Video: Gay Marriage Proponents Attack Elderly Woman , page 3
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 14 times


reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 04:41 AM by Acidtastic
reply to post by CreeWolf


I've nothing against religios principles....in principle But people who say gays are against this that or the other,forget 1 thing. Your god made us all,and he/she made us all the way we all are. So saying that we are against god,is saying that god is wrong. Which goes against the beliefs of religios folk IIRC.


It's funny how people pick and chose which bits of their religion they like better,to fit in with their own prejudices.


reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 04:42 AM by detachedindividual
Originally posted by CreeWolf
I've got a solution! Let gays and lesbians establish their own nation with their own Constitution. There, they can marry, propagate and circumvent all that silliness of living in a nation founded on religious principles......you know, like the UK, US, Saudi Arabia, India, and practically EVERY NATION on EARTH!

Is there a religion on earth where gay and lesbian "marriages" are "sacred"?

[edit on 12-11-2008 by CreeWolf]


Oh my god! Yes, I said GOD! Does that offend you?

And yes, there is a religion where gay people are recognized and respected as equals in all aspects, look up "Paganism". You know, that ancient belief system that the invaders tried to wipe out and replace with their own?

Seriously, some people are so moronic I wonder how they manage to breathe without constant care.

This is not about the "sanctity of marriage", if it were, the various churches would be doing something about the massive divorce rates. Where's your "sanctity of marriage" there?

This is about gay people having equality. I do not know which laws are in place discriminating against gay people there, but in the UK, you could be made homeless if your partner of fifty years died, you could be refused visitation rights in hospital, you'd be taxed to the hilt on inheritance... the list goes on.

I have no idea what makes some people (like CreeWolf) think that their way of life is somehow more acceptable or superior than another (I have a distinct feeling this comes back to Right-Wing fundamental Christians again though), or why they think others deserve less rights, less freedoms and less basic respect.

It has no effect on you how others choose to live, and you have ABSOLUTELY NO RIGHT to try to dictate to others how they should live when it has no bearing on your existence.

What does it matter to you if a gay man or lesbian woman can visit their partner in hospital, or leave their home to their partner? Fact is, it shouldn't matter to you at all, but it does because you (like so many other religious fanatics) believe that you have a right to tell other people that they must live by your rules.

The video was yet more propaganda. I'm as fed up as those guys there of hearing right-wing fanatics trying to be the next Hitler and giving their religious freedom as an excuse to dictate to the masses.
This was a democratic decision, and the fight to repeal it should be democratic too, without all the fanatics using the cross to hide their bigotry behind.

Now, if you don't mind, I'm going to take a walk, and try to forget that there are some truly hateful people in this world.


reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 04:45 AM by Acidtastic
reply to post by detachedindividual


go to BTS and check the puppycam for instant niceness restoral.


(though it's down at the moment,it'll be back soon)



reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 06:06 AM by Lucid Lunacy
reply to post by CreeWolf


Humanity doesn't need the approval of a Church to deem a couples marriage to be sacred. The binding of two persons love is sacred in of itself.

[edit on 12-11-2008 by Lucid Lunacy]


reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 06:08 AM by Raustin
reply to post by Acidtastic

I'm a fairly conservative guy but I don't get the ban at all. I sometimes get a little uncomfortable around people of the gay persuasion, but that's really more my problem. In this country you should be allowed to do what you want as long as you're not hurting/endangering others. It was stupid for these guys to act the way they did, but I think we can all agree there is probably something we would flip out about too. Let them be happy, the cooties won't rub off on you.


reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 07:03 AM by WickedStar
reply to post by CreeWolf


Originally posted by rapinbatsisaltherage
reply to post by SonicInfinity


Terrible actions that should be punished. It is very telling that the anti-gay or pro-8 people immediately turn this into an issue involving all gays and tolerance in general. These were a few people doing something stupid and wrong, please don’t use this to fuel your own bigotry or to lump all gays together and put them down. When a young gay man was shot this year because of his orientation, or another gay male last year was beaten to death because of his orientation I didn’t put down all straight people, or people like the ones on this site that sometimes make disconcerting comments about homosexuals, or religious people who believe terrible things about gay people-have no trouble saying it-and think their religion encourages it. Gays are persecuted by straights constantly; I don’t use that to fuel a dislike towards all straight people who disagree with me on issues involving homosexuals. I hope straight people will not use this instance to do the opposite when it comes to gays.


Let me echo this sentiment agian because it obviously slipped your over your head. The prop 8 protesters weren't stomping on the cross because it is a symbol of Christanity - they were stomping on it because these "Christians" were using it as a tool of oppression. And let me also add. When that lady used the symbol of Pure Compassion as a tool of biggoted oppression she denigrated and ruined it first - the protesters just followed suit. And truthfully - it needed to be done. When the prop 8 ammendment was introduced it became then a Civil Rights issue. We can talk about Civil Unions till the cows come home but there was no ammendment introducing civil unions in place of gay marriage and there exists no civil union clause in California. This was a blatant attempt to rattify bigotry and oppression into California's constitution and it should be fought and it will be fought. This is 2008 people - you prop 8 supporters are acting like you're living in the 1950's!

And to the Original Poster - you're a foolish sensationalist.


reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 07:11 AM by WickedStar
reply to post by TommyG


How can you say that their anger isn't focused? They are protesting a very specific item that has rattified blatant discrimination agianst them! HELLOOOO? Secondly, if we didn't have to live in fear of being murdered in the streets everyday or beaten in the streets then drug into the wilderness, thrown into a barbed wire fence and beaten again we wouldn't be crying all the time. YOU'VE GOT TO BE KIDDING ME! Do us all a favor and actually think purposefully before you post nonsense.


reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 07:30 AM by niteboy82
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.

reply to post by SonicInfinity


While I understand what you are trying to convey, and you are obviously angered by this, your source is going all nutty yelling "leftist" about this. There are gay Republicans that want to get married just as much as there are gay Democrats that want to get married.

Taking the attacks into consideration, was it rude? Yes. However, I bet Alex Jones wouldn't have put out an angry story if it was a Koran or the Tanakh that was stomped. To take an incident that involved protests by gay people and then turn it around to make it a reflection upon all gay people is no different than taking a terrorist attack perpetrated by an Israeli teenager and use it as a means to create hate against all Jews to further a personal agenda.

Gays do not have some secret underground railroad communications system where they plan all of this around the globe, so its a bit far fetched to place the blame on all of them as if they're secretly in the know.

I'm sure there are random gays all around the world that do some pretty dastardly things. I'm also sure that there are random heterosexuals that do some terrible things. There are some hermaphrodites out there that have stepped out of line before too. Does any of it make it excusable? No. Should we ignorantly go after one minority group because we have a personal agenda that says that homosexuals should behave better than other people if they want to have the same rights the rest of the groups have? Sounds pretty ignorant.

I'm unclear why one group of people are required to live more decently than heterosexuals just in order to share their rights to happiness.

-----

How many people have watched the video before responding? There is no assault going on. They take the cross out of her hands, well, I guess they are yanking it out of her hands. It is not as if they took the cross out of her hands and then started whacking her over the head with it. Theft I can see, assault I think not.


reply to post by WickedStar


A world where Matthew Shepherd is the norm will simply not be tolerated. The defenses that I saw for those boys coming from some people were utterly flooring. There just may be that gay underground railroad network then that I mentioned above.


As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.





[edit on 11/12/08 by niteboy82]



reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 07:33 AM by MacDonagh
reply to post by beforetime


Ah right. I always knew HIV was a codename for some kind of killer robot that has shoulder missiles of all kinds to take down outspoken opponents that disagree with the gays.

Or not.


reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 07:58 AM by Leo Strauss
Here is the link.

OXNARD, Calif. — Hundreds of mourners gathered at a church here on Friday to remember an eighth-grade boy who was shot to death inside a junior high school computer lab by a fellow student in what prosecutors are calling a hate crime.

The New York Times
Oxnard is known as a laid-back beach community.
In recent weeks, the victim, Lawrence King, 15, had said publicly that he was gay, classmates said, enduring harassment from a group of schoolmates, including the 14-year-old boy charged in his death.

“God knit Larry together and made him wonderfully complex,” the Rev. Dan Birchfield of Westminster Presbyterian Church told the crowd as he stood in front of a large photograph of the victim. “Larry was a masterpiece.”

The shooting stunned residents of Oxnard, a laid-back middle-class beach community just north of Malibu. It also drew a strong reaction from gay and civil rights groups.



Happens all the time...REAL assaults on gays...REAL murders of gays by what could be characterized as "christian killers". I would not characterize this murder as a "christian killing"! But it is funny the power of words to spread hatred and intolerance.


reply posted on 12-11-2008 @ 09:07 AM by Marcus Calpurnius
Originally posted by laiguana
reply to post by SonicInfinity


That video made me LOL! But seriously...that old woman was provoking a large angry crowd full of gay men. While I don't agree with them pulling away things from her hands, it shouldn't be difficult to see how was simply there as a provocateur.


Oh give me a break! Now suddenly left wing fanatics are being given passes on violence because other people DARE to disagree with them. What the hell is going through your head when you rationalize that? You seem to be saying that anyone who might protest against your protest is "provoking" and deserves a violent response?

Maybe people should start pushing these gay protesters around for provoking them.
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6  >>    ^^TOP^^