"Mothers don't stop Getting angry with stupid bigots who (mess) with their children!"

[Uncle Remus]

And ftr, here's the gay lifestyle:

Get up, go to work, pick up milk 'n bread on the way home, feed the kids, check their homework, put 'em to bed, watch a li'l TV (maybe even DWTS), bathe 'n go to bed. Repeat the next day.

And worry about tax increases, health insurance costs, kids' education, home improvements, etc.

And do it all regardless of our second class citizenship.

 

[declansdad]

I am just presenting an argument based on the OP's thread title of "stupid bigots" and wondering why it is ok to call someone a stupid bigot for not agreeing with the gay lifestyle... I am not passing judgement, I am asking a question, big difference...

If you want to be a racist, hey, more power to you .

So what you're saying is you're simply playing the devil's advocate?

 

[crashbb]

Yep, and again, we live in the United States of America and it is our RIGHT to be able to protest that which we find objectionable. Along with this right, people also have the right to NOT be called a bigot because they don't agree with a lifestyle. You also have every right to fight for that lifestyle. Are you then a bigot because you want to live a gay lifestyle and not a straight lifestyle--bigoted against straight people? Somewhere along the road, people DO need to stand up for common moral beliefs or you see civilized societies fall...

Take the gay/straight/transexual issue off the table--how about if we had a large group of people in the US fighting for zero population growth. Overpopulation is a strain to our natural resources, usable water is slowing diminishing, fossil fuel production and use is killing our environment, etc. This group now wants to limit people to having one child and you can only have that child between the ages of 25 and 30... So, are you a bigot because you want to have 3 children or are you a bigot because you think that no one should have more than one child?

Your analogy only works if people (i.e. the evil gay/straight/transexual people) were trying to stop you from being in a heterosexual relationship. They are not. So your analogy makes no sense whatsoever.

 

[Magic Mom]

And ftr, here's the gay lifestyle:

Get up, go to work, pick up milk 'n bread on the way home, feed the kids, check their homework, put 'em to bed, watch a li'l TV (maybe even DWTS), bathe 'n go to bed. Repeat the next day.

And worry about tax increases, health insurance costs, kids' education, home improvements, etc.

And do it all regardless of our second class citizenship.

What? No golf?

 

[Uncle Remus]

What? No golf?

It's folks like you that have caused me to have a messed up keyboard!!

I gotta quit drinkin' stuff when I'm openin' a thread.

We need a name for folks like you.

 

[Robinrs]

I'm sorry. this is driving me crazy
Weather

Weather is usually a noun:

How's the weather?

The weather is always great this time of year

What's the weather like in Spain?

Weather is also a verb that means "to be affected by the weather":

That house is really weathered

Figuratively, weather means "to get/live through":

I know we can weather this crisis


Whether

Whether is a conjunction that introduces possibilities or alternatives:

Do you know whether he is coming?

You'll do it whether you like it or not

Whether you win or lose, you'll have done your best


The Bottom Line

The words weather and whether are pronounced identically, hence the confusion in spelling. Just remember that whether is more or less interchangeable with "if," while weather indicates the temperature and atmospheric conditions.



This is why you lose me. Your posts tend to be very condescending when you respond to those who do not agree with your POV.

 

[Planogirl]

"what you find morally objectionable"...

Wow, that is amazing. First of all, who cares what you (as in general 'you') find morally objectionable? Maybe I find it morally wonderful so which one of us gets to decide?

As for protesting certain things, I protest anything that will hurt others or the environment in some way. Anything else isn't my business. I can't even make the leap in my mind to feeling like I have some say-so over how others lead their lives. Again, if you hurt me or someone else or an innocent animal or a rainforest - then I feel a moral obligation to speak up. However, if you hurt no one then I feel like I have a moral obligation to keep my thoughts to myself.

 

[Liberty Belle]

Just like protesting something you find objectionable is....

Yes, of course.

 

[Liberty Belle]

It's not ridiculous. It is the very core of the gay/straight argument. Doing what you want in the privacy of your own bedroom is fine, once you take it out of the bedroom is where it becomes an issue. People have every right to object to this.

As for the apples to oranges, no, it ins't, it is still talking about what is considered morally acceptable in our society. It is morally acceptable in other societies to kill your children does that make it wrong there too?? Our society as a whole, however, has decided that it is NOT ok to do this but what if there was a movement to change this just like there has been a movement in recent years to "accept" the gay lifestyle. Not to turn this into a religious post but even the Catholic church accepts gay people, they do NOT agree with the gay sex--that is a HUGE distinction. Our society as a whole has not decided that the gay lifestyle is morally acceptable. People are trying to change that.

What exactly are you objecting to? Gay sex in the street? What do you mean buy taking it out of the bedroom? I certainly would object to gay sex on the street just as much as I would heterosexual sex on the street.

 

[Mrs.Toad]

No, I didn't answer my question. When do people that find things morally objectionable get to stop being called bigots? Where do MY rights start in this. What if I don't want to be exposed to the gay lifestyle? What if I want to be able to walk down the street and not see two men kissing? Where are my civil rights???


Keep in mind this is all for argument sake......it isn't as easy as you are making it out to be. We DO, as a country, need to define what is morally acceptable or eventually society will turn into chaos.

What about MY right to walk down the street and not see an interracial couple kissing? I find it objectionable. Where are MY civil rights? (not my real feelings, used for discussion only)

See how ridiculous and bigoted that sounds? If you can substitute race or disablilty in your statement and it sounds bigoted, then it sounds bigoted when it's about LGBT folks, too.

Standards need to be applied equally among all segments of society. If you don't want to see people kissing in the street, go ahead and object, but object for ALL. If you only object for same-sex couples, you might be a bigot.

Exactly--and say that same sex marriage does effect my life--what if I don't want to watch same sex partners....where is the line of my rights vs their rights???

I disagree that it makes you closed minded too. You can object to something based on your beliefs without being closed minded.



When do we as a society as a whole draw the line though? By allowing everything, the only result will be chaos. What if someone has the belief that they should be able to kill their own children if they don't like something that child did, doesn't effect your life so why should it matter, right???

Then don't watch.

Seriously, you are taking a huge leap here, and it's really not helping your argument. Killing children obviously hurts other people. It may not affect MY life, but it affects the child's. Same sex marriage and gender reassignment surgery in and of themselves, clearly effect no one but the party(ies) involved.

Overpopulation destroys resources and directly affects other people, though I would never call it "bigoted" to want or not want a certain number of kids. That is about what you do, not who you are.

First, protesting and name calling are two different things. Again, why is it not ok to stand up for what you find morally objectionable, no one seems to be able to answer that...

When you find something innate about a person "morally objectionable", people WILL think you are a bigot. Yea, yea, I know the argument is "I have no problem with gay people, only their gay behaviors". Sorry, but love, sex, relationships are a huge part of human nature. If you love those gay people but expect them to suppress their sexuality because you find it objectionable, then you are objecting so something innate about them and that is bigoted, AFAIK.

But sure, it's OK to do so. Like she said:

Did anyone say it's not OK? Go ahead and object as it allows us to find the bigots.

True. Anyone who feels I'm a "bigot" for supporting the "gay lifestyle" is welcome to call me one.

Me, too!!

It's not ridiculous. It is the very core of the gay/straight argument. Doing what you want in the privacy of your own bedroom is fine, once you take it out of the bedroom is where it becomes an issue. People have every right to object to this.

Who is having gay sex in public? What do you mean by "taking it out of the bedroom"? Are you married? Do you wear a wedding ring? Put a pictures of your husband up in your office? Tell people the story of how you met? How is that any less "taking it out of the bedroom", than a gay person letting people know who his partner is, or a transgendered person letting people know he was once a woman? Are you saying it's OK for straight people to let everyone know they're straight, but not OK for gay people to let everyone know they're gay?

Damn that Prince William for shoving his sexuality down our throats with the big to-do about his wedding.

 

[Magic Mom]

It's folks like you that have caused me to have a messed up keyboard!!

I gotta quit drinkin' stuff when I'm openin' a thread.

We need a name for folks like you.

I take no responsibility for your messy keyboard. You should know better by now.

 

[Robinrs]

And ftr, here's the gay lifestyle:

Get up, go to work, pick up milk 'n bread on the way home, feed the kids, check their homework, put 'em to bed, watch a li'l TV (maybe even DWTS), bathe 'n go to bed. Repeat the next day.

And worry about tax increases, health insurance costs, kids' education, home improvements, etc.

And do it all regardless of our second class citizenship.

Have I told you lately that I looooove you? You are so funny!

Seems the whole thing has come down to "semantics" and what was a direct quote of a Mother defending her child.

ALL of us would do the same thing, I've seen DIS Moms go ballistic over MUCH less.

We all find things "morally objectionable" -- but we don't have to go on a discussion boad and spew it over and over. I personally find it morally objectionable to take over every single college thread, be LAUGHED at about our college choices and tell the world that your state is better than anyone elses'... but HEY, those of us on those threads are subjected to it.

We can make the choice to back off and not mention any of this or defend it as you do and be called whatever. It's the AMERICAN way!

 

[Liberty Belle]

What about MY right to walk down the street and not see an interracial couple kissing? I find it objectionable. Where are MY civil rights? (not my real feelings, used for discussion only)

See how ridiculous and bigoted that sounds? If you can substitute race or disablilty in your statement and it sounds bigoted, then it sounds bigoted when it's about LGBT folks, too.

Standards need to be applied equally among all segments of society. If you don't want to see people kissing in the street, go ahead and object, but object for ALL. If you only object for same-sex couples, you might be a bigot.

Then don't watch.

Seriously, you are taking a huge leap here, and it's really not helping your argument. Killing children obviously hurts other people. It may not affect MY life, but it affects the child's. Same sex marriage and gender reassignment surgery in and of themselves, clearly effect no one but the party(ies) involved.

Overpopulation destroys resources and directly affects other people, though I would never call it "bigoted" to want or not want a certain number of kids. That is about what you do, not who you are.
When you find something innate about a person "morally objectionable", people WILL think you are a bigot. Yea, yea, I know the argument is "I have no problem with gay people, only their gay behaviors". Sorry, but love, sex, relationships are a huge part of human nature. If you love those gay people but expect them to suppress their sexuality because you find it objectionable, then you are objecting so something innate about them and that is bigoted, AFAIK.

But sure, it's OK to do so. Like she said:

Me, too!!

Who is having gay sex in public? What do you mean by "taking it out of the bedroom"? Are you married? Do you wear a wedding ring? Put a pictures of your husband up in your office? Tell people the story of how you met? How is that any less "taking it out of the bedroom", than a gay person letting people know who his partner is, or a transgendered person letting people know he was once a woman? Are you saying it's OK for straight people to let everyone know they're straight, but not OK for gay people to let everyone know they're gay?

Damn that Prince William for shoving his sexuality down our throats with the big to-do about his wedding.

I can't believe they actually kissed eachother and held hands in public! How will we explain that to the children?!

 

[Plannin'Shannon]

Seems the whole thing has come down to "semantics" and what was a direct quote of a Mother defending her child.

ALL of us would do the same thing, I've seen DIS Moms go ballistic over MUCH less.

Like the implication that their child might not be such a gifted golfer after all?

Yes, I've seen that too.

ETA: Oh, and Magic Mom? You pretty much rock my world.

 

[Princess Dolly]

Damn that Prince William for shoving his sexuality down our throats with the big to-do about his wedding.

 

[jdisnut]

We all find things "morally objectionable" -- but we don't have to go on a discussion boad and spew it over and over. I personally find it morally objectionable to take over every single college thread, be LAUGHED at about our college choices and tell the world that your state is better than anyone elses'... but HEY, those of us on those threads are subjected to it.

Speaking of which, has anyone ever presented even the slightest shred of evidence that Minnesota is better than any other state, let alone all of them? Maybe someone has swallowed too much disgusting lake water to think straight.

 

[diznygirl]

No, I didn't answer my question. When do people that find things morally objectionable get to stop being called bigots? Where do MY rights start in this. What if I don't want to be exposed to the gay lifestyle? What if I want to be able to walk down the street and not see two men kissing? Where are my civil rights???


Keep in mind this is all for argument sake......it isn't as easy as you are making it out to be. We DO, as a country, need to define what is morally acceptable or eventually society will turn into chaos.

What else are we supposed to call them - Open-Minded Challenged? Narrow-Minded Americans? The Westboro Baptist Church?

 

[Robinrs]

I can't believe they actually kissed eachother and held hands in public! How will we explain that to the children?!

Like the implication that their child might not be such a gifted golfer after all?

Yes, I've seen that too.


ETA: Oh, and Magic Mom? You pretty much rock my world.

I guess there are several people who've felt the wrath...

Speaking of which, has anyone ever presented even the slightest shred of evidence that Minnesota is better than any other state, let alone all of them? Maybe someone has swallowed too much disgusting lake water to think straight.

I'm still waiting...

What else are we supposed to call them - Open-Minded Challenged? Narrow-Minded Americans? The Westboro Baptist Church?

Okay, you OWE me a monitor!!

 

[doxdogy]

So, when is it ok to stand up to something that you find morally objectionable and not be called a bigot??? Isn't the ability to protest what we don't like/want the foundation of our country??

You become a bigot when you start spurting your hate and vitriol and direct it towards a particular group. The Westboro nuts (refuse to call them a church) are bigots through and through.

You made your point and you are starting to not only dig yourself a hole, but bury yourself in it too.

If you don't like the fact that Bono was chosen, then there is a simple solution; don't WATCH the show. There are many times that I have turned the channel, because I did not like a show.

 

[nmmom95]

big·ot noun \ˈbi-gət

Definition of BIGOT

: a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance

Just sayin'