Christians suing for the right to be intolerant

[WIcruizer]

Er, you do realize that tolerating people doesn't mean you have to accept/approve of/love them, right? You resent the fact that you have to learn to coexist with all people? Guess what - you do whether you accept it or not but it makes living a whole lot more stressful if you fight it! But obviously you're just reacting knee-jerk to the right wing media so I understand why you're saying what you are.

And, as for the biology argument? Have to tell ya, you're wrong on that one. There are many instances of homosexuality in the whole of the animal kingdom. So the "laws of nature" don't hold up as part of your argument against homosexuality. And reproduction isn't required for a relationship. link

Just as you should tolerate anyone using their right to speak out against something they don't believe in. That's what the lawsuit is about.

It's also rather condescending for you to assume the poster's views are based on right-wing media. Then the reverse must be true, and your views are based on the left wing media?

 

[LukenDC]

unless someone can disprove the laws of nature and reproduction youll never be able to change my mind about homosexuality.

Homosexuals are a product of nature and have been in existance since the beginnings of mankind. And as someone said earlier, there are numerous examples of homosexual conduct in the animal kingdom. Homosexuals have always been a relatively small, fixed percentage of humanity so it appears that there is some sort of "natural law" underpinning their existence. A natural form of population control perhaps?

 

[auntpolly]

Yes, those POOOOOR Christians. How horriable for them to enjoy the majority status they have in this country and the politicans they have in their pockets.

Last time I checked, the constitutional separation of church and state still exists and abortion is still legal -- don't you are overreacting about the power the religious right has?

Every group that political activism has politicians "in their pockets", if by that you mean donating alot of money and execercing their right to vote in droves.

Boo hoo! Poor us! They don't have the numbers, and they tend to in the end shoot themselves in the foot with their own problems. But if we can't get it together and organize as well as they can, they deserve to win.

It's always a mistake to make a group like this into the boogey man just because they have some creepy leaders (most groups do). These aren't brainwashed Manson followers, they are our neighbors and colleagues who have learned to work the system to their own advantage, which is their right.

We're just steamed because we haven't managed to do it as well as they do.

THey don't speak for all Christians. If they did, you really would something to cry about.

 

[WIcruizer]

Homosexuals are a product of nature and have been in existance since the beginnings of mankind. And as someone said earlier, there are numerous examples of homosexual conduct in the animal kingdom. Homosexuals have always been a relatively small, fixed percentage of humanity so it appears that there is some sort of "natural law" underpinning their existence. A natural form of population control perhaps?

Whether that's true or not, I believe I still have a right to stand on the GA Tech campus and tell people that Gay Pride week or Black History month is foolish if I want to. That actually has nothing to do with tolerance. What if I could care less if someone is gay or straight, but I jsut make comments about how stupid Gay Pride week is? (Which, by the way, even many gay people think is stupid.) I think I have the right to say how stupid it is.

 

[auntpolly]

Whether that's true or not, I believe I still have a right to stand on the GA Tech campus and tell people that Gay Pride week or Black History month is foolish if I want to. That actually has nothing to do with tolerance. What if I could care less if someone is gay or straight, but I jsut make comments about how stupid Gay Pride week is? (Which, by the way, even many gay people think is stupid.) I think I have the right to say how stupid it is.

Yes and I think the ACLU would back you up, just like they do the KKK.

 

[MouseWorshipin]

Last time I checked, the constitutional separation of church and state still exists

There is no constitutional separation of Church and State. There never was.

And all those who don't believe me can read the constitution.

Not trying to be picky or disagree with your statement. Just like to point this out when it comes up, regardless of who brings it up.

 

[auntpolly]

There is no constitutional separation of Church and State. There never was.

And all those who don't believe me can read the constitution.

Not trying to be picky or disagree with your statement. Just like to point this out when it comes up, regardless of who brings it up.

We can debate this in another thread, if you like, but I heartily disagree.

 

[MouseWorshipin]

We can debate this in another thread, if you like, but I heartily disagree.

The U.S. Constitution is online. You can read it any time you like.

There is no constitutional separation of Church and State. It doesn't exist. There is no debate.

 

[auntpolly]

The U.S. Constitution is online. You can read it any time you like.

There is no constitutional separation of Church and State. It doesn't exist. There is no debate.

LOL I've done this on this very board a hundred times. The founding fathers talked about it and there are many quotes, and even though those very words many not appear, the intention is for church and state to remain two separate things. Let's not hijack this thread, but there is a boatload of evidence about this.

 

[WIcruizer]

Yes and I think the ACLU would back you up, just like they do the KKK.

I don't need the ACLU to speak for me. I just want the courts to protect my right to have an opinion and state it publicly. I n fact, a great example was made in that news story. If I believe black histroy month or gay pride week is stupid, I shouldn't have to go to diversity training. It's my opinion, and I shouldn't be discriminated against because of it.

 

[auntpolly]

I don't need the ACLU to speak for me. I just want the courts to protect my right to have an opinion and state it publicly.

I just meant that there are people who will fight in the courts to make sure you have that right -- didn't know you were an ACLU hater. I personally thank God for them, but sorry I offended you.

 

[MouseWorshipin]

LOL I've done this on this very board a hundred times. The founding fathers talked about it and there are many quotes, and even though those very words many not appear, the intention is for church and state to remain two separate things. Let's not hijack this thread, but there is a boatload of evidence about this.

The founding fathers were pretty smart guys, and not at all ambiguous in their writings.

They said you can set up any church you want, and practice your religion freely. They never addressed what you claim there is "boatloads of evidence" of in the U.S. Constitution.

If they'd meant to put it in there, it would have been very clear.

 

[auntpolly]

.

They said you can set up any church you want, and practice your religion freely. .

Well of course they said that. What does that have to do with church/state separation?

 

[MouseWorshipin]

Well of course they said that. What does that have to do with church/state separation?

Nothing. And that's pretty much it.

I now return you to the Free Speech debate...or is it Gays vs. Christians Debate...already in progress...

 

[auntpolly]

Nothing. And that's pretty much it.

I now return you to the Free Speech debate...or is it Gays vs. Christians Debate...already in progress...

OK, but as a side note, if you want to debate church and state, start a thread tomorrow morning. I have a meeting in 21 minutes, and I'll need time to dig up all my quotes, but I LOOOOOOVE a good church state debate!!!

 

[yeartolate]

I think it is offensive to think that Jesus was in the habit of harrassment.

 

[auntpolly]

I think it is offensive to think that Jesus was in the habit of harrassment.

He wasn't as far as I can see in the Bible. That was that crack head Paul's job!!! On that offensive note, , I go to my meeting!!!!!

 

[WIcruizer]

It has turned into a Christian vs Gay debate, and that's ok. But I take the religious part out of it completely, and I think this is more of a case of free speech vs political correctness.

As long as we don't dare question anything, fine. But when someone wants to point out the stupidity of gay pride week, black history month, diversity training, etc. they're accused of being racists, bigots, homophobes, etc. THAT'S why I hope this griup wins, and it has nothing to do with religion in that regard.

 

[wvrevy]

Wow...I go away for a day and this thread goes nuts A few points:

- This is not a speech issue, no matter how hard the right tries to make it into one. As I stated in my second post on this thread, this bigot...er...girl, is allowed to stand on the street corner and make a fool out of herself any way she would like to do so. What she can not do is harrass other students. GT has the right to say that she can't, and if she doesn't like it she is free to go somewhere else. This is about harrassment, not speech.

- re: church / state - Try reading something beyond the document itself or right wing interpretations. The intent was to keep religion and government seperate. As for "they would have made it clear", so, I assume you are for banning all firearms to private citizens, correct? Somehow, I doubt it.

- Back to the gay v. Christian thing....I'm not anti-christianity, despite the fact that I find it foolish. What I am very much against are the self-styled "christians" that practice their religion by attacking others rather than helping those in need. They would rather practice their bigoted views than focus on the other 99.9% of christian teachings, and yes, I'm sorry, but it gives all christians a bad image, in my view.

- "Christianity is under attack" You're kidding, right? With the president we have now (who believes in the "end times" and says that god wanted him to run for president?) you can't honestly say that and expect anything but laughter, can you? You've got the president, the supreme court, both houses of congress...exactly what is powerful enough to "attack" you ? Besides "reason" I mean? Too funny.

 

[MouseWorshipin]

It has turned into a Christian vs Gay debate, and that's ok. But I take the religious part out of it completely, and I think this is more of a case of free speech vs political correctness.

As long as we don't dare question anything, fine. But when someone wants to point out the stupidity of gay pride week, black history month, diversity training, etc. they're accused of being racists, bigots, homophobes, etc. THAT'S why I hope this griup wins, and it has nothing to do with religion in that regard.

Americans are free to say what they please. That IS in the Constitution.