Decline to Sign: Download the Flyer
The shower-nuts are going to be out in force this weekend, lying to people about what the gender-identity nondiscrimination law does, trying to get them to sign petitions to force a referendum. Equality Maryland has put together a flyer that gives some of the facts. I suggest that you click on the link below, download the pdf file, and print out a few dozen copies. If you're going to the grocery store, the mall, the Amish market, or anywhere else, bring them with you. If you see the Citizens for a Responsible Whatever out there with their petitions, stand around for a little while, talk with people, and hand out some of these flyers. People wouldn't sign the petitions if they knew what they really were.
Also, if you see them gathering signatures, will you please do us a favor? As soon as you can, email us at info@teachthefacts.org and let us know where you saw them.
You can download the flyer HERE.
Also, if you see them gathering signatures, will you please do us a favor? As soon as you can, email us at info@teachthefacts.org and let us know where you saw them.
You can download the flyer HERE.
posted by JimK at 9:33 PM
111 Comments:
The energy TTF is putting into stopping this vote tells you something. Putting this referendum on the ballot does nothing but present this to the voters of the county and give everyone a chance to discuss whether they want to take this step.
TTF claims that their radical views are mainstream but they know the truth. They've slipped alot of stuff under the radar and this bill could draw the attention of a sleeping giant- the sensible majority.
The defeat of the teacher union's candidate for the at-large position on Tuesday may be the first leak in the levee.
The storm of sensibilty is coming.
TTF is very worried.
Worried would apply to Theresa and Ruth being caught again
and CRW(hatever) being the hateful liars and bigots they are again and again.
That email sent Rio Theresa into bigot orbit. Worried she certainly was.
I think people should reference the email verbatim everywhere up to and including testimony on any level about this issue on how the bigots operate.
Ruth should get exposure from her own hand and thoughts. I know I will be sharing her email all over the place and so will others.
Ted
You think posting a little blog item with a link to a flyer represents some "telling" energy on TTF's part? Ha! Look at the facts: it is the CRG's energy output that is "telling." They are sending out volunteers who they have trained to lie to people (in direct violation of COMAR) in hopes of getting them to sign petitions, after having set up an elaborate hoax complete with a cross-dressed stooge and media coverage, which followed their main point man who gave the County Council a Nazi salute at one of the public hearings the CRG trains its volunteers to tell potential petition signers didn't happen. It's obvious which side's energy is "telling." CRG is so full of hate for people different than themselves that no lying deceitful tactic is too low for them to use.
Sadly, this is what CRW(eirdos) want to happen in our public schools. Sad news, my friends. I have never heard of any 'ex-gays' being killed for being "ex-gay/Straight". CRW: as a teacher, you make me disgusted. Thank God I actually care about students and I am the one each day in the classroom teaching them tolerance and to get along and love one another... CRW just fosters hate and wants kids to die. SICK!!
This was send to me from GLSEN:
A personal urgent message from GLSEN Founder Kevin Jennings
As you may know, I returned to GLSEN following a five month sabbatical last week.
The below was not the kind of welcome back news I was hoping for.
Lawrence King was a self-identified gay student who attended Green Junior High in Oxnard, California. His feminine gender expression “was freaking the guys out” according to one of his classmates.
Apparently, for this, he had to die.
On Tuesday morning Lawrence was shot at point blank range in his eighth grade English class by a boy who had apparently been one of his anti-LGBT tormentors. Now he’s going to die once they turn the machines off, which they may have already done by the time you get this message.
Ten years ago a gay college student, Matthew Shepard, was tied to a fence and beaten to death. Today, it’s a gay junior high student being shot in the head. When will we, as a society, say enough is enough?
We know that this student was a repeated target of classmates based on his sexual orientation and gender expression, and we know that such harassment can escalate to greater acts of violence. It is long past time to start addressing anti-LGBT bullying and harassment directly, and to start naming this problem, which threatens the safety of all students in school.
Make this a learning moment in your communities to have a dialogue about why creating safer schools for all students regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity/expression is so very important.
Also, you can reach out to the GLBT NATIONAL YOUTH TALKLINE 1-800-246-PRIDE (1-800-246-7743). The GLBT National Youth Talkline provides telephone and email peer-counseling, as well as factual information and local resources for cities and towns across the United States.
By taking action on school climate issues, you are making a difference in creating a better future. On a day like today, it's important to remember that you're not alone in that work. Students throughout the LA area and across the country are also working on these issues, and, as this story emerges, we will be thinking of you as well.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-oxnard14feb14,0,7204301.story
Oxnard student declared brain dead
Lawrence King, 15, was shot and wounded at a junior high school Tuesday. A classmate faces murder charge.
By Catherine Saillant and Gregory W. Griggs
Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
February 13, 2008
An Oxnard junior high student who was shot in the head by a classmate earlier this week was declared brain dead Wednesday, and the 14-year-old male suspect now faces a first-degree murder charge, authorities said.
Lawrence King, 15, was declared brain dead by two neurosurgeons about 2 p.m. at St. John's Regional Medical Center in Oxnard, said Craig Stevens, senior deputy Ventura County medical examiner. King's body remains on a ventilator for possible organ donation, he said. Authorities initially believed that King was improving following the shooting early Tuesday inside a classroom at E.O. Green Junior High School. But the boy's condition worsened early Wednesday, and he was placed on a ventilator a few hours later with his family nearby, said an official who asked not to be named.
David Keith, an Oxnard police spokesman, said the family would have no comment and asked the media to respect its privacy.
Police said the suspect, whose identity was not disclosed because of his age, shot King at least twice at the beginning of the school day and then fled the campus. The boy was apprehended by police a few blocks away and is being held in Juvenile Hall.
He is scheduled to appear in court today.
Dist. Atty. Gregory Totten said prosecutors would decide whether the case should remain in juvenile court after reviewing the police investigation. Under state law, prosecutors can ask the court to try the suspect as an adult, he said.
"In all probability he will be charged in adult court," Totten said.
Police have not determined a motive in the slaying but said it appeared to stem from a personal dispute between King and the suspect. Keith and Totten declined to elaborate. But several students at the south Oxnard campus said King and his alleged assailant had a falling out stemming from King's sexual orientation.
The teenager sometimes wore feminine clothing and makeup, and proclaimed he was gay, students said. Some of the male students were bothered by his appearance, calling it a distraction, several students said.
"He would come to school in high-heeled boots, makeup, jewelry and painted nails -- the whole thing," said Michael Sweeney, 13, an eighth-grader. "That was freaking the guys out."
Student Juan Sandoval, 14, said he shared a fourth-period algebra class with the suspect, whom he described as a calm, smart student who played on the basketball team.
"I didn't think he was that kind of kid," Sandoval said. "I guess you never know. He made a big mistake."
"Their lives are both destroyed now," said student Hansley Rivera, 12, after learning of King's death.
Several students said that a day before the shooting, King and several boys had some kind of altercation during the lunch period. Police and prosecutors said they had heard the same stories but have not come to a conclusion as to motive.
If the suspect targeted King because of his sexual orientation, it could rise to the level of a hate crime, authorities said.
"We've heard that and a lot of other things," Keith said. "But I can't say what the motive is until we finish our interviews."
Totten said he could not comment on the specifics of the case until he reviewed the police investigation. But a hate-crime enhancement is something that prosecutors would consider as they move forward, he said.
"It's something we will look at," he said. "But the case is going to be reviewed as a murder involving the use of a firearm, and that carries a potential sentence of 50 years to life."
Jerry Dannenberg, the school district superintendent, said E.O. Green staff were aware that King had butted heads with other students, including the suspect, and that they had offered both students help.
"They had been doing a lot of counseling and a lot of work with [King] to help him deal with some of his concerns and issues," Dannenberg said. "But I can't go into specifics about what was going on."
Bullying in schools has long been a problem. But recent studies show that a student who comes "out" as gay or lesbian is far more likely to suffer abuse than others, said Kevin Jennings, executive director of the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network based in New York.
A student thought to be gay was five times as likely to be threatened or injured by a weapon, according to a 2002 California Department of Education study. Jennings said subsequent studies have found similar results.
His group advocates more teacher training on how to handle bullying and harassment, specifically bullying of gay students.
"This Oxnard shooting is very upsetting but not surprising," Jennings said. "The real issue is not the kid coming out, but the kid sitting next to him. Schools must teach that we may not like one another, but we must respect one another."
Teachers and counselors at E.O. Green Junior High, meanwhile, sought to calm fears about escalating violence at the south Oxnard campus. About a quarter of the school's 1,000 students stayed home Wednesday due to fear of reprisals, Dannenberg said.
He said the school will have extra staff and police on campus for the next few days. Counselors will also be on hand as long as needed, Dannenberg said. The school district will hold a meeting for parents next week to discuss concerns.
This week's shooting was a first, not only for the school but for all of Ventura County, which has never before seen a classroom fatality. Dannenberg said school administrators can take steps to keep guns out of schools but that nothing would ever work perfectly.
"It's not just the schools," he said. "We have a societal problem. Last week, it was gunfire at a City Council back east. And this week, unfortunately, it was us."
"Suggestions for those collecting signatures: The best opener is “Would you sign a Petition to get a bad Law on the ballot in November so you can vote on it?.”"
Not a lie.
"When they question what the bill is about then say “We are concerned about privacy and safety for women” and explain the concerns about the bill from that stand point."
Not a lie. They will explain how they think the bill does this.
"Avoid labeling the bill as long as possible and then only refer to it as the “Gender Identity Non-Discrimination bill.” Please avoid for the most part referring to it as the Transgender bill."
Why is not a lie, either. Putting a label on something doesn't explain its effect.
"This is fascinating, isn't it?"
Not really.
"Call it a "bad law," okay, I don't see any problem with that. So far they're honest."
Glad we've got a ruling on that from the grand poo-bah of moral judgment.
"The "privacy and safety for women" angle is their first choice for presenting this."
Because that's the reason these people think the bill is bad.
"The bill, people, is about discrimination against transgender citizens."
Which is a broad statement. The kind of non-specificity which TTF revels in. There needs to be a discussion about the effect of such a law which radically redefines civil rights as applying to feelings and desires.
"It has nothing to do with the "privacy and safety for women." That is what we call a red herring, an argument that totally changes the subject."
No, it doesn't. They think this is the effect of the bill. You understand perfectly well what they're talking about. If you want to argue that they are wrong, that's fine. But your insistence that they are lying about something and your worry about simply having a public discussion and vote is intolerant.
"Their advice: don't tell them what it's really about. Avoid referring to it as the Transgender bill. Even though, of course, that's what it is. If you referred to it accurately, nobody would sign the petitions. Therefore, avoid that."
I don't know why they prefer "Gender Identity" to "Transgender" but their term is actually more accurate.
Your whole uproar about this memo is just a form of dishonesty.
Anonymous said...
"The energy TTF is putting into stopping this vote tells you something."
Oh my, what does it tell us?
"Putting this referendum on the ballot does nothing but present this to the voters of the county and give everyone a chance to discuss whether they want to take this step."
While we’re at it, why don’t we give everyone a chance to discuss whether they want the “freedom” to discriminate against people for their religious views, or their race, or their national origin, or their disability, or their marital status?
"TTF claims that their radical views are mainstream but they know the truth. They've slipped alot of stuff under the radar and this bill could draw the attention of a sleeping giant- the sensible majority."
From the TTF flyer:
"13 states and more than 100 local jurisdictions already have such a law, including Washington, D.C. and Baltimore."
My yes, 13 states and more than 100 local jurisdictions, including Washington D.C. and Baltimore -- all intentionally “slipped under the radar” by TTF. Wow TTF, you are a talented lot.
"The defeat of the teacher union's candidate for the at-large position on Tuesday may be the first leak in the levee.
The storm of sensibilty is coming.
TTF is very worried."
As any sensible person should be worried about a gathering and approaching storm of idiocy. Namely people who can’t tell the difference between sensibility and idiocy.
Anonymous says...
"The bill, people, is about discrimination against transgender citizens."
Which is a broad statement. The kind of non-specificity which TTF revels in. There needs to be a discussion about the effect of such a law which radically redefines civil rights as applying to feelings and desires.
--
Priceless. This coming from someone who enjoys and approves of civil rights to apply to pulled-out-of-their-ass “religious” BELIEFS, that some human beings are not worthy to be treated AS human beings.
Hypocritical to the core.
Anonymous said...
"It has nothing to do with the "privacy and safety for women." That is what we call a red herring, an argument that totally changes the subject."
No, it doesn't. They think this is the effect of the bill.
-“They think?” Now you’re defending the legal protection of their delusions?
--
"You understand perfectly well what they're talking about. If you want to argue that they are wrong, that's fine. But your insistence that they are lying about something and your worry about simply having a public discussion and vote is intolerant."
It’s rightfully intolerant, because it is a lie. In regard to the Rio Health Club incident, they were given VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE of this supposed threat to women, and have YET to call the police on the matter.
Therefore, one of two things is true: Either they don’t care about the “safety of women,” or they don’t think this non-discrimination bill is a threat to women.
No argument, it’s been proven by their behavior that they certainly DON’T think that a threat to safety would be the result of the bill.
""The energy TTF is putting into stopping this vote tells you something."
Oh my, what does it tell us?"
It tells us TTF is a fringe group afraid of being exposed to the mainstream voter. TTF doesn't really believe their rhetoric about being mainstream.
""Putting this referendum on the ballot does nothing but present this to the voters of the county and give everyone a chance to discuss whether they want to take this step."
While we’re at it, why don’t we give everyone a chance to discuss whether they want the “freedom” to discriminate against people for their religious views, or their race, or their national origin, or their disability, or their marital status?"
We've already done that long ago. That's how we got those laws. TTF wants to slip in this one without a public conversation. They fear democracy.
""TTF claims that their radical views are mainstream but they know the truth. They've slipped alot of stuff under the radar and this bill could draw the attention of a sleeping giant- the sensible majority."
My yes, 13 states and more than 100 local jurisdictions, including Washington D.C. and Baltimore -- all intentionally “slipped under the radar” by TTF. Wow TTF, you are a talented lot."
Actually, I think the poster was referring to the new MCPS curriculum which hasn't been scrutinized by the general public. This referendum will bring a conversation which won't be limited to the bill in question.
""The defeat of the teacher union's candidate for the at-large position on Tuesday may be the first leak in the levee.
The storm of sensibilty is coming.
TTF is very worried."
As any sensible person should be worried about a gathering and approaching storm of idiocy. Namely people who can’t tell the difference between sensibility and idiocy."
Hopefully, TTF will keep calling the mainstream view "idiocy". Referendums are lost that way.
"In regard to the Rio Health Club incident, they were given VERIFIABLE EVIDENCE of this supposed threat to women, and have YET to call the police on the matter.
Therefore, one of two things is true: Either they don’t care about the “safety of women,” or they don’t think this non-discrimination bill is a threat to women."
This is a laughable line told by a moron. TTF found out a guy went into the ladies room and they should have called the police? How about if they hear a bank robbery has taken place somewhere? Should they call the police? I saw something about a shooting on the news last night. Think I should get in touch with law enforcement? I heard someone has been spying on other people's e-mail. Should I call the cops?
Yes, AnonFreak, you should call the police to think for you becuase you're not smart enough to actually think for yourself.
Red Baron said "The energy TTF is putting into stopping this vote tells you something. Putting this referendum on the ballot does nothing but present this to the voters of the county and give everyone a chance to discuss whether they want to take this step...TTF is very worried.".
What worries decent people like those at Teach The Facts is that these people are lying about the law to get people to sign and if there is a vote on it they will continue to lie about the law to get people to vote against what is just and right. The shower nuts are telling people that the bill will affect the privacy and safety of women and not telling them its about protecting transgenders from discrimination. They can't get people to vote against it based on the truth so they lie about it instead.
I agree, Priya.
I made sure to give many local business managers a "Decling to Sign" flier as well (and on that back of it) I put Ruth's email to Theresa so that volunteers can actually learn that Theresa and Ruth are lying to their OWN volunteers. SHAME, SHAME-- too bad that they all the business owners now know your names!! I hope that we bump into each other this weekend, AnonFreak. It would be nice to put a face with a huge bigot.
"What worries decent people like those at Teach The Facts is that these people are lying about the law to get people to sign and if there is a vote on it they will continue to lie about the law to get people to vote against what is just and right."
But, Priya, TTF will have a chance to state their case.
If we don't believe that is likely, we've lost faith in democracy.
You believe in democarcy, don't you?
Red Baron, democracy can't work properly when people are deceived. Lying isn't a valid part of democracy.
Here is the link to where the CRW(eirdos) will be petitioning this today and this weekend:
http://www.notmyshower.net/petition_collection_locations.pdf
"Red Baron, democracy can't work properly when people are deceived. Lying isn't a valid part of democracy."
And who will decide who is lying and who's telling the truth in your "democracy"?
If someone is being deceived why can't those who have the truth demonstrate it?
In our current situation, I don't see any lying by CRC. I do see attempted deception by TTF which constantly tries to imply that the referendum will result in a law segregating restrooms by gender. All CRC says is that restroom owners should be free to set their own policies. It addition to democracy, you're also attacking freedom and the concept of private ownership.
Are you a Communist?
"I hope that we bump into each other this weekend, AnonFreak. It would be nice to put a face with a huge bigot."
Where will you be hanging, Mr TM? I'd love to see what a loud-mouthed, wild-eyed lunatic looks like.
AnonFreak, don't you see that every morning when you look in the mirror??
Boys and girls, don't make me start deleting stuff and banning people. There's plenty to talk about here without personal insults.
JimK
Be sure to contact the following places and inform them that these people are lying to them (CRW will be there this weekend)-- Also, go out with "Decling to Sign" fliers and Ruth's email to Theresa to prove to their volunteers and the public that they are lying. This weekend they will be at the following places (copy and paste link into your browser):
(http://www.notmyshower.net/petition_collection_locations.pdf)
Oops, the link was cut off. Here it is again:
http://www.notmyshower.net/petition_collection_locations.pdf
This is what Anon A. Mouse says about the CRC (sic)
All CRC says is that restroom owners should be free to set their own policies. It addition to democracy, you're also attacking freedom and the concept of private ownership.
This is what the County Executive says in his letter to the CRG:
Your reading of the terms of the bill is in error. The legislation as passed and signed does not include locker rooms and showers. Moreover, the County Attorney has indicated that the law does not apply to those facilities. That is County policy, period. (from the CRG website)
This is what the county Executive told The Washington Post:
The county's Human Rights Commission compliance director has said the law allows the owner of a health club or swim club to segregate facilities based on biological sex.
So since the CRG's, or as Mouse would have it, the CRC's concern is moot, and facility owners do retain the freedom to set their own policies, why are they continuing their petition drive?
Red Baron said "And who will decide who is lying and who's telling the truth in your "democracy"?".
The rational objective person. And ultimately the judiciary.
Red Baron said "If someone is being deceived why can't those who have the truth demonstrate it?".
We can't be there every time you lie to catch you in it and correct you. You don't see the shower-nuts asking for volunteers from TTF to go around with them and correct their lies as they try to sucker people into signing their petition.
Red Baron said "In our current situation, I don't see any lying by CRC.".
Get real, you see the lying but you as well are too dishonest to acknowledge it. They're telling people that womens privacy and safety is at risk when there's never been any problem in any jurisdiction that has such an anti-discrimination law - they're lying. They're telling their volunteers to avoid telling people what the law is really about as long as possible - they're lying by ommission.
Red Baron said "I do see attempted deception by TTF which constantly tries to imply that the referendum will result in a law segregating restrooms by gender.".
I think you're lying - show us where TTF said that.
Red Baron said "All CRC says is that restroom owners should be free to set their own policies. It addition to democracy, you're also attacking freedom and the concept of private ownership.".
If restroom owners are free to set their own policies they can have "white only" bathrooms as well - no one wants to go back to that. The essence of democracy and freedom is equality for all and transpeople deserve the right to use the bathroom consistent with their gender expression and the right to be safe in using the washroom most apropriate to them.
Emproph said: While we’re at it, why don’t we give everyone a chance to discuss whether they want the “freedom” to discriminate against people for their religious views, or their race, or their national origin, or their disability, or their marital status?"
To which Anon replied: "We've already done that long ago. That's how we got those laws. TTF wants to slip in this one without a public conversation. They fear democracy."
So we've had a public referendum on every single non-discrimination category exept gender identity?
Can someone please enlighten me on this new found information.
And why isn't the CRW screaming this from the rooftops?
You know guys, they say nature abhors a vaccum. Apparently, the same applies to society. Here's the latest in Britain, which in the last few decades has gradually turned its back on its religious heritage:
"Atheists can break out the champagne: there really are some wacky religious people out there. One of them seems to be Rowan Williams, the archbishop of Canterbury. In a recent speech Williams ruffled a lot of feathers--it is not Anglican custom to ruffle a lot of feathers--when he said it "seems unavoidable" that Muslim holy law or sharia is coming to Britain. Not only that, but our bearded, bespectacled cleric even thought that this would be a good thing because it would foster social cohesion."
Wow!
Good point Emproph. There was never a referendum on allowing interracial marriage, it was decided by those "activist judges". According to Red Baron that was anti-democracy and anti-freedom and the law should be overturned so the people can vote on it.
Red Baron, Rowan Williams statements merely show the moral bankruptcy of religion. On one hand people like him believe Muslims are going to be eternally tortured for believing in the wrong religion and yet on the other hand trying to suggest that the wrong religion is better than none at all. Fact is the most prosperous and socially healthy democracies are the least religious. Thank goodness Britain is turning its back on the religious dark ages.
"Fact is the most prosperous and socially healthy democracies are the least religious."
Hardly, but they are the least stable. If you believe demographic trends (and you probably don't because they are inconvenient truths for TTF), these secular societies in Europe will be inundated within a generation. Their only hope is an embrace of their historic faith.
No, as we've discussed in the past it is a fact that the most prosperous and socially healthy democracies are the least religious - check it out, don't just wallow in your ignorance and wishful thinking:
http://moses.creighton.edu/JRS/2005/2005-11.html
In general, higher rates of belief in and worship of a creator correlate with higher rates of homicide, juvenile and early adult mortality, STD infection rates, teen pregnancy, and abortion in the prosperous democracies (Figures 1-9). The most theistic prosperous democracy, the U.S., is exceptional, but not in the manner Franklin predicted. The United States is almost always the most dysfunctional of the developed democracies, sometimes spectacularly so, and almost always scores poorly. The view of the U.S. as a “shining city on the hill” to the rest of the world is falsified when it comes to basic measures of societal health.
If the data showed that the U.S. enjoyed higher rates of societal health than the more secular, pro-evolution democracies, then the opinion that popular belief in a creator is strongly beneficial to national cultures would be supported. Although they are by no means utopias, the populations of secular democracies are clearly able to govern themselves and maintain societal cohesion. Indeed, the data examined in this study demonstrates that only the more secular, pro-evolution democracies have, for the first time in history, come closest to achieving practical “cultures of life” that feature low rates of lethal crime, juvenile-adult mortality, sex related dysfunction, and even abortion. The least theistic secular developed democracies such as Japan, France, and Scandinavia have been most successful in these regards. The non-religious, pro-evolution democracies contradict the dictum that a society cannot enjoy good conditions unless most citizens ardently believe in a moral creator. The widely held fear that a Godless citizenry must experience societal disaster is therefore refuted. Contradicting these conclusions requires demonstrating a positive link between theism and societal conditions in the first world with a similarly large body of data - a doubtful possibility in view of the observable trends.
There is evidence that within the U.S. strong disparities in religious belief versus acceptance of evolution are correlated with similarly varying rates of societal dysfunction, the strongly theistic, anti-evolution south and mid-west having markedly worse homicide, mortality, STD, youth pregnancy, marital and related problems than the northeast where societal conditions, secularization, and acceptance of evolution approach European norms (Aral and Holmes; Beeghley, Doyle, 2002).
Dear friends,
Beware. I think that anonynous/Red Baron is in fact a paid lobbyist for an antigay organization trolling on this blog with the aim of goading good-hearted people into inadvertently saying things in a public forum that she and her allies can use against them when the occasion arises.
Anonymous, feel free to confirm or deny.
rrjr
Anonymous said...
"This is a laughable line told by a moron. [If] TTF found out a guy went into the ladies room and they should have called the police?"
So you think it would have been absurd to have called the police, simply because “a guy went into the ladies room,” yet you are convinced of the CRW contention that this bill is a threat to the safety of women?
Which is it Anonymous, a threat, or absurd to consider it a threat, or both?
Well, I deny, Robert. You do have a point though that you guys hurt your cause when you attack God. This will never be a crowd-pleaser.
Priya, are you an alter ego of Randi who has pasted and posted this Creighton University study many times? I wonder how this study explains that the most secular places in America, cities, have the highest crime rate.
No matter, however, it doesn't address my point, which is that low morale in secular societies results in low birth rates and declining population in those regions. They are obviously fated to be overcome by those who can will themselves to get out of bed in the morning.
A religious heritage is the destiny of all secular societies. The choice is which. When gays attack Christianity, they should proceed with caution. They may get what they wish for.
"So you think it would have been absurd to have called the police, simply because “a guy went into the ladies room,” yet you are convinced of the CRW contention that this bill is a threat to the safety of women?
Which is it Anonymous, a threat, or absurd to consider it a threat, or both?"
Number one, CRC supports allowing health clubs to make any policy they want. If someone is violating their policy, the club can call the police. CRC might stop patronizing a place that lets men dress with young girls, as would most people, but they don't suggest getting law enforcement involved.
Additionally, have you ever tried calling the police about a crime when the perpetrator has disappeared? They'll laugh at you.
I live in Montgomery County. I once woke up in the middle of the night and saw someone rummaging through my car. I called the police and they said unless I can keep the criminal there, they can't do anything about it.
Anonymouse said...
"Well, I deny, Robert. You do have a point though that you guys hurt your cause when you attack God."
Thus, speaking for the mind of God, as Anonymous does, helps ones cause.
Red Baron said "you guys hurt your cause when you attack God. This will never be a crowd-pleaser.".
I can't attack that which doesn't exist. I attack lies and the suggestion that I lie as well to be popular is a non-starter.
Red Baron asked "Priya, are you an alter ego of Randi".
Yes, I should have cleared this up earlier. I changed my name, I am now Priya Lynn, formerly Randi Schimnosky.
Red Baron said "low morale in secular societies results in low birth rates and declining population in those regions.".
Actually you have it exactly backwards. People who are unhappy with their lives, who have little hope for the future seek solice in the promise of an afterlife that makes everything better. That's why religion is the most popular in poor third world countries with high crime rates. For the same reason people in these countries have large families - they are concerned about their futures and hope having a large family will mean they have someone to care for them in their old age. This is explained in further detail here:
http://richarddawkins.net/articleComments,956,Why-the-Gods-Are-Not-Winning,Edge-Gregory-Paul-amp-Phil-Zuckerman,page1#36316
Red Baron said "A religious heritage is the destiny of all secular societies. The choice is which. When gays attack Christianity, they should proceed with caution. They may get what they wish for."
Once again you have it exactly backwards. The secular democracies in Europe all started as religious societies and they've moved towards atheism as standards of living rose and people no longer needed the crutch of religion to give them false hope for something better. The trend is observable and inevitable, as societies progress people lose the desire for the religious psychological bandaid. The world is gradually edging forward in providing happy lives for people and as that happens people put aside religion.
Anonymous said...
"CRC might stop patronizing a place that lets men dress with young girls, as would most people, but they don't suggest getting law enforcement involved."
So you and the CRW are convinced that Rio Health Club endangers the very lives of women and girls, and all that you and the CRW are willing to do is “stop patronizing” them?
"Additionally, have you ever tried calling the police about a crime when the perpetrator has disappeared? They'll laugh at you.
I live in Montgomery County. I once woke up in the middle of the night and saw someone rummaging through my car. I called the police and they said unless I can keep the criminal there, they can't do anything about it."
Irrelevant. The Rio Health Club has the name and address of this CRW-defined-as-potential-predator, yet they have done NOTHING to get the police involved.
They and you, are CONVINCED this man in a dress may be a rapist predator, yet you defend the CRW for having done NOTHING to ensure that this is not the case.
Remind me not to raise kids in your neighborhood.
Red Baron said "I wonder how this study explains that the most secular places in America, cities, have the highest crime rate.".
False, the highest crime rates are in the religious south and the irreligious North is the most prosperous and successful. Cities have higher crime rates than rural areas because people are more anonymous there and don't have the same sense of being connnected to their neighbours.
Once again, the countries with the highest level of social dysfunction are the most religious ones. Check it out for yourself, look at the stats, don't just wallow in your ignorance:
http://moses.creighton.edu/JRS/2005/2005-11.html
Priya Lynn said...
"Yes, I should have cleared this up earlier. I changed my name, I am now Priya Lynn, formerly Randi Schimnosky."
Oh hey Ra, I mean Priya.
I just wanted to say for the record, that I do believe in God, and Jesus for that matter, but I would rather spend an eternity in “hell” with atheists like you, who’s morality is based on the common good for all, than spend an eternity in “heaven,” with those supremacists who believe in a “loving” god who threatens humans with an eternal hell. :)
Mr. Teacher Man said...
Be sure to contact the following places and inform them that these people are lying to them (CRW will be there this weekend)-- Also, go out with "Decling to Sign" fliers and Ruth's email to Theresa to prove to their volunteers and the public that they are lying. This weekend they will be at the following places:
http://www.notmyshower.net/petition_collection_locations.pdf
Lancaster Dutch Marker
Giant Montgomery Village
Chick-Fil-A
Brewster’s Ice Cream
California Tortilla
Caribou Coffee
Shady Grove Metro
Kiss ‘n Ride
Giant Rockshire Village Center
Giant Rockville Town Center
Falls Grove Safeway
the Container Store Congressional Plaza
Giant Westfield Shopping Town Wheaton
Giant Chevy Chase
Giant Arliss Street Center
Beltway Chevron
--
Are these businesses aware that they are being used for a virulently bigoted agenda?
It almost seems that some proaction would be easier than reaction.
Let them know about what the shower-nuts are up to, or simply give them a flyer. Then if someone complains, it will be additional confirmation.
I'd be ashamed to have my business associated with the antics of CRW.
Thanks Teacherman.
I thought you wanted to see me, Mr TM.
Where should I be when?
"Are these businesses aware that they are being used for a virulently bigoted agenda?
It almost seems that some proaction would be easier than reaction.
Let them know about what the shower-nuts are up to, or simply give them a flyer. Then if someone complains, it will be additional confirmation.
I'd be ashamed to have my business associated with the antics of CRW."
Parking lots of shopping centers are public spaces. Remember how TTF whined when the business owners in downtown Silver Spring tried to control their space?
Still, it's so wonderfully transparent how afraid of free speech TTF is! They don't just seek to have people disagree with CRC. They don't want CRC members to even have the right to speak. If they were able, TTF would have all the members of CRC arrested and jailed. They are that rabid with anger and fear.
Why don't you guys move to France? They'd love you over there. Until they pass sharia anyway.
Red Baron, we're afraid of the injustices that happen when people push a hate agenda by lying.
Priya
The appropriate way to fight speech is with speech.
That's a pathetic justification for lying.
Anonymous said...
"Still, it's so wonderfully transparent how afraid of free speech TTF is! They don't just seek to have people disagree with CRC. They don't want CRC members to even have the right to speak. If they were able, TTF would have all the members of CRC arrested and jailed. They are that rabid with anger and fear."
Passing out a flyer = rabid with anger and fear.
By all means Anon, do go on.
"Passing out a flyer = rabid with anger and fear"
Theatening to boycott businesses who don't throw CRC off their premises= rabid with anger and fear
Here's some thoughts from one of the leading atheists of the twentieth century revealing atheist bias against the perpetuation of the human race:
"New documents released by the State Department have revealed that when Mao Tse Tung met with Henry Kissinger in 1973, the Chinese leader offered to send ten million women from China to the United States. Though the remark "provoked laughter" and "was clearly meant as a joke," Mao returned to the idea several times. He believed that Chinese women were having too many children and draining resources."
Hey, AnonFreak. I will be at a whole bunch of places this weekend. If you venture out, I am sure we'll meet. See you then!
Red Baron, there's no such thing as a "leading" atheists, atheists don't have leaders like the Christians have the pope or like Hitler lead other Christians in Nazi germany.
Still, it's so wonderfully transparent how afraid of free speech TTF is! They don't just seek to have people disagree with CRC. They don't want CRC members to even have the right to speak. If they were able, TTF would have all the members of CRC arrested and jailed. They are that rabid with anger and fear.
If you are such a believer in free speech, then I'm sure you will welcome the TTFers who show up with Decline to Sign fliers with Dr. Jacobs' email to Theresa Rickman (great idea Teacher Man, thanks!) on the back and offer them to people who are considering signing the petition because of CRW's "free speech" lies.
Anonymous, you said:
"Well, I deny, Robert."
You are far too schooled in the party line of anti-gay organizations and their rhetoric just to be an average-joe commenter. What is your interest in blogging here in the antagonistic way that you do? Do you deny receiving compensation for your anti-lgbt work? All the rest of us are volunteers. If you're not a professional, are you then a volunteer? Again, you know all the lingo, all the catch-phrases, all the counter-arguments amazingly well (you took good notes in those seminars, didn't you?). You must admit it is suspicious. I really don't believe you are who you claim to be.
BTW, in the email exchange I had with Regina Griggs years ago, which I referenced, she pretended to be genuinely humanly interested, until she got the quote she was looking for. Then she cut off contact, later shared some of what I said in a spirit of friendship, with CRC, in order to discredit me. Do you defend that? I personally felt betrayed.
rrjr
Andrea- not anon
Parking lots of most shopping centers are not public spaces. If they were, they could not tow you if you are parked more than the listed hours. The Shower nuts will be on the property of these businesses- they were at the Giants according to my political friends.
And indeed, I am sure this would never win in a vote- but trying to put anyone's civil rights on a ballot is the act of a bigot. As to the signers -we now see the lies that the Shower nuts have resorted to -to get more decent people to sign.
Anonymous said...
[Re TTF]
1. "Passing out a flyer = rabid with anger and fear"
2. "would have all the members of CRC arrested and jailed"
3. "Theatening to boycott businesses"
(You forgot to mention #4)
4. "also want to outlaw Christianity for all time and throughout all space, in an attempt to mock God's laws of physics!"
Maryanne and I were out today at the Lancaster Dutch Market and we met two very nice gentleman. One man was very pronounced in the Bible (as am I) and another, many years my elder, was taken aback by Maryanne's story. This ended, once again, with hand-shakes and hugs. It was nice to see.
These volunteers are good people but they, unfortunately, have been brainwashed by Ruth Jacobs and Theresa Rickman.
I think it is our civic (and moral) duty to inform them of the truth. I can't wait to meet more of them tomorrow.
"there's no such thing as a "leading" atheists, atheists don't have leaders like the Christians have the pope or like Hitler lead other Christians in Nazi germany."
Hitler was a Darwinist like you. Atheists do indeed have leaders. Strange that you would deny it with your obsession with today's top guys, Dawkins & Hitchens.
My goodness. These shower people certainly have their panties in a bunch. I agree, the solution to hateful and deceitful speech is more speech, corrective speech. I wonder how the 'decline to sign' flyer fails to qualify in their eyes?
There isn't even the shadow of a doubt that there will be a law in Montgomery County that protects transgender people from discrimination, regardless of this frenzy of activity. Is it really worth all this effort to possibly delay that outcome for a little while? They can't possibly think that anything they do could result in more than that.
Or do they completely fail to notice the arc of history?
"Or do they completely fail to notice the arc of history?"
David, history shows that societies that embrace homosexuality soon perish.
BTW, no one in CRC denies you your right to pass out fliers. I think, however, your constant attempt to shut them up by trying to raise a ruckus that business owners will want to avoid displays fear at what will happen if the public hear both sides of the argument.
The referendum will be on the ballot. Start getting ready for an open and honest discussion. Not the type Dana keeps insisting CRC should have had with her and the Duch behind closed doors.
We are not lying. I defy you to find a lie in this email, please.
Two, Equality MD Is handing out a "DECLINE TO SIGN" flyer.
Quick things to point out about this in case you get confronted.
1) Note the flyer quotes the Washington Post Leggett article. We're note sure if Mr. Leggett ever read the law he signed in context. Bill 23-07 amends county code, so you have to look at the new law after Bill 23-07. Just show people the new public accommodations law, and bring it with you everywhere. Accomodations are restaurants, hotels, swimming pools. Facilities are bathrooms. Our new law covers public accomodations and their facilities.
2) Leggetts quote from the Post. The county council debated what would happen with the bathrooms on forming this law. It was discussed in detail. Read the county council's memo. The memo states, the "HRC indicated that if Bill 23-07 were silent on the issue of public facilities, they would interpret the bill as allowing persons to use facilities based on that persons gender identity" (page 3). What matters is what the HRC told the council on the memo that accompanied the law (linked above) - that establishes the legislative intent, not what the HRC director told the Post in an attempt to sidestep.
3) This should make you mad. The Council memo continues, "Council staff agrees with the county attorney's opinion because the County code prohibiting discrimination in public accomodations does not apply to accomodations that are distinctly private or personal" Note the language, here we are referring to accomodations. When discussing the HRC's opinion above we were talking about facilities. Accomodations does not mean bathrooms. It means your house, a private health club, the boy scouts... Private accommodations and their facilties are exempt from this law. Public accommodations and their facilties are covered. Are you mad yet ? I call this a DELIBERATE ATTEMPT BY THE COUNCIL TO MISLEAD THE PUBLIC. Want revenge ? Help us put the law up for referendum. volunteer@notmyshower.net
4) We have no problem with an anti-discrimination bill for transgenders, as long as the Bill includes reasonable exemptions so other folks rights are not infringed upon. The Council could start with an exemption for public accomodations (like the Federal Bill), add a religous exemption (like the Federal Bill), pull the educational mandates out and add an exemption for renters looking for roommates... and we could all go home. So, our Bill IS NOT LIKE the other 100 jurisdictions that have passed anti-discrimination gender identity bills, because most of those bills had reasonable exemptions.
I would advise the TTF's read the new code on public accomodations after the amendment, just in case, like Leggett they don't know that the bill says. It says that access to bathrooms will be governed by gender identity.
And saying that the bill threatens to give 'men' access to ladies room is not a lie. You may call a person with male equipment who believes he is a female a "women". I call him a man. Sorry.
So I guess it depend on what the definition of "man" is.
We are not lying said...
"And saying that the bill threatens to give 'men' access to ladies room is not a lie."
Oh we weren’t arguing that. As Jim has said repeatedly, men already and always have had "access to ladies room."
The lie is in you’re saying that such access is because of this bill.
Ergo, Lie. You just lied.
IN ADDITION:
You were given PROOF of this so called “THREAT,” as per Rio Health Club incident, and chose not to take any protective action what-so-ever.
Therefore, EVEN IF what you said was true, it has already been established that you don’t care one iota for the safety of the women of Montgomery County - as you have YET to call the police in regard the man in a dress who walked into the ladies’ locker room at Rio Health Club!
CRG: "Who cares whether or not your wives or children get killed, it’s worth it to get our talking points on TV."
That about sums up your concern.
And obviously your concern is a lie.
"This should make you mad."
What makes me mad is the fact that CRG is lobbying to reinstate discrimination in housing and employment against transgender residents of Montgomery County Maryland with lies, fear-mongering, publicity stunts, and out of state money.
Behind closed doors? You truly are a fascist. This process, contrary to the lies your circulators tell, has been completely open and by the book, just like every other bill and resolution that goes through the Council. There was a public hearing, and there was a committee worksession. Had Theresa simply been interested in clarifying language about facilities with public nudity, she could have asked for it. Had she wanted Barney Frank's ENDA language, she could have provided it before the bill was passed. Instead, all we got was hate speech, lies, threats, etc.
You will never affect public policy like that in Montgomery County. Grow up.
"Behind closed doors? You truly are a fascist."
How so?
"This process, contrary to the lies your circulators tell, has been completely open and by the book, just like every other bill and resolution that goes through the Council. There was a public hearing, and there was a committee worksession. Had Theresa simply been interested in clarifying language about facilities with public nudity, she could have asked for it."
Not Theresa's job. It was yours. You screwed up.
"Had she wanted Barney Frank's ENDA language, she could have provided it before the bill was passed. Instead, all we got was hate speech, lies, threats, etc."
As Theresa has documented above, county officials are lying about the bill. She is correct that the memos between these people will be used to demonstrate legislative intent- not the senile ramblings to the newspaper of the county executive eager to please his radical base.
You're lying about the intent of the bill. You've lied many times about what the referendum is about.
You keep talking about the effect of the bill in other places but in other places the bill had reasonable exemptions. Duch and Dana were either too lazy or too cunning to get similar bills to use as a template for their own. They shouldn't be surprised by the reaction. They could have prevented it by a little due diligence.
There needs to be some changes in the council come next election.
The Duch and Dana show needs to be shut down by the voters.
Thanks for the issue.
So, AnonFreak. Why does the CRG use fear tactics to get people to sign their petition. I am about to go out right now, after I finish my coffee, and hand out Ruth's email to Theresa (to both the pubic and volunteers) and ensure that the truth is told.
Enjoy your day! I most certainly will.
"And indeed, I am sure this would never win in a vote- but trying to put anyone's civil rights on a ballot is the act of a bigot."
Andreary, you're again displaying your contempt for democracy. If you think something shouldn't be subject to the electorate, you should be working to have it put in the Constitution.
"You are far too schooled in the party line of anti-gay organizations and their rhetoric just to be an average-joe commenter."
Thanks for the kind words, Robert. I've learned all that stuff from reading. I actually didn't know much about this topic before I starting commenting here and got challenged about every freakin' syllable. So, I had to look things up to defend myself. And, you may be surprised by this, I've gotten much more verbal ammo from the pro-gay sites than anti-gay sites.
David, history shows that societies that embrace homosexuality soon perish.
Thank you for this admission. Your agenda with regard to this law is to maintain the right to discriminate, just as TTF has been saying.
We have no problem with an anti-discrimination bill for transgenders [sic]
This is a lie.
"Thank you for this admission. Your agenda with regard to this law is to maintain the right to discriminate, just as TTF has been saying."
Didn't know that represented an admission, David. Most people do indeed think that individuals have a right to be discriminating in who they deal with. People have a right to associate and partner in life's endeavours with those whose values they share. Gays are free to do the same.
Having said that, I don't speak for CRC but it seems that they are saying that they don't think it's worth opposing this legislation if a few reasonable exemptions were made. You guys could cut your losses by accomodating their offer.
two things - that crack about "history shows that societies that embrace homosexuality soon perish" is a lie.
It is an anti-gay industry talking point. But I think it gets to the heart of the matter.
anonymous, you seem to be presenting yourself as a libertarian voice on this matter, but you intentionally ignore several things.
What it all boils down to is a group (CRC) opposing this legislation on so-called moral grounds and manufacturing reasoning (i.e. the bathroom and locker room mess) to oppose it. They no doubt pored over the legislation looking for a loophole to make their objections sound credible.
And then folks like yourself come along and try to "launder" their mess to make it sound reasonable.
This entire controversy is about an objection to the lgbt community and manipulating facts and exploiting fears to hinder a law that was fairly passed.
"But I think it gets to the heart of the matter."
The heart of the matter is this:
Gays want the government to force people to associate with them because they know that most people are innately predisposed to not want to associate with them.
Gay oppose freedom because they know free people oppose homosexuality.
Omg...just substitute the word Jews in place of Gays in the following diatriabe by Anonymous:
"Gays want the government to force people to associate with them because they know that most people are innately predisposed to not want to associate with them.
Gay oppose freedom because they know free people oppose homosexuality."
That sounds eerily like words that would have been spouted from the mouths of Adolf Hitler or Julius Streicher or Joseph Goebbels in Nazi Germany in the 1930's. You have stripped the mask of humanity and honesty from your lying face, Anonymous. Shame, shame, shame
Anonymous is a bigoted nut.
That is the "heart of the matter."
Ted
anonymous,
i am rarely one for blanket statements about whether someone is a "bigot" or "Nazi" but I have to tell you that your comments about gays would warrant me to call u those things.
It's one thing to oppose homosexuality on a religious basis. It's another thing to think that your opposition to homosexuality gives you carte blanche to lie and distort, to use discredited studies, to orchestrate moral panics, etc.
But the thing you said about gays goes beyond the pale. If you substituted the word "Jews" or "African-Americans," you would get deservedly shocked reactions.
Why would it be so hard for you to understand why you get the same reactions when you say those things about lgbts?
"i am rarely one for blanket statements about whether someone is a "bigot" or "Nazi" but I have to tell you that your comments about gays would warrant me to call u those things."
And, why is that?
"It's one thing to oppose homosexuality on a religious basis. It's another thing to think that your opposition to homosexuality gives you carte blanche to lie and distort, to use discredited studies, to orchestrate moral panics, etc."
I never said it did.
"But the thing you said about gays goes beyond the pale. If you substituted the word "Jews" or "African-Americans," you would get deservedly shocked reactions.
Why would it be so hard for you to understand why you get the same reactions when you say those things about lgbts?"
Except it doesn't get that reaction for one simple reason. Homosexuality is not a race or physical characteristic. It's a lifestyle and worldview and moral choice. Why shouldn't people be free to partner and associate with those who share their views? Choosing who to associate with is not a form of violence as you so deceitfully suggest.
"That sounds eerily like words that would have been spouted from the mouths of Adolf Hitler or Julius Streicher or Joseph Goebbels in Nazi Germany in the 1930's."
Not really. Have you read about the Nazi rise to power? When the Nazis first came to power, open homosexuality was a regular feature of the sexually depraved culture in Germany. Nazis embraced homosexual culture with the whole S&M component that fit well with their Darwinist philosophy. Indeed, when Hitler went to jail for treason, he developed a close relationship with an open homosexual, Ernst Rohm, who later became head of the military wing (SA) of the Nazi party. Rohm filled SA with his gay friends. The Nazis didn't oppose homosexuality until, in a power struggle with Rohm, Hitler used Rohm's homosexuality as an excuse to execute him under German anti-perversion laws dating to the 1800's. That's history.
Truth is, the societal embrace of homosexuality is more "eerily" reminiscient of the rise of Nazism than anything else.
Red Baron said "Hitler was a Darwinist like you. Atheists do indeed have leaders. Strange that you would deny it with your obsession with today's top guys, Dawkins & Hitchens.".
I'm not a "Darwinist". Atheists don't get together and elect or appoint leaders like the Christians do the pope and bishops. Dawkins and Hitchens aren't my leaders, if anything they're my peers.
Red Baron said "David, history shows that societies that embrace gayness soon perish."
You obviously don't know your history too well. The roman empire lasted for a very long time while it embraced gayness. When the Christians took over and started persecuting gays it quickly fell to the barbarians. The fact is that no society that's persecuted gays has survived.
Theresa said "The Council could start with an exemption for public accomodations (like the Federal Bill), add a religous exemption (like the Federal Bill)."
Religious people don't deserve special rights that others don't have. If the law says you can't discriminate there should be no exemption allowing religious people to break the law. Just because you're a Christian doesn't make you better than everybody else.
Theresa said "And saying that the bill threatens to give 'men' access to ladies room is not a lie. You may call a person with male equipment who believes he is a female a "women". I call him a man. ".
It is a lie. The vast majority of transwoman do not have male equipment and all transwomen have female brains and are not men inside. And that is far from the only lie told in the email. It also told the lie that women's safety and privacy is at risk. There's never been an incident in any of the other jurisdictions that have a law like this.
Red Baron said "Andreary, you're again displaying your contempt for democracy. If you think something shouldn't be subject to the electorate, you should be working to have it put in the Constitution.".
The law on interracial marriage wasn't subject to the electorate either. Tell us how that was contempt for democracy and let's hear you demand to have that law repealed and put to a vote - you won't because you're a hypocrite.
Red Baron said " I actually didn't know much about this topic before I starting commenting here and got challenged about every freakin' syllable.".
You still don't know much about the topic but stick around and we'll gradually pound the concepts of fairness and equality into your dense little brain.
Red Baron said "Most people do indeed think that individuals have a right to be discriminating in who they deal with. People have a right to associate and partner in life's endeavours with those whose values they share. Gays are free to do the same.".
No they don't. Most people think "Whites only" signs and segregated water foundains were wrong and its no different with transgendered and gay individuals. You run a business and make your living of the public you've got an obligation to serve all the public and treat all fairly.
Red Baron said "Gays want the government to force people to associate with them because they know that most people are innately predisposed to not want to associate with them.
Gay oppose freedom because they know free people oppose homosexuality.".
Let's substitute a few words and see how that sounds:
Blacks want the government to force people to associate with them because they know that most whitepeople are innately predisposed to not want to associate with them.
Blacks oppose freedom because they know free people oppose blacks.
You see how bigoted you are now?
Discrimination against people that harm no one is wrong whether those people are black, transgender or gay. When the law has to step in and make people do the right thing then that is what the law should do.
Oops, I see a couple of other people alread pointed out the black/jew/gay analogy with the bigotry Red Baron was spouting.
"You still don't know much about the topic"
In your opinion. Robert thinks I'm as well informed as any professional researcher of the topic.
Robert's an educator, you know.
"Blacks want the government to force people to associate with them because they know that most whitepeople are innately predisposed to not want to associate with them.
Blacks oppose freedom because they know free people oppose blacks.
You see how bigoted you are now?"
No. When you insert "blacks" and "whitepeople", these statements are no longer true.
They were true before you changed them.
Black Tsunami said "It's one thing to oppose homosexuality on a religious basis. It's another thing to think that your opposition to homosexuality gives you carte blanche to lie and distort, to use discredited studies, to orchestrate moral panics, etc."
Red Baron replied "I never said it did.".
And yet that's what you've done. If you don't think your opposition to gayness gives you cart blanche to lie, distort, etc. then why are you doing it?
Black Tsunami said "But the thing you said about gays goes beyond the pale. If you substituted the word "Jews" or "African-Americans," you would get deservedly shocked reactions.
Why would it be so hard for you to understand why you get the same reactions when you say those things about lgbts?"
Red Baron said "Except it doesn't get that reaction for one simple reason. Gayness is not a race or physical characteristic. It's a lifestyle and worldview and moral choice."
No, who we are attracted to is an innate characteristic of who we are inside. The brains of gay men resemble straight women, the brains of lesbians resemble those of straight men. Gay is who you are and not something you do. No one chooses to be same sex attracted.
Red Baron said "Why shouldn't people be free to partner and associate with those who share their views? Choosing who to associate with is not a form of violence as you so deceitfully suggest.".
By your logic people should be able to discriminate against Jews or Christians because those are simply worldviews and moral choices. You'd never advocate that because you're a hypocrite and you use that as a pathetic excuse to discriminate against gays.
Red Baron said " Nazis embraced gay culture with the whole S&M component that fit well with their Darwinist philosophy.".
That's an outrageous blatantly obvious lie. It is well known that the Nazis persecuted gays througouth the third reich, destroying the renowned gay libary in germany and putting thousands and thousands of gays to death in concenctration camps. You clearly have no integrity or brains given that you'd tell a lie like that.
"Blacks want the government to force people to associate with them because they know that most whitepeople are innately predisposed to not want to associate with them.
Blacks oppose freedom because they know free people oppose blacks.
You see how bigoted you are now?"
Red Baron replied "No. When you insert "blacks" and "whitepeople", these statements are no longer true.".
But they most certainly were true during the time of slavery and segregation. That's what people like you thought then. We know now that such ideas are bigotry and bit by bit the majority are relizing its just as bigoted to make such statements about gays.
"That's an outrageous blatantly obvious lie. It is well known that the Nazis persecuted gays througouth the third reich, destroying the renowned gay libary in germany and putting thousands and thousands of gays to death in concenctration camps. You clearly have no integrity or brains given that you'd tell a lie like that."
It's not a lie, Priya. Gays were an integral part of the Nazi Party. They were concentrated in the SA. Hitler turned on his gay prison buddy because his socialist tendencies were scaring the business community and was causing Hitler to lose their support. It was only after this "Night of the Long Knives" that the Nazis rewrote paragraph 175 to strengthen anti-perversion laws so he could wipe out Rohm supporters. Go to the libary and get a book on the history.
Its an outrageous lie, the history of Nazi persecution of gays is well known and well documented. If you had a conscience you'd be ashamed of yourself.
so anonymous,
what we hear about the Pink Triangle and the persecutions of gays in concentration camps are just products of the grand gay conspiracy, huh?
"Except it doesn't get that reaction for one simple reason. Homosexuality is not a race or physical characteristic. It's a lifestyle and worldview and moral choice. Why shouldn't people be free to partner and associate with those who share their views?"
The last time i checked, anonymous, religion is neither a race or a perosnal characteristic, it is a lifestyle and a moral choice.
So what is the difference between discrimination on a religious basis and discrimination against the lgbt community?
Hey, Priya. Have you ever heard of glbtq.com? It's a gay version of wikipedia. Here's an excerpt from their article on Rohm:
"The underside of the SA was the reputed homosexuality of many of its members, including Röhm. Interestingly, Röhm's homosexuality was not veiled, but widely known, even to Hitler, according to Shirer's The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich (1959): "And yet Hitler had known all along, from the earliest days of the party, that a large number of his closest and most important followers were sexual perverts. It was common talk . . . . These things Hitler had not only tolerated, but defended; more than once he had warned his party comrades against being too squeamish about a man's personal morals if he were a fanatical fighter for the movement.""
See? Hitler liked gays. Personally, I wouldn't be surprised if he was one. Why else would become such close friends with one in prison and never subsequently marry?
"The last time i checked, anonymous, religion is neither a race or a perosnal characteristic, it is a lifestyle and a moral choice.
So what is the difference between discrimination on a religious basis and discrimination against the lgbt community?"
Alvin, religions are endeavours of moral self-improvement.
Homosexuality is an endeavour of hedonistic indulgence.
Do you see the difference in societal impact?
Red Baron you can repeat the lie all you like it still won't make it true. It is well known and well documented history that the Nazis persecuted gays from day 1 and put thousands and thousands to death. The pink triangle is a well known symbol of Nazi oppression of gays.
Red Baron said "Alvin, religions are endeavours of moral self-improvement.
Gayness is an endeavour of hedonistic indulgence.".
False. The abrahamic religions are all death cults where people worry more about what happens after they die than they worry about life itself. The foundation of Christianity is the repusive idea that an innocent person is tortured and murdered for the wrongs of others, it most certainly isn't about moral improvement with THAT as a moral basis. The idea that a human sacrifice makes things all right is insanne.
Gayness on the other hand is not an endeavour, it is the characteristic of same sex attaction. Its a core characteristic of who we are just like gender or race. In a democracy your hateful opinions don't take precidence over rational and honest people.
Anonymite said:
"Robert thinks I'm as well informed as any professional researcher of the topic."
Let's be clear. Robert thinks you are well-versed in the arguments of anti-gay organizations (am I misquoting myself). People who work for FRC and FOF are not "researchers" by any stretch of the imagination (nor, shudder to imagine, is Paul Cameron or that weird dude who used to head PFOX). They do "research" in the sense that Cyril Burt and Paul Jensen did "research" on intelligence: i.e., they took predermined prejudices and manipulated data to make their notions appear to be scientific conclusions.
Did you know that 80% of statistics are made up?
rrjr
As an aside, you know I'm an educator because I speak as myself, openly, rather than creating a personality for the purpose of entrapping others (I will note that, to her credit, Theresa does the same). You, on the other hand....
"Red Baron you can repeat the lie all you like it still won't make it true. It is well known and well documented history that the Nazis persecuted gays from day 1 and put thousands and thousands to death. The pink triangle is a well known symbol of Nazi oppression of gays."
Priya, at the beginning of this conversation perhaps you were ignorant. Now, you're lying. I have documented, from a pro-gay website yet, that gays were heavily represented in the formation of the Nazi party. Their persecution in the latter stages was due to a power struggle between Hitler and a gay friend from his prison days who Hitler liked so much he put him in charge of his military. The excesses of his gay buddy were becoming an embarassment and a threat to Hitler's power and he had to distance himself from them to save his movement.
Let's extrapolate a little further. This openly gay individual who was close with Hitler in prison during the time he was writing "Mein Kampf", bought totally into this idea that Hitler was to be exalted. It's common for even heterosexuals to turn to homosexual activity in prison for sexual release. Is it even slightly conceivable that, in this society were there was no stigma to homosexuality, Rohm didn't offer to engage in homosexual acts with Hitler in prison? Further, is it very likely that Hitler, who never married, would have turned him down? Is it a coincidence that the whole top/bottom S&M idea common in homosexuality find such close parallels in Nazi ideas of a master race and that Hitler was living with an gay when he devised them? Can anyone fill in the blanks here? Are there any blanks here?
"Did you know that 80% of statistics are made up?"
Where do you think TTF gets them from?
As a volunteer at the Holocaust Museum and a history teacher, Anonymous, I am more than well-acquainted with the events associated with the Nazi rise to power in Germany. I do not need your condescension about my knowledge of that subject!("Have you read about the Nazi rise to power? When the Nazis first came to power, open homosexuality was a regular feature of the sexually depraved culture in Germany.")
What you offer up is nothing but a discredited historical view of the "influence" of homosexuals in the Nazi regime...closely akin to the discredited "holocaust deniers" so beloved by some members of the religious-right(although I will give you credit for the somewhat accurate accounting of the Roehm Putsch; but not for not telling us that Hitler used anybody, any organzation (i.e. the Catholic Church), or any philosophy that he could find to enable his rise to power and to solidify his Fuehrer position vis-a-vis the German military ruling class.
Michael Berenbaum, in his book, "The World Must Know") says, on page 49:
"The Nazi hatred of homosexuals was based on several strains in Nazi ideology and was exclusively directed at male homosexuals, seen as a threat fo "Aryan" breeding policy. Homosexuality was also identified with the lack of manlinesss that the Nazis associated with the humiliation of Versailles and with...the Weimar years. Above all, the upholders of the macho-centered culture of Nazism felt threated by the very existence of homosexuality."
You apparently will say anything or dehumanize anybody in a vain attempt to give your rants any degree of credibility and you always manage to fail miserably!
RT
Andrea-not anon
I normally don't bother with anything Bigot anon and his shower buddies say except to ridicule them. The people who speak for that group in its 4 th rebirth are bigots. putting the blame on the victims. However, the Civil Rights Act of 64, women's right to vote and desegregation of schools- none were put up for a popular vote. No one's civil rights should be put to the vote. Look at Virginia- many private schools opened purely to maintain segregation.
I have been thinking about help for Shower and friends and based on the talk at Columbia by the Pres of Iran- I suggest the showernuts visit him- he says there are no gays in Iran.
Red Baron, I'm not buying your lies and nor is anyone else remotely acquainted with history who isn't a rabid homophobe. Your assertion that gays were integral to the Nazi party is as absurd and foolish as your assertion that Hitler never married. It is well known that Hitler had a long relationship with Eva Braun and he was indeed married to her. We're not remotely as stupid as you would like to think we are, take your BS elsewhere.
Your claim - Homosexuality is an endeavour of hedonistic indulgence - is rude and very judgemental.
LGBTs are living full and successful lives, we are raising children and are contributing to society. You claim that our lives are filled with hedonistic indulgences is a HUGE stretch of judgement on a group of people.
No one can make you "accept" lgbts, but you do not have the right to confine our lives to your stereotypes, nor do you have the right to manipulate laws in accordance to your definitions of who we are.
Hey, that gay agenda doesn't hurt anybody.
Right?
Right.
Here's a report from the front lines of the war against our culture:
"As Michael Nutter was sworn in as the city's 98th mayor last month, he called for a new wave of public service to clean up drug-infested neighborhoods. If he is serious about renewing volunteerism, he'll start by putting an end to the city's campaign against the Boy Scouts.
On May 31, the cradle of Liberty Council, the local boy scout chapter, will be evicted from its headquarters, a space in the city it has occupied since 1928.
The eviction isn't for breach of contract. It comes at the bequest of the City Council, which voted 16 to 1 last tear year to kick the Boy Scouts out unless they reverse a ban on gays serving as scoutmasters.
Throughout the city, there are about 56,000 Boy Scouts who spent countless hours cleaning parks, running food drives, and organizing meals for the needy. And, of course, helping young boys, many without strong male figures in their lives, develop skills that will serve them well in life.
J.R. Brockman is a human relations consultant who volunteers to lead a troop of about 20 scouts out of a church in West Philadelphia. On Fridays, he can be found with his scouts at the church as the boys eat pizza and play XBox. "It's an activity that keeps them off the streets and lets them spend time with their friends," he says.
But it's not all fun and games. Mostly, Mr. Brockman focuses on steering kids clear of drugs and violence, which leads many of the city's youth to a stint in jail. On weekends, his scouts go for hikes or campouts at local parks. In town, they renovate sections the city's fairmont Heights, run food drives and feed the homeless."
the boy scouts don't have to allow gays in if they won't.
but at the same time, they shoudldn't be allowed access to gay money or the things that gay money can contribute to bringing.
But I guess that would be distracting from the subject at hand - this wanna be referendum.
sorry for the bad spelling. i was typing fast. but i think u get the gist of my point
Go ahead, Wyatt, Anon, whatever -- keep calling me a liar. Your contempt for your government and the process by which they work is visible to all.
This bill was written by lawyers, and not by me. it was vetted by lawyers. The county attorneys spoke on it. The Council UNANIMOUSLY approved it, from the liberals to those conservatives, such as Marilyn Praisner, who know county law inside out and read all the fine print.
Yet you have the nerve to call me and all of us liars.
You've made it clear why you oppose this law -- not because of the lack of bathroom language or a religious exemption -- but because you think I'm a pervert, teachthefacts is run by perverts, Barney Frank is a pervert, and we're all committed to destroying western civilization.
Thank you for your clarity.
When your circulators are challenged on the facts, they actually stop and think. Some convert to rationality and decency.
Good luck running in the special election and getting a Republican elected. None of you have ever had the guts before; I sincerely doubt you will now.
Dana.
I didn't go to the council and ask for an exemption for restrooms, but Ruth did and you know she did...loudly and frequently.
So what else, exactly, do you think should have been done ?
The council also debated 5 different amendments, some of which would have required folks to prove they are "really" a person in transition. The council first decided to put in the amendment which specifically ALLOWED transgenders in the opposite biological sex bathroom, and then, when the whole county sent 2500 emails and phone calls, pulled the amendment which we both know leaves it wide open.
So the county DID think about it, was asked to amend it, and deliberately decided not to. Are you denying that ? I thought you didn't lie ? You know, there are ways you can twist words to deliberately mislead without outright lying. The county memo which accompanies the bill is a great example of that.
I had thought you were above that. Shame.
theresa
Rio Theresa said, "You know, there are ways you can twist words to deliberately mislead without outright lying."
Such as the email language between you and "I sleep with my labcoat and stethoscope on" Ruth most recently?
I had thought you were above that. Shame.
SHAME SHAME SHAME SHAME because you are not Rio Theresa.
Ted
Ruth did no such thing, Theresa, and you know it. She came in and loudly, as you said, called us mentally ill. She acted like an authority with her silly lab coat and stethoscope, when she is anything but. She acted like the rude, religious extremist she can be. She didn't come in and ask for bathroom language, because she was concerned about bathrooms. To the contrary -- bathrooms to her, as to you, were and are a red herring, and simply a means to an end.
Now Ruth can be a decent person, and she may very well be a skilled ID specialist. I simply don't know. She came to the Council to oppose the bill, not to have it amended. Had she simply asked to have it amended, and had made her case as a rational person and not someone out to lunch with a purely religious agenda which in and of itself has no foundation in anyone's Bible, she probably would have succeeded.
The committee considered a great deal of language from other jurisdictions, and other language besides all that. We have attorneys, we discussed it with them, and the choice following the committee session was to be explicit about the legislation being directed only to those persons who exclusively and consistently live in their gender. That language excludes cross-dressers, who are generally men (our society ignores all the female crossdressers, since every woman these days is one). That language would have specifically excluded men from the women's room, but not trans women. It was after that when we heard from your friends across the country -- no, not 2500 emails and calls from Montgomery County or Maryland, another one of your consistent lies, but from elsewhere as a result of the Tupelo and Colorado Springs and worldnetdaily extremist Catholic emails. We have caller ID, you know. At that point the Council members decided no language was better than any language, the attorneys said the the current law would therefore be unchanged, and the current law provides for proprietors to make their own decisions.
You keep claiming "facilities" means bathrooms, when it never says that in the County Code. You keep ignoring the fact that this was a unanimous vote, from left and right, including the conservative and scrupulous Marilyn Praisner, who always read the fine print, a highly religious Catholic woman who was appalled at your tactics throughout the process, which you topped off with your ally, the clownish neo-Nazi-like Adol Owens-Williams after the vote shouting to the Council that blood will be on their hands.
All your lies about the Council members, including the recently deceased Mrs. Praisner, are scurrilous and shameful. As is your suggestion that the County Exec never even read the bill.
And you wonder why no one took you seriously?
The fact is that most proprietors don't know and don't care about trans persons, we use the bathroom that matches our gender expression, and everyone is fine. We also have either the legal documentation or the medical documentation to back ourselves up should we ever be questioned, which is unusual.
But you know this, which is why you created the canard of pedophiles lurking on the web just waiting for the law to go into effect so they could cross-dress, assault women and girls, and then claim this law as a defense. I personally cannot imagine a more ludicrous scenario than that, and I'm sure you recognize it as such as well, which is why you had to stage your little charade at Rio.
You lie to your circulators, so we visit them and educate them, and, I will tell you, that aside from Ruth and Steina, the more certifiably crazed members of your merry band of bigots, they are decent people who have been conned by you and are quite upset that they are being used. When Maryanne or I approach them and ask if they are interested in actually discriminating against us, they say no. When we ask if we should be allowed into the ladies' room, they say yes. So we ask why they are doing the devil's work and trying to make our lives more difficult, and all they can come up with is that they don't want men in the bathroom with their granddaughters. Hell, I don't either. But your entire crusade is based on your outmoded, primitive belief that not only are we men, but mentally ill men, and predators and pedophiles to boot. So you peddle your ignorance which has been transmuted, a la Karl Rove, into fear and then hate, and deceive these decent folks into becoming bigots against their will.
Bravo.
I would imagine you and your God are not on very good terms these days.
You keep asking me what you could have done, yet I have told you and you ignore me, just as you have consistently ignored the existence of trans men whom you want in the women's bathrooms instead of me. I don't think all your deceived grandmothers would be happy with that.
You could lobby just like all other citizens and entities. You could present reasonable requests, backed by science and public policy and by those who are more than religious fanatics. You could present a legal analysis, on paper, backed up by lawyers, submit it to the County's lawyers, and ask for an evaluation, rather than just calling everyone liars and deceivers. You could try being decent human beings who aren't motivated by eschatological paranoia and fear of the other. You could stop fear-mongering, and try being nice.
You might even consider going back to the time when Americans kept their religious beliefs to themselves, realized that mixing church and state was harmful to the church as well as the state, and acted in the public square only on those morals which are of universal application, such as the Golden Rule.
Again, just be a decent person. Get to know those whom you fear as real human beings, and not cardboard cutouts from a Rove or Dobson fax. Go back to your science textbooks and learn something for a change.
Dana.
After hearing two of our volunteers go ask their county council members about this bill, and being told that "I didn't receive any phone calls or emails about this bill" - I do not believe the council is at all responsive or cares about what their constituents think. Marc Erlich said this to Lisa... who had spent about 20 hours in the council offices counting and recording email addresses of 2500 emails and phone calls - a lot of which were addressed to Ehlrich, and MOST of which were local county residents. I don't how she kept her cool when he said that. But let's just say, given that, it makes it a little difficult to trust. And, by the way, AFF did a legal analysis of the bill, as did PFOX, which were submitted to the council. Both were ignored. Why in the world do you think we would bother to write a letter or petition the council at this point ? It's pointless and a complete waste of time... they don't listen. They got thousands of letters which they ignored ! We are simply going to talk with votes, that's all. It seems to be the only thing they pay attention to... and we will remind the voters. I promise you, we won't ever let the voters forget who voted for this bill.
I am not going to reply, because I'm a little busy right now.
Theresa
Well said Dana!
Theresa, I'm sure all the Republicans left in Montgomery County will never forget who voted for the bill -- everyone -- and will be lining up behind Obersturmfuhrer Owens-Williams for the next election.
I'm sorry, but I checked all the phone logs and emails at my office and I disagree with you. I personally have no idea what goes on in Marc's office.
Again, you provided a legal analysis from whom? PFOX? AFF?
You've got to be kidding. Why would anyone take those groups seriously? If you ever get to court, you can hire the Thomas More lads, but until then, I suggest you get a respectable firm to do your analysis for you. There are plenty who visit every day, primarily on development issues, but I'm sure you could find someone conservative who would be welcome in this county.
Finally, I really don't care how many phone calls or emails or signatures you get from fear-mongering. You know full well that you're motivated by ignorance and fear which has clearly morphed into hate. You don't want to think about me or others like me. You just want us to disappear from your consciousness. And as a result you lie to your team who then go out and lie to their neighbors. And who should be ashamed?
Well, it ain't gonna happen, so you should do what your former circulator, Jeff, did last night after having met us -- go home, smile, laugh, think and pray. And then get on with a healthy life.
This just in from the former Phoenix Sun power forward, Charles Barkley, who joined the Republican party after his retirement:
Hey, I live in Arizona. I have got great respect for Senator McCain. Great respect. But I don't like the way the Republicans are taking this country. Every time I hear the word "conservative," it makes me sick to my stomach, because they're really just fake Christians, as I call them. That's all they are. But I just -- I'm going to vote Democratic no matter what.
...BLITZER: All right. One quick point before I let you go. You used the phrase "fake Christians" for conservatives. Explain what you're talking about.
BARKLEY: Well, I think they -- they want to be judge and jury. Like, I'm for gay marriage. It's none of my business if gay people want to get married. I'm pro-choice. And I think these Christians -- first of all, they're supposed to be -- they're not supposed to judge other people. But they're the most hypocritical judge of people we have in this country. And it bugs the hell out of me. They act like their Christians. And they're not forgiving at all.
BLITZER: So you're going to get a lot of feedback on this one, Charles.
BARKLEY: They can't do anything to me. I don't work for them.
BLITZER: You feel comfortable saying all that?
BARKLEY: I feel very comfortable saying I'm pro-choice, and I'm for gay marriage. Very comfortable.
BLITZER: But you can't lump all these conservatives as being fake. A lot of them obviously -- most of them are very, very sincere in their religious beliefs.
BARKLEY: Well, they should read the part about they're not supposed to judge other people. They forget that one when it doesn't fit what they want it to say. "
Theresa replied with a full paragraph and:
I am not going to reply, because I'm a little busy right now.
Theresa
demonstrating CRWhatevers really do have to lie, it's like an obsession.
When I was a career teacher I was aware of what we in the profession called the "willfully ignorant" student...a student who either dared you to help them learn or one who simply chose the easy way out and refused to open him/herself to information, understanding, or anything that upset their comfortable and narrow world view. That, unfortunately, is a universal human characteristic. There is a constant battle against ignorance that has to be fought.
It seems that we are dealing with "willfuly/willingly ignorant" individuals who call themselves "Recall...", CRC, CRG, or whatever they choose at any given moment. Trying to reason with folks like Theresa, Ruth, Michelle, et al., is like - as my grandfather loved to tell me - "engaging in a pissing contest with a skunk". It is futile, a waste of time, and leaves a lasting odor that is hard to get rid of.
Those who choose to remain ignorant when all prevailing information and reasoning are presented are essentially hopeless and incapable of moving out of their narrow, confining worlds.
RT
Andrea-not anon
RT- a pissing contest with a skunk- love it. I will think of that whenever I read the skunky e:mails of Theresa and M.N anon.
Anonymous said...
"Hey, that gay agenda doesn't hurt anybody.
Right?
On May 31, the cradle of Liberty Council, the local boy scout chapter, will be evicted from its headquarters, a space in the city it has occupied since 1928.
The eviction isn't for breach of contract. It comes at the bequest of the City Council, which voted 16 to 1 last tear year to kick the Boy Scouts out unless they reverse a ban on gays serving as scoutmasters."
----
And now for the rest of the story, as BlackTsunami already touched on:
"Boy Scouts Lose Philadelphia Lease in Gay-Rights Fight
Municipal officials said the clash stemmed from a duty to defend civil rights and an obligation to abide by a local law that bars taxpayer support for any group that discriminates. Boy Scout officials said it was about preserving their culture, protecting the right of private organizations to remain exclusive and defending traditions like requiring members to swear an oath of duty to God and prohibiting membership by anyone who is openly homosexual.
This week the Boy Scouts made their last stand and lost.
“At the end of the day, you can not be in a city-owned facility being subsidized by the taxpayers and not have language in your lease that talks about nondiscrimination,” said City Councilman Darrell L. Clarke, who represents the district where the building is located. “Negotiations are over.”"
--
So they wanted the taxpayer money, including that of gays (and atheists), so they could have the special right to discriminate against gays (and atheists). And you characterize that as being a harmful result of "gay agenda."
The equality agenda is naturally and rightfully going to hurt supremacists who demand the special right to harm others.
Not only do you endorse the discrimination of gays and atheists, want us to pay for that discrimination, but also believe that not paying for our own discrimination is an attack on those who claim the special right to discriminate.
And you consider that position to be the result of your “religious endeavor of moral self-improvement?”
That’s one of the dumbest things I’ve ever heard in my life.
One brain, MIA.
"That’s one of the dumbest things I’ve ever heard in my life."
Improb, if you'd just stop and listen to yourself, you wouldn't be able to say that anymore.
So, you think if the Boy Scouts don't hire gays, they're hurting them. Yet, the Boy Scouts believe sexual morality and belief in God are necessary elements in the character they are trying to instill in young men. It's part of their mission. What sense would it make for them to hire a gay? Why would a gay want to work for such an organization? Are Catholics hurting Muslims if they don't hire them to conduct Mass? Would Obama be hurting the Heritage Foundation if he didn't hire one of them to run his campaign?
Of all the contributors here, you are really the most illogically demented.
Red Baron, you don't contribute here but you most certainly are the most illogically demented. The boy scouts are not a religious organization, if they don't want to open their organization to all they deserve to be sanctioned and most certainly do not deserve to be subsidized.
"Of all the contributors here, you are really the most illogically demented."
Aw, you do love me.
BTW, it’s been almost an hour since he wrote that, shouldn’t the universe have imploded by now?
"So, you think if the Boy Scouts don't hire gays, they're hurting them."
When they want our money on top of it, yes. It’s called stealing.
"Yet, the Boy Scouts believe sexual morality and belief in God are necessary elements in the character they are trying to instill in young men. It's part of their mission."
What makes same-gender attraction, IN AND OF ITSELF, “moral?”
"What sense would it make for them to hire a gay? Why would a gay want to work for such an organization? Are Catholics hurting Muslims if they don't hire them to conduct Mass? Would Obama be hurting the Heritage Foundation if he didn't hire one of them to run his campaign?"
All irrelevant. You didn’t address a thing I said, you just changed the subject.
When you find that brain, you might want to have a LoJack installed.
You might want to work on growing a spine too, so you can answer this question:
If homosexuality, IN AND OF ITSELF, were not a sin, what problem would you have with it?
Post a Comment
<< Home