1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from 67redsox. Show 67redsox's posts

    Re: Jason Collins

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

    This is factually incorrect. People who are gay are, in fact, born that way. Its not a choice.

    There is no science that "people are born with same-sex sexual proclivity". But "being born with a behavior" doesn't make it moral or natural.

    It takes small minded persons to continue a narrative that uses the term "gay" as an identity. Same-sex sexual behavior proclivity is the issue, and the political agenda to try and legally classify people based upon public declarations of same-sex sexual behavior proclivity is as legally absurd as pretending that abortion as birth control is is a right based on whether life is in the first, second or third trimester.

    If mankind wants to call personal sexual behavior and relationship (these laws were and are the exclusive jurisdiction of the States and were all based on sectarian tenets) moral authority on wrong and right, wrong, based on a majority of mankind's secular reasoning, the Constitution allows States to license the marriages of first cousins and/or same-sex couples. However, there is patently no Constituional right to marriage, and equal protection regarding marriage laws is not violated when men and women are allowed to marry. The Supreme Court is fallable, though, as the abortion, taxing powers and commerce clause cases have manifestly demonstrated.

    The timing and media grandizement monolithic campaign that followed the Jason Collins' public pronouncement regarding his present sexual proclivity places the issue of the motivation for the pronouncement squarely on the same table as the very issue of public pronouncements regarding sexual proclvity and the legitimacy of a federal class group idenity for persons who make same-sex sexual proclivty pronouncements.

    The reality is that the motivation and moral authority for the current media and politically driven narrative is completely bereft of intellectual integrity. Of course it has no Judeo-Christian-Islamo integrity. The superficiality of the public monoloithic narrative is revealed in terms like "gay" and "coming out".

    The issue of hazing and disrespect of human beings, regardless of the motivation for doing so, cannot be intellectually advanced as the reason for changing public laws with regard to persons who share a particular behavioral proclivity. Just as "hate crimes" (supplementing age old common law crimes) are intellecutally and legally illegitimate cover, in their application if not Constitutionality, to advance an agenda of legitimazing groups of persons classified under the artifice of shared publicly proclaimed sexual proclivity and by one specific gender. These laws patently violate equal protection in their application.

    It is truly demented to use youth as props "see primary school letter to the current President, repeating all talking points", for an agenda driven by adults with fully formed emotional capacity to engage in a debate about the virtue and Constituonality of this issue. And it is worth noting that the "hateful" opposition on this issue have, in addition to religous tenets as moral authority, and natural law, a firm conviction that it is emotional and sexually maturing youth who will suffer from the sexual identity confusion that is mainfestly inherent in both same-sex sexual relationships and the body politic licensing such relationships.

    The reality is that there is a total absense of, and censorship of, intellectual debate on this issue, which is highlighted by a childishly emotional narrative that misuses words like "gay" to distract from the very essence of the issue at hand, sexual behavioral proclivity vs. genetic sexual identity. The use of "hater" and "bullied" are bugaboos to try and evoke sympathy and/or empathy, and, of course, guilt, from as many people as possible.

    The true irony is that gender discrimination is inherently manifest in same-sex sexual relationships licensed or unlicensed by a body politic, as well as in public pronouncments of same-sex sexual proclivity.

    There is also irony of the self-proclamed "tolerant" attempting to procure central decrees to order States to license same-sex couples, which is inherently intolerant.

    An intellectual examination of these issues should give one pause before embracing the assumptions and presumptions being advanced by the current narrative of "gay" and "coming out" and "gay marriage", not to mention the very scientific purpose of human gender and the history of mankind. While it may be politically expedient to frame the issue as secular vs. the need to "update" the body politics' adoption of sectarian Canon Law on issues of State laws regarding sexual behavior and sexual relationships, the Constitutional and Natural Law issues raised are quite profound.

     




    Well said, thank-you.

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from SonicsMonksLyresVicars. Show SonicsMonksLyresVicars's posts

    Re: Jason Collins

    I may have posted this before, apologies if so, but recently one of the awful Tory MPs here, a cabinet member, has come out very strongly opposed to Gay Marriage.  He is, of course, more of a hate figure than ever to decent people.  Slaughtered in much of the media (not Murdoch’s papers, of course), even verbally assaulted in the street for his grotesque intolerance and hatred/fear (choose both).

     

    Sadly, even his young children are being bullied at school.  That is so wrong, it’s not their fault their father is evil.  But the twist in the tail is the bullying is along the lines of “Your father is a homophobe!”  I feel sorry for his kids, but it is so great that children are now growing up realising how wrong all bigotry is…even if the 67redsox and Softy’s still rage against the dying of the light.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from RSF4Life234. Show RSF4Life234's posts

    Re: Jason Collins

    In response to 67redsox's comment:

     

    In response to RSF4Life234's comment:

     

    In response to redsoxdirtdog's comment:

     

    In response to 67redsox's comment:

     

    In response to RSF4Life234's comment:

    In response to 67redsox's comment:

    In response to michaelsjr's comment:

     

    Collins praised for coming out as gay.  Tebow vilified for coming out as devout Christian.  Why the double standard?

    Because if you speak against christians it's ok, if you speak against those with same sex attraction disorder you are a homophobe.  I guess they would be called chistophobes.

     

    They were not the same and they will not be the same. Collins came out and said hes gay cool. Tebow came out and said he is a devot christian and this is who you should vote for or you are going to hell. That is not OKAY

     

    Please provide your source for tebows quote.  Why can't I refer to people who are closed minded to christian beliefs christophobes.

     

     

     

    To be fair.....  This is true!  The only religion that it is 'SAFE' to mock & denigrate, is Christianity.

    SADLY.....

    It's folks like Stiffy who bring this on with this type of hateful rhetoric.  Don't kid yourself!  His rhetoric is nothing short of hateful!!!!  You refuse to denounce it, and even parrot it???  67....  You reap what you sow!

     

     

     



     

    can only post about what has personally affected me. We are a country established with the principle of freedom of religion. I have not seen any jewish lobbies trying to outlaw pork, i have not seen any muslim lobbies (In america) trying to inforce woman wearing headscarfs. I have not seen buddhists try to force everyone to follow the path to nirvana

     

    I have seen Christian groups brainwash children in America (watch Biblecamp)

     

    I have seen Christian groups try to permanently ban homosexual marriage (see doma)

     

    I have seen Christian groups attempt to have religious dogma taught in school not simply as informational theology but to be taught as fact.

     

    I can only go by what i see that happens in this country. People are free to believe what they went to, but its when they try to enforce it upon me that I have a problem with.

     

     



    So, this isn't about same sex attraction disorder at all.  You have a problem with christians, so you are a christophobe.  I understand now.

     

     



    How can anyone be this ignorant. You are part of the reason that Christians get a bad rap in this country. You are a unthinking and unfeeling idiolog. You don't have a basic grasp on history, science, or even, current events. You call me a christianphobe without any understanding of the word. The love of my life is Christian and it means literally nothing to me because, and please try some level of comprehension here, she doesn't force her beliefs upon others unlike yourself. You are an example of the worst of society. You don't look for information you look for idiology hence your fervent belief in Obama's one world gov ideology. Btws you are a homophobe demonstrated by your repeated reference to homosexuality as a disorder. Gay marriage and the homosexual life style don't effect you at all! Period! You are ignorant, horribly miss informed and frankly offensive. On ignore you go perpermanently.

     

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from donrd4. Show donrd4's posts

    Re: Jason Collins

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

    In response to 67redsox's comment:

     

    In response to SpacemanEephus' comment:

     

    That is a brave, stand-up guy right there.  I know there will be some reactionary backlash right here on our esteemed board.  So, thought I would beat y'all to the punch and say:  Much power to J. Collins.  Someone needed to do it, and it took courage and fortitude.  I toast to this man.

     




    I'm not sure why someone needed to do it.These guys are payed to entertain us not to tell us what they do behind closed doors.

     

    Some belive in polygamy so if a a public figure has 4 wives should we stand up and applaud them also?

    Some like oritz are getting divorced and we are asked to give them privacy yet we applaud those who tell us about their private lives.  Don't think so.

     



    I will tell you why: because there are still kids in the closet in this country being told that the way they are is unacceptable and inferior. Because the suicide rate among gay kids is several times higher than straight kids. Because homophobia is the last bastion of socially acceptable bigotry in this country. If Collins admitting he is gay gives strength and solace to a single gay teenager in this country then it was worth it.

    Does that go for anything that someone believes in? Just come out and tell the world and it helps someone who wants to be just like that?Drag what you want in life to others and say it's ok to be just like me.Is this just for the gay issue thing?What is the suicide rate for kids on drugs? Several times higher then straight kids.




     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from LloydDobler. Show LloydDobler's posts

    Re: Jason Collins

    This thread shows that the gay community, while gaining some acceptance in this country, still has far to travel. I'm not bashing anyone's opinion, other than to say discrimination of any kind, against any group, is abhorrent.

     

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: Jason Collins

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

    This is factually incorrect. People who are gay are, in fact, born that way. Its not a choice.

    There is no science that "people are born with same-sex sexual proclivity". But "being born with a behavior" doesn't make it moral or natural.

    It takes small minded persons to continue a narrative that uses the term "gay" as an identity. Same-sex sexual behavior proclivity is the issue, and the political agenda to try and legally classify people based upon public declarations of same-sex sexual behavior proclivity is as legally absurd as pretending that abortion as birth control is is a right based on whether life is in the first, second or third trimester.

    If mankind wants to call personal sexual behavior and relationship (these laws were and are the exclusive jurisdiction of the States and were all based on sectarian tenets) moral authority on wrong and right, wrong, based on a majority of mankind's secular reasoning, the Constitution allows States to license the marriages of first cousins and/or same-sex couples. However, there is patently no Constituional right to marriage, and equal protection regarding marriage laws is not violated when men and women are allowed to marry. The Supreme Court is fallable, though, as the abortion, taxing powers and commerce clause cases have manifestly demonstrated.

    The timing and media grandizement monolithic campaign that followed the Jason Collins' public pronouncement regarding his present sexual proclivity places the issue of the motivation for the pronouncement squarely on the same table as the very issue of public pronouncements regarding sexual proclvity and the legitimacy of a federal class group idenity for persons who make same-sex sexual proclivty pronouncements.

    The reality is that the motivation and moral authority for the current media and politically driven narrative is completely bereft of intellectual integrity. Of course it has no Judeo-Christian-Islamo integrity. The superficiality of the public monoloithic narrative is revealed in terms like "gay" and "coming out".

    The issue of hazing and disrespect of human beings, regardless of the motivation for doing so, cannot be intellectually advanced as the reason for changing public laws with regard to persons who share a particular behavioral proclivity. Just as "hate crimes" (supplementing age old common law crimes) are intellecutally and legally illegitimate cover, in their application if not Constitutionality, to advance an agenda of legitimazing groups of persons classified under the artifice of shared publicly proclaimed sexual proclivity and by one specific gender. These laws patently violate equal protection in their application.

    It is truly demented to use youth as props "see primary school letter to the current President, repeating all talking points", for an agenda driven by adults with fully formed emotional capacity to engage in a debate about the virtue and Constituonality of this issue. And it is worth noting that the "hateful" opposition on this issue have, in addition to religous tenets as moral authority, and natural law, a firm conviction that it is emotional and sexually maturing youth who will suffer from the sexual identity confusion that is mainfestly inherent in both same-sex sexual relationships and the body politic licensing such relationships.

    The reality is that there is a total absense of, and censorship of, intellectual debate on this issue, which is highlighted by a childishly emotional narrative that misuses words like "gay" to distract from the very essence of the issue at hand, sexual behavioral proclivity vs. genetic sexual identity. The use of "hater" and "bullied" are bugaboos to try and evoke sympathy and/or empathy, and, of course, guilt, from as many people as possible.

    The true irony is that gender discrimination is inherently manifest in same-sex sexual relationships licensed or unlicensed by a body politic, as well as in public pronouncments of same-sex sexual proclivity.

    There is also irony of the self-proclamed "tolerant" attempting to procure central decrees to order States to license same-sex couples, which is inherently intolerant.

    An intellectual examination of these issues should give one pause before embracing the assumptions and presumptions being advanced by the current narrative of "gay" and "coming out" and "gay marriage", not to mention the very scientific purpose of human gender and the history of mankind. While it may be politically expedient to frame the issue as secular vs. the need to "update" the body politics' adoption of sectarian Canon Law on issues of State laws regarding sexual behavior and sexual relationships, the Constitutional and Natural Law issues raised are quite profound.

     




    What a croc of unadulterated stool Softy. You have outdone yourself with this prolific batch of typewritten oral diarrhea. The basic problem you have is that you do not recognize gay Americans as a legitimate minority group that has been oppressed here for generations. Even today there are literally hundreds of laws that discriminate against them. In some states its legal to fire gay employees just because they are gay. Is that fair Softy? Most civilized countries are now passing appropriate laws aimed at correcting this, and hopefully in June the Supreme Court will affirm what most of this country now believes is right. You are a real work of art Softy; not good art, but really bad art.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from pumpsie-green. Show pumpsie-green's posts

    Re: Jason Collins

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

    There are still way too many evil, creepy homophobes fascinated by others' sex lives, but all decent people simply don't care who other people sleep with.

    "homophobe" means "fear of the same". It's meaningless blather.

    There are still way too many evil, creepy insecure Biblephobes who are desperately seeking public attention and approval of their current sexual proclivty.

    It is quite creepy for a professional athlete to wait until impending FA to pronounce his current sexual proclivity, for a player who had a dubious NBA contract fture before he made his current sexual proclivity a media campaign.  



    Again, factually incorrect, as are most of your posts. Here is how the dictionary defines "homophobia":

    : irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals

     

    There is no "wrong time" for a player to talk about this. Unfortunately, Collins is not a very good basketball player and is likely out of work anyway. He knows that, and I am quite sure he realizes that his poor on court performance is the reason he will not be playing ball next year.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from SFBostonFan. Show SFBostonFan's posts

    Re: Jason Collins

    I put Jackie Robinson & the race card issue in a different category than gays mingling with non-gays. In the Military in the foxholes & showers, one or many may have had disciminatory feelings but the non-white person was not a threat to one's beliefs that God put us on this earth to use our God given gift to pro-create when physically able to do so. I've said this before, I play mixed doubles tennis with females, we are clothed but I still find them attractive and I would be aroused(and doubt if many heterosexuals wouldn't be too) if we then showered together. Sure it's nice to say that Jason Collins or other gays can control their sexual feelings in nude surroundings but the situation may make heterosexuals uncomfortable and cause a moral problem. I recommend, as we don't shower with women, that the gays have separate shower stalls. Now, if someone discriminates against gays if their sexual preference is not threatened as being in a shower with them, then yes they are bigots.

     

    OK, hopefully this topic has been beaten ala a dead horse and I'm impressed that so many avid sports fans have very intelligent, some not so much, views on this controversal subject.

    I wish to end with some levity that we refer to the Bible to help resolve the issue of same sex marriage & the use of marijuana as it says and I'm paraphrasing " Man who lies with Man shall be Stoned" !!!
     

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from 37stories. Show 37stories's posts

    Re: Jason Collins

    In response to 67redsox's comment:

    In response to 37stories' comment:

     

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

     

    Who (or what) is "our" creator? The only authority for the founding and continuation of this nation is the not authority at all but the people's ascent to this form of governmentt unless and until the peole see fit to change it. No individual and no government represents or carries out any actions due to a "creator's " authority.

    The only individual you can speak for is yourself.

    Since this Nation was conceived based upon rights endowed from the Creator, your comment is jaded in such a way as to take the context and attempt to project the bugaboo that representatives of this Republic, both elected and unelected, don't carry out any actions except with a secular authority. And, of course, you can't speak for theocracies like the one in Iran, which the media places way down the list behind "gay's coming out" when it comes to data publication decisions.  

     

    They can only wield any authority to the extent that the people accept and allow their authority.

    True, which also makes it important to point out that the founding fathers make it clear that the People should not accept a central government that is as despotic as the current collectivist central government that has exceeded it's Constitutional powers by the illegitmate use of the Commerce Clause and ignorance of the X Amendment.  it is a federal authority that has injected itself through regulation and laws that make the People it's de facto subjects.

    The People should not accept the way the business of the People is being dictated from Washington, with Bills introduced and not read and not provided to the people, on demand, before there is time to read them and protest them.

    Unless the People run and elect non-party primary establishment choices and incumbents then this Nation will collapse under a financial system that will implode under the weight of the vision of utopian collectivism. What will emerge is manifest from a study of history.

    The irony is that the People are more tuned into the media for purposes of issues of sexual behavior and what the body politic and sports businesses are doing in that regard, all while the federal government presides over terrible unemployment, repeated attacks from militant Muslim jihadists, and incomprehsible debt and deficits and a percentage of GDP and in the aggregate.

    But let's get back to the issue of that brave free agent, Jason Collins, making this public announcment as he approaches the market. Is there a lesson to be learned on the issue of public policy and individual guilt and sympathy as it concerns the organized powers who nominate individuals seeking to further a one-party agenda or individuals entering the market place during a time when lawyers and cases involving same-sex sexual proclivity has now reached the stage where any oppposition is deemed hateful and bigoted.

    I suppose questioning the motivation for someone's public pronouncements regarding sexual proclivity is "off limits", which is very ironic in the context of issues of today.  

     



    Interesting post.

     

    But what do you think about Jason Collins telling people that he is gay?

     



    Excellent post, please re-read for the answer to your question.  On closer inspection you will have your answer.

     



    Your poat was even better.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from RSF4Life234. Show RSF4Life234's posts

    Re: Jason Collins

    In response to SFBostonFan's comment:

    I put Jackie Robinson & the race card issue in a different category than gays mingling with non-gays. In the Military in the foxholes & showers, one or many may have had disciminatory feelings but the non-white person was not a threat to one's beliefs that God put us on this earth to use our God given gift to pro-create when physically able to do so. I've said this before, I play mixed doubles tennis with females, we are clothed but I still find them attractive and I would be aroused(and doubt if many heterosexuals wouldn't be too) if we then showered together. Sure it's nice to say that Jason Collins or other gays can control their sexual feelings in nude surroundings but the situation may make heterosexuals uncomfortable and cause a moral problem. I recommend, as we don't shower with women, that the gays have separate shower stalls. Now, if someone discriminates against gays if their sexual preference is not threatened as being in a shower with them, then yes they are bigots.

     

    OK, hopefully this topic has been beaten ala a dead horse and I'm impressed that so many avid sports fans have very intelligent, some not so much, views on this controversal subject.

    I wish to end with some levity that we refer to the Bible to help resolve the issue of same sex marriage & the use of marijuana as it says and I'm paraphrasing " Man who lies with Man shall be Stoned" !!!
     



    Since Dont ask Dont tell has been lifted the military has not suffered. But first and foremost as a united states soldier you are not protecting the bible but the constitution of the United States of America!

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from Flapjack07. Show Flapjack07's posts

    Re: Jason Collins

    There are still way too many evil, creepy insecure Biblephobes

    The only thing to fear about the Bible (which for the most part is a laugh-fest) is its teachings being forced on others by religious zealots.

    It is quite creepy for a professional athlete to wait until impending FA to pronounce his current sexual proclivity,

    If his "sexual proclivity" was heterosexual, I doubt his making it known in public would be considered "creepy."

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from 67redsox. Show 67redsox's posts

    Re: Jason Collins

    In response to RSF4Life234's comment:

     

    In response to 67redsox's comment:

     

    In response to RSF4Life234's comment:

     

    In response to redsoxdirtdog's comment:

     

    In response to 67redsox's comment:

     

    In response to RSF4Life234's comment:

    In response to 67redsox's comment:

    In response to michaelsjr's comment:

     

    Collins praised for coming out as gay.  Tebow vilified for coming out as devout Christian.  Why the double standard?

    Because if you speak against christians it's ok, if you speak against those with same sex attraction disorder you are a homophobe.  I guess they would be called chistophobes.

     

    They were not the same and they will not be the same. Collins came out and said hes gay cool. Tebow came out and said he is a devot christian and this is who you should vote for or you are going to hell. That is not OKAY

     

    Please provide your source for tebows quote.  Why can't I refer to people who are closed minded to christian beliefs christophobes.

     

     

     

    To be fair.....  This is true!  The only religion that it is 'SAFE' to mock & denigrate, is Christianity.

    SADLY.....

    It's folks like Stiffy who bring this on with this type of hateful rhetoric.  Don't kid yourself!  His rhetoric is nothing short of hateful!!!!  You refuse to denounce it, and even parrot it???  67....  You reap what you sow!

     

     

     



     

    can only post about what has personally affected me. We are a country established with the principle of freedom of religion. I have not seen any jewish lobbies trying to outlaw pork, i have not seen any muslim lobbies (In america) trying to inforce woman wearing headscarfs. I have not seen buddhists try to force everyone to follow the path to nirvana

     

    I have seen Christian groups brainwash children in America (watch Biblecamp)

     

    I have seen Christian groups try to permanently ban homosexual marriage (see doma)

     

    I have seen Christian groups attempt to have religious dogma taught in school not simply as informational theology but to be taught as fact.

     

    I can only go by what i see that happens in this country. People are free to believe what they went to, but its when they try to enforce it upon me that I have a problem with.

     

     



    So, this isn't about same sex attraction disorder at all.  You have a problem with christians, so you are a christophobe.  I understand now.

     

     



    How can anyone be this ignorant. You are part of the reason that Christians get a bad rap in this country. You are a unthinking and unfeeling idiolog. You don't have a basic grasp on history, science, or even, current events. You call me a christianphobe without any understanding of the word. The love of my life is Christian and it means literally nothing to me because, and please try some level of comprehension here, she doesn't force her beliefs upon others unlike yourself. You are an example of the worst of society. You don't look for information you look for idiology hence your fervent belief in Obama's one world gov ideology. Btws you are a homophobe demonstrated by your repeated reference to homosexuality as a disorder. Gay marriage and the homosexual life style don't effect you at all! Period! You are ignorant, horribly miss informed and frankly offensive. On ignore you go perpermanently.

     

     




    As always, progressives revert to name calling when they don't have a leg to stand on.  Shame on you.  I'm not forcing my beliefs on anyone, I'm simply having a discussion. 

     

    I have a right to post on a thread that someone else started.  I have a right to express my opinion. You don't have any facts to dispute my statements so you call me names.  Sad but typical of those who call themselves tolerant of others.  You are tolerant as long as everyone agrees with you.

    Your post indicates that you have a problem with christians, not my problem but yours.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from 67redsox. Show 67redsox's posts

    Re: Jason Collins

    In response to Flapjack07's comment:

    There are still way too many evil, creepy insecure Biblephobes

    The only thing to fear about the Bible (which for the most part is a laugh-fest) is its teachings being forced on others by religious zealosts.

    It is quite creepy for a professional athlete to wait until impending FA to pronounce his current sexual proclivity,

    If his "sexual proclivity" was heterosexual, I doubt his making it known in public would be considered "creepy."



    This all boils down to those who don't like christians.  I'm called vile names because I believe marriage is between one man and one woman. 

    Because progressives control the country and the media you believe you can bully christians,  you feel empowered.  Have at it.  God is my defender, I have nothing to fear.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from SpacemanEephus. Show SpacemanEephus's posts

    Re: Jason Collins

    In response to 67redsox's comment:

    In response to Flapjack07's comment:

     

    There are still way too many evil, creepy insecure Biblephobes

    The only thing to fear about the Bible (which for the most part is a laugh-fest) is its teachings being forced on others by religious zealosts.

    It is quite creepy for a professional athlete to wait until impending FA to pronounce his current sexual proclivity,

    If his "sexual proclivity" was heterosexual, I doubt his making it known in public would be considered "creepy."

     



    This all boils down to those who don't like christians.  I'm called vile names because I believe marriage is between one man and one woman. 

     

    Because progressives control the country and the media you believe you can bully christians,  you feel empowered.  Have at it.  God is my defender, I have nothing to fear.



    Progressives control the country because it is a democracy and the movement of people in this particular democracy tends toward progress:  away from bigotry wrapped in the name of God (blasphemy in its most egregious form) and towards tolerance and undertsanding.  

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from 67redsox. Show 67redsox's posts

    Re: Jason Collins

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

     

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

     

    This is factually incorrect. People who are gay are, in fact, born that way. Its not a choice.

    There is no science that "people are born with same-sex sexual proclivity". But "being born with a behavior" doesn't make it moral or natural.

    It takes small minded persons to continue a narrative that uses the term "gay" as an identity. Same-sex sexual behavior proclivity is the issue, and the political agenda to try and legally classify people based upon public declarations of same-sex sexual behavior proclivity is as legally absurd as pretending that abortion as birth control is is a right based on whether life is in the first, second or third trimester.

    If mankind wants to call personal sexual behavior and relationship (these laws were and are the exclusive jurisdiction of the States and were all based on sectarian tenets) moral authority on wrong and right, wrong, based on a majority of mankind's secular reasoning, the Constitution allows States to license the marriages of first cousins and/or same-sex couples. However, there is patently no Constituional right to marriage, and equal protection regarding marriage laws is not violated when men and women are allowed to marry. The Supreme Court is fallable, though, as the abortion, taxing powers and commerce clause cases have manifestly demonstrated.

    The timing and media grandizement monolithic campaign that followed the Jason Collins' public pronouncement regarding his present sexual proclivity places the issue of the motivation for the pronouncement squarely on the same table as the very issue of public pronouncements regarding sexual proclvity and the legitimacy of a federal class group idenity for persons who make same-sex sexual proclivty pronouncements.

    The reality is that the motivation and moral authority for the current media and politically driven narrative is completely bereft of intellectual integrity. Of course it has no Judeo-Christian-Islamo integrity. The superficiality of the public monoloithic narrative is revealed in terms like "gay" and "coming out".

    The issue of hazing and disrespect of human beings, regardless of the motivation for doing so, cannot be intellectually advanced as the reason for changing public laws with regard to persons who share a particular behavioral proclivity. Just as "hate crimes" (supplementing age old common law crimes) are intellecutally and legally illegitimate cover, in their application if not Constitutionality, to advance an agenda of legitimazing groups of persons classified under the artifice of shared publicly proclaimed sexual proclivity and by one specific gender. These laws patently violate equal protection in their application.

    It is truly demented to use youth as props "see primary school letter to the current President, repeating all talking points", for an agenda driven by adults with fully formed emotional capacity to engage in a debate about the virtue and Constituonality of this issue. And it is worth noting that the "hateful" opposition on this issue have, in addition to religous tenets as moral authority, and natural law, a firm conviction that it is emotional and sexually maturing youth who will suffer from the sexual identity confusion that is mainfestly inherent in both same-sex sexual relationships and the body politic licensing such relationships.

    The reality is that there is a total absense of, and censorship of, intellectual debate on this issue, which is highlighted by a childishly emotional narrative that misuses words like "gay" to distract from the very essence of the issue at hand, sexual behavioral proclivity vs. genetic sexual identity. The use of "hater" and "bullied" are bugaboos to try and evoke sympathy and/or empathy, and, of course, guilt, from as many people as possible.

    The true irony is that gender discrimination is inherently manifest in same-sex sexual relationships licensed or unlicensed by a body politic, as well as in public pronouncments of same-sex sexual proclivity.

    There is also irony of the self-proclamed "tolerant" attempting to procure central decrees to order States to license same-sex couples, which is inherently intolerant.

    An intellectual examination of these issues should give one pause before embracing the assumptions and presumptions being advanced by the current narrative of "gay" and "coming out" and "gay marriage", not to mention the very scientific purpose of human gender and the history of mankind. While it may be politically expedient to frame the issue as secular vs. the need to "update" the body politics' adoption of sectarian Canon Law on issues of State laws regarding sexual behavior and sexual relationships, the Constitutional and Natural Law issues raised are quite profound.

     

     




    What a croc of unadulterated stool Softy. You have outdone yourself with this prolific batch of typewritten oral diarrhea. The basic problem you have is that you do not recognize gay Americans as a legitimate minority group that has been oppressed here for generations. Even today there are literally hundreds of laws that discriminate against them. In some states its legal to fire gay employees just because they are gay. Is that fair Softy? Most civilized countries are now passing appropriate laws aimed at correcting this, and hopefully in June the Supreme Court will affirm what most of this country now believes is right. You are a real work of art Softy; not good art, but really bad art.

     

     

     

     

     

     



    You want everything to be fair for everyone?  Really?  What about the kids who are picked on because they are overweight, wear braces, come from the wrong side of town or don't have the best clothes.

     

    What about kids who are bullied through social media?  Some of those kids who are hetero are killing themselves because they can't stand being picked-on.

    What about kids like my son who has attention defecite disorder.  Yes, I called my son disordered because that is the correct medical term just as same sex attraction disorder is the correct medical term.

    He was horribly pick-on as a kid.  I could tell you stories that would break your heart. I give him a lot of credit for surviving and thriving.  I believe a stong family and a strong faith helped him through.  He still carries the scars.

    I was abused as a child by a man and a teen-age boy in my neighborhood just because I was a pretty little girl. I still carry the scars.

    Life is unfair, it stinks sometime, we do not live in paradise. 

    I believe those with ssad should be able to work and live without being bullied. My husband employs a man with ssad.  He and his 'partner' came to my home when we hosted a christmas party. No one should be attacked or picked-on for any reason.  Those with ssad should be treated with respect because they are made in the image and likeness of God.

    That being said we as a country should not change our laws on marraige because some suffer with this disorder. 

    Marriage has been between a man and a woman in multiple cultures for thousands of years. There is a reason for that, the natural law.  The same law that dictates that murder, stealing and adultery is wrong.  We naturally know these things to be wrong, why?  Because it is written on our hearts.

    Some say SSAD marriage doesn't hurt me.  You are wrong.  Society is built on marriage.  A strong home life helps to create strong citizens.  Good citizens make a better country for me and my family.

    If marriage is based soley on who loves who then the fabric of our country will change.  If two men love three women then there is nothing to stop them from getting married.  If someone loves their sibling and they have surgery to prevent children then there is nothing to stop them from getting married.

    The whole moral fabric of our society will be torn and yes, that will affect me and my family.

    There are those who say this will never happen.  It has already happened in another area.  First we had the pill.  That allowed for the so called sexual revolution.  That resulted in more unwanted pregnancys.  That lead to more abortions. First trimester, then second trimester then third trimester was allowed.  That lead to partail birth abortion.  Now we are dealing with children who are killed after they are born alive because of a failed abortion. 

    When society starts down a slippery slope anything can and does happen.

    Ok, I'm ready for the hateful posts coming my way.

     

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from 67redsox. Show 67redsox's posts

    Re: Jason Collins

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

    Same to you. It's nice to know that there is more than one person on here who doesn't simply accept and embrace the status quo on this issue.




    People just don't want to hear the truth so they become nasty.  The name calling doesn't bother me because I know it's more of a reflection of them than of me.

     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from 67redsox. Show 67redsox's posts

    Re: Jason Collins

    In response to donrd4's comment:

    In response to pumpsie-green's comment:

     

    In response to 67redsox's comment:

     

    In response to SpacemanEephus' comment:

     

    That is a brave, stand-up guy right there.  I know there will be some reactionary backlash right here on our esteemed board.  So, thought I would beat y'all to the punch and say:  Much power to J. Collins.  Someone needed to do it, and it took courage and fortitude.  I toast to this man.

     




    I'm not sure why someone needed to do it.These guys are payed to entertain us not to tell us what they do behind closed doors.

     

    Some belive in polygamy so if a a public figure has 4 wives should we stand up and applaud them also?

    Some like oritz are getting divorced and we are asked to give them privacy yet we applaud those who tell us about their private lives.  Don't think so.

     



    I will tell you why: because there are still kids in the closet in this country being told that the way they are is unacceptable and inferior. Because the suicide rate among gay kids is several times higher than straight kids. Because homophobia is the last bastion of socially acceptable bigotry in this country. If Collins admitting he is gay gives strength and solace to a single gay teenager in this country then it was worth it.

    Does that go for anything that someone believes in? Just come out and tell the world and it helps someone who wants to be just like that?Drag what you want in life to others and say it's ok to be just like me.Is this just for the gay issue thing?What is the suicide rate for kids on drugs? Several times higher then straight kids.


    I made the same point in another post.




     




     
  21. This post has been removed.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from SpacemanEephus. Show SpacemanEephus's posts

    Re: Jason Collins

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

    This thread shows that the gay community, while gaining some acceptance in this country, still has far to travel. I'm not bashing anyone's opinion, other than to say discrimination of any kind, against any group, is abhorrent.

    The same-sex sexual proclivity community, while receiving sympathy in this Country, has traveled down the monolithic path of combatting dissidents with censorship, propaganda, and personal intimidation. "Discrimination" is what every human being does, everyday of their lives. The issue of group intimidation and unfair prejudice is a legal issue. The intellectual dishonesty of equating same-sex sexual behavioral proclivity with skin pigmentation is patently bigoted.



    Same-sex sexual proclivity community.  same-sex behavioral proclivity.  hahaha.  thank you counselor.  You crack me up.  I appreciate a good semantic pretzel and you bake em up just right.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from 67redsox. Show 67redsox's posts

    Re: Jason Collins

    In response to SpacemanEephus' comment:

    In response to 67redsox's comment:

     

    In response to Flapjack07's comment:

     

    There are still way too many evil, creepy insecure Biblephobes

    The only thing to fear about the Bible (which for the most part is a laugh-fest) is its teachings being forced on others by religious zealosts.

    It is quite creepy for a professional athlete to wait until impending FA to pronounce his current sexual proclivity,

    If his "sexual proclivity" was heterosexual, I doubt his making it known in public would be considered "creepy."

     



    This all boils down to those who don't like christians.  I'm called vile names because I believe marriage is between one man and one woman. 

     

    Because progressives control the country and the media you believe you can bully christians,  you feel empowered.  Have at it.  God is my defender, I have nothing to fear.

     



    Progressives control the country because it is a democracy and the movement of people in this particular democracy tends toward progress:  away from bigotry wrapped in the name of God (blasphemy in its most egregious form) and towards tolerance and undertsanding.  

     



    Progressives control this country because we have become a welfare country.  So many people are getting so many free handouts. They of course keep voting in the hand that feeds them. We are progressing towards a socialist nation.  As Margaret Thatcher once said socialism lasts as until you run out of other people's money.  Enjoy what you have while you have it.  Socialism never has worked and it never will.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from 67redsox. Show 67redsox's posts

    Re: Jason Collins

    In response to SpacemanEephus' comment:

    In response to softlaw2's comment:

     

    This thread shows that the gay community, while gaining some acceptance in this country, still has far to travel. I'm not bashing anyone's opinion, other than to say discrimination of any kind, against any group, is abhorrent.

    The same-sex sexual proclivity community, while receiving sympathy in this Country, has traveled down the monolithic path of combatting dissidents with censorship, propaganda, and personal intimidation. "Discrimination" is what every human being does, everyday of their lives. The issue of group intimidation and unfair prejudice is a legal issue. The intellectual dishonesty of equating same-sex sexual behavioral proclivity with skin pigmentation is patently bigoted.

     



    Same-sex sexual proclivity community.  same-sex behavioral proclivity.  hahaha.  thank you counselor.  You crack me up.  I appreciate a good semantic pretzel and you bake em up just right.

     



    Really?  The guy makes a sound argument and this is your response.  How about something more substantial.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Flapjack07. Show Flapjack07's posts

    Re: Jason Collins

    In response to 67redsox's comment:

    In response to Flapjack07's comment:

     

    There are still way too many evil, creepy insecure Biblephobes

    The only thing to fear about the Bible (which for the most part is a laugh-fest) is its teachings being forced on others by religious zealosts.

    It is quite creepy for a professional athlete to wait until impending FA to pronounce his current sexual proclivity,

    If his "sexual proclivity" was heterosexual, I doubt his making it known in public would be considered "creepy."

     



    This all boils down to those who don't like christians.  I'm called vile names because I believe marriage is between one man and one woman. 

     

    Because progressives control the country and the media you believe you can bully christians,  you feel empowered.  Have at it.  God is my defender, I have nothing to fear.




    I'm a libertarian actually, so no one can accuse me of controlling the country or the media...LOL.

    And I don't hate or go through life bullying Christians (I'm married to one)...people can believe what they want to believe as far as I'm concerned. But if you inject your religion into political and social issues like this, and act as if everyone else is obligated to live according to your church's dictates, then I have no problem voicing my displeasure at that.

    Have a nice day.

     

Share