It's been a while. Let's try to be more civil than in the past. LOL.... Here goes.
Just remember, despite my cursing and our mutual political hatred, I don't dislike you or anything.
True. He is an annoying twat and got famous for doing less than his namesake. At least she does something. He tries to be the princess of the party.
She "does something"? What does she do? Gain attention because she's attractive? There's a lesson for America's young females! You don't have to work or study or try hard at anything girls, as long as you're physically attractive!
But he slammed her for being intolerant.....by being intolerant. Her job was to answer the question given with poise and intelligence. She didn't lack either. Just because you don't agree with her doesn't mean she didn't give an intelligent reasoned answer. Her beliefs are her beliefs.
Yeah, her answer most certainly lackled intelligence. Intolerance and homophobia isn't what I would refer to as "intelligence". Again, this "her beliefs are her beliefs" BULLSHIT is becoming tiresome. Hate to keep using the Hitler reference, but if you can respect her for her beliefs, I guess we can respect Hitler since, after all, his "beliefs are his beliefs" right?
Yes, I did. And, when I looked up judging criteria and watched the other queens answers, she outperformed them. She was ahead on points before that round, and didn't deserve to lose. She deserves less the firestorm she is being subjected to now.
I won't argue with you here because I have no idea how she performed for the rest of the contest or what the criteria was. But usually in my book, spouting homophobic views in one of the most liberal states in the country isn't what I'd refer to as "intelligent".
No, I don't believe that. Barack Obama announced his "prejudiced" views to the world, and he wasn't penalized. Everyone looked the other way. The prejudice here isn't against gays, it's against Christian Conservatives. Suddenly, God is a bad word and sinners rule the day!
Are you pulling this too? Obama endorses civil unions, which is in itself just another word for marriage. Homosexual people can't be married in Christian churches to begin with, which only leaves civil unions. Gay marriage
IS civil unions. So no actually, Obama DOES support gay marriage.
Actually, it is different. Very different. Blacks were disallowed entrance because on face they were different. Gays have to announce their differences or act flamboyantly for people to notice them.
So being in love is announcing your difference and acting flamboyantly? Wanting to settle down with the person you love and begin a life with them is "flamboyant"? Really? On what planet does that even resemble logic? Even if a gay couple were decked out in pink feathers and leotards and walked down the street shouting "I'M GAY!", how is that wrong? Is that any different from pride in being African American? Guess we should get rid of African American History month, they want too much attention right?
It's really incredibly simple. Blacks were refused something because they were different. Gays are refused something because they are different. There is no difference.
Therefore, they are probably violating other rules of the establishment to get banned. Furthermore, I think more people should be banned from places too. For instance, I would never allow a baby into a restaurant or movie.
"Violating rules of the establishment to get banned"? What are you even referring to? Homosexuals? How do you not understand how barring someone certain privelages because of their sexual preference is wrong? I truly don't understand that. Don't Christians preach equality for all?
Again, really quite black and white and simple. If you bar someone from certain privelages because of their sexuality/race/creed, it is prejudice. That is the exact f'n dictionary DEFINITION of the word. Go argue with Webter.
Next, my real argument, is that there has to be a line somewhere. Married couples allowed to file jointly can get a discount on taxes. If the second salary bumps a couple to the next tax bracket, they can get 29% taxed on an entire sum as opposed to 22% on two separate sums. Therefore, allowing gay marriage reduces tax revenue.
Small price to pay to stop RACISM. By that logic, let's bar black people from getting married, think of all the tax money we'll save!
There is now a push to allow triad marriages. This, of course, is marriage with three people. Where do we draw the line?
Push for triad marriages? Are you serious? How long did it take you to come up with that absurd argument, as though there was ever a chance in hell that a triad marriage law would ever pass in any state for any reason? Really?
Besides, triad marriages are already semi-legal, it's called Mormonism.
For 5,000 years marriage has been between a man and a woman, and if homosexuality is genetic, as people will have you believe, then it has always existed alongside marriage.
"As people will have you believe". You make it sound like a conspiracy theory. What you should have written was "100% of Scientific facts point to Homosexuality being genetic", because then that would be the truth. Saying homosexuality is a choice would mean that heterosexuality is a choice. It's an absolutely absurd statement with no scientific merit whatsoever in any way, shape or form.
Why now should it be allowed, encouraged, and glamorized, when for 5,000 years it wasn't an issue?
Seriously? That's your arguing point? I'm sure that exact same thing was said in the 1800s when people were asked about blacks being slaves. "Hey, they've been slaves for thousands of years with no rights, and it's never been an issue! Why should we change it?". That isn't an argument FTS, that's an
excuse. And as for it not being an issue, I could cite you dozens of cases of homosexual protests and riots because of their treatment. So again, epically wrong.
Why does this overly permissive society have to infringe on traditional institutions? I don't even think it's a big deal to gay people. All the gay people I know, and surprisingly, there are a lot, think she said what she believes, and applaud her for it.
That sounds like bullshit to me. And if you really do know a ton of gay people who apparently don't care about being discriminated against, I'd say that's sad for them that they don't care about their own creed of people. As for it "not being a big deal to gay people"...yeah, go tell that to the millions of homosexual protestors every year. I'm sure they'd certainly beg to differ.
As for "infringing on traditional institutions"... doesn't divorce infrince on traditional institutions? Divorce undermines the "sanctity" of marriage just as much as homosexual marraige does, yet I don't see you having any big moral problems with divorce, or any big campaign to prevent divorce from being legal. It's just as immoral and un-Christian as gay marriage is.
None of your arguments have any basis whatsoever in fact, reason or logic, they are all entirely based on prejudice. In 20 years our children will look back at us with disbelief over how long it took us to legalize gay marriage, just as we look back in that same disbelief to the whites-only stores and water fountains of the 50's.
Well, I hope I didn't lose you. I just feel that there has to be a line somewhere, and why not here? The burden of proof is on the one trying to change the law. Are there any good arguments for changing the law? The people of California, the most liberal state in the nation, didn't think so. Super-lefty Barack Obama doesn't condone gay marriage. It's not just the conservatives who are losing you. It's also your drug-slave master.
And, from the attacks on Ms. Prejean, it seems that the gay community is just as intolerant. If they were as tolerant as they want me to be, there wouldn't be a backlash and smear campaign against her. Instead, they think that posting nudie pics against her is the mature response to a question begging for public discourse.
A moron like Diane Sawyer, who was Ms. America? Have you watched her press conferences? She is a poised, intelligent lady, who answers every question she is asked with a reasoned, concise response. I would love for the women I know and am forced to work with to be as well spoken as she is. Furthermore, this statement is completely unfair to her and pageant girls. So what if most of them are blow up dolls. You act as if their opinion matters less than yours. This is, of course, the same intolerance which you preach against.
I didn't know that "gay" was a race. And is it respectable of you to call pageant girls morons as a "race?" You are intolerant of conservative Christians, we get that. You don't need to kick a dead horse. I just wish you would give a reason instead of saying they're stupid and wrong. You consistently tell me that Conservatives are wrong because they are intolerant, you curse, and bitch and moan. That's great. You should change your name to Jeanene Garrofalo. She does the same thing, and is a laughingstock. There is a reason her Air America radio station went under. No one wants blind hatred, they want reasoning.
Yawnnn.... wake me up when she kills someone, or advances on a defenseless country. Comparing her to Hitler is just a useless point. Obama is a terrorist because his best friend bombed the US Capitol. Jesus, this is the worst argument against her I have heard. It is baseless, the analogy doesn't work, and it just shows that your level of tolerance is somewhere below hers. She never said all gays are morons. She never said that sodomy laws should be brought back. She simply said that marriage is between one man and one woman. This has been correct for 5,000 years, why change it now?
On a side note, how does posting nudie pics of Carrie Prejean help their cause? She showed her titties, so gays should be allowed to marry!!!!!
And you call pageant girls morons.[/QUOTE]
I go on Perez's website a lot, like a couple times everyday and he's nowhere near as biased or as horrible as people make him out to be, most of the times anyway lol. 