You have way more staying power than I.

Strange as it may sound, my intensely Catholic childhood--altar boy, folk group member, lector, rectory receptionist, prep seminarian--helped with that in two ways.

The first was that I was surrounded by people who were comfortable enough in their loyalty/devotion to be incredibly candid about institutional foibles and failings. So I've always had a warts-and-all perspective on religion. And I've also known that, for all our flaws, church folk are capable of great love and good humor.

The second was that, stereotypes aside, Catholic moral teaching prizes reason. Even when I disagree with the conclusions, I respect that lots of careful thought went into them. Catholics are emphatically--and a bit snobbishly, to be honest--not Bible-thumpers.

All that said, I did eventually conclude that Catholicism was not the right home for me as an out gay guy. I was blessedly fortunate to find my way to a quirky Episcopal parish that has been one of the great joys of my life--and a tremendous support during my medical misadventures.

Two favorite quotations also help when I feel frustrated by the public face of Christianity:

"Do you consider yourself a Christian?" [the interviewer] asked.
I sighed and said, "My problem with that is that so many people who publicly identify
themselves as Christians are such jerks about it."
The woman laughed, as did the people in the sound booth behind her. . . .
I said I often wondered if being a Christian was something we could, or should, claim for ourselves;
that if being a Christian meant incarnating the love of Christ in my own life,
then maybe it would be best to let others tell me how well, or how badly, I'm doing.

KATHLEEN NORRIS, THE CLOISTER WALK

* * *
If I, being what I am, can consider that I am in some sense a Christian,
why should the different vices of those people in the next pew
prove that their religion is mere hypocrisy and convention?

C.S. LEWIS, THE SCREWTAPE LETTERS


Heavens, that's a long answer! Hope it helps.

_____________________________

No matter how cynical you become,
it's never enough to keep up.

JANE WAGNER, THE SEARCH FOR SIGNS OF
INTELLIGENT LIFE IN THE UNIVERSE

(in reply to PeonForHer)
Profile   Post #: 919
RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone - 4/9/2015 8:56:23 AM   
CreativeDominant


Posts: 11032
Joined: 3/11/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant


quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

Lordy, DC, how do you put up with these right wing Christians and their never ending self-serving flatulence and still remain a Christian? You have way more staying power than I.

But Peon they tell us they don't hate homosexuals at all. They insist that they love homosexuals, that they "love the sinner but hate the sin".

Of course refusing to serve perceived or genuine homosexuals is hating the sinner because the discriminator hasn't the foggiest idea of what sins they may or may not have committed. When they discriminate, all they have to go on is the evidence in front of their eyes which normally wouldn't include a vision into what goes on in that person's bedroom. It's all about the sinner - it can't be anything else.

But, where sinners and/or sin is involved, it's best not to take chances isn't it? Nothing wrong with erring on the side of safety is there? Just a shame that perceived or genuine gays aren't granted the same margin of graceerror. That would be erring on the side of compassion. And that would be so unChristian ......

Talk about asswipe...

No one in this story, including the pizza owner, made any sort of judgement based on the way someone looked. Their decision was based on what they were told. But that doesn't fit the nice little narrative you've got going does it, tweak?

When I wrote that post, I didn't have this particular case in mind but was speaking generally about typical cases of discrimination, as ought to be clear from the text itself which doesn't refer to any one case - rather it speaks about discrimination generally.

It's your mistaken assumption that I had this particular case in mind. So the asswipe, as you so charmingly chose to term it, is all yours. Own it.
Actually, you own it because...as usual...you And others have gone to generalities instead of speaking to the specifics of thofcase which broubrought this thread into being.

You can speak about "Christian hate" in general all you want but unless you choose to focus on the specifics of the case in question, all you're doing is making a case that Christians...in general...are haters.

Maybe the ones you know are...but I'm not. And while there are many in the church I used to belong to...one reason I no longer belong to that OR any other church...there are many who are not.

(in reply to tweakabelle)
Profile   Post #: 920
Page:   <<   < prev  44 45 [46] 47 48   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Indiania can now discriminant against anyone Page: <<   < prev  44 45 [46] 47 48   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2024
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.188