It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

HIDDEN CAMERA: Gay Wedding Cake At Muslim Bakeries

page: 29
49
<< 26  27  28    30  31  32 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 11:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: IAMTAT
...AND, of course, the fact that, when challenged 'Je Suis Charlie', their extremist wing will track down you, your family, and everyone you know 'Je Suis Charlie' and go 'ape-sh*t on your a**'' for violating their religion: 'Je Suis Charlie'.


If you're comparing Christianity in the US to Islam's most despicable and vile extremists around the world to make Christianity look good, I'm missing your point.


Then you're trying to miss my point.
Which is just fine.




posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 12:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gryphon66

A national measure is likely the only way to insure equality for all, including both the religious and LGBT.

After all, that's what we're all really looking for ... right?



Oh yeah! That's the only way to go. Federal equality.

Im so sick of the Religious Right trying to control others with their belief.



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 12:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: IAMTAT
...AND, of course, the fact that, when challenged 'Je Suis Charlie', their extremist wing will track down you, your family, and everyone you know 'Je Suis Charlie' and go 'ape-sh*t on your a**'' for violating their religion: 'Je Suis Charlie'.


If you're comparing Christianity in the US to Islam's most despicable and vile extremists around the world to make Christianity look good, I'm missing your point.


Then you're trying to miss my point.
Which is just fine.


I have no clue what point you were trying to make

That makes at least 2 of us.



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 12:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee

Damfool folks readin' words and understandin' them based on their rational, standard meanings!

What is the world coming to, one wonders?

Con men pretending to be gay and harassing the religious or stealing candy from children, I guess, based on the content of this thread.

/sigh



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 12:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: Justoneman
They are certainly throwing gays off of buildings and worse in other places like Egypt and Saudi Arabia.


But not in Michigan, Colorado, New Mexico, Oregon or Indiana, where we're talking about religious freedom vs the freedom to be served at public accommodations...

Or are you claiming Christianity's purity by comparing them to the most vile and despicable actions around the world? Are you really saying, "At least we're not killing people" as some sort of badge of honor?


NO not at all. I am saying the two are apples and oranges. You might be the one saying we THINK so but it is not true. A humble servant of God does not pass judgement on the person but does pass a judgement on deeds they themselve are willing to participate in was my theme.



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 12:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee

Annee, are you saying Christians support murder and dismemberment of gays in those countries? If so I doubt they are really Christians as I doubt the KKK would be.



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 12:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Justoneman
a reply to: Annee

Annee, are you saying Christians support murder and dismemberment of gays in those countries? If so I doubt they are really Christians as I doubt the KKK would be.


Are you saying American Evangelists belong in those countries pushing their anti-gay hate agenda?

They may not be the "flame lighter", but they're sure waving the match.




Brown’s international anti-gay advocacy mirrors that of Scott Lively, who has boasted his anti-gay influence around the world. Armed with his book about how homosexuality was responsible for the rise of the Nazi party, Lively helped plant the seeds for Uganda’s “Kill The Gays” bill, and calls Russia’s ban on “gay propaganda” “one of the proudest achievements of my career.”


thinkprogress.org...
edit on 4-4-2015 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 12:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Gryphon66

A national measure is likely the only way to insure equality for all, including both the religious and LGBT.

After all, that's what we're all really looking for ... right?



Oh yeah! That's the only way to go. Federal equality.

Im so sick of the Religious Right trying to control others with their belief.


What way are the "Religious Right" doing things for control. This legislation in Indiana is a shield not a sword. My understanding ,hearing the author of said bill in an interview just yesterday, it is the same language from a Bill Clinton era Dem bill sponsored by Chuck Schumer. (Fine when a lib does it not so when a right winger does eh?)
edit on 4-4-2015 by Justoneman because: grammar

edit on 4-4-2015 by Justoneman because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 01:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: Justoneman

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Gryphon66

A national measure is likely the only way to insure equality for all, including both the religious and LGBT.

After all, that's what we're all really looking for ... right?



Oh yeah! That's the only way to go. Federal equality.

Im so sick of the Religious Right trying to control others with their belief.


What way are the "Religious Right" done for control. This legislation in Indiana is a shield not a sword. My understanding ,hearing the author of said bill in an interview just yesterday, it is the same language from a Bill Clinton era Dem bill sponsored by Chuck Schumer. (Fine when a lib does it not so when a right winger does eh?)


Did I mention Indiana in that post?

Shumer:


Schumer: Indiana RFRA Doesn’t Compare to Mine

There are two simple reasons the comparison does not hold water. First, the federal RFRA was written narrowly to protect individuals’ religious freedom from government interference unless the government or state had a compelling interest. If ever there was a compelling state interest, it is to prevent discrimination. The federal law was not contemplated to, has never been, and could never be used to justify discrimination against gays and lesbians, in the name of religious freedom or anything else. Second, the federal RFRA was written to protect individuals’ interests from government interference, but the Indiana RFRA protects private companies and corporations. When a person or company enters the marketplace, they are doing so voluntarily, and the federal RFRA was never intended to apply to them as it would to private individuals.

littlegreenfootballs.com...



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 01:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Justoneman
a reply to: Annee

Annee, are you saying Christians support murder and dismemberment of gays in those countries? If so I doubt they are really Christians as I doubt the KKK would be.


Are you saying American Evangelists belong in those countries pushing their anti-gay hate agenda?

They may not be the "flame lighter", but they're sure waving the match.



What the heck. You don't want to get it at all?? Christians tell no one to murder or maim. They do CHOOSE to be 1) left alone to believe things that starts from love one another, and 2) don't condone certain things because, like smoking drugs, they feel they are wrong.

You seem to want to redefine unreasonable. To you it seems any unwilling participant with people of questionable moral character should be treated as if they are from within those who would murder those with an amoral behavior. No one tells them to torch a gay in those countries and I think most of us have sense to realize this. FREE choice is what each of us were born with. Some would stomp that out . Truly, less than 10% of the planet and they are upset because the truth is many people have felt that lifestyle is anti to what is basically the norm. Should people love them anyway? yes. Should people be forced to accept it as normal? no way.

It is ok to not be normal but don't ask normal people to believe it is when they know it is not.



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 01:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee

Did it matter? I thought it was part of the overall discussion as it has been repeatedly mentioned in this thread. Sorry for being logically concluding we are talking about the whole subject this thread. Should i just keep it to there is a double standard?

FYI : The show the interview was on was yesterday aftenoon's Phil Valentine show found at 99.7 on Iheartradio. Whatever the authors name, I recall maybe wrongly, that he stated he intentionally used the language the Dem's approved of earlier to draw a similar law that gave some freedoms to businesses to not be forced to violate their own beliefs and Bill Clinton signed off on it.
edit on 4-4-2015 by Justoneman because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 01:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Justoneman



It is ok to not be normal but don't ask normal people to believe it is when they know it is not.


LOL you don't even know what normal means.

Anyway the Fundies are the one who are trying to deny equality to gay people. Why bring in other countries? We live here in America.



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 01:21 PM
link   
Perhaps you should venture outside your "bubble".

Pastor Sparks Anger by Saying 'Gays Should Be Executed'



Controversial Ariz. Pastor Sparks Anger by Saying 'Gays Should Be Executed' A 31-year-old electrician, father of seven and pastor from Tempe, Ariz., . . ., came under fire from Irish citizens last week after he declared that the Bible says "gays should be executed" and he supports the teaching.

"Well the Bible teaches actually that gays should be executed. Because it actually says in Leviticus 20:13 that if a man also lie with mankind as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination, they shall surely be put to death, their blood shall be upon them," said Anderson

www.christianpost.com...



edit on 4-4-2015 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 01:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Deaf Alien

Excuse me? You are qualified how? I think I know what 10% statistically speaking means. DO you?



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 01:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee

Here again, KKK said they were Christians and we know they believed in murder based on race and religious beliefs that Jesus would not have them do if I read love thy neighbor correctly. The Jihadist are said to not be actual Muslim but they keep saying they are too.
edit on 4-4-2015 by Justoneman because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 01:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Justoneman

'Senator' Obama also voted for the RFRA...before he didn't.
Back then, under Clinton, the debate was about the right of Native Americans to be allowed to use Peyote in their religious ceremonies...so, absolutely, the president and congress were enthusiastically all for it.

Now, that Christians are attempting to utilize it to protect their religious freedom,....Obama's enthusiasm for it?...Well,...not so much.

You see, these days, among progressive liberals, it's really ONLY about protecting the religious freedoms of Americans you like.



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 01:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Justoneman
a reply to: Annee

Here again, KKK said they were Christians and we know they believed in murder based on race and religious beliefs that Jesus would not have them do if I read love thy neighbor correctly. The Jihadist are said to not be actual Muslim but they keep saying they are too.


Seriously, take off the rose colored glasses.

American Fundy Christians ARE sparking the flame of gay hatred world wide.

They are instigators holding a lit match, whether they personally light the flame or not.



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 01:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Justoneman



Excuse me? You are qualified how? I think I know what 10% statistically speaking means. DO you?


Ok if you know what it means then what is your point then? Are you saying that it's ok for "normal" people to treat people who are not normal differently?
edit on 4/4/2015 by Deaf Alien because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 01:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: Deaf Alien
a reply to: Justoneman



Excuse me? You are qualified how? I think I know what 10% statistically speaking means. DO you?


Ok if you know what it means then what is your point then? Are you saying that it's ok for "normal" people to treat people who are not normal differently?


Left handed people 10%

Green eyes 2%

Redheads 13%



posted on Apr, 4 2015 @ 02:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: IAMTAT
a reply to: Justoneman

'Senator' Obama also voted for the RFRA...before he didn't.
Back then, under Clinton, the debate was about the right of Native Americans to be allowed to use Peyote in their religious ceremonies...so, absolutely, the president and congress were enthusiastically all for it.

Now, that Christians are attempting to utilize it to protect their religious freedom,....Obama's enthusiasm for it?...Well,...not so much.

You see, these days, among progressive liberals, it's really ONLY about protecting the religious freedoms of Americans you like.


How did Obama vote for RFRA again?

RFRA passed in 1994
Obama Senate term 2005-2008

Wait ... OBAMA IS A TIME TRAVELER????

THAT explains so much!



new topics

top topics



 
49
<< 26  27  28    30  31  32 >>

log in

join