Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill[W:451:959]

Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

Top Cat said:

Explains a great deal about you.

Click to expand...

LMAO, it's pretty funny....a group of people with a phobia that doesnt exist trying to base a law on disrespecting their beliefs in a deity that doesnt exist!

I mean, hey....how do you prove God exists? lol

Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill[W:451]

Mr.Nick said:

Why you progressives keep calling this bill "anti-gay" when it's not? PC reasons, sympathy?
I thought you alleged "liberals" were all about freedom......... The best part is the IRS is ****ing conservative/tea party/libertarian groups up the ass - singling them out and you don't say ****.
So much for liberty!
Meanwhile you have the audacity to say a small business owner has to serve an individual that contradict their FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHTS????
I've read articles after articles (and in some situations progressive tyrant legislators) proposing bills to allow Muslims not to touch pork or even sell it..... How the **** is this any different?
Oh yeah because progressives are against Christianity - Islamic bigotry is fine with progressives but the second a Christian couple refuse to bake a cake for a gay couple our Constitution turns upside-down.
But I suppose that is the logic to progressivism. Retribution, retaliation and all out destruction of the capitalism model and Christianity in general.

Click to expand...

Why do you need so many paragraphs?

So you're saying that a sign outside a business that says "no blacks" is your idea of freedom? And for the record, I'm as liberal as they come, and I don't support the idea of Muslims working at a supermarket and refusing to handle pork if their job requires it. I believe that it's entirely legal for an employer to choose not to hire somebody who is unable to perform the duties of their job for any reason. I live in Minnesota and issues like that have come up and frankly I don't remember much support for the pro-Muslim-pork-avoiding advocates.

I definitely think this bill is anti-gay. Can you name an instance in which a business owner has denied service to a sinner, for being a sinner? Are people being denied service because they are divorced, or because they cheat on their spouse, or because they have sex before marriage? Persecuting a child of God is a sin, so shouldn't half of the people who support this bill all be denied service from Christian business owners? Out of all the sins, it just so happens that only homosexuality has been the basis of discrimination in cases of business owners claiming the right to deny service based on religion?

Do you know how many sins there are? And yet we only hear about homosexuality being a problem for business owners who are so concerned about upholding the principles of their religion? Don't be insulting. This is entirely about business owners looking for a thumbs up to discriminate against homosexuals.

Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

"Homophobia" is a recent term added by popular culture. An attempt has been made of late to shoehorn it into an actual medical condition, but to this day it does not appear in the DSM or any international list of phobias.

Homophobia has never been listed as part of a clinical taxonomy of phobias, neither in Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) or International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (ICD); homophobia is usually used in a non-clinical sense.[24]

Click to expand...

Homophobia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill[W:451]

Mustachio said:

Why do you need so many paragraphs?

So you're saying that a sign outside a business that says "no blacks" is your idea of freedom? And for the record, I'm as liberal as they come, and I don't support the idea of Muslims working at a supermarket and refusing to handle pork if their job requires it. I believe that it's entirely legal for an employer to choose not to hire somebody who is unable to perform the duties of their job for any reason. I live in Minnesota and issues like that have come up and frankly I don't remember much support for the pro-Muslim-pork-avoiding advocates.

Click to expand...

So they can refuse to hire the disabled? Who is bigotted now. :mrgreen:

Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill[W:451]

Mustachio said:

Why do you need so many paragraphs?

So you're saying that a sign outside a business that says "no blacks" is your idea of freedom? And for the record, I'm as liberal as they come, and I don't support the idea of Muslims working at a supermarket and refusing to handle pork if their job requires it. I believe that it's entirely legal for an employer to choose not to hire somebody who is unable to perform the duties of their job for any reason. I live in Minnesota and issues like that have come up and frankly I don't remember much support for the pro-Muslim-pork-avoiding advocates.

I definitely think this bill is anti-gay. Can you name an instance in which a business owner has denied service to a sinner, for being a sinner? Are people being denied service because they are divorced, or because they cheat on their spouse, or because they have sex before marriage? Persecuting a child of God is a sin, so shouldn't half of the people who support this bill all be denied service based on religious freedom? Out of all the sins, it just so happens that only homosexuality has been the basis of discrimination in cases of business owners claiming the right to deny service based on religion?

Do you know how many sins there are? And yet we only hear about homosexuality being a problem for business owners who are so concerned about upholding the principles of their religion? Don't be insulting. This is entirely about business owners looking for a thumbs up to discriminate against homosexuals.

Click to expand...

Guess what? gays aren't black and marriage is a choice.

We're blacks given the option to be black or white?

Furthermore our government violated the bill of rights by enslaving the children of "slaves."

Once again I could write a whole book on this ****....

Gays and blacks are not in the same ballpark - so quit trying to compare blacks to gays....

Do you really need me to show the differences or were they not pointed out in high school or college?

Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill[W:451]

clownboy said:

So they can refuse to hire the disabled? Who is bigotted now.

Click to expand...

If you have to ask you wold never understand, but may I suggest that next time you need surgery seek out a blind surgeon.

Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill[W:451]

Mustachio said:

Why do you need so many paragraphs?

So you're saying that a sign outside a business that says "no blacks" is your idea of freedom? And for the record, I'm as liberal as they come, and I don't support the idea of Muslims working at a supermarket and refusing to handle pork if their job requires it. I believe that it's entirely legal for an employer to choose not to hire somebody who is unable to perform the duties of their job for any reason. I live in Minnesota and issues like that have come up and frankly I don't remember much support for the pro-Muslim-pork-avoiding advocates.

I definitely think this bill is anti-gay. Can you name an instance in which a business owner has denied service to a sinner, for being a sinner? Are people being denied service because they are divorced, or because they cheat on their spouse, or because they have sex before marriage? Persecuting a child of God is a sin, so shouldn't half of the people who support this bill all be denied service from Christian business owners? Out of all the sins, it just so happens that only homosexuality has been the basis of discrimination in cases of business owners claiming the right to deny service based on religion?

Do you know how many sins there are? And yet we only hear about homosexuality being a problem for business owners who are so concerned about upholding the principles of their religion? Don't be insulting. This is entirely about business owners looking for a thumbs up to discriminate against homosexuals.

Click to expand...

yep many things like this are DRENCHED in hypocrisy and bigotry

there was a case where a church owned a pavilion on a separate piece of public access property at a boardwalk and rented it out all the time. They tried to deny a gay wedding there and tried to claim because of religious reasons which is complete crap lol

a pavillion is not a church
and they rent it out as a business

and the best part is when it was checked into they rented it out to other nonreligious weddings, non religious events and jewish events too LMAO what big dummies they were lying and trying to claim religion as a reason, you shouldnt lie to a judge

well the judge granted usage of the pavillion and then took thier tax exempt status away from them just for that piece of property

justice served

Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

clownboy said:

"Homophobia" is a recent term added by popular culture.

Click to expand...

You don't read the articles you cite, it was not "recent" nor was "added by pop culture".

Although sexual attitudes tracing back to Ancient Greece (8th to 6th centuries BC to the end of antiquity (ca. 600 AD)) have been termed homophobia by scholars, the term itself is relatively new.[11] Coined by George Weinberg, a psychologist, in the 1960s,[12] the term homophobia is a blend[13][14][15] of (1) the word homosexual, itself a mix of neo-classical morphemes, and (2) phobia from the Greek φόβος, Phóbos, meaning "fear" or "morbid fear". Weinberg is credited as the first person to have used the term in speech.

Again, the concept is ancient, the word is over 45 years old.

Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

prometeus said:

No you are endorsing bigotry, that is clear and indisputable, that you may be embarrassed by it and wish to cloak it is not surprising.

Click to expand...

No, I'm not endorsing people discriminate against anyone. Provide prove of your claim that I endorsed discrimination or stop making it.

Tell me though, do pro-choice people like yourself endorse abortion? I look forward to your answer and the hypocrisy it will detail.

Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill[W:451]

prometeus said:

If you have to ask you wold never understand, but may I suggest that next time you need surgery seek out a blind surgeon.

Click to expand...

That's nice, but the ADA is on the books and you must restructure the workplace to accomodate workers with disabilities. Believe it of not, being short actually qualifies (though being tall doesn't for some reason). I've seen businesses have to redo their countertop height.

Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

clownboy said:

"Homophobia" is a recent term added by popular culture. An attempt has been made of late to shoehorn it into an actual medical condition, but to this day it does not appear in the DSM or any international list of phobias.



Homophobia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Click to expand...

Exactly. It's not a phobia nor is it recognized as one. It's all just bull**** by people that need something to use to attack their opponents.

Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill[W:451]

clownboy said:

So they can refuse to hire the disabled? Who is bigotted now. :mrgreen:

Click to expand...

Yes, if you can not manage the prerequisites of a job, you cannot take on that job either physically or mentally.

Now. if you're mentally capable of handling the duties required of your position - that is certainly an ample demonstration for litigation.

Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

Gimmesometruth said:

You don't read the articles you cite, it was not "recent" nor was "added by pop culture".

Although sexual attitudes tracing back to Ancient Greece (8th to 6th centuries BC to the end of antiquity (ca. 600 AD)) have been termed homophobia by scholars, the term itself is relatively new.[11] Coined by George Weinberg, a psychologist, in the 1960s,[12] the term homophobia is a blend[13][14][15] of (1) the word homosexual, itself a mix of neo-classical morphemes, and (2) phobia from the Greek φόβος, Phóbos, meaning "fear" or "morbid fear". Weinberg is credited as the first person to have used the term in speech.

Again, the concept is ancient, the word is over 45 years old.

Click to expand...

That has NOTHING to do with law.

Funny part is that homosexuality was a mental disorder and now that many nations let people live off the dole for having mental disorders - it's quite popular now to classify homosexuality as a mental disorder - you know so gays can get subsidies from their European countries that for some odd reason now believe it's a mental disorder.

Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

Gimmesometruth said:

You don't read the articles you cite, it was not "recent" nor was "added by pop culture".

Although sexual attitudes tracing back to Ancient Greece (8th to 6th centuries BC to the end of antiquity (ca. 600 AD)) have been termed homophobia by scholars, the term itself is relatively new.[11] Coined by George Weinberg, a psychologist, in the 1960s,[12] the term homophobia is a blend[13][14][15] of (1) the word homosexual, itself a mix of neo-classical morphemes, and (2) phobia from the Greek φόβος, Phóbos, meaning "fear" or "morbid fear". Weinberg is credited as the first person to have used the term in speech.

Again, the concept is ancient, the word is over 45 years old.

Click to expand...

That's recent generation and the source is indeed pop culture. The word means nothing clinically and again is not listed ANYWHERE professionally as a medical condition.

The word homophobia first appeared in print in an article written for the May 23, 1969, edition of the American pornographic magazine Screw, in which the word was used to refer to heterosexual men's fear that others might think they are gay

Click to expand...

Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill[W:451]

Top Cat said:

As a grunt infantryman, my liberal father landed at Normandy and fought in the Battle of the Bulge to protect your freedom to exercise your extremist views and spew your nonsense.

Speaking of experience, it appears you skipped 6th grade English. There really is a difference between to, too and two. Not to worry, there is even a website that was created for you.

To, Too, Two - The Easiest Way To Learn How To Use These Words

Click to expand...

A liberal on June 6th, 1944 would be either a neoconservative or a Reagan Democrat today.

Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill[W:451]

clownboy said:

That's nice, but the ADA is on the books and you must restructure the workplace to accomodate workers with disabilities.

Click to expand...

As long as they are capable to do the job, but that is not how you presented your last point.

Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill[W:451]

clownboy said:

So they can refuse to hire the disabled? Who is bigotted now. :mrgreen:

Click to expand...

Unless there is somebody here who thinks it make sense to hire a blind person to be a cab driver, I think "pragmatic" is the word.

Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill[W:451]

Mustachio said:

Unless there is somebody here who thinks it make sense to hire a blind person to be a cab driver, I think "pragmatic" is the word.

Click to expand...

What if the car drives itself and all the person has to do is collect the fees? Then what?

Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

Henrin said:

No, I'm not endorsing people discriminate against anyone. Provide prove of your claim that I endorsed discrimination or stop making it.

Click to expand...

Did you not say that the law does not go far enough? Do you or do you not endorse or approve of this law?

Tell me though, do pro-choice people like yourself endorse abortion?

Click to expand...

I endorse the freedom for every woman to do as she sees fit. I could care less if no woman ever had an abortion or of e every one aborts. I realize that the square peg of your world that you are trying to hammer into the round hole of reality will have to be reshaped, but that is your problem.

Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill[W:451]

Mustachio said:

Unless there is somebody here who thinks it make sense to hire a blind person to be a cab driver, I think "pragmatic" is the word.

Click to expand...

It was a tongue in cheek comment regarding throwing around the word, "bigot". If pragmaticism were in practice the bakery in Colorado would never have been required to make a cake for the gay wedding.

Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

prometeus said:

Did you not say that the law does not go far enough? Do you or do you not endorse or approve of this law?

Click to expand...

Yes, I do. Not really, but I suppose I could vote for it. As I said, the law doesn't go far enough.

I endorse the freedom for every woman to do as she sees fit. I could care less if no woman ever had an abortion or of e every one aborts. I realize that the square peg of your world that you are trying to hammer into the round hole of reality will have to be reshaped, but that is your problem.

Click to expand...

The only way the woman could have the right to abort is due to her right to body sovereignty, which gives her ownership of own person and the right to control her own body. So tell me, why are you selective in your support of property rights?

Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill[W:451]

clownboy said:

It was a tongue in cheek comment regarding throwing around the word, "bigot". If pragmaticism were in practice the bakery in Colorado would never have been required to make a cake for the gay wedding.

Click to expand...

It's only bigotry if straight white males do it. Anyone else, it's "pride and principle".

Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

clownboy said:

That's recent generation and the source is indeed pop culture.

Click to expand...

Keep on trying to debase the English language, again, the term is over 40 years old....the CONCEPT is ANCIENT.

The word means nothing clinically and again is not listed ANYWHERE professionally as a medical condition.

Click to expand...

Who was claiming it was?

Non-sequitur.

Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

Gimmesometruth said:

Who was claiming it was?

Non-sequitur.

Click to expand...

Pretty much everyone that uses it. If it is not a phobia the term has no purpose being used against anyone.

Re: Arizona lawmakers pass controversial anti-gay bill

Mr.Nick said:

That has NOTHING to do with law.

Click to expand...

Who said it was?

WTF is wrong with you?

Funny part is that homosexuality was a mental disorder and now that many nations let people live off the dole for having mental disorders - it's quite popular now to classify homosexuality as a mental disorder - you know so gays can get subsidies from their European countries that for some odd reason now believe it's a mental disorder.

Click to expand...

Oh...wait....this bit of non-sense.....HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE LAW!!!!....DERP.

Geez....what a waste of time.