It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Guinness Opts Out of NYC’s St. Patrick’s Day Parade Over Anti-Gay Policy

page: 12
<< 9  10  11   >>

log in


posted on Mar, 28 2014 @ 08:00 AM


So I can read the post while replying to it without wasting space.

You clearly didn't read any of the hundreds of papers identifying genetic markers, age of fathers and number and gender of prior children then. There doesn't need to be a singular gay gene for there to be a genetic link. That's a gross oversimplification of the way genetics work - all the evidence shows there are markers which significantly increase the chances. Various genetic markers interact with each other to raise it further still.

Sorry but your opinions are archaic - how is denying gay people equal rights and spreading lies and borderline hate speech a progressive thing. That kind of despicable behaviour should be consigned to the past in any civilised society, not pushed onto future generation based on a load of groundless statements.

i highly doubt 85% voted against, and if they did all it shows is how religious fundamentalism in America is gradually pushing it into the Dark Ages and highlight how gay people are denied equal treatment in society.

I'm not going to stop pointing out you're wrong and probably homophobic just because you asked me to. You lost your right for me to be polite to you when you promoted denial of basic rights to others.

edit on 28-3-2014 by bastion because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 28 2014 @ 05:33 PM

In any case, the issue here isn't that, but what should and should not be in a parade.

Bahahahahaha, you are kidding me right? You waste how many pages going off topic and ranting and raving as much anti gay bollicks as you can and NOW you decide that the topic is about a St Patricks day parade?

Well done Einstein

No one was told they could not participate. What was stated was that banners promoting "gay pride" or whatever weren't allowed. That is obviously related to sexual practices. Pretending it isn't isn't being honest.

I have already stated and you have ignored as per usual that it was because of the term LGBT on the banner. No, LGBT does not stand for lettuce, grapefruit, bacon, tomato. It stands for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender. You folk take no offense when it's your turn to call us these things, but when we own the terms and use them on ourselves you act like spoiled little children who have just been asked to share their favourite toy and crack it.

Now, frankly, I really don't care if you like my opinions or not. I will still state them. They aren't "archaic", either, and are shared by the majority of the country. If that wasn't the case, a good 85%, roughly, wouldn't vote against the "gay marriage" issue. Archaic? No; that's simply a label you use to try and diminish the opposing point of view. It's a lame tactic.

If you feel my opinions are wrong, then keep that to yourself. How does that she fit?

Haha, double standards much? We prove you wrong time and time again with well documented sources and you tell us that you are allowed your opinions and we should sit down and shut up if we disagree.

Sorry honey, that aint ever gonna happen. How about you keep your opinions to yourself and you will find that you won't have to come up with shady arguments to justify views that are not based in fact.
edit on 28-3-2014 by markosity1973 because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 5 2014 @ 12:39 AM
a reply to: bastion

No, I didn't miss any of that. I simply won't speculate that something "must exist" because I want it to. No such connections are proven. Twins don't always go the same direction in that regard. I could go on, but you have decided to not accept anything but your own opinion, so there is no point.

No, my opinions aren't "archaic", either. They are held by a majority of people, in fact.

Now you resort to calling me some term that is utterly meaningless, save as an obvious label to derail civil conversation ,and to make the opposition look bad? You lost all credibility.

posted on May, 5 2014 @ 12:45 AM

originally posted by: boymonkey74
So you wantr others to not reply to you If they disagree?
NOPE...If we see Ill informed archaic outdated views on a subject it is our right (as it is yours) to speak against those views.
How old are you btw? I just see your view as old and wrong...good job it is a dying view and good riddance.

Oh and also your stats are way off.

Here in the UK 68% of people agree with gay marriage and that will rise as the older generations die off.
So I would get with the times and evolve your feelings eh? I mean it isn't like two gay people getting married effects you one tiny bit.

Try and keep up. The other person told me to keep my opinions to myself, so I pointed out how he sounded in doing so. If you read his comment, to which I responded, you would have seen that. Disagreeing, and telling someone to keep their opinions off a discussion thread, are two very different things.

My age is my business. Nowhere near "dying off", either. Nor is the viewpoint I hold. Far more share it than you want to believe.

The discussion is about a parade, not about gay marriage. Again, try to keep up.

<< 9  10  11   >>

log in