Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules - You must read(Updated!)

DISCLAIMER

You agree to NOT use this site or its affiliated sites, services you may have access to as a result of being a member here (subscriber or otherwise), to post items (images, textual material, etc.) that are pornographic in nature, illegal in the United States and/or the country you reside in, support or encourage illegal activities (e.g., terrorism), advertise for your own personal profit, or send unsolicited messages (i.e. SPAM) to members or non-members.

AND

You agree that if any clause or component of this document is found to not be legally binding in a court of law of proper jurisdiction then the remainder of this document shall remain fully binding and in full force.

AND

You agree to NOT hold Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (makers of the forum software), uspoliticsonline.com, sites affiliated with uspoliticsonline.com, its administrators, its moderators, others associated with its operation, and its owners liable for any and all of the following (in whole or in part):
Personal insults/attacks by other members.
The content posted by other members, whether directed at you personally or a label/classification you associate with. This includes remarks you consider to be libelous or slanderous in any way.
Any financial or time loss due to your participation here or as a result of something you read at this site, including posts/PMs by other members and feature(s)/software available at the domain uspoliticsonline.com.
The dissemination of any personal information about you as a result of either your negligence (e.g. staying logged into a computer that others have access to) or willingness to post such information on a public and or private forum, private message or chat box. This includes using your real name or other details that could allow other members and/or the general public to determine your true identity. You are prohibited from using your real name on these forums, either as your username or in posts / PMs you write.

FORUM RULES, IN ADDITION TO THE DISCLAIMER

1. These rules apply to all sections of USPOL, including public and private forums, blogs, and visitor messages.

2. You cannot attack and/or personally insult someone. You cannot bait other forum members; this includes referring to posters by derogatory terms. Please, remain courteous and respectful to all forum members at all times. You agree to take responsibility for reporting such posts when you come across them. Please, use the ignore feature if need be. Any member who intentionally and continually posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion, may be regarded as a “troll” by staff, and have their account suspended or banned.

3. You cannot harass (sexually or otherwise) other members. This includes malicious, slanderous, or defamatory comments. If you are not sure if something you write is inappropriate or not then don't say it. Err on the side of caution.

4. Copying and Pasting Articles, and Starting New Threads. You cannot simply cut and paste in posts or when starting threads. You MUST provide the identifying information (source, author, date, and URL). You must also offer some original thoughts along with the cut and paste. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts from the article. Excerpts really shouldn’t be more then a paragraph or two. Furthermore, if you use images or other copyrighted material in your posts or signature you must have permission of the copyright holder unless you know for a fact that the image is in the public domain. In addition:
a. It must include the identifying information; e.g., where available, the author, the publication, the date, the URL.
b. The member must offer some context, including: How did you hear of this article? What is your opinion? Why is it important to you? Why should it be important to forum readers? The more context you provide, the more you assist others in gauging the excerpted information's significance.
c. You may copy and paste an excerpt or series of excerpts, not the whole thing or even the majority of the whole thing to encourage people to read the entire article.

A violation of any of the above will result in the deletion or closing of the post or thread and could earn you a warning or suspension. If you have any questions concering any of the above please PM a moderator and we will be happy to clarify.

5. You cannot post the same thing in multiple forums. You must not open similar threads about the same or a similar topic. You cannot spam the board or send unsolicited messages to members via PM, email or any other means.

6. Do not post off-topic. You cannot derail a thread with off topic posts.

7. You cannot shout in posts. This includes posting in all CAPS, bold, lIkE tHiS, and extra large font. Posts should also be one color, although you may use an additional color for highlighting ideas you wish to address.

8. You may not alter quotes in a way that misrepresents what was originally said.

9. Multiple accounts are not allowed. If you are found to have more than one account all accounts will be permanently terminated.

10. You cannot have a user name, avatar, signature, or post images that are deliberately offensive. That includes the display of overly explicit or graphic images that may not be suitable for minors.

11. Signatures can not have more than three lines of text, with a font size no larger than "4", and no more than two font colors. Images in signatures cannot be any larger than 800 pixels wide x 200 pixels tall. Animated images are not allowed.

12. You are prohibited from taking any action to disturb the use of the services by others, distribute material that contains viruses, spyware or any other malicious code or harmful programs. This includes interfering with the working of the network, attempts to gain unauthorized access to a service or other computer systems that are part of the site or any other site, by use of the available services.

13. Discussion of moderation actions in public and/or private forums is not permitted. Moderation actions include warnings, suspensions and the editing or deletion of posts. If a member has a concern about a moderation action, he or she is invited to address it with the board staff via Private Message. This rule exists to protect the privacy of all posters with regards to disciplinary action. The moderator team will never publicly discuss the warnings/suspensions of any posters, and we ask that you return the favor, whether about yourself or another poster. Posting about moderation actions in the public forums constitutes a violation. You are free to discuss a moderation action via Private Message with the moderator involved, but you may not harass or abuse the moderators (as already specified in the forum rules). In practical terms, this means that once a moderator tells you his or her decision is final, no further PMs about that moderation action are permitted. If you have a concern about a moderation action, you are free to appeal to a Forum Administrator via Private Message. You may only discuss moderator activities or discussion of moderation with staff member if you chose to private message and are not under any circumstances allowed to use the PM function to forward or promote moderator discussion in regards to specific forum action, amongst other regular members. Administrators do reserve the right to read said PMs and may do so ; if that results in discovery of messaging between posters of such moderator discussion then it will lead to the same violation being received for discussing said moderator actions on the forum. If you receive a message to the effect of having been given moderator information, please report it to a member of staff. Engaging back in that discussion with the original violator will earn you just as stiff a sanction.

14. Do not ignore moderators or administrators. Do not repost something a moderator or administrator has deleted. You cannot have moderators or administrators on your ignore list.

15. Only post in English. Short passages in foreign languages may be acceptable if its use seems helpful for the ongoing discussion and when there is no indication of a potential violation of the forum rules. Always provide a translation into English in such cases. In case of doubt, the incident will be regarded as a violation, no matter of the actual meaning of the foreign language text.

16. The use of words/comments etc. written by other posters, without approval of the poster in your personal signature is not allowed nor are references, by name, to other posters allowed.

17. Please pay attention to announcements by Forum staff that will be found in the "Welcome! / News & Announcements" forum from time to time.

18. Use of "liar", "lies", "lying", etc. Accusing someone of being a "liar" or similar accusations towards other posters will generally be regarded as implying an insult and therewith as a violation of the forum rules. "I question the validity of your statement because...", "That's not the truth" or "you are wrong about that" are sufficient for any decent discussion if you want to disagree with somebody's assertions.

19. Thread opening restriction for new members. In order to control SPAM, new members must have moderator approval to start their own threads.

20. Thread titles must relate to the discussion within. Do not make misleading titles, or titles such as "Guess what..." or "You'll never believe this...". Members need to be able to identify the general gist of the thread via the title. Profanity in thread titles is not permitted.

21. Forum members are instructed to use forum tools and abilities for their intended purposes and no other. If members identify a forum glitch or weakness of any kind that allows you to see or do something you know you shouldn't, please report it. Being aware of any unintended access to the Forum and failing to take appropriate steps to notify staff of said access issues, will create a presumption of seeking to take advantage of the issue, will result in either account suspension, or banishment.

22. Any link to a site that contains graphic content, must contain a warning describing what a person might reasonably expect to view if they click on said link. No graphic pictures are to be posted on the Forum.

23. Threats or advocations of violence toward a public figure, or member of the Forum, will not be tolerated. Conversation about revolution or the like is not prohibited by this rule; directly calling for violence is, eg “It's time to kill every <redacted> that voted for the bill,” is not permitted.

24. Accounts with no posts will be deleted after 30 days. Inactive accounts with low post histories may be deleted after one year.

25. Private forums are something offered to members that decide to contribute directly to this site via donations. These donations help immensely in keeping this site up and running. Private forums are designed to allow the contributing member discuss whatever he/she wants to and to have the power to direct that discussion in whatever way he/she chose. They were not designed nor are they intended for simply talking trash about members that don't have access to the forum. While the targeted members cannot see the forum or the comments, it creates a negative atmosphere that really isn't necessary. If you want to totally rip apart ideas, ideologies, political parties, etc. that is fine. We simply ask that you don't use the private forums as a means to attack other members that aren't privy to such comments. It is difficult enough to have a political discussion forum because the discussion of politics is inherently heated as people are so passionate about their beliefs...the ones that take the time to come to such a site in the first place at least. The idea of private forums is so people of similar political persuasions can discuss whatever they want without fear of being attacked. Nonetheless, we hope that a certain level of maturity would foster itself within such an arena and not simply lend itself to a bashing forum.

Private Forums are governed by all of the above Forum rules. In addition:
  • Private forums that essentially become abandoned homes will be subject to deletion, donation or reorganization. Just like elsewhere in life, clubs sometimes lose their vitality and purpose for a myriad of reasons. If it becomes clear that a private forum has clearly lost its vitality and nobody is going to really use it anymore, owners are advised to consider whether to reuse the forum for something new and productive rather than let them linger or notify the Administration that the forum should be rearranged for other purposes, closed, merged with other compatible private forums, donated to others for new purposes, etc. Do not be concerned that your forum must be a membership and post count race with others to avoid falling under this policy; the question is whether your forum has actual vitality instead of being 'brain dead.'
  • Additionally, private forums may only be owned by subscribed members in the Platinum or Diamond categories.
  • Should the owner of a private forum be banned, quit USPOL or otherwise abandon the forum the PF will be transferred to another owner or closed.
  • Propriety of private forums. Administration staff will determine the desirability of a proposed private forum and enact any conditions upon it to ensure its purpose is productive.
  • Any and all instances of sharing accounts by allowing someone else to log in under their own account so they can see into private forums for which they are otherwise not permitted to access, will be deemed violation of the double account rule and all caught doing so will be permanently banned.
  • Relaying private forum posts and information to other posters who are not members of the particular private forum for any negative or destructive purpose (eg mean-spirited gossip, fueling interpersonal disputes, etc), is not permitted, and will constitute a violation of the Forum rules.
  • For purposes of monitoring USPOL Terms of Service Administrative staff (not Moderators) will have access to Private Forums.
  • All Private Forums must have at least one active Administrator as a member for purposes of handling issues which cannot be addressed through moderation permissions.
  • Discussion of moderation activities is prohibited on the open site and is likewise prohibited in Private Forums.

26. The administrators and moderators reserve the right to edit and/or delete a post,and/or close a thread, and/or delete a thread at any time if of the opinion that the post is too obscene, inappropriate, or the discussion has run its course.

27. 'Back seat moderating' is not allowed. If you take issue with another poster's contribution to the forum, you're welcome to report any posts you think are out of line, but you should not bring it up publicly within the forum.

28. Images in posts (whether embedded or hot linked) must be reasonable in size. 800x800 should be considered a good rule of thumb. Excessively large images make it difficult for users on mobile devices to load pages. If necessary please simply link to very large images using the URL tags. In addition, the following images are not permitted (including, but not limited to pages with images or videos containing):
  • Strategically covered nudity
  • Sheer or see-through clothing
  • Lewd or provocative poses
  • Close-ups of breasts, buttocks, or crotches

29. Any solicitation or communication involving sports betting / gambling / online casinos / bookies and or internet based card or slot machine systems or sites will lead to all said content being physically removed from the site and server, and will lead to any and or all parties involved being permanently removed and banned from the site to the farthest extent possible. This includes any links to any form of bookmaker, casino, any type of game or match or event where money transfers on the outcome or link of any sort to wire act violations and or anything in violation of either the Internet Gambling Regulation, Consumer Protection, and Enforcement Act, Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006, or the Federal wire Act. This applies not only to the open forum but all and or any chat rooms, articles, private messages and or private forums. All content that violates this rule will be deleted, without notice.

CONSEQUENCES

Failure to comply with any of the forum rules may result in your posts being edited or deleted and/or your account being temporarily or permanently banned from the forums. U.S. Politics Online uses a warning system that generates an automated Private Message to members when they are in violation of Forum rules. The decision to issue a warning is left to the discretion of the moderator or administrator handling the violation. If a member does not agree with an action taken by a moderator, they can appeal to an administrator after seeking clarification from the moderator who issued the warning/infraction and appealing to them in the first instance. Members MAY NOT harass a moderator or administrator by sending excessive PMs when they are discussing an appeal.

Violations are assigned a point value. Points are valid for 30 days. When a members earns 10 points, their account will be automatically suspended: five (5) days for a first suspension; ten (10) days for a second suspension; and twenty (20) days for a third suspension. If a member incurs an additional 10 points after having served three periods of suspension, then they will be permanently banned from the Forum.

Point values are as follows:
Zero (0) points – Warning
Two (2) points - Minor infraction / Non post infraction (minor) / Off topic posts / spamming
Four (4) points - Academic dishonesty / Baiting / Discussing moderator or administrator actions / Implying an insult / Minor insults / Moderate infraction / Non-post infraction (moderate) / Thread dumping
Six (6) points - Direct insult at another member / major infraction / Non-post infraction (major)
Ten (10) points - Act of criminality, or advocating thereof

The administrators and moderators also bear the right to issue warnings, temporarily suspend or ban posters for continued trolling or other serious misconduct (eg. professional spamming) even if the poster has not yet reached the maximum warning points or suspensions level. Other options if the above consequences do not seem adequate include placing the member in a moderation queue, which means all posts will have to be approved before they are posted to the board.

PRIVACY POLICY

All information obtained by the end user via the registration process is for internal purposes only and will not be sold to or shared with any third parties. However, if the end user participates in illegal activities and a court of proper jurisdiction orders U.S. Politics Online to release certain information about said user then we will act according to the law. Furthermore, no information will be released on threat of a lawsuit, attempted or actual intimidation, or due to any other reason except as notated in the first sentence of this paragraph. Nonetheless, keep in mind that the information we do have is very limited and generally only consists of the IP address a member uses.

SUBSCRIPTIONS

U.S. Politics Online offers several subscription plans to help cover the operational costs of the site. As a thank you for your donation, you will receive special added benefits meant to enhance your U.S. Politics Online experience. Plans vary in price, starting at only $0.05/day, and benefits vary with the price. Benefits include ability to go straight to new posts, to search the forum, larger avatar, private forums, invisible mode, photo gallery, email, web hosting, and no advertisement banners. Please, click here for more details.
See more
See less

Cities seeking to ban Chick-Fil-A?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: Cities seeking to ban Chick-Fil-A?

    Originally posted by OldmanDan View Post
    You and I both, but we don't get the luxury that libs have of writing their own moral code and changing it at will.
    Nor do you get to enjoy the luxury of imposing your morality on anyone else.

    Liberals don't do that. They don't impose their morality on anyone. I don't know a single liberal who's upset that I'm married to a woman. However, I know a boatload of conservatives who are upset about a gay couple we know being married. Like I said, I'm happily heterosexual. But, even if I wasn't, I wouldn't have to be concerned with liberals imposing some ridiculous restriction which may preclude me from marrying the person I love.

    Conservatives, however, would do exactly that.

    מה מכילות החדשות?


    • Re: Cities seeking to ban Chick-Fil-A?

      Originally posted by HonorsDaddy View Post
      Behavior, on the other hand, is. A behavior in which less than 2% of the entire human population engages is by definition abnormal. Sorry there are some homosexuals who find the use of plain and accurate language to be offensive, but that really is not my problem.
      So, less than 2% of the population engages in a behavior, and that makes it "abnormal".

      I can accept that.

      Just so I understand, though: You want to ban something because the behavior is considered abnormal?

      מה מכילות החדשות?


      • Re: Cities seeking to ban Chick-Fil-A?

        Originally posted by OldmanDan View Post
        As was homosexual activity until late in the 20th century.
        hey genius owning alchol was illegal for awhile there too, as were women and ethnic folk voting or owning property. That's not a legitimate criteria for whether or not something is "wrong" or "bad" or should be illegal.
        Do you understand what informed consent is? Children can't give it being not adults. Its why when an 18 yr old who just turned 18 gets caught finger banging his 15 yr old girlfriend its called statutory rape. she can't consent she's 15. therefore pedophilia being legal: never going to happen unless we completely rewrite our entire legal system and people somehow lose their aversion and inherent disgust for child molesters.
        bestiality: same thing. animals cannot consent to sex acts, not to mention they don't WANT to mate with anything not their species as most animals mate only during estrus (heat) with the notable exception of dogs and dolphins which have sex for pleasure and dominance purposes between their own species. when a dog humps your leg he's not trying to bust a nut, he's asserting his dominance over you.
        Keep talking and prove you know jack shit about the legal system.

        מה מכילות החדשות?


        • Re: Cities seeking to ban Chick-Fil-A?

          Originally posted by OldmanDan View Post
          When they are ordered by their employer to say Happy Holidays instead of Merry Christmas, that is a problem. Their employer is bowing to political correctness based on hate.
          its not based on hate for most people (of course rabid anti christians exist. so do rabid christians see westboro baptist church). for most people its based on annoyance. imagine you're jewish, or pagan. you celebrate high holidays at the same time as christians and with the same general atmosphere of feasting, reverence, celebration, gift giving etc. As a pagan you know that Christians co opted the pagan festival of Saturnalia/yuletide etc as well as multiple religious traditions (mistletoe = norse, tree= german pagan, gift giving = roman pagan ) and now claim them as their own. they even go so far as to erect these things in the public square with your tax dollars using city workers, then they have the audacity to further marginalize your beliefs (that they thought were cool enough to steal) by telling you "merry christmas" incessantly instead of a more generalized form "happy holidays" which acknowledges that Christianity is not the only religious belief with a high holiday during the last weeks of december. Might annoy the shit out of you enough that you bitch alot, don't you think?
          Its got nothing to do with a war on Christianity. Its got everything to do with a war on the idea that Christianity is the only religion that matters or that Christian beliefs should be catered to by our secular government in detriment not only to other religions and their beliefs but also to atheists and agnostics who don't believe at all as is their right.

          מה מכילות החדשות?


          • Re: Cities seeking to ban Chick-Fil-A?

            Originally posted by fishjoel View Post
            I believe homosexual acts are immoral.
            and i believe that legislating morality is immoral. the only laws we should have are the ones that regulate the bare minimum of behaviors necessary for society to function: no theft. Let me explain: all things that should be prevented by law involve theft. Murder is theft of life, rape theft of innocence, power and choice, theft of property is obvious, fraud is theft through deceit, obstruction of justice is theft of justice. Shooting heroin? not theft as you can't steal from yourself and "the people" have no legitimate claim upon your property, life, or liberty beyond simple payment of taxes. Putting your dick in another guys ass? not theft so long as the catcher consents to sex which any adult may do provided they have not been deemed completely mentally insane (as in cannot perceive reality from fiction insane. completely bonkers). Munchin rug? same thing.
            You social conservatives need to just but the fuck out of other people's lives and bedrooms. So some queers get married, so the fuck what? Doesn't change your marriage whatsoever unless you've got a really shitty marriage. the divorce rate is OVER 50%, thats a real sacred institution you've got there, not to mention that in the US marriage is purely a STATE institution rather than a religious one (keeping in mind equal protection etc) which is why you have to A) get a marriage license before you can legally be considered married unless you've been living together for a number of years in which case you can have a common law marriage and b) a justice of the peace is sufficient to marry ANYONE with a license. no priest need be involved unless it just gives you the warm and fuzzies. also why priests have to take a STATE COURSE in marriage and they say "by the power vested in me by God/etc and the great state of X I now pronounce you husband and wife" at the end. You can be married by a priest in front of God and everyone but if you didn't get a license for that marriage YOU"RE NOT MARRIED. Its a legal issue for taxation, inheritance, and hospital visitation, thats it. That's what marriage is to the government of these United States. To certain individuals who subscribe to religion it can also be about jesus safeguarding your relationship and being together in heaven etc etc etc etc. but that has no LEGAL STANDING. Never has, never will as we are a SECULAR nation made up of some religious people of various faiths and some not religious people of no faith at all. Yes you have religous freedom. Fine. Don't want to marry fags at your church? Don't, you don't have to freedom of religion (which is not carte blance to do whatever the fuck you want in any case whatsoever, but in this case it does work for you. A case where it doesn't work for you is healthcare for contraception if you're catholic or abortions if you're pro life and that employee has a health insurance plan you provide in lieu of extra pay. you don't get to dictate healthcare decisions for your employees when you provide benefits in lieu of extra pay. period.)

            מה מכילות החדשות?


            • Re: Cities seeking to ban Chick-Fil-A?

              Originally posted by The Islander View Post
              So, less than 2% of the population engages in a behavior, and that makes it "abnormal".

              I can accept that.

              Just so I understand, though: You want to ban something because the behavior is considered abnormal?
              I said nothing about banning it in any way. In fact, I've repeatedly stated, I don't give a damn who you fuck. Really. Don't care. Sex is an activity between two or more consenting adults and it is solely the business of those involved.

              You just illustrated the entire issue I have though. Just because I am not actively encouraging homosexual activity and am in fact pointing out that it is very different than heterosexual activity, you assume, wrongly, that I oppose it. Far from it - in fact, I heartily endorse homosexual or bisexual activity involving attractive women in my presence at any time they may feel the urge.

              Seriously though - if a man finds love in another man, or a woman in another woman, good for them! Love is a hard thing to find. I'm happy for those who find it.

              Now, this is the kicker though - I do not believe one's sexual choices should be in any way protected or granted special protections by law. Yes, you have the right to be with whomever wishes to be with you - but with that comes consequences whether you are straight, gay or flexible. Sometimes those consequences are positive, sometimes neutral, sometimes negative. That's life.

              CFA is not calling for homosexuality to be banned. Cathy was merely stating his personal opinion. They do not discriminate against homosexuals in any way either. That does not mean if you want to work there and flaunt your gayness all over the place that you're not going to get fired. I would expect the same thing would happen if you were flagrantly heterosexual as well. Nobody wants to know what you're doing on your off hours - keep it to yourself. Really.

              I'm not saying my personal experiences encompass the sum total of human behavior, but I have noticed those who bitch the loudest about being persecuted for being gay make a point of letting everyone know they are gay even when it is inappropriate to do so. By "inappropriate" i mean, there is no legitimate reason to mention at your place of employment that you are gay. None. If co-workers figure it out because your partner drops you off one day, fine. If they give you some good natured ribbing about it, tough shit, welcome to the human race. If you get fired because of it, I'll be the first to say the company was out of line. On the other hand, if you march into the job interview and say something about how you regularly attend the Pride parades, well I'm probably not going to hire you - and its your own fault. I would react the same if you were straight and bragged about your upcoming vacation to Hedo.

              See how that works?

              Keep your private life private and I don't give a damn. Make it public and you have earned whatever ridicule you receive.

              מה מכילות החדשות?


              • Re: Cities seeking to ban Chick-Fil-A?

                Originally posted by reality View Post
                hey genius owning alchol was illegal for awhile there too, as were women and ethnic folk voting or owning property. That's not a legitimate criteria for whether or not something is "wrong" or "bad" or should be illegal.
                Do you understand what informed consent is? Children can't give it being not adults. Its why when an 18 yr old who just turned 18 gets caught finger banging his 15 yr old girlfriend its called statutory rape. she can't consent she's 15. therefore pedophilia being legal: never going to happen unless we completely rewrite our entire legal system and people somehow lose their aversion and inherent disgust for child molesters.
                bestiality: same thing. animals cannot consent to sex acts, not to mention they don't WANT to mate with anything not their species as most animals mate only during estrus (heat) with the notable exception of dogs and dolphins which have sex for pleasure and dominance purposes between their own species. when a dog humps your leg he's not trying to bust a nut, he's asserting his dominance over you.
                Keep talking and prove you know jack shit about the legal system.
                At one time, in this country, there was an inherent disgust for homosexual activity. For many, there still is. Homosexuals claim they were born that way, so do pedophiles. In some countries pedophilia is considered a disability. How long before that happens here? Slippery slope.

                מה מכילות החדשות?


                • Re: Cities seeking to ban Chick-Fil-A?

                  Originally posted by lutherf View Post
                  Meanwhile, this stalwart citizen makes a valiant stand against Chicken McEvil and shows them how it REALLY is!

                  Rachel replies!

                  Chick-fil-A Worker Rachel Elizabeth Talks To Fox About Incident Caught On Video | Mediaite

                  Classy kid and good job!

                  מה מכילות החדשות?


                  • Re: Cities seeking to ban Chick-Fil-A?

                    This again shows how fascist progressives are......

                    מה מכילות החדשות?


                    • Re: Cities seeking to ban Chick-Fil-A?

                      Originally posted by JohnLocke View Post
                      Opposite is the same as same? LOL





                      Bringing up banning marriage to same sex couples is the complete non sequitor. You are the one who brought up sexuality as a means to NOT answer the question.
                      Do you believe people who behave differently should be treated the same?
                      How do homosexuals and heterosexuals behave differently?

                      מה מכילות החדשות?


                      • Re: Cities seeking to ban Chick-Fil-A?

                        Originally posted by Unique POV View Post
                        How do homosexuals and heterosexuals behave differently?
                        I'm not going there.

                        מה מכילות החדשות?


                        • Re: Cities seeking to ban Chick-Fil-A?

                          Originally posted by OldmanDan View Post
                          I'm not going there.
                          Because you can't. There's nothing inherently different about the way they live their daily lives.

                          מה מכילות החדשות?


                          • Re: Cities seeking to ban Chick-Fil-A?

                            Originally posted by Unique POV View Post
                            How do homosexuals and heterosexuals behave differently?
                            Originally posted by OldmanDan View Post
                            I'm not going there.
                            Originally posted by Unique POV View Post
                            Because you can't. There's nothing inherently different about the way they live their daily lives.
                            Obviously, they do, which explains why you do not answer the general question: Do you believe people who behave differently should be treated the same?

                            It is fun to expose the blatant flaw in your reasoning - and see your attempts to avoid/ignore them. Examples include holding as METAPHYSICAL & MORAL EQUIVALENTS "all" to "some" and "opposite" to the "same."

                            מה מכילות החדשות?


                            • Re: Cities seeking to ban Chick-Fil-A?

                              Originally posted by reality View Post
                              and i believe that legislating morality is immoral. the only laws we should have are the ones that regulate the bare minimum of behaviors necessary for society to function: no theft. Let me explain: all things that should be prevented by law involve theft. Murder is theft of life, rape theft of innocence, power and choice, theft of property is obvious, fraud is theft through deceit, obstruction of justice is theft of justice. Shooting heroin? not theft as you can't steal from yourself and "the people" have no legitimate claim upon your property, life, or liberty beyond simple payment of taxes. Putting your dick in another guys ass? not theft so long as the catcher consents to sex which any adult may do provided they have not been deemed completely mentally insane (as in cannot perceive reality from fiction insane. completely bonkers). Munchin rug? same thing.
                              You social conservatives need to just but the fuck out of other people's lives and bedrooms. So some queers get married, so the fuck what? Doesn't change your marriage whatsoever unless you've got a really shitty marriage. the divorce rate is OVER 50%, thats a real sacred institution you've got there, not to mention that in the US marriage is purely a STATE institution rather than a religious one (keeping in mind equal protection etc) which is why you have to A) get a marriage license before you can legally be considered married unless you've been living together for a number of years in which case you can have a common law marriage and b) a justice of the peace is sufficient to marry ANYONE with a license. no priest need be involved unless it just gives you the warm and fuzzies. also why priests have to take a STATE COURSE in marriage and they say "by the power vested in me by God/etc and the great state of X I now pronounce you husband and wife" at the end. You can be married by a priest in front of God and everyone but if you didn't get a license for that marriage YOU"RE NOT MARRIED. Its a legal issue for taxation, inheritance, and hospital visitation, thats it. That's what marriage is to the government of these United States. To certain individuals who subscribe to religion it can also be about jesus safeguarding your relationship and being together in heaven etc etc etc etc. but that has no LEGAL STANDING. Never has, never will as we are a SECULAR nation made up of some religious people of various faiths and some not religious people of no faith at all. Yes you have religous freedom. Fine. Don't want to marry fags at your church? Don't, you don't have to freedom of religion (which is not carte blance to do whatever the fuck you want in any case whatsoever, but in this case it does work for you. A case where it doesn't work for you is healthcare for contraception if you're catholic or abortions if you're pro life and that employee has a health insurance plan you provide in lieu of extra pay. you don't get to dictate healthcare decisions for your employees when you provide benefits in lieu of extra pay. period.)
                              We have tons of moral laws. Like not allowing pedophilia.

                              מה מכילות החדשות?


                              • Re: Cities seeking to ban Chick-Fil-A?

                                Originally posted by fishjoel View Post
                                We have tons of moral laws. Like not allowing pedophilia.
                                Politics is a subset of morals. Having said that, what Ron Paul and other mean when the talk about legislating morality is not restricting relationships between consenting adults by law.

                                מה מכילות החדשות?

                                Working...
                                X