Obama, whom Time Magazine described as the Gay president, refused to defend DOMA and now America has officially become a Sodom and Gomorrah country.  

 

Thousands of years of tradition in human civilization has been thrown in the trash, and wickedness now becomes our foundation. Man with man and woman with woman is the greatest abomination imaginable.

 

Franklin Graham says U.S. tempting God’s judgment with marriage ruling

 

 

 

 

Original Post
Originally Posted by Jay Bharrat:

Those are 2 separate issues.  I don't put gays and blacks in the same sentence - that is wickedness.  Sodomy and race are apples and oranges.

The problem with discrimination is who is to say what is discriminatory or not, what discrimination is allowed or not, and where the line is drawn, other than the victims themselves, who, being discriminated against, have little or no voice.

You must have a good idea what white people thought, said and did when slavery was abolished, and when all the other legislation were passed in favor of non-whites.

It's amusing to see people quote from the bible on matters that affect everyone else, including those who do not believe in the bible.

This is not about discrimination.  It's about sodomy parading as "human rights."

 

Sodomy has been seen as a mental disorder for a long time.

 

Now the homos have all rights and normal people have to be afraid to say homo is sin.

 

God bless Obama, the worst US president ever.

Jay,

Are you complaining about your right to discriminate against people of your choosing being abrogated?

And that people are beginning to shun people who practice discrimination?

Why is it bad again when people are afraid to discriminate?
Originally Posted by Jay Bharrat:

This is not about discrimination.  It's about sodomy parading as "human rights."

 

Sodomy has been seen as a mental disorder for a long time.

 

Now the homos have all rights and normal people have to be afraid to say homo is sin.

 

God bless Obama, the worst US president ever.

How is depriving a real, active sector of the population, that has existed from the dawn of time, of rights, not discriminatory?

While screaming about sodomy, you're probably the type dreaming to see two women together, without realizing it's the same homosexuality.

Black people had no rights for a long time. Should we have maintained that status quo?

The issue has less to do with Obama and more to do with social evolution.

Yes Cobra,

Aunty Rena's son is very gay. And has been so his whole life. Not many men in this family have no wife or sweethoman especially in middle age. Also no one else wears ladies purses like he does. So for the foregoing reasons, we've all concluded he was gay before it became fashionable. No one makes an issue of it because it's none of our business.

Anta:

 

I don't put gays and blacks in the same sentence - that is wickedness.  Sodomy and race are apples and oranges.

 

Don't attach the black struggles as similar to the "fight" for gay "rights." That's wickedness.

Originally Posted by Jay Bharrat:

Anta:

 

I don't put gays and blacks in the same sentence - that is wickedness.  Sodomy and race are apples and oranges.

 

Don't attach the black struggles as similar to the "fight" for gay "rights." That's wickedness.

Whether you put gays and blacks in the same sentence or not does not make it any less discriminatory. You are refusing to accept homosexuals are human in the same fashion as many people refuse to accept blacks are human.

Regardless of your opinion, or my opinion, they are people with the same rights to do what everyone else does.

Jay,

You obviously know nothing about American history if you think today is "the darkest day in American history."

I could offhand think of at least a dozen darker days in American history. Like Washington losing NYC to the British, the burning of Washington DC in 1814, the Dred Scott decision declaring Blacks cannot be citizens and extending slavery, any battle of the Civil War like Antietam or Gettyburg, the premature end of Reconstruction, Plessy v Ferguson 1898, the Spanish-American War, he treatment of Black soldiers at anytime prior to the 1980s.

Should I go on? Or can you wiki these things for yourself?
Originally Posted by Jay Bharrat:

Anta:

 

I don't put gays and blacks in the same sentence - that is wickedness.  Sodomy and race are apples and oranges.

 

Don't attach the black struggles as similar to the "fight" for gay "rights." That's wickedness.

Gay people are human beings. They are endowed with rights on being born into the society no different than anyone else. No one should give a damn what they do among themselves. As long as it is not your business it should matter not. You have no right to peek into their bedrooms.

What big dummy said and did to get votes

 

Twenty four hours later, the court was back at it -- legalizing same sex marriage nationwide. Obama was a late-arriver on the issue, without question. He supported only civil unions during his 2008 campaign and it wasn't until May 2012 -- as his race for reelection neared -- that Obama finally came out in support of gay marriage.

But even prior to Obama's own public statement in support of same-sex marriage, his administration was taking actions that led to Friday's ruling. In 2011, the Justice Department announced it would no longer defend the Defense of Marriage Act; in June 2013, the Court struck DOMA -- a decision that set things in motion for Friday's ruling.

 
Obama on marriage ruling: 'America should be very proud'(2:34)
President Obama lauded the Supreme Court ruling in favor of same-sex marriage at the White House Friday. Here are key moments from President Obama's speech. (AP)

And Obama carved out time in his second inaugural address to express his belief that allowing gays and lesbians to marry was part of the greater American movement to freedom and equality. "Our journey is not complete until our gay brothers and sisters are treated like anyone else under the law for if we are truly created equal, then surely the love we commit to one another must be equal as well," he said that day.

On Friday, in remarks delivered after the marriage ruling, Obama returned to that theme. "Today we can say, in no uncertain terms, that we have made our union a little more perfect," Obama declared.

Originally Posted by Jay Bharrat:

What big dummy said and did to get votes

 

Twenty four hours later, the court was back at it -- legalizing same sex marriage nationwide. Obama was a late-arriver on the issue, without question. He supported only civil unions during his 2008 campaign and it wasn't until May 2012 -- as his race for reelection neared -- that Obama finally came out in support of gay marriage.

 

But even prior to Obama's own public statement in support of same-sex marriage, his administration was taking actions that led to Friday's ruling. In 2011, the Justice Department announced it would no longer defend the Defense of Marriage Act; in June 2013, the Court struck DOMA -- a decision that set things in motion for Friday's ruling.

 
Obama on marriage ruling: 'America should be very proud'(2:34)
President Obama lauded the Supreme Court ruling in favor of same-sex marriage at the White House Friday. Here are key moments from President Obama's speech. (AP)
 

And Obama carved out time in his second inaugural address to express his belief that allowing gays and lesbians to marry was part of the greater American movement to freedom and equality. "Our journey is not complete until our gay brothers and sisters are treated like anyone else under the law for if we are truly created equal, then surely the love we commit to one another must be equal as well," he said that day.

 

On Friday, in remarks delivered after the marriage ruling, Obama returned to that theme. "Today we can say, in no uncertain terms, that we have made our union a little more perfect," Obama declared.

Like most of us from cultures with in build homophobia ( in our ignorance we ignored that these people exist, has existed and will continue to exist and we even knew some of them and they were family we loved) one has to grow into the idea, the sound idea, that we cannot deny that which should be a natural right. Gay people, minus their sexuality, are humans who possess all that we take for granted and would die to protect. They are not going to go away if we ignore them or marginalize them.

 

Good societies recognize who they are and see to it what is natural to them in terms of rights are protected. Inheritance rights, the right to make decisions for ones significant other when they cannot or unable to do so, the rights to access government services etc are not reliant on ones religious orientation.

 

Religious people take it for granted that their religion does not intervene as a basis for denial of rights. Even Satanists are protected! In many nations and historically in the west, religion was one of those basis for denying rights. We are over that. We should be over this and I am glad we are.

 

By the way, what makes Obama a dummy? What metric are using to make that call? He has made it to the presidency of the greatest nation on the planet and contrary to any prevailing notions, fools do not get that far.

Obummer is a real supporter of sodomy and buggery.

 

The colors illuminated the north side of the White House

(WASHINGTON)—The White House is lit up in rainbow colors in commemoration of the Supreme Court’s ruling to legalize same-sex marriage.

Gay and lesbian couples in Washington and across the nation are celebrating Friday’s ruling, which will put an end to same-sex marriage bans in the 14 states that still maintain them.

President Barack Obama said earlier Friday that the court ruling has “made our union a little more perfect.”

The colors illuminated the north side of the White House as Obama returned Friday evening from Charleston, South Carolina, where he delivered the eulogy of the funeral of Clementa Pinckney, one of nine people murdered in the massacre at the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church last week.

white-house-rainbow

Attachments

Photos (1)
Originally Posted by Jay Bharrat:

Obummer is a real supporter of sodomy and buggery.

 

The support is the right for people do live as t heir god made t hem not for bilious impressions of impoverish minds to imprint that venom on their lives and deny them what is their due. A gay, bi, or transgender individual is a human first. Personhood and the rights therein emanates from that not from some bilious,sanctimonious religiosity.

 

 

The one thing Obummer, who calls himself first black president (and that's a lie because he is a bi-racial man), is that he made the great moral bastion USA a Sodom and Gomorrah country.

 

It's one thing to have tolerance policies, but another when you go out of your way to destroy centuries of good family values practices, and enshrine wickedness as civil rights.

Why do you have so much hate? let's live and allow others to live and love. Take note you will see more gays coming out of the closet because of this ruling. Gays are the most calm ,understanding and less violent people, they don't spread gay on strait people, they are not rapist.They work  and pay taxes like you, so why not allow them the freedom to live a happy life. The same way you accept whites and blacks , do yourself a favor and accept GAYS, they are here to stay. Stop discriminate.Stop hate.

Originally Posted by Jay Bharrat:

The one thing Obummer, who calls himself first black president (and that's a lie because he is a bi-racial man), is that he made the great moral bastion USA a Sodom and Gomorrah country.

 

It's one thing to have tolerance policies, but another when you go out of your way to destroy centuries of good family values practices, and enshrine wickedness as civil rights.

First of all Biblical Sodom And Gomorrah were not dens of inequities because of gay people but as the torah stated because they were populated by envious, selfish and uncharitable people.

 

The supposed centuries of family value is mythical. Marriage was a contract to own property; the woman, and to cement political and economic interest. History hardly ever documented "family values" as we know it as the reason for people to marry.

 

Even so, centuries of gay people served the world proudly and without chastisement until recently. Michelangelo, Socrates, Plato, many of the roman generals we admire for strategy and rule...in modern times we have people like Turin staring you in the face for their sheer brilliance and not because they were gay.

 

It is us in the society who reviled them and intruded in their lives not they on us. This recent ruling means we keep our prejudices where is should be, to ourselves.

 

Biracial is just a term with no significance except to the person. Society calls him black as it will call you or any other person of color since blackness is not a feature  identifiable by any other metric other than  our prejudicial minds

Originally Posted by Jay Bharrat:

When you remove gender differences, you destroy the family and social fabric which forms the foundation of society.

 

Don't drink the cool aid.

None of us have the ability to remove gender differences. We however need to recognize there is more to the term than is traditional so it is merely improving on the understanding of the diversity in the human community.

 

Humans always had slave cultures in the except until recently. These always acted to destroy family. The Arabs took some 14 million black Africans mainly women. The men they took they castrated. Today, Arab cultures still have very few black people since they never cared to foster family groups and slaves never replenished themselves.

 

Replacement of slaves on Brazil was very cheap. They saw it as uneconomical to rear a slave culture that cared for children. It was an added cost they could avoid. Even in North America where replacement costs were expensive it was still not conducive to institutionalize families so kids were often sold off rather than kept and slave families rear.

 

Indentureship never cared for family unit either since they ratio of men to women to the colonies were some 20 to 1 Your thesis that Gay people will destroy family is weak. The family did not die with slavery or indenture ship so gay people will not kill it

Originally Posted by Shaitaan:
 All because gays were allowed to get married to other gays.

So here is where you get it wrong.

 

It's not about gays marrying gays.  It's about the removal of gender differences in the whole of society.

 

So Bruce Jenner is a macho man one day, and next day he is a woman, and we should not laugh.  That's normal?

 

Gays will now sue for anything they perceive as slighting them.  Like Pat Sajak had a man contestant on Wheel of Fortune who said he was getting married soon.  Sajak asked him who was the lucky girl?  Later, he had to make a public apology, because the man was homo and was offended.

 

The homo movement has become an in-your-face, pounce-on-you movement.Normal people are scared to say anything and the homos are on parade. Every TV show now promotes the homo agenda, and try to sanitize it as some human rights thing.  So don't drink the cool aid.  That's a wicked, wicked thing they did yesterday.

Originally Posted by Jay Bharrat:
Originally Posted by Shaitaan:
 All because gays were allowed to get married to other gays.

So here is where you get it wrong.

 

It's not about gays marrying gays.  It's about the removal of gender differences in the whole of society.

 

So Bruce Jenner is a macho man one day, and next day he is a woman, and we should not laugh.  That's normal?

 

Gays will now sue for anything they perceive as slighting them.  Like Pat Sajak had a man contestant on Wheel of Fortune who said he was getting married soon.  Sajak asked him who was the lucky girl?  Later, he had to make a public apology, because the man was homo and was offended.

 

The homo movement has become an in-your-face, pounce-on-you movement.Normal people are scared to say anything and the homos are on parade. Every TV show now promotes the homo agenda, and try to sanitize it as some human rights thing.  So don't drink the cool aid.  That's a wicked, wicked thing they did yesterday.

 Gender differences are not ad hoc concoctions. They are a consequence of biology.  Jenner was "normalized" per his biology.  Normal people include gays, bi and transgender people. It has always been the case. Rights in society are not hierarchical. One merely has to be a human being to tap into the full compendium of rights available. When sentient robots or cybernetic humans come on the scene they will enjoy those rights.

Jay,

The ruling yesterday was about the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and the Due Process Clause of the same.

That's all. The Bill of Rights was initially criticized because of the inherent problem in enumerating the rights of the people. If you list rights then some idiot down the road will get the idea that people only have rights that are listed. No Bill of Rights captures all the rights of the people. Unless something is specifically denied to us as part of a grant of power to the government then it is reserved to the people. As in its not surrendered.

So in the future, constitutional law especially in the area of fundamental rights of citizens will continue to seem to be "expanding" when in reality we are only recognizing the inherent rights of people and applying them to different situations.

Gays have the same rights as you and I. In every way you can imagine that. There is no way that one person in society can hold a right that another person is disqualified from holding and enjoying without the due process of law having properly deprived him of said right.

I take that back.  That's a dark shame for your family to bear.  Don't wish it on anyone.

 

But this is what you get when the gays take over:

 

STATE & LOCAL 

Newspaper faces firestorm after attempted crack-down on anti-gay marriage op-eds

 
NOW PLAYING

Same-sex ruling raises questions for religious institutions

 

A Pennsylvania newspaper is facing a firestorm of criticism after the editorial board said it would "very strictly limit" op-eds and letters against same-sex marriage on the heels of Friday's historic Supreme Court ruling. 

PennLive/The Patriot-News in Harrisburg has issued a string of statements on its opinion page policies since the ruling -- which legalized gay marriage nationwide -- and by Saturday morning, appeared to have softened its op-ed restrictions on the subject.  

But the newspaper initially took a hard-line stance. Editorial Page Editor John Micek tweeted shortly after the ruling that the newspaper would "no longer accept" or print op-eds and letters to the editor in opposition to same-sex marriage. 

He then tweeted:


 

More on this...

  • How gay marriage ruling will impact America

The editorial board then began to dial back, in the face of apparent criticism from readers. 

A newspaper editorial published online was updated Friday afternoon to clarify the board's op-ed policy. In the editorial, which cheered the decision and said majority opinion author Justice Anthony Kennedy "nailed it," the board issued the following statement: 

"As a result of Friday's ruling, PennLive/The Patriot-News will very strictly limit op-Eds and letters to the editor in opposition to same-sex marriage. 

"These unions are now the law of the land. And we will not publish such letters and op-Eds any more than we would publish those that are racist, sexist or anti-Semitic. 

"We will, however, for a limited time, accept letters and op-Eds on the high court's decision and its legal merits." 

Micek also tweeted: 

 

This apparently did not satisfy readers, who posted a cascade of critical comments online. One read: "Clearly, PennLive's policy is not to limit criticism of settled law, but rather to limit criticism of settled law that its editors like." 

Saying he had been inundated with critical emails and phone calls, Micek then apologized in a column on Saturday morning -- saying they had made a "very genuine attempt at fostering a civil discussion" but recognize that "there are people of good conscience and of goodwill who will disagree with Friday's high court ruling." 

He wrote: "They are, and always will be, welcome in these pages, along with all others of goodwill, who seek to have an intelligent and reasoned debate on the issues of the day. These pages, I remind myself finally, belong to the people of Central Pennsylvania. I'm a conduit, I recognize, for them to share their views and to have the arguments that make us better as a people. And all views are -- and always will be -- welcome." 

Micek stressed that nobody at the newspaper is an opponent of the First Amendment. But he stressed that a civil debate is important, and the opinion page would draw the line when it comes to offensive speech. 

"More than once yesterday I was referred to as 'f****t-lover,' among other slurs," he wrote. "And that's the point that I was trying to make with our statement: We will not publish such slurs any more than we would publish racist, sexist or anti-Semitic speech. There are ways to intelligently discuss an issue. The use of playground insults is not among them. And they are not welcome at PennLive/The Patriot-News."

Add Reply

Likes (0)
Post


×
×
×
×
×