One Million Moms rally at JcPenny's to fire Ellen Degeneres for being GAY!

Originally posted by sweetliberty
I got on here because Annee was seriously hating on Christians and on Moms/parents who feel the need to rally.

Wrong. I am not responsible for your interpretation of my position.

The Constitution gives everyone the right of protest.

AFA/NOM - - ARE Christians. They are not ALL Christians.

FACT: AFA/NOM are both listed by the SPLC as Hate Groups. It wasn't my doing.

All the gays/lesbians I worked with were Christian/Catholic.

The Extreme Right Christians which AFA/NOM are - - - do make it difficult to keep personal perspective and not take it out on all Christians. But I am very much about perspective. My Avatar even represents perspective.

reply to post by sweetliberty


TPTB don't like different, they like conformity. They actively persecute those who are different in society, especially women.

These people are used as scape goats and made an example of. However, I guess we can individually choose to be tolerant of others on a personal level.

reply to post by Annee


Well, you say it harms no one. If that were the case, then why do so many people feel put out by the agenda? Why do parents not wish their children to be exposed to the alternative lifestyle being presented as wholesome? Do you believe that the crazy lifestyle of Hollywood promotes well-being when they are invariably exposed to all kinds of recreational drugs and all manner of excesses? Of course that is their right to engage in such practices in the privacy of their homes. But do they have the right to control the entire dialogue of the country and the educational process?
You see, that is where you and I differ. You feel it is logical to promote an alternative lifestyle to masses of children in the supposed interest of battling "homophobia".
I never even heard of it till I was graduated from high school, so doesn't that tell you something? It means I didn't grow up with it in my face and I didn't have any opinion one way or the other.
You are for propaganda in the schools and I am not. The Left promotes what it wants, and it is invariably about some kind of demoralization in the guise of "tolerance".
The JC Penney thing is just one more addition to the promotion of the agenda. I could care less about Ellen or what she does, where she works, or whatever. I still say let the market take care of it, but govt wants to force us all to be whatever the State wishes. And you clearly are for that Statist approach.
In Marxist philosphy, the ends always justify the means.
Anyway, we are not going to change each other's minds on this.

Originally posted by yurichan
reply to post by sweetliberty

 

TPTB don't like different, they like conformity. They actively persecute those who are different in society, especially women.

These people are used as scape goats and made an example of. However, I guess we can individually choose to be tolerant of others on a personal level.

Yes, they do, even to the point of making something alternative the norm. We all have to be PC according to their standards.

reply to post by sweetliberty

I might get flamed for this but gays have suffered far far less than what the black's suffered under that idiotic horrible law.

I meant to reply to this part earlier - you won't get flamed by me - it's a fair question

This would make an amazing topic for a thread - which injustice is the worst - who has suffered the most?

How would we even begin to measure these things?

In all honesty sweetliberty - I believe freedom is for everybody. If we deny basic rights to any one group - it's a crime against us all. I know not everybody sees it that way

Are right and wrong relative? Of course they are - if they weren't we wouldn't be disagreeing over any of this

Those Jim Crow laws - it's hard to believe now that any of that was ever real...who were the people behind those laws - and what was their rationale?

Don't you see?

Things need to change - and they will

also - thanks for an intelligent back and forth

:-)

Originally posted by Spiramirabilis
reply to post by sweetliberty

 

It's so simple, no one can see it. May I ask, (subjectively) which one is which?

a very good point

which side wants to deny the other the right to be married - based on their idea of what's right and wrong?

why does this group need to be special?

why should all of us coddle them and deny the other group something that should obviously be an option for them - just as it is for everybody else?

here and now sweetliberty, why don't you try and answer this: how is this in any way about sex?

the team that is now legally able to marry acts like sex is a toxic substance or something - so even if it was about sex - what is the worst thing that could happen?

:-)

go on - I'm sure you can do it

edit on 2/13/2012 by Spiramirabilis because: (no reason given)

edit on 2/13/2012 by Spiramirabilis because: editing my edits - again

How is it about sex?????
What is a honeymoon for?
Now you're going to assume one team acts like sex is a toxic substance or something?
I have to ask, what makes you think that the legally married people don't know how to love and embrace sex?
You'd be surprised just how incredible sex is to those darn married people.

Do you support introducing other peoples children to anything other than the golden rule and the general academics while attending school ?

Originally posted by peck420

Originally posted by kaylaluv

We DO have laws against discrimination, however. The Civil Rights Act was not about making the black segment of our society "special" - it was about eliminating discrimination. You discriminate against someone by not treating them the same as everyone else, by not allowing them the same rights as everyone else - in other words - inequality. See how it works?

Nope, don't see it.

Unless you can show me the laws that allowed discrimination?

The problem is that new laws were never required, only equal application of existing laws.

There were plenty of laws that allowed discrimination. How about anti-miscegenation laws that prohibited interracial marriage? How about laws requiring voters to be heads of families and/or property owners, which left most women out of the voting process? How about "Jim Crow" laws, that prohibited blacks from voting, holding office, owning property, entering towns without permission,or serving on juries? When those laws were found unconstitutional on the basis of discrimination, those laws were abolished/overturned/taken off the books. And of course we now have current state laws that ban same-sex marriage, which discriminate against gays. Discriminating against someone because of their sexual orientation is unconstitutional, just like discriminating against someone because of their race or gender.

Now we have a situation, this is just for example, where it is worse to attack a homosexual than a none homosexual ('hate crimes'). Thereby, homosexuals (and any other 'protected group') have been deemed more valuable than the rest by the very nature of having special laws to protect them.

We're not talking about hate crimes here, we are talking about discrimination. For the record, though, I'm not crazy about the idea of hate crimes, either. There's never any good feelings associated with any crime. You should have the same punishment if you beat someone up to rob them, as you would if you beat someone up because they're gay. I do believe that the severity of the punishment should match the severity of the crime.

This will be just as bad in the future as it was in the past, simply because nobody can figure out that the best 'anti-discrimination' policy is the removing of all labels/titles/etc from our existing laws.

They should all protect all equally, not some for this group, some for that group.

I don't necessarily disagree with this. We SHOULD, however, remove all existing laws that allow for discrimination, therefore we should never say that you are prohibited from getting a marriage license if you are the same sex, as that is putting a label on the humans who are allowed to get married. This law should (and eventually will, IMO) be removed in ALL states.

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by sweetliberty
I got on here because Annee was seriously hating on Christians and on Moms/parents who feel the need to rally.

Wrong. I am not responsible for your interpretation of my position.

The Constitution gives everyone the right of protest.

AFA/NOM - - ARE Christians. They are not ALL Christians.

FACT: AFA/NOM are both listed by the SPLC as Hate Groups. It wasn't my doing.

All the gays/lesbians I worked with were Christian/Catholic.

The Extreme Right Christians which AFA/NOM are - - - do make it difficult to keep personal perspective and not take it out on all Christians. But I am very much about perspective. My Avatar even represents perspective.

Ok Annie, this sword cuts both ways. You are bothered by what you call the "extreme right". Of course that always conjures up images of right wing militias toting guns and members of KKK or Neo Nazis. You know you are promoting this image when you use the term.

So let's just talk about the far left now. In Hegelian Dialectic, the far left is communist, anarchist, revolutionary, radical, alternative.

The truth is that Nazism and Totalitarian fascism are components of the left, even though declared to be "right wing" in Hegelian terms. Both Nazism and Communism are out of the same leftist ideology.

The far left pretends to be for human rights, civil rights, etc, and yet look what has come out all communist regimes? Brutal murders and imprisonment of whoever is against the regime. Hillary's "It Takes A Village" is nothing more than fancy words for communism and collectivism. While they are currently supporting the rights of many radical groups of people, it is all for the purpose of subversion. And Hillary pretends to be all for the rights of the "child", but she is just paving the way for the UN control of all the Nations of the world, and to replace the parent with the State.
That is FACT.
Besmenov makes it plain that many of these people are gotten rid of after they serve their initial purpose. They are no longer needed for the revolution.

Of course, since the dialogue on communism bothers you so much, how about discussing the activities of the Illuminati and all of their perversions?

reply to post by Annee


If you think it's better for other people to teach or support the teaching of.... other than... History, English, Math, and the similar subjects to other peoples children then you are worse than those who you claim are haters.
Leave the children alone if they're not yours. You support of taking away those rights of parents is despicable.

But I am very much about perspective. My Avatar even represents perspective.

Long ago I thought your avatar represented a nosy neighbor and in the last week your avatar actually made sense.

reply to post by sweetliberty

How is it about sex?????
What is a honeymoon for?
Now you're going to assume one team acts like sex is a toxic substance or something?
I have to ask, what makes you think that the legally married people don't know how to love and embrace sex?
You'd be surprised just how incredible sex is to those darn married people.

:-)

none of that answers the question sweetliberty...

how is this about sex? what would happen ( to the children) even if it was only about sex?

why are some trying to deny gay people the right to marry? How is letting them marry - and explaining to children why same sex couples are married - going to harm them?

Do you support introducing other peoples children to anything other than the golden rule and the general academics while attending school ?

Yes - I support taking the golden rule all the way to it's obvious logical extreme - and teaching children about how all people on this planet are the same - except in the ways they are different. Then teach them that when people are different - we can still accept them, live with them, and treat them as equals

We do children no favors by protecting them from reality

Reality of course being different things for different people

:-)

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
Well, you say it harms no one. If that were the case, then why do so many people feel put out by the agenda?

Having a belief that something is harmful - - doesn't make it so.

Why do parents not wish their children to be exposed to the alternative lifestyle being presented as wholesome?

Why do Hindu's worship cows - - when many people are starving to death?

Do you believe that the crazy lifestyle of Hollywood promotes well-being when they are invariably exposed to all kinds of recreational drugs and all manner of excesses?

My kid works in Hollywood production. Today "Please and Thank You" are the top criteria for that working environment. (don't stereotype).

The #1 crop in Oklahoma is not corn.

Of course that is their right to engage in such practices in the privacy of their homes. But do they have the right to control the entire dialogue of the country and the educational process?

I'm not even going to accept that as a valid question.

You see, that is where you and I differ. You feel it is logical to promote an alternative lifestyle to masses of children in the supposed interest of battling "homophobia".

I feel it is logical and necessary that young children accept differences and what is/will be part of their generation. Just as racism is not socially acceptable in this generation.

I never even heard of it till I was graduated from high school, so doesn't that tell you something?

Neither did I. I didn't have any black kids in my high school either.

It means I didn't grow up with it in my face and I didn't have any opinion one way or the other.

Gay/lesbian - transgender kids grew up with YOU in their face.

You are for propaganda in the schools and I am not. The Left promotes what it wants, and it is invariably about some kind of demoralization in the guise of "tolerance".

Propaganda? Like the "Pledge of Allegiance"? Propaganda that military recruiters are allowed on campuses - - but anti-war supporters are not? (just a point - I am not a pacifist. In my heart yes - in reality no)

Acceptance of differences is demoralization? Let's go back when my disabled mother was asked to leave restaurants because it made other customers uncomfortable.

The JC Penney thing is just one more addition to the promotion of the agenda.

I thought Ellen was promoting make up from Sephora.

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
Well, you say it harms no one. If that were the case, then why do so many people feel put out by the agenda?

Having a belief that something is harmful - - doesn't make it so.

Why do parents not wish their children to be exposed to the alternative lifestyle being presented as wholesome?

Why do Hindu's worship cows - - when many people are starving to death?

Do you believe that the crazy lifestyle of Hollywood promotes well-being when they are invariably exposed to all kinds of recreational drugs and all manner of excesses?

My kid works in Hollywood production. Today "Please and Thank You" are the top criteria for that working environment. (don't stereotype).

The #1 crop in Oklahoma is not corn - - its a weed.

Of course that is their right to engage in such practices in the privacy of their homes. But do they have the right to control the entire dialogue of the country and the educational process?

I'm not even going to accept that as a valid question.

You see, that is where you and I differ. You feel it is logical to promote an alternative lifestyle to masses of children in the supposed interest of battling "homophobia".

I feel it is logical and necessary that young children accept differences and what is/will be part of their generation. Just as racism is not socially acceptable in this generation.

I never even heard of it till I was graduated from high school, so doesn't that tell you something?

Neither did I. I didn't have any black kids in my high school either.

It means I didn't grow up with it in my face and I didn't have any opinion one way or the other.

Gay/lesbian - transgender kids grew up with YOU in their face.

You are for propaganda in the schools and I am not. The Left promotes what it wants, and it is invariably about some kind of demoralization in the guise of "tolerance".

Propaganda? Like the "Pledge of Allegiance"? Propaganda that military recruiters are allowed on campuses - - but anti-war supporters are not? (just a point - I am not a pacifist. In my heart yes - in reality no)

Acceptance of differences is demoralization? Let's go back when my disabled mother was asked to leave restaurants because it made other customers uncomfortable.

The JC Penney thing is just one more addition to the promotion of the agenda.

I thought Ellen was promoting make up from Sephora.

edit on 13-2-2012 by Annee because: (no reason given)

Woo hoo Annee! You are on FIRE today!!

reply to post by Spiramirabilis


I don't think relationships are only about sex
Some (many) are trying to deny gay marriage because it is a religious belief.

How is letting them marry - and explaining to children why same sex couples are married - going to harm them?

I'm sure the children could care less actually. If they want to know about same sex marriage, they'll ask their parent/parents or the people who are in the same sex marriage.
Do you think the children have already been harmed by our education system? If so, how is adding to it going to help?

Just like government, our education system should stay out of our childrens lives if it isn't to protect them from abuse.
Your choices aren't so superior that they supersede those of the parents.

Originally posted by sweetliberty
reply to post by Annee

 

If you think it's better for other people to teach or support the teaching of.... other than... History, English, Math, and the similar subjects to other peoples children then you are worse than those who you claim are haters.

Here's a history lesson I can't wait for my daughter to be taught: There used to be discrimination against gays, just like there was discrimination against blacks and women.... and now there's not.

Originally posted by kaylaluv

Woo hoo Annee! You are on FIRE today!!

LOL - - I'm usually trying to think and type with a bouncy active 4 year old boy in the mix - - who hasn't taken a nap since he was 2.

He's not feeling well and playing quietly in his room. Very rare occurrence.

Oh well - - that was short lived. He's baaaaaaaaaaaaaaack.

reply to post by Spiramirabilis

Yes - I support taking the golden rule all the way to it's obvious logical extreme - and teaching children about how all people on this planet are the same - except in the ways they are different. Then teach them that when people are different - we can still accept them, live with them, and treat them as equals

Very well said, I like that. If I heard a teacher teaching that to a classroom of children, I"d have no problem what-so-ever.
If the teacher went into too much more detail and specifically singled this out about same sex marriage, they've gone over the line of why children are attending their school.
I support educating the golden rule without focusing on things like marriage.

We do children no favors by protecting them from reality Reality of course being different things for different people

When my son was about two or three years old, I was told that if I didn't want strangers giving him his "first influence" that I should try to talk to him as much as possible about "ewwww" subjects too.
So I made sure here and there to talk to him about a wide variety of things including sex and same sex.

I didn't protect him much. Had I done that, he would have had an even harder time living out there in the big world.
I'm not an advocate for "protecting" children from reality
I'm just not so righteous that I would interfere with another parents parenting.

Oh... I told David I would love him no matter who he is or what he did. I specifically mentioned if he was gay, it wouldn't change my love for him.
He was allowed his own personal feelings about such subjects. Imo, even if I were to try to influence him, he would eventually grow into his own opinion anyway, so I just let it happen for him.

Originally posted by kaylaluv

Originally posted by sweetliberty
reply to post by Annee

 

If you think it's better for other people to teach or support the teaching of.... other than... History, English, Math, and the similar subjects to other peoples children then you are worse than those who you claim are haters.

Here's a history lesson I can't wait for my daughter to be taught: There used to be discrimination against gays, just like there was discrimination against blacks and women.... and now there's not.

Cool, that's the way it should be..... parents teaching their children

reply to post by Annee


What does the "please and thank you" thing have to do with Hollywood? Hollywood is just as capable of producing decency as degeneracy.
Some examples of decent films are "Beethoven"( the story of a family who adopt a dog), and The Black Stallion(a story of a boy who is stranded on a desert island and saved by the horse, and which had amazing cinematography).

But again, you fail to understand the nature of moral relativism and it's use in the deliberate demise of culture. It was recorded in Congress that the deliberate degradation of culture and art is part of the process of communism.

As far as Hindu's worshiping cows, true they do not eat the cows, but I do not think that is what is producing starvation in that country. Rice is a staple food in most countries. They do serve chicken and fish in many restaurants there. What was your point about the cows and belief? It's just as odd that Global Warming proponents imagine that cow farts are destroying the earth, and they happen to be the very people who are promoting a cowless world.

reply to post by sweetliberty

I'm sure the children could care less actually. If they want to know about same sex marriage, they'll ask their parent/parents or the people who are in the same sex marriage.

absolutely - so, you see why this should be a non-issue?

Do you think the children have already been harmed by our education system? If so, how is adding to it going to help?

I think adding this to it can only help - that's a difference you and I aren't going to overcome

Do you remember being a kid sweetliberty? I do...

I was harmed, I was helped - I learned about life in a variety of ways - same as everyone. Protecting children from harm is impossible if you're not being honest with them

and harm is in the eye of the beholder - that much is obvious

Your choices aren't so superior that they supersede those of the parents.

which parents?

:-)

reply to post by Annee

Propaganda that military recruiters are allowed on campuses - - but anti-war supporters are not? (just a point - I am not a pacifist. In my heart yes - in reality no)

being a pacifist in your heart still makes you a pacifist

just sayin'

:-)