Originally posted by jfj123

Yet the person who opened this thread has taken the opportunity to misrepresent the bill in question to further their own HATE agenda.

Yes. What's your point?

Why don't you ask who it was that said that

You gays ? I assume this is a derogetory statement?

You assume a lot of things. What is it about the statement that maligns them?

Since you're responding to me, you should know, as I've stated before, I'm not gay.

You assume a lot of things.

1. I respond to quotes and address them directly

2 This is a public forum that assumes the readers have common sense so when I say "You gays" it suggests that my attention has turned to those whom I have identified moreover,, identified as "more than one gay" using the word "gays". So the contextual distinction having been made and assuming anyone having the average 7th grade reading level and above lurking this thread, most likely came to the same conclusion I did seeing you attempt to cast aspersions then draw on this ad-hom that I was not listening to you when you gave your unsolicited sexual ori.

Get a life? really? Why do you keep responding then?

Yes, get a life.
Really.

What personal attacks and hate speech against christians are you talking about? I think you're responding in the wrong thread buddy.

1)

"drama queen." -jfj123

2)

"That's your opinion which in my opinion is worth as much as a piece of used toilet paper " -jfj123

3)

When Aermacch becomes an adult, he will hopefully mature -jfj123

4)

"Do you actually think about what you write ? - jfj123

5)

"You might realize how stupid your above post was." - jfj123

6)

"-I'm the one that forgives your ignorance and hubris
-I'm the one that tolerates your intolerance because I believe in the Constitution.
-I'm the one that doesn't hate people like you but feels sorry for people like you as you simply don't know any better." - jfj123

8)

"the only problem I have with Christians of any kind, is that most of them are hypocrates. Not that all Christians are bad - jfj123

9)

"I personally don't approve of creationists, scientologists, westburo baptist church members, islamic extremists and douchbags"-jfj123

10)

"If you don't understand this, let me know, I'll try using smaller words. "-jfj123

11)

"Or put them in the spotlight so all can see their (Christians) ignorance" -jfj123

12)

" sex is a big part of life. Again, if you don't know that, maybe you should have "that talk" with your parents." -jfj123

13)

"I called you intolerant and hate filled? Can I just add hypocrite to that too? " -jfj123

14)

I rarely say something like this but This statement is just stupid.
Nobody is ever taught to be gay in any public school." -jfj123

Just to name a "few"

continuing,,,

You're kidding right? It just doesn't work that way and if you think it does, you might indeed be BI or GAY

.

Not kidding and I wouldn't know I don't act on impulses like that one way or the other.

You see, no matter how much I might want to have sex, another guy couldn't be a substitute.

Wow, that must be like your own worst private hell huh.

OK give me other options. You claim there are more then 2 so why not post the others.

I did

I'm just asking you to back up what you're saying. ,

Asked and answered

It's your problem that you can't, not mine.

I don't seek your approval

You can't prove that religion is real. A gay person can prove their gay

How?

Teaching religion doesn't have a place in public schools for many reasons.
There's this thing called Separation of Church and State.

No there isn't. There is no such statement made in the Constitution regarding any so called wall of separation

I rarely say something like this but...
This statement is just stupid.
Nobody is ever taught to be gay in any public school

Many are and encouraged to try it, some stay with it THEN they begin to prefer it like many prisoners find out in the federal penn.

Your passionate defense of them is almost text book behavior exhibiting latent homosexual proclivities vicariously expressed and defended because you just happen to be a straight guy that really likes the gays cause, so much so you have been the go to guy taking on all who would suggest the most benign criticism, with all the zealotry and angst aggression of a woman scorned.






[edit on 14-4-2009 by Aermacchi]

Originally posted by scorand


thank you for posting these parts of the bill since obviously there are some here that wont bother to read it.for the wanna be morally superior would rather spout crap out of their butts then deal with reality..

Dealing with reality is what one does when one understand that crap coming out of our butts is what our butts were intended to do.

I realize this is hard for gays to appreciate, since they have so many other uses for it these days.

They, like you, may have forgot what its basic default function was originally for.

Having said that, why are you thanking him again?

I don't see where he has put any light at all on understanding this bill. Obviously he is naive and doesn't understand politics and the gradual erosion process, how it starts with bills like this.

gays are asking for special consideration be made for them

Bottom Line:

They ain't special

not at all


[edit on 14-4-2009 by Aermacchi]

Originally posted by jfj123
You responded to me. The reader might also assume you have a clue. That is what you might have meant but that is not what you wrote.

Really? what did I write? show me where it refers to you in any way at that point . you know simon,, give us a clue.

Actually since you were responding to me, and due to your sentence structure, you included me in your little attack. I thought it necessary to point out that a straight person also is against your attacks..

No, you're wrong sherlock, I know who I was responding to and inspite of your mind reading skills, do you know how I know who I was talking to?

PssssT! ,,, C'mere, Ill tell you.
closer,,

ready?

I WAS THERE WHEN WHEN I WROTE IT!

POT + KETTLE = BLACK ?

Pot with life telling closet kettle with no life to get one

Still nope.

well i am not responsible to explain to you what you don't understand

You can't prove that religion is real. A gay person can prove their gay

Really? Please return to your parents with this question. They obviously forgot this part during "that talk".

yeah but I am asking you because my parents know the same answer you are afraind to admit to and is why you use another asinine ad-hom to duck the question. It would really mess up your gay choice test

The separation of church and state is a legal and political principle derived from the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, which reads, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . ." The phrase "separation of church and state" is generally traced to an 1802 letter by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists, where Jefferson spoke of the combined effect of the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment. It has since been quoted in several opinions handed down by the United States Supreme Court.

yeah and like I said, the wall is NOT in the constitution it is in a letter telling the danbury baptists NOT that the government separates Government from religion but that it wouldn't create another church of england. You have no reason to think any other way

Many are and encouraged to try it, some stay with it THEN they begin to prefer it like many prisoners find out in the federal penn.

I'm going to call you on this one.
BACK IT UP.


Google Richard Speck
What you never heard of someone being a prison bitch?

Your passionate defense of them is almost text book behavior exhibiting latent homosexual proclivities vicariously expressed and defended because you just happen to be a straight guy that really likes the gays cause,

1. Your attempt to provoke me by calling me a latent homosexual is just plain SAD. Is that really the best you can do? Do you really think you can provoke me with this pathetic bate?

What you don't like tasting your own medicine hotshot?

2. I'm also passionate regarding the defense of minorities, women, the handicapped, soldiers.

wasnt my logic it was yours,

so much so you have been the go to guy taking on all who would suggest the most benign criticism, with all the zealotry and angst aggression of a woman scorned.

No it was the best you were doing, I am just showing you why I thought you needed to grow up

Look you can keep pulling us off topic but you won't change the fact that the bill we're discussing, does not censor christians. You're safe to continue with your hate speech

I never said it did, YOU keep saying I do, I keep telling you about the question I had but you are too busy being the village *****

[edit on 15-4-2009 by Aermacchi]

Originally posted by orangetom1999
This has been my purpose in many of my postings ..hoping and praying that one of you would paint yourself and the others on this board with the true fingerprint and colour of what is happening.

Pretty narrow minded don't you think? Oh well, you have just opened the doors for us to paint all Christians with the same brush. After all, that is what you are doing right? Taking the words of one and using it as a "Stereotype" for all. Good work, and thanks for the opportunity.

There is indeed an agenda here and you have finally taken down enough of the veil for those with abilities to see truly of what you are made.

And those "abilities" would be? Please enlighten us as to the abilities you posess that we lack, you know, besides tolerance.

I must cede to your wisdom, passions, and abilities here in doing a better job than myself in making these points.

Very "Homophobic" of you. And not "Gay" at all.

Thanks again for this opportunity. Keep up the good work for the Believers on this and other threads.

Hey, we do what we can for the believers in tolerance,...

BTW: God Bless.

Originally posted by Aermacchi

Actually since you were responding to me, and due to your sentence structure, you included me in your little attack. I thought it necessary to point out that a straight person also is against your attacks..

No, you're wrong sherlock, I know who I was responding to and inspite of your mind reading skills, do you know how I know who I was talking to?

PssssT! ,,, C'mere, Ill tell you.
closer,,

ready?

I WAS THERE WHEN WHEN I WROTE IT!

I have no doubt in my mind that YOU knew what you meant but it doesn't mean anything if you wrote something different.
You know how I know that?
PssssT! ,,, C'mere, Ill tell you.
closer,,

ready?
I WAS THERE WHEN I READ IT !!

You can't prove that religion is real. A gay person can prove their gay

Really? Please return to your parents with this question. They obviously forgot this part during "that talk".

yeah but I am asking you because my parents know the same answer you are afraind to admit to and is why you use another asinine ad-hom to duck the question. It would really mess up your gay choice test

Well I'll explain it to you. You see when people of the same sex like each other in a "special way", they sometimes get together in a certain personal way. You may have heard of this. It's called sex. If you haven't, let me know and I can send you some links that MAY clear a few things up.

The separation of church and state is a legal and political principle derived from the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, which reads, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . ." The phrase "separation of church and state" is generally traced to an 1802 letter by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists, where Jefferson spoke of the combined effect of the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment. It has since been quoted in several opinions handed down by the United States Supreme Court.

yeah and like I said, the wall is NOT in the constitution it is in a letter telling the danbury baptists NOT that the government separates Government from religion but that it wouldn't create another church of england. You have no reason to think any other way

Apparently you simply didn't read what I posted.

The separation of church and state is a legal and political principle derived from the First Amendment to the United States Constitution

So once again....You're wrong.

Your passionate defense of them is almost text book behavior exhibiting latent homosexual proclivities vicariously expressed and defended because you just happen to be a straight guy that really likes the gays cause,

1. Your attempt to provoke me by calling me a latent homosexual is just plain SAD. Is that really the best you can do? Do you really think you can provoke me with this pathetic bate?

What you don't like tasting your own medicine hotshot?

Wow, I must really be getting under your skin
Apparently I have been giving you a taste of medicine?
The difference between you and me is that you're taking this personal and trying to be hurtful. You can call me whatever you want. I personally don't care. You have absolutely no affect on me at all. I find you amusing

Look you can keep pulling us off topic but you won't change the fact that the bill we're discussing, does not censor christians. You're safe to continue with your hate speech

I never said it did, YOU keep saying I do, I keep telling you about the question I had but you are too busy being the village *****

[edit on 15-4-2009 by Aermacchi]

If you'd like me to answer a question and I haven't, first of all, I'm genuinely sorry I didn't answer your question but feel free to just ask it again. I always do my best to answer everyone's questions regardless of who they are. So..... ASK AWAY

Originally posted by jfj123

I WAS THERE WHEN I READ IT !!

Then Ill ask again, genius, copy paste the quote and translate for us what you think I wrote and how when I say "you gays" somehow means:

"you" you" or when I say, "you gays" I am actually "writing" something else even when it is spelled the same way "You" and "Gays" are, I am actually writing this "jfj123" Please share with us, won't you jfj123, of and yes I am speaking directly to you IE; jfj123. Rather than admit you got yourself painted in corner here and are just so above admitting you screwed up like you have when you think what is written in that bill doesn't have anything to do with getting people to compromise their otherwise drop dead honest opinions of homosexuals and their sympathizers. Please allow the gentle readers the opportunity to witness your staggering intellect and clever repartee by telling them what the statement I typed out REALLY is typed out to say, because YOU know what I really wrote. Regardless of your reading what you want to read in what people say or don't say, write or don't write. I submit this is the reason the very reason we cannot afford to allow people whose very own issues of hatred and prejudice of a "group" he singles out and superimposes his own hatred on what they say, as if they actually said it.

Then he responds to the argument he is now having, virtually with himself, vicariously as if it is the Christian he aims to exploit as the root cause and underlying motivation for a bill like this as if this bill is just a waste of time for our elected officials to approve because, according to him, it has no teeth so then WHY EVEN BOTHER.

but getting back to my argument, challenging jfj123 to take responsibility of his statements for the third time is has contradicted but is too skeeeered to illustrate in any way shape or form HOW his allegations can be seen as anything other than delusions and / or wishful thinking.

I believe he knows when I wrote "You Gays", I was talking to Gays, ALL gays, Gays in general, and is too desperate, too proud, too in-experienced and too immature to admit he was wrong and apologize.

Well I'll explain it to you. You see when people of the same sex like each other in a "special way", they sometimes get together in a certain personal way. You may have heard of this. It's called sex. If you haven't, let me know and I can send you some links that MAY clear a few things up.

hehe Orange Tom YOU were RIGHT! It is so easy when that tactic is used to simply ask a question to get someone like that to act like a jerk. If you are right about them not seeing it, I can almost guarantee this one here believes he looked real cool when all I need to do is give em enough rope

The separation of church and state is a legal and political principle derived from the First Amendment to the United States Constitution

So once again....You're wrong.

Your passionate defense of them is almost text book behavior exhibiting latent homosexual proclivities vicariously expressed and defended because you just happen to be a straight guy that really likes the gays cause,

1. Your attempt to provoke me by calling me a latent homosexual is just plain SAD. Is that really the best you can do? Do you really think you can provoke me with this pathetic bate?

I must really be getting under your skin

He says with a smile hehe,, so indicative of people whose involvment in threads like this is to do just that, get under peoples skin, I have forgotten more logical arguments given with more compelling debate, then you will ever know son, so as you flatter yourself underneath that thin veneer of wishful thinking, BE ADVISED: when you do that, you give yourself away your intentions would have otherwise only been conjecture but are now exploited as your intent.

You have absolutely no affect on me at all.

Yeah that's it, you got it all over me with that last comment, I have no affect on you, The over a dozen disparaging remarks and name calling I listed and you shamelessly admitted adding even more sarcasm laced excuses for them, was done because, I have no affect on you.

The over two dozen pages of this thread you have without fail responded to and solicited the overhyped undeserving praise from your clique, as if you just won a Nobel Prize, as much time, and collaboration you have lavished on me with the praise of reverse prejudice branding me a bigot with every counterpoint I make when you were overwhelmed as it is being totally out classed by the articulate intelligent wisdom and sound advice of member Orange Tom. Yes it is true, you need more practice when attempting to "play through" someone so totally out of your league where he not only pre-empted anticipated dialogue as if he was kreskin, but taught many here, honest enough to borrow from this technique you and all your interlocutors seem to have adopted as your cliques signature style of debate, he illustrated and proved that anyone can get such an opponent to not only GIVE testimony that can be used to impeach their argument, but get them to display the coordinating behavior

of beligerant legends in their own minds making patent the axiomatic truth to the scripture in Romans, "though they profess to be wise, they are as fools given to their delusions" or the writings they think you wrote but can't seem to show us why.

Ill remind them why quoting from the most compelling and credible source, that even you will paradoxically agree and disagree.

You do all this because I have no

affect on you..

Yeah uh huh

Originally posted by Aermacchi

Originally posted by jfj123

I WAS THERE WHEN I READ IT !!

Then Ill ask again, genius, copy paste the quote and translate for us what you think I wrote and how when I say "you gays" somehow means:

"you" you" or when I say, "you gays" I am actually "writing" something else even when it is spelled the same way "You" and "Gays" are, I am actually writing this "jfj123"

Again, you responded to my post which by default includes me in your statement unless of course you specifically stated that I wasn't included which you did not. Responding to my post and talking to other people is bad form and confusing, again, unless of course you specifically state with whom you are speaking in addition to the person you are responding to.

The easiest way to avoid this type of confusion is, if you want to make a general statement as you claim, simply klick the POST REPLY button next to the NEW THREAD BUTTON at the bottom right side of the page.

but getting back to my argument, challenging jfj123 to take responsibility of his statements for the third time is has contradicted but is too skeeeered to illustrate in any way shape or form HOW his allegations can be seen as anything other than delusions and / or wishful thinking.

I believe he knows when I wrote "You Gays", I was talking to Gays, ALL gays, Gays in general, and is too desperate, too proud, too in-experienced and too immature to admit he was wrong and apologize.

See above.

Well I'll explain it to you. You see when people of the same sex like each other in a "special way", they sometimes get together in a certain personal way. You may have heard of this. It's called sex. If you haven't, let me know and I can send you some links that MAY clear a few things up.

I must really be getting under your skin

He says with a smile hehe,,

My friend, you've been posting infamatory statements for pages, trying to get under everyone's skin and obviously taking pleasure in your attempts so by even bringing up my smile at the end of my statement is very hypocritical.
Or I could use your argument....When I was smiling it was a general smile meant for all those on the thread and not just you

so indicative of people whose involvment in threads like this is to do just that, get under peoples skin, I have forgotten more logical arguments given with more compelling debate, then you will ever know son, so as you flatter yourself underneath that thin veneer of wishful thinking, BE ADVISED: when you do that, you give yourself away your intentions would have otherwise only been conjecture but are now exploited as your intent.

Oh I'm not trying to hide anything.
YOU GET WHAT YOU GIVE.
I'm generally a very nice person unless someone comes along and makes me not nice

You have absolutely no affect on me at all.

Yeah that's it, you got it all over me with that last comment, I have no affect on you, The over a dozen disparaging remarks and name calling I listed and you shamelessly admitted adding even more sarcasm laced excuses for them, was done because, I have no affect on you.

Well I should change that statement. No affect means I wouldn't even care enough to post anything and that's not quite true. So I'd like to apologize for slightly misrepresenting that statement.
The truth is I find you amusing and your posts entertaining.
But no worries, you'll never be able to get under my skin
Hopefully that clears my statement up a bit

....of beligerant legends in their own minds making patent the axiomatic truth to the scripture in Romans, "though they profess to be wise, they are as fools given to their delusions" or the writings they think you wrote but can't seem to show us why.

Tirade much ?????

OK so what was your question?

I notice you skipped right over the part where you were wrong about the Separation of Church and State

My suggestion is, calm down, take a deeeeeep breath......it's ok.....it's just a discussion board....please don't take things here too seriously....you'll end up giving yourself a stroke.

Hopefully this thread will expand some peoples minds and allow them to at least understand tolerance of other cultures, groups, etc..

I also hope that people will read this bill and understand that our rights are safe.

I wish everyone well and hope we can get beyond our petty differences.

We've all dealt with bullies in your lives I'm sure. Some of us are able to defend ourselves and some of us are not. That poor child was not able to defend himself which makes hims one of those that we should defend.

Not to sound like a TV tag line but what exactly is wrong with helping the helpless???

Why are some of us treating children like less then people just because they are children?


If you saw a woman being assaulted and/or verbally abused, wouldn't you do something?
If you saw someone being beaten up, wouldn't you try and step in?
If you saw an older person being mugged, wouldn't you try to help?
I'm using "YOU" in the general sense here so please don't think I'm speaking to one person in particular.
Maybe most people wouldn't help and just maybe that is at least part of tthe problem.

If they want to say they or God hate gays, fine.
If they want to say gays deserve to rot in hell, so be it.
If they want to say gays deserve to die, they've crossed the line.
Preaching hate is one thing.Preaching death is quoite another.