Nebraska Woman - Representing God & Jesus - Files Lawsuit Against "All Homosexuals"

originally posted by: Seamrog

originally posted by: Klassified


...there are some topics we happen to be of similar mind on.

That much is clear - if it feels good....do it!!!

Hmmmm. I don't remember either of us saying that. Maybe, If it feels good, and harms no one else, or infringes on their rights as an individual. Do it.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I consider it's possible that there are more claiming to be gay for both reason? And well I, unlike many it seems am humble enough to know that I have very little understanding when it comes to exactly how the natural laws work.
And I do know that those artificial estrogens have been playing havoc in the animal kingdom and homosexual behavior amount the animals have been one of the things that have been noted to have a possible link. And well can surmise that in earlier cultures where women's urine were finding it's way into the streams untreated and containing their estrogen, well it would be a great way for nature to control the population.

originally posted by: Telos
I'm replying once again out of respect for a female member.

Why would you respond to me based on my genitals? I'm not trying to intimidate you, I'm having a discussion with you. If it's making you uncomfortable, I apologize.

That being said, all the best and good luck in your virtual fight for freedom and individuality.

I assure you, my "fight" is not limited to the virtual world. And being a self-appointed defender of equal rights, freedom and individuality is not "dangerous" in the least. You're just tossing insults about my gender and my opinions, hoping to shut me up. But I'm not "hiding my thoughts". You must be intimidated because you're not taking this tack with others who disagree with you... Is it my genitals?

originally posted by: Telos

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: Telos
Once again, I was referring to what the member I quoted the post from said. That people were holding their tongue from the fear of being labeled. That in my book is not freedom of speech but pure suppression.

You've got a faulty book. If people CHOOSE to hold their tongue because they don't want to hear what others say, it's self-imposed and has NOTHING to do with suppression or freedom of speech. If the GOVERNMENT arrests you for something you say, THEN it's a freedom of speech issue.

People are FREE to say what they want. There is no guarantee or promise of protection from consequences.

I respectfully agree to disagree with what you say and stick to my own opinions. Cheers.

Thats good. The more of you who put your fingers in your ears and close your eyes, the easier it will be to effect real beneficial change in our society and get rid of draconian religious appeasing laws in this country.

a reply to: dawnstar

Look, natural laws are mathematically precise. E=MC^2 is a Natural Law. The only thing that violates a natural law is something that breaks physics.

a reply to: Woodcarver

Yes...preach on brother - you moral relativists are going (sooner rather than later) to get exactly what you asked for.

e.g.: Baltimore.

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: Telos
I'm replying once again out of respect for a female member.

Why would you respond to me based on my genitals? I'm not trying to intimidate you, I'm having a discussion with you. If it's making you uncomfortable, I apologize.

That being said, all the best and good luck in your virtual fight for freedom and individuality.

I assure you, my "fight" is not limited to the virtual world. And being a self-appointed defender of equal rights, freedom and individuality is not "dangerous" in the least. You're just tossing insults about my gender and my opinions, hoping to shut me up. But I'm not "hiding my thoughts". You must be intimidated because you're not taking this tack with others who disagree with you... Is it my genitals?

What are you talking about? I said respect as the opposed gender because to a guy I would have replied accordingly. And that's not an insult but chivalry.

And believe me, I don't get intimidated that easy and I can defend my convictions and opinions. I'm not expecting people to agree with me as I don't agree with everyone in here. Each of us has its own opinions. Wouldn't be right to repeat in unison the same tune. That would make us parrots of the so called "free speech".

a reply to: Seamrog

I live in Baltimore. Somehow I think your knowledge of the situation on the ground isn't as good as mine.

It'a sad and amusing that this has become a topic for discussion.

In the beginning, God made man. Or a fish walked out of the water.

Dunno which, really. I'm leaning towards God, but that's just my thing.

But it's not "the beginning" that we should be focused on.

Nor "the end" because, we all die, there isn't getting around that.

It's the middle part, the living, that most concerns me. Now we can spend our time focused on how others live, or we can focus on how we live. I certainly will fight for the freedom for everyone to express themselves how they see fit, but at the same time, I will also fight for everyone to ignore the other person (as they see fit).

If your actions, your life, your choices, your desires, your wants, your needs, are different than mine, then that should be okay, as long as it never conflicts with my life, choices, desires, wants, needs.

I just don't understand why this is so complicated or contentious.

originally posted by: Woodcarver

originally posted by: Telos

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: Telos
Once again, I was referring to what the member I quoted the post from said. That people were holding their tongue from the fear of being labeled. That in my book is not freedom of speech but pure suppression.

You've got a faulty book. If people CHOOSE to hold their tongue because they don't want to hear what others say, it's self-imposed and has NOTHING to do with suppression or freedom of speech. If the GOVERNMENT arrests you for something you say, THEN it's a freedom of speech issue.

People are FREE to say what they want. There is no guarantee or promise of protection from consequences.

I respectfully agree to disagree with what you say and stick to my own opinions. Cheers.

Thats good. The more of you who put your fingers in your ears and close your eyes, the easier it will be to effect real beneficial change in our society and get rid of draconian religious appeasing laws in this country.

Ok, this is getting funny now. So because I'm not agreeing with someone's opinion, that makes me blind and deaf and whoever comes forth with that opinion in question is the righteous one? God complex is a dangerous one. And if you wanna label just religious people as anti homosexuality then you're up for a big disappointment. There is as much as big of a number of atheists who share the same stance on homosexuality. As there are also from other system beliefs, including pagans.

This is why I love the 1st Amendment. Freedom of speech allows me to come home from my last day of a looooong work week and read the OP and have a nice looooooong laugh. Despite all its flaws I love this place!

a reply to: beezzer

Watch it, you're a step away from being called a bigot.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Seamrog

I live in Baltimore. Somehow I think your knowledge of the situation on the ground isn't as good as mine.

One can observe the cesspool that is Baltimore from lunar orbit.

It does not take an advanced degree SNIP to spot squalor and moral decay from afar.

You wouldn't happen to be employed by the government, now would you?

a reply to: Seamrog

You cannot legislate morality. I don't want to see anyone try it in this country honestly. When we get into making religious laws, we get into the nasty territory of who gets to decide them.

Plus, I don't want anyone going the other way either and trying to make it illegal for me to have my morals and my religion.

I want to have, and enjoy my freedom... I expect others enjoy the same in their own fashion.

Baltimore is not a situation about immorality either.. it was some people protesting, and some other people stealing and destroying. Stealing and destroying stuff we already have laws against.

The question of gay marriage should in no way shape or form be a discussion on whose religion will make this countries laws.. there are just too many...

I follow Jesus.. he ate with the sinners... he didn't sit with the pharisees in judgement of everyone.

originally posted by: Telos
a reply to: beezzer

Watch it, you're a step away from being called a bigot.

If I can get through the day with just being called a bigot, I consider that a "win".

originally posted by: Seamrog

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Seamrog

I live in Baltimore. Somehow I think your knowledge of the situation on the ground isn't as good as mine.

One can observe the cesspool that is Baltimore from lunar orbit.

Cesspool? Have you ever even BEEN here? Clearly you haven't or you wouldn't be saying that.

It does not take an advanced degree SNIP to spot squalor and moral decay from afar.

Erm... What?

You wouldn't happen to be employed by the government, now would you?

Not that it matters, but I work for the IT department in a mid-sized pharmaceutical manufacturing company.

a reply to: beezzer

50 dollars says you can't! lol...

(jk on the 50.. just in case its your lucky day or something!)

I think it would be a hoot if the judge ruled that the bible was a work of fiction and that God and Jesus were fictional characters. It would serve her right for trying to use God for hate filled purposes.

a reply to: damwel

We're talking about Nebraska here. That would be a quick way for that judge to not be reelected next election season.