The Original Gay Porn Community - Free Gay Movies and Photos, Gay Porn Site Reviews and Adult Gay Forums

  • Welcome To Just Us Boys - The World's Largest Gay Message Board Community

    In order to comply with recent US Supreme Court rulings regarding adult content, we will be making changes in the future to require that you log into your account to view adult content on the site.
    If you do not have an account, please register.
    REGISTER HERE - 100% FREE / We Will Never Sell Your Info

    PLEASE READ: To register, turn off your VPN (iPhone users- disable iCloud); you can re-enable the VPN after registration. You must maintain an active email address on your account: disposable email addresses cannot be used to register.

GOP Sen. nominee Christine O'Donnell: homophobe or closet case?

Huh?

I'm beginning to see that you really aren't all that informed about our political process (no offense).

2. If a law is found unconstitutional by a court, whether it remains on the books is irrelevant. It is no longer enforceable at that point, meaning you don't have to follow it.

DADT and Prop8 were both found unconstitutional in the last couple of months.

But they're both still being enforced. And 100% of Republicans vote to keep DADT a couple days ago and came up with some REALLY lame reasons to do it.

Which one of us is uninformed about the process again?(!)
 
DADT and Prop8 were both found unconstitutional in the last couple of months.

An injunction against enforcement has not been entered in either of those cases yet. When the legal process is concluded, if the unconstitutional status is upheld, one will be.
 
You don't seem to get that there are many people who believe the scriptures, and their translations, are divinely-inspired. The alternative translations that have different meanings? Well, those are not divinely-inspired.

I don't know if it's an issue of the translations being divine or just a misunderstanding of translation. I don't think that all of the fundamentalists realize that there is not a one to one translation for everything.
 
You are just and insulting and hurtful as the Christians you chastise.

Hm.. interesting stance.

Cuz I don't remember giving a lot of time and money to take away the rights for Christians to marry.

Not like I wouldn't.

That said, I might be just as hurtful but I'm not MORE hurtful. And I don't pretend to be better than them. So I think I get the win there.
 
Jasun has a point. However, would you take away their rights if you could, Jasun?
 
Hm.. interesting stance.

Cuz I don't remember giving a lot of time and money to take away the rights for Christians to marry.

Not like I wouldn't.

That said, I might be just as hurtful but I'm not MORE hurtful. And I don't pretend to be better than them. So I think I get the win there.

I didn't mean you were hurtful and insulting to Christians. You were hurtful and insulting to me.
 
Jasun has a point. However, would you take away their rights if you could, Jasun?

I'm willing to talk about it anyway.

First thing to go would be their tax exemption. Second thing to go would be "In God We Trust" off the money.

Third... they'd all have to register somewhere. Like Sex Offenders. (there are a lot of parallels with Sex Offenders and Christians)
 
I'm willing to talk about it anyway.

Third... they'd all have to register somewhere. Like Sex Offenders. (there are a lot of parallels with Sex Offenders and Christians)

Kind of like the same way Hitler made the Jews register and wear yellow stars on their clothing?

If you want tolerance from the Christians, show them tolerance. If you really feel they are wrong, be different from them.
 
dek123leo, getting back to the issue you raised about voting against gay marriage, don't you believe in separation of church and state?
 
Kind of like the same way Hitler made the Jews register and wear yellow stars on their clothing?

Yeah. Just like that, actually.

If you want tolerance from the Christians, show them tolerance. If you really feel they are wrong, be different from them.

How about "no?"

I think the gay community HAS shown them tolerance. And it's done jack shit for us.

We haven't started bills that were anti-Christian marriage, anti-Christian adoption, anti-Christian in housing or employment discrimination. We haven't campaigned to have it illegal for their kind to serve in the military.

And I think it's about time we took the Christian "and eye for an eye" advice.
 
You are just as insulting and hurtful as the Christians you chastise.

So. You think Christians are insulting and hurtful. Then we agree. Now let's see. How exactly are Christians insulting and hurtful? I'll start.

They (i.e. the hateful Christians, not the other kind) affirm that long-term committed gay relationships are on the same level as adultery. I think that's pretty insulting and hurtful. Don't you?

How about considering homosexuality to be a distortion of sexuality as God created it? I'd say that's pretty insulting and hurtful.

They say that homosexual acts are always sin (unlike heterosexual acts which are sin only sometimes). I'd say that's at least hurtful. It might be insulting, too. What do you think?

I think we can just start with those. You seem to have bought into each of these three propositions. Correct me if I'm wrong. How are you less insulting and hurtful than these Christians whom you call insulting and hurtful?
 
I think the gay community HAS shown them tolerance. And it's done jack shit for us.

We haven't started bills that were anti-Christian marriage, anti-Christian adoption, anti-Christian in housing or employment discrimination. We haven't campaigned to have it illegal for their kind to serve in the military.

And I think it's about time we took the Christian "and eye for an eye" advice.

It sounds like you don't think homosexuals and Christians can live alongside each other. I think they can. So what's your solution?
 
Back
Top