[poochee]

Originally Posted by angelize56

I guess you could compare it to a Jewish synagogue...if I wanted to be a smart butt and have my Christian wedding performed there....and they say no because of my religious affiliation...should I have the right to sue...no! If homosexuals want to have a civil ceremony...then have it where they are accepted and tolerated by their own kind or those who embrace their choice to be homosexual...simple solution..don't try to force themselves down others throats! The man at the inn gave a valid reason for not wanting the civil union performed there...it's his perogative! The happy homosexual couple can go elsewhere rather than cause problems!

Do you understand what I have been saying to Linsky? I thought I was clear, but apparently not.

[angelize56]

Hang on poochee..I have to read back a page! My post wasn't directed at anyone in particular!

[angelize56]

Originally Posted by poochee

Do you understand what I have been saying to Linsky? I thought I was clear, but apparently not.

You were pretty clear to me...but Jack has his own agenda at the moment...trying to figure us out!

[poochee]

Originally Posted by angelize56

You were pretty clear to me...but Jack has his own agenda at the moment...trying to figure us out!

OK...Just wondered.

[poochee]

Angelize, I feel like I'm conducting a union grievance, and the union VP is trying to entrap me into something. Been there, done that.

Successfully, I might add.

[linskyjack]

Originally Posted by angelize56

I guess you could compare it to a Jewish synagogue...if I wanted to be a smart butt and have my Christian wedding performed there....and they say no because of my religious affiliation...should I have the right to sue...no! If homosexuals want to have a civil ceremony...then have it where they are accepted and tolerated by their own kind or those who embrace their choice to be homosexual...simple solution..don't try to force themselves down others throats! The man at the inn gave a valid reason for not wanting the civil union performed there...it's his perogative! The happy homosexual couple can go elsewhere rather than cause problems!

OH, now its an inn--I thought it was a hotel! Enough with these ridiculous analogies---dont pick the very few instances that some gay person does something irrational or confrontational and paint the whole community that way---that is good old fashion bigotry. The facts are simple---the very vast majority of gay people who want to get married want to get married in a place where they are welcome. The vast majority of gay people who want to get married want to get married for the same reasons that hetrosexuals want to get married. Lets be frank---its all about bigotry--that simple. Maybe hetrosexual couples should worry more about the horrendous state of marriage in this country (50% end in divorce)? Maybe they should be concerned with the epidemic of domestic violence! When someone tells me they have nothing against homosexuals, but then proceeds to deny them the ability to express their love and devotion to each other through marriage---well that tells me that there is something there that doesn't meet the eye.

[angelize56]

Good job poochee!

Read this:

Allstate terminates manager over homosexuality column (Shame on Allstate!)

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=44961

Email Liddy about this here:

http://www.afa.net/Petitions/TakeAction.asp?id=134

[poochee]

Originally Posted by linskyjack

OH, now its an inn--I thought it was a hotel! Enough with these ridiculous analogies---dont pick the very few instances that some gay person does something irrational or confrontational and paint the whole community that way---that is good old fashion bigotry. The facts are simple---the very vast majority of gay people who want to get married want to get married in a place where they are welcome. The vast majority of gay people who want to get married want to get married for the same reasons that hetrosexuals want to get married. Lets be frank---its all about bigotry--that simple. Maybe hetrosexual couples should worry more about the horrendous state of marriage in this country (50% end in divorce)? Maybe they should be concerned with the epidemic of domestic violence! When someone tells me they have nothing against homosexuals, but then proceeds to deny them the ability to express their love and devotion to each other through marriage---well that tells me that there is something there that doesn't meet the eye.

Inn, hotel whatever. Big deal.
Do you not understand what I mean by "radical". I have not painted the whole gay community with a broad brush. Homosexuality is againt my religious principals and I will stand by that. If someone wants to be gay that is their business, not mine. Now getting back to my question about is it fair for that couple to complain because the owner turned them down?

[poochee]

Originally Posted by angelize56

Good job poochee!

Read this:

Allstate terminates manager over homosexuality column (Shame on Allstate!)

http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=44961

Email Liddy about this here:

http://www.afa.net/Petitions/TakeAction.asp?id=134

It figures! Of course, Christians are supposed to turn the other cheek. I don't think so.........

[angelize56]

Fri, July 1, 2005

Political fiction

How much longer before Bible is declared hate literature?

By LINK BYFIELD -- Calgary Sun

Canada's social conservatives suffered another painful body-blow Tuesday when the Liberals' homosexual marriage bill cleared the Commons 158 votes to 133.

Now it just needs to be rubber-stamped through the Liberal Senate, and presto! it becomes the law of the land.

Despite heroic resistance, despite public opinion and common sense being on their side, despite vigorous organization, despite the best efforts of the Conservative Party, the social conservatives lost.

And surely they must be wondering why.

Why is it that whatever is "progressive" (i.e. whatever makes the Canadian government more powerful) always triumphs, regardless of how unpopular it is, and why always at the expense of traditional authorities, especially the family and the faiths?

As when the Liberals legalized abortion in 1969, staunchly refusing to admit that they had opened the way to abortion on demand (and Paul Martin's father resigned from cabinet in protest), they have now legalized same-sex marriage without admitting it will suppress religion from public life.
But as anyone knows who isn't comatose, by making homosexual marriage an "equality right" under the Charter, governments have put churches on notice that they are henceforth outside the Charter.

Human rights law is quite clear. You may believe and say anything you like in private, but not in public.

Legally, churches are being treated as "private," at least for now. But this is completely arbitrary, illogical and changeable. In the "public" realm --which means in schools (including religious ones), community halls (including religious ones), commercial and professional businesses (including religious ones) and government programs --"Charter values" are already being relentlessly enforced, and dissent (i.e. "hate") is not tolerated.

Stickers are already being plastered on news boxes in Toronto to "Tax the churches!"

A Saskatchewan judge has already ruled that publishing the mere citation of anti-sodomy passages from the Bible is "discriminatory."

Pro-gay MPs such as Keith Martin have already de-nounced as "venom" and "hatred" parliamentary statements against homosexual marriage. It is already a serious criminal offence to publish undefined "hatred" of homosexuals.

For a little longer, the fiction will be preserved that gay equality does not conflict with freedom of belief. But then, six years ago, Parliament was insisting gay marriage would never happen. Political fictions outlive their usefulness pretty fast these days.

So how much longer will it be before the Bible is formally condemned as hate literature, because it describes sodomy as worth hating?

The great crusade will start with a demand to remove the Bible from commercial hotel rooms, and then from public libraries and schools, and then from courtrooms and finally from tax-deductible churches.

How much longer before it is counted as abuse to tell your own children that anal sex is sinful? Can such rampant hate be tolerated in an inclusive society which promotes Charter values?

Pro-marriage conservatives now face the same unhappy dilemma pro-lifers did three decades ago. Do they fight on, striving to hold an increasingly reluctant Conservative party to its pro-marriage position? Or do they just shrug and let it go?

The gay marriage bill shows that there is something fundamentally flawed in Canada's system of government.

Here was a serious change to a fundamental social institution which most people did not want, do not support, and probably never will. Yet it passed because the federal executive -- the cabinets and senior bureaucrats of Jean Chretien and Paul Martin -- wanted it passed.

They wanted it passed because they are power-crazed and have taken upon themselves the duty of reshaping Canadian society to their own image and values.

To this end, they manipulate the courts, by funding court challenges to Canadian laws and then deliberately losing, and by appointing judges who will do what they want.

The single biggest problem facing this country is not gay marriage, nor the attack on traditional values.

It is the unchecked power of the prime minister.

If that didn't exist, neither would same-sex marriage.

http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/Column...0/1112603.html

[poochee]

Satan is busy!!

[Deathblow]

Originally Posted by poochee

Satan is busy!!

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.

[angelize56]

Originally Posted by Deathblow

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.

Or a few bad men do too much!

[Wino]

Originally Posted by angelize56

Or a few bad men do too much!

bad men as in ..........Cheney, Bush, Rove, Rumsfeld, Frisk, Powell, Rice et al?

[xico]

Originally Posted by poochee

Inn, hotel whatever. Big deal.
Do you not understand what I mean by "radical". I have not painted the whole gay community with a broad brush. Homosexuality is againt my religious principals and I will stand by that. If someone wants to be gay that is their business, not mine. Now getting back to my question about is it fair for that couple to complain because the owner turned them down?

This sounds like plain, old sexism, another form of racism. Hey, should a restaurant owner have to serve ******s if it's against his belief? That's the argument I heard in New Orleans for years and years. If ******s come here, I'll lose all my business. Blacks are now able to eat pretty much wherever they want now; but then we had to stage sit ins and cause an uproar before the outrageous stupidity of bigotry melted like the last snow of Spring.