Springsteen cancels show because of North Carolina law

[JetsetBkk]

<snip>

Upside - .01% of the population get to pee sitting down instead of standing up

<snip>

I prefer to pee sitting down. These damn underpants don't have a big enough fly-hole.

[pedro01]

<snip>

Upside - .01% of the population get to pee sitting down instead of standing up

<snip>

I prefer to pee sitting down. These damn underpants don't have a big enough fly-hole.

I can't pee sitting down.

I find the water too cold.

[Pimay1]

<snip>

Upside - .01% of the population get to pee sitting down instead of standing up

<snip>

I prefer to pee sitting down. These damn underpants don't have a big enough fly-hole.

I can't pee sitting down.

I find the water too cold.

I don't mind the cold water but it is too shallow.

[mopar71]

And then there are people who are getting tired of the small special interest groups who insist that they are entitled to special treatment. Enough already.

Well that's your problem. The rest of us don't care. Deal with it.

No, not a problem at all. The problem lies with the 5% of the population that thinks the other 95% should give in to their demands, lol. Asinine outlook on life, really.

5%? Is this the gay marriage thread? I think the trans part is much closer to 0.005%.

I have no problem with gay marriage but at the time opponents were saying that demanding marriage was only the beginning and that the next demand would be for people to marry pets or children. After all, these people are born with those desires, they aren't learned...true?

Well, we are now in the middle of that next demand, toilet rights. I'm curious what the demand after this one will be.

Springsteen & Bryan Adams - looking for some added publicity? Or an excuse not to play a gig? They could certainly do more using the stage as a pulpit rather than not going at all.

[DM07]

Bryan Adams is following The Boss!

I hope many more will!

Of course they will. Protecting toilet rights for transvestites is such an earth-shakingly important issue.

Exactly!

And if you and the "likers" of your not very intelligent post really think, that this is the problem at hand, I guess you deserve Ted Nugent, every day of the week!

[chuckd]

Bryan Adams is following The Boss!

I hope many more will!

Of course they will. Protecting toilet rights for transvestites is such an earth-shakingly important issue.

Exactly!

And if you and the "likers" of your not very intelligent post really think, that this is the problem at hand, I guess you deserve Ted Nugent, every day of the week!

I "liked" the post because it is true. Complain to the forum staff if you have a problem with the "like" function.

What is a Ted Nugent?

[Jingthing]

Please stop distorting the hateful N.C. bill.

Transvestites are not the same thing as transgender people.

Please do some homework before conflating two quite different things.
Also the bill is most certainly NOT only about bathroom access for a stigmatized minority group.

The much more important part is the banning of any kinds of CIVIL RIGHTS protections for all GLBT people in that state including things like employment and housing, etc. Don't trivialize how serious that is with red herring posts about wedding cakes.

The tactics of the right wing anti-GLBT civil rights movement are crystal clear. They cynically USE the hot button issues of transgender bathroom access and "religious liberty" as a cover for their real agenda ... to try to rationalize discrimination against GLBT citizens in ALL matters.

Another member wondered what's next on the agenda of the GLBT civil rights movement after marriage equality. That's easy to answer and very popular in national polls: legal protection against discrimination in basic things like employment and housing legislated at the NATIONAL LEVEL.

But even though popular, due to the nastiness of the bigoted anti-GLBT movement, that probably won't actually happen for several years or even multiple decades.

Edited April 12, 2016 by Jingthing

[rgs2001uk]

Bryan Adams is following The Boss!

I hope many more will!

Ok, so Springsteen isn't coming, Bryan Adams isn't coming, and New York State Employees aren't coming. I don't see a downside here.

My guess is North Carolina would be very happy if all liberal Democrats would boycott their state.

Well, I hope Bruce Springsteen will remember

A Southern man don't need him around anyhow.

[Jingthing]

To add, this is a BIG election year in the USA and, as usual, the democrats are going to be on the side of basic civil rights (human rights) for GLBT American citizens and the republicans are going to be on the fearful BIGOTED side against them. Some had thought this wedge issue was going to diminish after the marriage equality victory, but no such luck. As bad as ever, especially if the republicans put up Cruz who is positioned as an anti-GLBT civil rights EXTREMIST.

https://www.facebook.com/hillaryclinton/videos/1120735021316359/

To add, I think it's a mistake to focus on wedding cakes. It's a trivial issue. If you're in an urban area you won't have a problem finding a wedding cake provider for a gay wedding. If you're in a very small town and the only baker won't do it for "religious reasons" whether real or used as an excuse for discrimination, yes that's a problem, but it's still a relatively trivial matter compared to much more important issues, like legal protection against discrimination in housing and employment. It plays into the right wing anti-gay agenda to inflate the wedding cake issue.

On the other hand, if you're talking about something like a restaurant open to the public and they won't serve a meal to a gay couple, that's another level, and that should NOT be legal, just like it is not legal in all 50 states to refuse to serve a meal in a restaurant to black people.

Edited April 12, 2016 by Jingthing

[DM07]

Bryan Adams is following The Boss!

I hope many more will!

Of course they will. Protecting toilet rights for transvestites is such an earth-shakingly important issue.

Exactly!

And if you and the "likers" of your not very intelligent post really think, that this is the problem at hand, I guess you deserve Ted Nugent, every day of the week!

I "liked" the post because it is true. Complain to the forum staff if you have a problem with the "like" function.

What is a Ted Nugent?

I have no problem with the "like" function!

I have a problem with stupid, homophobic, uninformed, bigoted comments and people who make them!

But ...it becomes a kind of mantra, really: there is no cure for stupid!

[slipperylobster]

I used to listen to that kind of music? No wonder my day booted me out when I was 17.

[Scott]

Off-topic, inflammatory posts and replies removed. Please stay on topic and keep the discussion civil.

[lostboy]

Bryan Adams is following The Boss!

I hope many more will!

Of course they will. Protecting toilet rights for transvestites is such an earth-shakingly important issue.

Even if respecting the human rights of individuals who are different from you is not as big a priority as protecting the second amendment or keeping African Americans in their place, the issue has resonance with the MAJORITY of people who are in favour of protecting LGBT rights.

[lostboy]

Fake red herring issue.

There is no movement to force religious cake bakers to bake obscene baked products for ANYONE!

Never has been. Never will be.

Geez, the twisted games the opponents of GLBT civil rights play are seemingly endless.

Some bakeries do erotic baked products and it's fair to assume none of them are religious fundamentalists of ANY flavor.

Can you really imagine a bakery that does penis cakes discriminating based on the sexuality of the customers? Come on now.

Duh. Double Duh.

Next ...

Nobody said they were, you klutz.

It was merely injecting a little humor into the debate.

What IS happening is that homosexual couples are suing cake shops for not making cakes with (for example) two male figurines on and "well done Ben and Joe" on them.

Now - the reason you should be allowed to refuse to make the cake is simple. The act of making the cake is participating in the event. It's not refusing someone because you don't like them. It's refusing to participate. There is a huge difference.

If you are devoutly religious and your religion tells you that homosexuality is a mortal sin (something I do not believe), then you should not be forced to participate in any way in a homosexual event.

It is not about prejudice it is about forced participation.

The LGBT community very much has it in for Christians. Muslims get a free pass for some reason, so we don't see LGBT activists trawling southern states looking for Mulsim bakeries to sue. Christians are very much a target.

At the end of the day, I'll bake the bloody cakes. They won't look much - but these Christians have their beliefs. I don't agree - but honestly, it's hardly saving the world forcing them to cook your dick-cake is it?

Deriving humour from debasing other people's dignity. Very funny. Perhaps you should do this in the jokes section or the gay forum and see what response you get. It was and is not very amusing in the context of a political discussion.

[lostboy]

And then there are people who are getting tired of the small special interest groups who insist that they are entitled to special treatment. Enough already.

Well that's your problem. The rest of us don't care. Deal with it.

No, not a problem at all. The problem lies with the 5% of the population that thinks the other 95% should give in to their demands, lol. Asinine outlook on life, really.

5%? Is this the gay marriage thread? I think the trans part is much closer to 0.005%.

I have no problem with gay marriage but at the time opponents were saying that demanding marriage was only the beginning and that the next demand would be for people to marry pets or children. After all, these people are born with those desires, they aren't learned...true?

Well, we are now in the middle of that next demand, toilet rights. I'm curious what the demand after this one will be.

Springsteen & Bryan Adams - looking for some added publicity? Or an excuse not to play a gig? They could certainly do more using the stage as a pulpit rather than not going at all.

Yes, those pesky gays. Even worse than your father's generation of uppity blacks. All that marching and demanding their rights. Well with the Scalia SCOTUS gutting the Voter Rights Act, the good ol' boys are putting a stop to them. Same with the gays right. They got the marriage ruling but they won't stop. All the fears will come true. People will want to marry their dogs or their lawn-mowers.

This nonsense was nonsense back during the marriage equality discussions. It remains nonsense now. It merely serves to trivialise the issue of respecting the dignity of LGBT people. So what if the numbers are small. You have no grounds for assuming any percentage. You are just pulling that number out of your bum. In any case, it has no relevance.

Where does it stop? Easy, when minorities have equal protection under the law as any other person. When minorities cannot be discriminated against in terms of access to public facilities or public funds on the basis of their minority status. Not really such a big concept to get your head around. And not related at all to the promotion of bestiality or necrophilia or any other non conformist sexual practice. Just equality under the law. In such an environment, people who promote discrimination will have to face consequences. I look forward to that day.

[chuckd]

I used to listen to that kind of music? No wonder my day booted me out when I was 17.

Now be honest. Do you really believe one single judges chair would turn around for him during the blind auditions for The Voice?

They never respond well to monotones.

[Chicog]

Bryan Adams is following The Boss!

I hope many more will!

Of course they will. Protecting toilet rights for transvestites is such an earth-shakingly important issue.

Exactly!

And if you and the "likers" of your not very intelligent post really think, that this is the problem at hand, I guess you deserve Ted Nugent, every day of the week!

I "liked" the post because it is true. Complain to the forum staff if you have a problem with the "like" function.

What is a Ted Nugent?

It is a well known republican gun nut and friend of Alex Jones.

[Chicog]

And just another reminder that more Republican politicians have been arrested for immoral conduct in toilets than transgender people.

I think this law needs rewriting, since it doesn't seem to mention them.

[pedro01]

Fake red herring issue.

There is no movement to force religious cake bakers to bake obscene baked products for ANYONE!

Never has been. Never will be.

Geez, the twisted games the opponents of GLBT civil rights play are seemingly endless.

Some bakeries do erotic baked products and it's fair to assume none of them are religious fundamentalists of ANY flavor.

Can you really imagine a bakery that does penis cakes discriminating based on the sexuality of the customers? Come on now.

Duh. Double Duh.

Next ...

Nobody said they were, you klutz.

It was merely injecting a little humor into the debate.

What IS happening is that homosexual couples are suing cake shops for not making cakes with (for example) two male figurines on and "well done Ben and Joe" on them.

Now - the reason you should be allowed to refuse to make the cake is simple. The act of making the cake is participating in the event. It's not refusing someone because you don't like them. It's refusing to participate. There is a huge difference.

If you are devoutly religious and your religion tells you that homosexuality is a mortal sin (something I do not believe), then you should not be forced to participate in any way in a homosexual event.

It is not about prejudice it is about forced participation.

The LGBT community very much has it in for Christians. Muslims get a free pass for some reason, so we don't see LGBT activists trawling southern states looking for Mulsim bakeries to sue. Christians are very much a target.

At the end of the day, I'll bake the bloody cakes. They won't look much - but these Christians have their beliefs. I don't agree - but honestly, it's hardly saving the world forcing them to cook your dick-cake is it?

Deriving humour from debasing other people's dignity. Very funny. Perhaps you should do this in the jokes section or the gay forum and see what response you get. It was and is not very amusing in the context of a political discussion.

Oooh look - a regressive liberal telling someone what they should and shouldn't say.

How predictable.

What's next? Name calling?

[pedro01]

And then there are people who are getting tired of the small special interest groups who insist that they are entitled to special treatment. Enough already.

Well that's your problem. The rest of us don't care. Deal with it.

No, not a problem at all. The problem lies with the 5% of the population that thinks the other 95% should give in to their demands, lol. Asinine outlook on life, really.

5%? Is this the gay marriage thread? I think the trans part is much closer to 0.005%.

I have no problem with gay marriage but at the time opponents were saying that demanding marriage was only the beginning and that the next demand would be for people to marry pets or children. After all, these people are born with those desires, they aren't learned...true?

Well, we are now in the middle of that next demand, toilet rights. I'm curious what the demand after this one will be.

Springsteen & Bryan Adams - looking for some added publicity? Or an excuse not to play a gig? They could certainly do more using the stage as a pulpit rather than not going at all.

Yes, those pesky gays. Even worse than your father's generation of uppity blacks. All that marching and demanding their rights. Well with the Scalia SCOTUS gutting the Voter Rights Act, the good ol' boys are putting a stop to them. Same with the gays right. They got the marriage ruling but they won't stop. All the fears will come true. People will want to marry their dogs or their lawn-mowers.

This nonsense was nonsense back during the marriage equality discussions. It remains nonsense now. It merely serves to trivialise the issue of respecting the dignity of LGBT people. So what if the numbers are small. You have no grounds for assuming any percentage. You are just pulling that number out of your bum. In any case, it has no relevance.

Where does it stop? Easy, when minorities have equal protection under the law as any other person. When minorities cannot be discriminated against in terms of access to public facilities or public funds on the basis of their minority status. Not really such a big concept to get your head around. And not related at all to the promotion of bestiality or necrophilia or any other non conformist sexual practice. Just equality under the law. In such an environment, people who promote discrimination will have to face consequences. I look forward to that day.

With the issue of transgender toilet access, transgenders already have equal rights.

Men use mens toilets and women use theirs.

What is being requested is special treatment over and above everyone else.

It's not even TGs campaigning for these rights. It is regressive liberals who believe that gender us a social construct and that masculinity is bad, that all males are potential rapists and murderers.

Their agenda is de-masculisation of society. Spell checkers will have a field day there.

[lostboy]

Fake red herring issue.

There is no movement to force religious cake bakers to bake obscene baked products for ANYONE!

Never has been. Never will be.

Geez, the twisted games the opponents of GLBT civil rights play are seemingly endless.

Some bakeries do erotic baked products and it's fair to assume none of them are religious fundamentalists of ANY flavor.

Can you really imagine a bakery that does penis cakes discriminating based on the sexuality of the customers? Come on now.

Duh. Double Duh.

Next ...

Nobody said they were, you klutz.

It was merely injecting a little humor into the debate.

What IS happening is that homosexual couples are suing cake shops for not making cakes with (for example) two male figurines on and "well done Ben and Joe" on them.

Now - the reason you should be allowed to refuse to make the cake is simple. The act of making the cake is participating in the event. It's not refusing someone because you don't like them. It's refusing to participate. There is a huge difference.

If you are devoutly religious and your religion tells you that homosexuality is a mortal sin (something I do not believe), then you should not be forced to participate in any way in a homosexual event.

It is not about prejudice it is about forced participation.

The LGBT community very much has it in for Christians. Muslims get a free pass for some reason, so we don't see LGBT activists trawling southern states looking for Mulsim bakeries to sue. Christians are very much a target.

At the end of the day, I'll bake the bloody cakes. They won't look much - but these Christians have their beliefs. I don't agree - but honestly, it's hardly saving the world forcing them to cook your dick-cake is it?

Deriving humour from debasing other people's dignity. Very funny. Perhaps you should do this in the jokes section or the gay forum and see what response you get. It was and is not very amusing in the context of a political discussion.

Oooh look - a regressive liberal telling someone what they should and shouldn't say.

How predictable.

What's next? Name calling?

I am gay. I also have a sense of humour. I banter and crack funnies with my friends and work colleagues and sometimes people I hardly know. This is not the case here. It is political speech. Your trivialisation of the issue and stereotyping of a minority was not humorous. It was offensive. I am also anti-religious and an atheist. This is not a function of my sexual orientation. My objection to religious pro-discrimination laws is again a political statement and not related to spirituality at all.

My sexual orientation should not matter at all (in a just world) but the fact that I have to admit that in response to your boorishness is telling. No doubt you think yourself fair minded because you have gay friends? Are you really sure what they think of you?

You believe that anti PC means you can say any stupid thing that you want? Well go to any African American and use the N word. Nothing regressive or liberal about that observation. It is a matter of cultural power. But I guess you are just being humorous here also?

How predictable.

Edited April 12, 2016 by lostboy

[up2u2]

Noted Brian Adams has cancelled his show as well. Also the Basketball team has requested they not play there. If people of NC want to live in the dark ages maybe unplug them from the power grid and disconnect their Internet connection as well.

[Chicog]

Perhaps when the population of NC see companies cancelling projects and pulling out of their state, taking jobs with them, they will get rid of these petty little jobsworths who like imposing their religious poison on everyone else.

[pedro01]

Nobody said they were, you klutz.

It was merely injecting a little humor into the debate.

What IS happening is that homosexual couples are suing cake shops for not making cakes with (for example) two male figurines on and "well done Ben and Joe" on them.

Now - the reason you should be allowed to refuse to make the cake is simple. The act of making the cake is participating in the event. It's not refusing someone because you don't like them. It's refusing to participate. There is a huge difference.

If you are devoutly religious and your religion tells you that homosexuality is a mortal sin (something I do not believe), then you should not be forced to participate in any way in a homosexual event.

It is not about prejudice it is about forced participation.

The LGBT community very much has it in for Christians. Muslims get a free pass for some reason, so we don't see LGBT activists trawling southern states looking for Mulsim bakeries to sue. Christians are very much a target.

At the end of the day, I'll bake the bloody cakes. They won't look much - but these Christians have their beliefs. I don't agree - but honestly, it's hardly saving the world forcing them to cook your dick-cake is it?

Deriving humour from debasing other people's dignity. Very funny. Perhaps you should do this in the jokes section or the gay forum and see what response you get. It was and is not very amusing in the context of a political discussion.

Oooh look - a regressive liberal telling someone what they should and shouldn't say.

How predictable.

What's next? Name calling?

I am gay. I also have a sense of humour. I banter and crack funnies with my friends and work colleagues and sometimes people I hardly know. This is not the case here. It is political speech. Your trivialisation of the issue and stereotyping of a minority was not humorous. It was offensive. I am also anti-religious and an atheist. This is not a function of my sexual orientation. My objection to religious pro-discrimination laws is again a political statement and not related to spirituality at all.

My sexual orientation should not matter at all (in a just world) but the fact that I have to admit that in response to your boorishness is telling. No doubt you think yourself fair minded because you have gay friends? Are you really sure what they think of you?

You believe that anti PC means you can say any stupid thing that you want? Well go to any African American and use the N word. Nothing regressive or liberal about that observation. It is a matter of cultural power. But I guess you are just being humorous here also?

How predictable.

Many of these issue are trivial.

But regressive liberals like you are typical in many ways:

- you like to tell people what they can and cannot say

- you are anti-religion

- you pretend to be offended at a whim

You have only fallen short in not calling me a homophobe - but that is surely around the corner, as is a non-Christian cock-cake shop.

There is no need to force people to participate in gay events. Yet that is what LGBT activists try to do. They go beyond anti-discrimination to forcing people to participate and that is where the line needs to be drawn.

So - if your house is also your hotel, and you are deeply religious - be it Muslim or Christian, then you should be able to refuse gay couples. Similarly, if you make wedding dresses, you should be able to refuse to make a wedding dress for a transgender in a same sex ceremony. Otherwise you are being forced to participate in something you truly believe to be sinful.

And of course, this is why LGBT activists trawl the earth looking for Christian bakeries, hotels looking for the tiny minority that refuse their business so that they can make a big thing about it. They are not content to live and let live, they must force every last person on the planet to actively support their sexuality as opposed to ignoring it.

[lostboy]

Oooh look - a regressive liberal telling someone what they should and shouldn't say.

How predictable.

What's next? Name calling?

I am gay. I also have a sense of humour. I banter and crack funnies with my friends and work colleagues and sometimes people I hardly know. This is not the case here. It is political speech. Your trivialisation of the issue and stereotyping of a minority was not humorous. It was offensive. I am also anti-religious and an atheist. This is not a function of my sexual orientation. My objection to religious pro-discrimination laws is again a political statement and not related to spirituality at all.

My sexual orientation should not matter at all (in a just world) but the fact that I have to admit that in response to your boorishness is telling. No doubt you think yourself fair minded because you have gay friends? Are you really sure what they think of you?

You believe that anti PC means you can say any stupid thing that you want? Well go to any African American and use the N word. Nothing regressive or liberal about that observation. It is a matter of cultural power. But I guess you are just being humorous here also?

How predictable.

Many of these issue are trivial.

But regressive liberals like you are typical in many ways:

- you like to tell people what they can and cannot say

- you are anti-religion

- you pretend to be offended at a whim

You have only fallen short in not calling me a homophobe - but that is surely around the corner, as is a non-Christian cock-cake shop.

There is no need to force people to participate in gay events. Yet that is what LGBT activists try to do. They go beyond anti-discrimination to forcing people to participate and that is where the line needs to be drawn.

So - if your house is also your hotel, and you are deeply religious - be it Muslim or Christian, then you should be able to refuse gay couples. Similarly, if you make wedding dresses, you should be able to refuse to make a wedding dress for a transgender in a same sex ceremony. Otherwise you are being forced to participate in something you truly believe to be sinful.

And of course, this is why LGBT activists trawl the earth looking for Christian bakeries, hotels looking for the tiny minority that refuse their business so that they can make a big thing about it. They are not content to live and let live, they must force every last person on the planet to actively support their sexuality as opposed to ignoring it.

I am trying to work out which bigotry is operating here. So much bigotry characterise your postings but I cannot work out which bigotry you feel gives you the right of personal abuse. Delivering personal abuse, by the way, at the same time as accusing your antagonist of being about to use personal abuse. I think this is clearly the case of not being able to fix stupid. Trying to have a dialogue with someone who is basically arguing with themselves and projecting what others will say is pretty much a waste of time.

BTW I call BS on the notion that you have any gay friends.

You may keep your assumptions about me and your quite trivial examples of 'religious freedom' for dress makers and bakers. Religious people believing that a gay person is sinful for being gay. Well no point at all responding to that kind of ignorance and Sunday School mentality. Good luck with your Gay friends and your fairy tales.

[mopar71]

The LGBT community very much has it in for Christians. Muslims get a free pass for some reason, so we don't see LGBT activists trawling southern states looking for Mulsim bakeries to sue. Christians are very much a target.

HIDDEN CAMERA: Gay Wedding Cake At Muslim Bakeries

http://louderwithcrowder.com/hidden-camera-gay-wedding-cake-at-muslim-bakery/#.Vw3Dzfl9600

Christians are also less unlikely to thrown the GBLT off a roof...

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/isis-persecution-gay-men-murder-lgbt-muslim-society/

[mopar71]

Dear Gay-Trans Bullies: Sorry, the Rest of Us Still Have Rights…

...You are the definition of intolerance. You embody hate. You see someone with a traditional lifestyle, and rather than taking your business elsewhere, rather than going on with your gay or trans life, you attack them. You harass them. You force your will, your way of life upon them. “Tolerance” isn’t enough for you. You want full compliance, full acceptance or HATE BE UPON THOSE WHO DISAGREE.

http://louderwithcrowder.com/dear-gay-trans-bully-pulpit-sorry-the-rest-of-us-still-have-rights/#ixzz45g0cqJmz

[lostboy]

Dear Gay-Trans Bullies: Sorry, the Rest of Us Still Have Rights…

...You are the definition of intolerance. You embody hate. You see someone with a traditional lifestyle, and rather than taking your business elsewhere, rather than going on with your gay or trans life, you attack them. You harass them. You force your will, your way of life upon them. “Tolerance” isn’t enough for you. You want full compliance, full acceptance or HATE BE UPON THOSE WHO DISAGREE.

http://louderwithcrowder.com/dear-gay-trans-bully-pulpit-sorry-the-rest-of-us-still-have-rights/#ixzz45g0cqJmz

I am sure you are proud of yourself promoting hatred against minorities. Why is it not surprising that your link takes us to a site with a picture of Hitler on it?

You don't want to be branded a bigot? Then don't say bigoted things. Don't promote bigotry. Respect diversity. The whole Straight White Right Victim thing is pretty infantile. Maybe time for you white boys to man up.

[Ulysses G.]

Dear Gay-Trans Bullies: Sorry, the Rest of Us Still Have Rights

...You are the definition of intolerance. You embody hate. You see someone with a traditional lifestyle, and rather than taking your business elsewhere, rather than going on with your gay or trans life, you attack them. You harass them. You force your will, your way of life upon them. Tolerance isnt enough for you. You want full compliance, full acceptance or HATE BE UPON THOSE WHO DISAGREE.

http://louderwithcrowder.com/dear-gay-trans-bully-pulpit-sorry-the-rest-of-us-still-have-rights/#ixzz45g0cqJmz

Indeed. I had no doubt that the gay marriage issue would just be the beginning of the bizarre demands. I saw how gay politics worked when I lived in San Francisco.

Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.

― William F. Buckley Jr.

[pedro01]

Oooh look - a regressive liberal telling someone what they should and shouldn't say.

How predictable.

What's next? Name calling?

I am gay. I also have a sense of humour. I banter and crack funnies with my friends and work colleagues and sometimes people I hardly know. This is not the case here. It is political speech. Your trivialisation of the issue and stereotyping of a minority was not humorous. It was offensive. I am also anti-religious and an atheist. This is not a function of my sexual orientation. My objection to religious pro-discrimination laws is again a political statement and not related to spirituality at all.

My sexual orientation should not matter at all (in a just world) but the fact that I have to admit that in response to your boorishness is telling. No doubt you think yourself fair minded because you have gay friends? Are you really sure what they think of you?

You believe that anti PC means you can say any stupid thing that you want? Well go to any African American and use the N word. Nothing regressive or liberal about that observation. It is a matter of cultural power. But I guess you are just being humorous here also?

How predictable.

Many of these issue are trivial.

But regressive liberals like you are typical in many ways:

- you like to tell people what they can and cannot say

- you are anti-religion

- you pretend to be offended at a whim

You have only fallen short in not calling me a homophobe - but that is surely around the corner, as is a non-Christian cock-cake shop.

There is no need to force people to participate in gay events. Yet that is what LGBT activists try to do. They go beyond anti-discrimination to forcing people to participate and that is where the line needs to be drawn.

So - if your house is also your hotel, and you are deeply religious - be it Muslim or Christian, then you should be able to refuse gay couples. Similarly, if you make wedding dresses, you should be able to refuse to make a wedding dress for a transgender in a same sex ceremony. Otherwise you are being forced to participate in something you truly believe to be sinful.

And of course, this is why LGBT activists trawl the earth looking for Christian bakeries, hotels looking for the tiny minority that refuse their business so that they can make a big thing about it. They are not content to live and let live, they must force every last person on the planet to actively support their sexuality as opposed to ignoring it.

I am trying to work out which bigotry is operating here. So much bigotry characterise your postings but I cannot work out which bigotry you feel gives you the right of personal abuse. Delivering personal abuse, by the way, at the same time as accusing your antagonist of being about to use personal abuse. I think this is clearly the case of not being able to fix stupid. Trying to have a dialogue with someone who is basically arguing with themselves and projecting what others will say is pretty much a waste of time.

BTW I call BS on the notion that you have any gay friends.

You may keep your assumptions about me and your quite trivial examples of 'religious freedom' for dress makers and bakers. Religious people believing that a gay person is sinful for being gay. Well no point at all responding to that kind of ignorance and Sunday School mentality. Good luck with your Gay friends and your fairy tales.

You cant figure out the nature of my bigotry?

How quaint.

The liberal regressive cant argue the point, so needs to fall back to accusing his 'opponent' of bigotry.

Yet there is no bigotry present. No homophobia, no racism.

So in absence of bigotry he sits there scratching his head till he just ups and asks what sort if bigot he is dealing with.

Idiotophobia - strange you didnt spot it...