Why Homosexuality MUST Be Recriminalized! Part 3

[aCultureWarrior]

I'm actually not convinced no-fault divorce is consistent with libertarianism.

You're a Libertarian? (the things we learn about a disciple of secular humanists Ron Paul, Murray Rothbard and atheist Walter Block).

I could easily be convinced that it isn't, at least if one party wants to keep the marriage together.

Because trying to convince a 20 year old Libertarian who just recently moved out of mommy and daddy's house for the first time in his life what is right and what is wrong is what this thread is all about.

If two parties agree to a contract of "till death do us part" I'm not sure one person can just unilaterally drop out of that contract because they feel like it. I'd actually be inclined to say they could not do so.

Of course, from a Christian POV, if the partner is an unbeliever, the Bible says we're supposed to let them go anyway. Which would be inconsistent with trying to lobby for laws against it, IMO.

I don't really like using force to solve these problems. I'd rather solve them through persuasion.

Obviously you still don't know how important the institution of marriage is to a society (for those of you that still don't know, review part 2's segment on marriage to see numerous articles explaining how the institution of marriage is invaluable to society).

I see that some of the links that I used in part 1's most important post are disabled.

The following article shows what happened to our society when California Governor Ronald Reagan signed legislation allowing no fault divorce:

The Evolution of Divorce

In 1969, Governor Ronald Reagan of California made what he later admitted was one of the biggest mistakes of his political life. Seeking to eliminate the strife and deception often associated with the legal regime of fault-based divorce, Reagan signed the nation's first no-fault divorce bill. The new law eliminated the need for couples to fabricate spousal wrongdoing in pursuit of a divorce;...But no-fault divorce also gutted marriage of its legal power to bind husband and wife, allowing one spouse to dissolve a marriage for any reason — or for no reason at all.

In the decade and a half that followed, virtually every state in the Union followed California's lead and enacted a no-fault divorce law of its own. This legal transformation was only one of the more visible signs of the divorce revolution then sweeping the United States: From 1960 to 1980, the divorce rate more than doubled — from 9.2 divorces per 1,000 married women to 22.6 divorces per 1,000 married women. This meant that while less than 20% of couples who married in 1950 ended up divorced, about 50% of couples who married in 1970 did. And approximately half of the children born to married parents in the 1970s saw their parents part, compared to only about 11% of those born in the 1950s...

Read more: http://www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/the-evolution-of-divorce

No fault divorce has brought us single parent/fatherless homes, where children often times turn to drugs, alcohol, crime and (as seen in part 2's most important post) dysfunctional sexual activities.
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3393262&postcount=17

Have your sexual anarchist comrade GFR7 tell you how important the institution of marriage is to a society and how devastating it's been to one of the 3 institutions that God ordained for the governance of man (the Family; the Church and Civil Government being the other two) once unrighteous laws allowed it to dissolve...

for any reason — or for no reason at all.

 

[TracerBullet]

Your religious affiliation says "Christian". Do you believe what the Bible says about homosexuality being a sin? If not, you should change your religious affiliation.

The bible says a lot of things are sinful, most of which modern Christians have no trouble with.

That said A christian is defined as an individual with a particular relationship to God. There is no requirement to share your personal prejudices to be a Christian.

There is a fine line here. Its one thing to call someone a bigot. While I might disagree with you that that's true about the person (although not in aCW's case), its not "silencing" anyone. Its free speech.

To use the force of law to force people not to be "bigots", on the other hand, is.

bigotry is an activity that involves attacks, both personal and general, false witness, the promotion and support of discrimination and hatred all based on an individual's membership - or perceived membership - in of a minority.

With no action it is just prejudice.

The Constitution has protections for individuals against bigotry. We apply this force of law to protect people from acts of hate and discrimination.

 

[Christian Liberty]

The bible says a lot of things are sinful, most of which modern Christians have no trouble with.

That said A christian is defined as an individual with a particular relationship to God. There is no requirement to share your personal prejudices to be a Christian.



bigotry is an activity that involves attacks, both personal and general, false witness, the promotion and support of discrimination and hatred all based on an individual's membership - or perceived membership - in of a minority.

With no action it is just prejudice.

The Constitution has protections for individuals against bigotry. We apply this force of law to protect people from acts of hate and discrimination.

No, the Constitution says:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.[1]

Sorry, but "Bigoted" speech is protected.

Now, I'm not saying I condone some of the moe extreme anti-homosexual positions. I don't want to criminalize it and I certainly do not approve of what Westboro does. But just because I don't agree with those views doesn't mean they don't have the right to say them.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

(Two homosexualists arguing with each other; one pretending he believes in Biblical morals. Too funny. I see that Grossie Marowbe has used the force of TOL government once again and reported Jr. for a policy violation. Hopefully Jr. will stick around for awhile because he is fun to mock).

Back later with "The Top Homosexualist Posts of 2014!"

 

[Arthur Brain]

I almost forgot! It's that time of year where I hand out awards to some of my favorite posts by TOL's homosexualists.

This years awards will include:

The "He tries SO hard!" award.

The "Queen of Denial" award.

And amongst a few others, one of my favorites:

The "Captain Obvious" award.

Being looking for that post in a WHMBR! Part 3 thread near you soon!

Hmm, that's not a bad idea actually, here are some additional categories...:

Biggest forum crank.
Most gay obsessed.
Biggest whacked out loony tunes bat crazy loop the loop rock brained dingbat.

:think:

 

[Rusha]

Hmm, that's not a bad idea actually, here are some additional categories...:

Biggest forum crank.
Most gay obsessed.
Biggest whacked out loony tunes bat crazy loop the loop rock brained dingbat.

:think:

I never win anything.

 

[Arthur Brain]

I'll make this post about my recent ban (somewhat short), as I don't want to dwell on it.





Years ago I walked into a Libertarian Party Convention and while I couldn't see who was on stage because of the cloud of dope smoke in the air, I did hear every profanity and vulgarity known to modern man being used:

And none of them started with the letter "f" and ended with the letter "h".

The term I used is slang for a liberal woman who likes to hang around homosexual males. Refer to my posts about the late Joan Rivers or Ann Coulter (yes, Coulter is a liberal) if you need further information.

Because Libertarian WizardofOz's full intention was to silence me on this subject, I'll dedicate this next segment entitled

Silencing the Christians (a review from all 3 threads showing how the LGBTQueer movement through their thuggish tactics, attempts to silence anyone that speaks out against homosexual behavior or the agenda) to him.

Yours ended in 'g' and I don't buy for a second that you didn't know how that was going to read...If the supposed term you were going for wasn't that particular word then why didn't you simply spell it out in full anyway?

 

[aCultureWarrior]

I never win anything.

Oh but Sandy, you've won the respect and friendship of macho man Art Brain, could you ask for anything more? (Besides, as you'll see when I link the first two years awards, you did win a category).

 

[aCultureWarrior]

And now a few words from TOL's resident drama queen:

Yours ended in 'g' and I don't buy for a second that you didn't know how that was going to read...

(Hence the reason Art Brain has won this years "Queen of Denial" award hands down...oops, I wasn't supposed to give that information away as of yet).

If the supposed term you were going for wasn't that particular word then why didn't you simply spell it out in full anyway?

I had my reasons.

Anyway, believe what you want Art, as it appears since you wallow in filth, you think everyone else does as well.

On that note:

Moving on...

 

[aCultureWarrior]

I see that anarchist meshak is lingering around, probably typing yet another anarchist post of hers.

I addressed this post to Grosnick Marowbe awhile back (it was in the latest table of contents).

http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4086961&postcount=2865

Feel free to respond to the above post meshak, as Grossie Marowbe never did.

 

[Rusha]

Oh but Sandy, you've won the respect and friendship of macho man Art Brain,

Yay!!!

could you ask for anything more?

Well, of course. Winning the lotto or having a devoted, multi-billionaire as my second best friend would be spectacular!

(Besides, as you'll see when I link the first two years awards, you did win a category).

I am so honored to be included in your obsessive little world ...

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
Oh but Sandy, you've won the respect and friendship of macho man Art Brain,

Yay!!!

(Secular humanists are as thick as the river of innocent blood that they're responsible for shedding).

Quote:
could you ask for anything more?

Well, of course. Winning the lotto or having a devoted, multi-billionaire as my second best friend would be spectacular!

And here I thought maybe you're say something like:

"Stopping the slaughter of the innocents"; but then you did vote for the king of slaughter, B. Hussein Obama. Was it once or twice that you voted for him Sandy?

Quote:
(Besides, as you'll see when I link the first two years awards, you did win a category).

I am so honored to be included in your obsessive little world ...

Welcome to the obsessed with decency thread Sandy. It's an honor to have you and your friends post in my thread as I know it gives me incentive to fight evil that much harder (and I hope that it does others as well).

On that note Sandy: I'm sorry, but your posts weren't hateful enough to get into this years awards.

But then I guess other than electing baby murderer, sodomite lover Hilary Clinton as the next POTUS, that gives you something to look forward to in the future, huh?

 

[Rusha]

Welcome to the obsessed with decency thread Sandy.

It's your thread ... and your imagination to claim it is something it is not.

It's an honor to have you and your friends post in my thread as I know it gives me incentive to fight evil that much harder (and I hope that it does others as well).

No doubt your Part 4 will pay off. Homosexuality will be illegal, and freedom of and from religion will be a thing of the past. Yay you!

On that note Sandy: I'm sorry, but your posts weren't hateful enough to get into this years awards.

Sigh. It's true ... being mean is just not my cup of tea.

But then I guess other than electing baby murderer, sodomite lover Hilary Clinton as the next POTUS, that gives you something to look forward to in the future, huh?

:chuckle: That is so cute when you go fishing for private info ...

Have fun with that.

 

[TracerBullet]

No, the Constitution says:



Sorry, but "Bigoted" speech is protected.

yes bigoted speech is protected. People can say any racist, antisemitic or homophobic thing they please. However acting on those racist, antisemitic or homophobic ideals is against the law.

Now, I'm not saying I condone some of the moe extreme anti-homosexual positions. I don't want to criminalize it and I certainly do not approve of what Westboro does. But just because I don't agree with those views doesn't mean they don't have the right to say them.

you have the right to say any racist, antisemitic or homophobic you like. Everyone else has the right to respond to your statements and hold you accountable for what you say.

 

[Arthur Brain]

And now a few words from TOL's resident drama queen:

(Hence the reason Art Brain has won this years "Queen of Denial" award hands down...oops, I wasn't supposed to give that information away as of yet).

Dude, you go on more rants here than anyone else so quit with the projection for the new year?

I had my reasons.

Not very good ones were they considering the result?

Anyway, believe what you want Art, as it appears since you wallow in filth, you think everyone else does as well.

On that note:

Moving on...

You said the word ended in 'h'. if it's the one I'm thinking you were 'alluding' to then it ends in 'g' but not 'ing' as that would make no sense, so what were your reasons for not typing the actual word out? Was it too vulgar by any chance?

 

[aCultureWarrior]

You said the word ended in 'h'. if it's the one I'm thinking you were 'alluding' to then it ends in 'g' but not 'ing' as that would make no sense, so what were your reasons for not typing the actual word out? Was it too vulgar by any chance?

You might want to take a look at the conversation that Sandy and I had shortly before my ban Art.

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Granted, it was a given that anna was the type of woman that just loves to hang around male homosexuals (they exchange dresses and talk about hairstyles, etc.)?

They do have a keen sense of fashion. Back in the 80's, I had my best haircut ever delivered by a really cute gay dude at the beauty school my sister was attending. He had that whole Tony Orlando look going on.

http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4165834&postcount=4484

(I've seen a picture of Art, and he definitely doesn't have the Tony Orlando look going on...but he is without a doubt TOL's...

Queen of Denial).

 

[Arthur Brain]

You might want to take a look at the conversation that Sandy and I had shortly before my ban Art.

I saw the conversation at the time and you're squirming out of answering. Why are you claiming the term you were using ended in 'h' when it actually ends in 'g'? It's a vulgar and pathetic term but adding 'ing' to it would make no sense so why were you so reticent to not type it out in full and write what could only reasonably be construed as obvious implied profanity? Got no answer?

(I've seen a picture of Art, and he definitely doesn't have the Tony Orlando look going on...but he is without a doubt TOL's...

Queen of Denial).

Anyone who can access my home page can see what I look like brainiac so several people know what I look like doofus. You really aren't all that bright are ya?

 

[Rusha]

(I've seen a picture of Art, and he definitely doesn't have the Tony Orlando look going on...but he is without a doubt TOL's...

Queen of Denial).

Once again, your selective vision is showing.

 

[Christian Liberty]

(Two homosexualists arguing with each other; one pretending he believes in Biblical morals. Too funny. I see that Grossie Marowbe has used the force of TOL government once again and reported Jr. for a policy violation. Hopefully Jr. will stick around for awhile because he is fun to mock).

Back later with "The Top Homosexualist Posts of 2014!"

What did he report me for, out of curiosity?

Hmm, that's not a bad idea actually, here are some additional categories...:

Biggest forum crank.
Most gay obsessed.
Biggest whacked out loony tunes bat crazy loop the loop rock brained dingbat.

:think:

Why so many categories that will be won by the same person? Everyone else will feel left out

I'm going to nominate myself for "most libertarian." Anyone want to challenge me on that?

I see that anarchist meshak is lingering around, probably typing yet another anarchist post of hers.

I addressed this post to Grosnick Marowbe awhile back (it was in the latest table of contents).

http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4086961&postcount=2865

Feel free to respond to the above post meshak, as Grossie Marowbe never did.

Meshak isn't really an anarchist, she's just anti-political. Genuine anarchists are downright opposed to the State as an institution. Meshak just thinks Christians should ignore it. I'm more anarchist than she is.

yes bigoted speech is protected. People can say any racist, antisemitic or homophobic thing they please. However acting on those racist, antisemitic or homophobic ideals is against the law.



you have the right to mane any racist, antisemitic or homophobic you like. Everyone else has the right to respond to your statements and hold you accountable for what you say.

If by "acting on" you mean acts of force against whatever group you don't like, we of course agree.

On the other hand, if it means only passive non-association, that should be completely legal. I am not sure why you care so much about the current laws. The US government isn't a moral authority.

 

[annabenedetti]

You might want to take a look at the conversation that Sandy and I had shortly before my ban Art.

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Granted, it was a given that anna was the type of woman that just loves to hang around male homosexuals (they exchange dresses and talk about hairstyles, etc.)?

The idea that you spent even two seconds thinking about what I do really creeps me out.

(I've seen a picture of Art, and he definitely doesn't have the Tony Orlando look going on...but he is without a doubt TOL's...

Queen of Denial).

It must be so frustrating to you, knowing that no matter what inanity you come up with you're just one post away from another one, and another and another.

You're trapped forever in the WHMBR crazy maze, with no way out. (That's a good thing for the rest of us.)