Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com > General Discussion Forums > The Club House > Miss California stands up for her beliefs

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-21-2009, 11:15 AM   #11
Supporting Member
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Mark F's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Bedford Texas
Posts: 2,855
Liked 47 Times on 30 Posts
Likes Given: 12

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by matt g View Post
By posting this thread, and quoting scriptures, you're "forcing your opinions" on me the same way I'm doing it to you.
Here is my "OPINION": I don't give a sh!t... someone can marry a sheep for all I care. I'm not "forcing this opinion" on anyone because... well... if you don't dump in my Post Toasties, I won't piss on your parade...
__________________
*** Don't Mess With TEXAS ***
Μολὼν λάβε
Mark F is offline  
 
Old 04-21-2009, 12:07 PM   #12
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
mpd8488's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 245
Liked 1 Times on 1 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bkt View Post
Words have meaning. Marriage, using its proper definition, is a religious event; it is a sacrament -- a commitment -- before God, friends, family and a member of the clergy. Virtually all religions recognize marriage as existing only between a man and a woman. Because marriage is a religious entity, the government should have no hand or say in it at all, whether for heterosexual or homosexual couples.

Civil unions protect couples legally in a number of ways, and because this is a civil entity the government SHOULD be involved. It is unreasonable to deny a couple a civil union, and all the protection under the law it affords, to a couple regardless of the genders of the people involved.

Why is this an issue? Again, words have meaning. When we seek to legalize or ban gay marriage, we potentially pit the full force of the law against religious doctrine. If gay "marriage" is legalized yet churches refuse to conduct ceremonies for gay couples because it goes against the tenets of the religion, has the door been opened to sue the church?

That rubs the First Amendment the wrong way.

What Hilton did was wrong. He punished someone for her beliefs, and this is exactly the sort of thing that could come back to haunt him.
Very well put.

If more people would be willing to separate their personal, private religious views from public politics this nation would do a much better job of addressing issues that are actually important.
__________________
mpd8488 is offline  
 
Old 04-21-2009, 12:18 PM   #13
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
SGT-MILLER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 2,354
Liked 6 Times on 5 Posts

Default

Quote:
By posting this thread, and quoting scriptures, you're "forcing your opinions" on me the same way I'm doing it to you.
Nobody forced you to read the thread, tough guy. You did that on your own.
__________________
"TRAIN WITH WHAT YOU HAVE, NOT WITH WHAT YOU WISH YOU HAVE."
SGT-MILLER is offline  
 
Old 04-21-2009, 02:25 PM   #14
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: everywhere
Posts: 9,639
Liked 9 Times on 9 Posts

Default

I think BKT nails it perfectly.

I also think that groups who percieve some wrong done to them have a tendency to go overboard to call out whatever icon or archetype they feel symbolizes their "opressors", and they're often wrong.

I don't attend a church as a self professed Satanist, and demand all the rights and priveleges afforded members of that church. I either conform to their rules, or find a church that doesn't have a problem with me and my bucket of goat's blood.

The Gay Movement, rather than be content with the rights they already have, wants to go overboard and demand that you not only accept them, but embrace them. And if you don't, there's something wrong with you.

You want a civil union, fine. Am I duty bound to approve? No. Can I inflict my beliefs on you? Again, no. Would some devout religious people object to the word "marriage"? Probably.

__________________
Benning Boy is offline  
 
Old 04-21-2009, 02:48 PM   #15
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Jo da Plumbr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 4,754
Liked 10 Times on 8 Posts

Default

Everyone is focused on the answer; I’m more upset by the question. This is a beauty pageant, why are they putting their political agenda in the middle of it.

I bet of all the contestants they thought they would get the gay support from Ms. California. Wrong!!! We’ve voted twice now against having gay marriage forced on us, but still the leftist media won’t let it go.

__________________
Jo da Plumbr is offline  
 
Old 04-21-2009, 02:53 PM   #16
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: I see you, and you will not know when I will strike
Posts: 24,301
Liked 3474 Times on 1607 Posts
Likes Given: 3590

Default

I want to know why Perez Hilton is still breathing MY AIR?!?

Hasn't his 15 minutes been up for, oh I don't know, a DECADE by now??????

Who, EXACTLY, is he relevant too in the grand scheme???

JD

__________________
Dillinger is offline  
 
Old 04-21-2009, 03:15 PM   #17
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: everywhere
Posts: 9,639
Liked 9 Times on 9 Posts

Default

I'll have to goole Mr. Hilton, as I've no idea who he is.

Judging from what I've seen, I surmise he's an abrasive little s#!t with no grasp that a beauty pageant is not a pre qualifier for an international diplomatic post, nor is it a forum to show us how ferociously fabulous he is.

It's a time honored T&A show for straight men to think to themselves "I'd hit that", and for gay men to think to themselves "Ooohh, I just wanna scratch her eyes out".

I'm not a Christian. I respect their beliefs, but I'll add this. If they are correct about the return of their Savior, I think when he gets here, he's gonna be more than a little upset with the way things have turned out.

__________________
Benning Boy is offline  
 
Old 04-21-2009, 03:18 PM   #18
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,437
Liked 1 Times on 1 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bkt View Post
Words have meaning. Marriage, using its proper definition, is a religious event; it is a sacrament -- a commitment -- before God, friends, family and a member of the clergy. Virtually all religions recognize marriage as existing only between a man and a woman. Because marriage is a religious entity, the government should have no hand or say in it at all, whether for heterosexual or homosexual couples.

Civil unions protect couples legally in a number of ways, and because this is a civil entity the government SHOULD be involved. It is unreasonable to deny a couple a civil union, and all the protection under the law it affords, to a couple regardless of the genders of the people involved.

Why is this an issue? Again, words have meaning. When we seek to legalize or ban gay marriage, we potentially pit the full force of the law against religious doctrine. If gay "marriage" is legalized yet churches refuse to conduct ceremonies for gay couples because it goes against the tenets of the religion, has the door been opened to sue the church?

That rubs the First Amendment the wrong way.

What Hilton did was wrong. He punished someone for her beliefs, and this is exactly the sort of thing that could come back to haunt him.
Again, this is more evidence that BKT is the wisest motherf*cker here. +8 sideways, broseph
__________________
user4 is offline  
 
Old 04-21-2009, 03:42 PM   #19
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
matt g's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,885
Liked 7 Times on 5 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SGT-MILLER View Post
Nobody forced you to read the thread, tough guy. You did that on your own.
It's my job as a moderator to read these threads. It's my duty as a human being and American citizen to speak out against biggotry and tyranny when it rears it's ugly head, especially when it happens under the guise of religion.

Jesus loved all unconditionally. Not once did he speak out against homosexuality, not once is it decried in the New Testament. The books of the Old Testament are nothing more than fables stolen from the Jewish faith.

Most of you are Christians. The name alone would suggest that you'd follow the teachings of Christ, rather than those of the Jews.

Christ taught things like "Turn the other cheek," "Resist not evil," "The meek shall inherit the earth," and "Judge not, lest ye be judged."

These are the true teachings of Christ. They're also the things that helped lead to his death at the hands of the Jews.

Are you folks Christian, because you follow the teachings of Christ, or are you something else, that relies on the teachings of the Bible that has been bastardized and altered over the years to suit the needs of whomever is in power at the time?
__________________

"'Did you ever wonder why we had to run for shelter when the promise of a brave new world unfurled beneath a clear blue sky? "
Roger Waters

Vote freedom, join the Libertarian Party.

matt g is offline  
 
Old 04-21-2009, 03:44 PM   #20
FTF_SUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
matt g's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,885
Liked 7 Times on 5 Posts

Default

If the word marriage is the problem, then we should do away with it in all but a religious context. You and your life partner can celebrate your civil union anywhere you want. Your marriage can only be celebrated in your church.

Equal is equal. Fair is fair.

__________________

"'Did you ever wonder why we had to run for shelter when the promise of a brave new world unfurled beneath a clear blue sky? "
Roger Waters

Vote freedom, join the Libertarian Party.

matt g is offline  
 
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Firearms Forum Replies Last Post
God, Ghosts and other faith based beliefs supergus The Club House 13 06-17-2009 01:28 AM
Did I miss something? BILLYBOB44 The Club House 4 03-06-2009 01:57 PM
Boy stands up for Old Glory sculker The Club House 7 05-20-2008 01:19 AM
Make your own target stands ScottG The Club House 12 04-26-2008 05:46 PM