MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!
| Started By | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
shiza h minelli |
|||
|
Yay... Teebag is actually putting time and effort into thinking about me when I am not here...
MISSION ACCOMPLISHED! |
|||
Penelope McBagpipe |
|||
|
I cant decide if Teeanday is the most annoying or mentally unbalanced poster I've ever seen here.
So I'll go with both. |
|||
airshowpilot |
|||
|
pp what happened to your laser beam?
|
|||
Teeanday |
|||
|
poor delusional shiza
took you 3 days to get over my last post and now it took less than an hour to respond today at least you stopped calling people a bigot yippeeeeeeee btw give up the avatar, the file is still too large and no one can see it |
|||
Toddomination |
|||
Screerider wrote:That's a nice ideal but unfortunately education simply isn't enough. Especially when there are political institutions and mores weighted towards a majority to begin with. This is invisible to those who are born into privilege though. Just as Affirmative Action is not institutionalized racism, the recognition of hate crimes geared towards a particular group of people has a purpose. That is to help offset a preexisting inequality that cannot be solved by nice thoughts and spreading the word alone. After all even those who aren't homophobic shoot down legislation that would provide equality like gay marriage. Why? A lot of people just don't care and they are have their own politics and values. That's when intervention is needed. |
|||
Screerider |
|||
|
Villainizing people is a great way to get them on your side. And setting up minorities on some sort of protected pedestal with fast track benefits isn't
going to work either. It's making the opposite of the point you're trying to make.
And you don't know if education is enough or not. Perhaps the problem is AA and Hate Crimes are educating the populace that minorities don't want to be equal at all. Remove the bias and let a level playing field be where the talks can begin. |
|||
Toddomination |
|||
|
Who's villainizing anybody?
The point of helping minorities isn't to give them a protected pedestal or give them fast track benefits for the sake of doing so. It's to help offset the inherent inequities and flaws of the system. Yes we know education isn't enough. Knowing something will change some minds but most people will hear it and not care or take action anyways. History is littered with examples. You can only talk about level playing fields when the playing field is already level--and it's not. Keeping things the same is tolerating inequality. Most people are okay with inequality because it doesn't affect them personally. |
|||
Screerider |
|||
|
By labeling those who are intolerant with the "Hate" label is what I meant by villainizing. Even those who aren't committing crimes based on
their intolerance are now "Haterz".
And by level playing field, I'm talking the "rules" of the game, i.e. the laws of the government. By promoting one side as having special abilities in a game is not level. Everyone appreciates the game better when the rules are fair. |
|||
Teeanday |
|||
|
tried to tell you Obama was a poor pick for a champion:
When President Obama helps Governor Deval Patrick raise campaign cash Friday in Boston, he'll be met with gay rights protestors outside the Westin Copley hotel. Join The Impact MA announced today that the protest will focus on the "don't ask, don't tell" policy that bans gays from serving openly in the military and the Defense of Marriage Act, which defines marriage as between a man and a woman. Obama campaigned on overturning both, but has taken little substantive action -- much to the consternation of gay rights advocates -- as he focuses on health care and other issues. The advocates are urging the president to sign an executive order to immediately halt the discharge of openly gay service members as the administration works with the Pentagon and Congress to reverse the law. They are also calling on Obama to stop defending the marriage law in court, as it is in a
Massachusetts case.
|
|||
RazorrzzEdge |
|||
|
Yeah, Obama's been fucking pitiful when it comes to gay rights. In his election e-mail blast last week, he didn't even bother to urge Washington
residents to vote in favor of Referendum 71 - Washington's "everything but marriage" statute that would've expanded domestic partnership
rights of gay couples to include more of those enjoyed by married couples.
I mean...I understand why he didn't want to support Maine's No on 1 effort since politicians on both sides are fucking chickenshits about the gay marriage third rail, but why wouldn't he support ref. 71? Besides being a fucking chickenshit, that is. |
|||
RazorrzzEdge |
|||
Screerider wrote:This is what I constantly tell dumb faggos who don't get how the game is played. "But they are bigoted little shits - they're taking away our RIGHTS! THEY DESERVE IT!" *facepalm* |
|||
Screerider |
|||
|
Inherent "flaw" in the system: being able to hire whoever you want, rather than being forced to hire a woman, a black, a gay, and a guy with no legs,
in order to legally run your business.
Inherent "flaw" in the system: the same crime carries the same range of penalties for all, rather than rapist A gets 15-20 years, rapist B gets 15-20 years, and rapist C gets 30-40 years - cuz he's got a thing for asians. I'm against "Hate Crimes" legislation. I'm against Affirmative Action. I'm for "gay marriage." I don't think laws should refer to race, gender, orientation, etc., either on the victim's side or the accused's. I think to the future, where acceptance is everywhere, people are people, and such laws would be rightly railed against as divisive and unnecessary. Better to work toward the forward, than against it. |
|||
springfeverish |
|||
|
I am so freaking pissed at this cult I used to belong to. The Archdiocese of Philadelphia is closing schools right and left yet they have $50,000 to donate to
stop gay marriage. It's time to tax these bastards; if they do charity work fine, if they donate to political causes tax them.
Archdiocese donated to defeat Maine gay marriageST. LOUIS - The Archdiocese of St. Louis says Archbishop Robert Carlson used $10,000 in discretionary funds to support the successful effort to prevent legalization of gay marriage in Maine. Such money, from private gifts, has been used previously to financially support everything from disaster relief to anti-abortion efforts. Tax-exempt religious organizations can't support a candidate, but they can advocate for issues. The Jefferson City diocese donated $2,000 to the effort. The Springfield-Cape Girardeau diocese gave $500. Dioceses in Philadelphia and Phoenix gave $50,000 each. Maine voters repealed a state law earlier this month that would have allowed same-sex couples to marry.
|
|||
B DeBrun |
|||
|
I was just recently on 295 South. I think I saw spring's house.
|
|||
Visa Declined |
|||
springfeverish wrote: The Knights of Columbus had some retards collecting donatiions outside the grocery stores, I was like FUCK YOU RETARD because I was so pissed off about the Knights of Columbus support of Prop 8 but I dont think they got that. lol |
|||
springfeverish |
|||
B DeBrun wrote:295 goes through Jersey, dumbass. That was youfist's house you saw. The only way you'd see mine is if you got off of 95 to drive thru the Bucks County countryside and then got hopelessly lost. |
|||
B DeBrun |
|||
|
I bet you were Hopeing against hope I really wasn't in Bucks Cnty seeing your house.
BTW... last time I was there, I was playing in a charity rugby match. Not too often one sees a pitch in a backyard. |
|||
springfeverish |
|||
|
If you really play rugby I have to applaud you; my youngest daughter played for 2 years and it was more terrifying to watch than even her previous sport
gymnastics. Thank goodness she settled on field hockey.
Did you play in Maennechor field in Doylestown? That's not too far from where I used to live. |
|||
springfeverish |
|||
|
I have never been prouder to be an EX- Catholic.
Catholic Church gives D.C. ultimatum Same-sex marriage bill, as written, called a threat to social service contracts By Tim Craig and Michelle Boorstein
The Catholic Archdiocese of Washington said Wednesday that it will be unable to continue the social service programs it runs for the District if the city doesn't change a proposed same-sex marriage law, a threat that could affect tens of thousands of people the church helps with adoption, homelessness and health care. Under the bill, headed for a D.C. Council vote next month, religious organizations would not be required to perform or make space available for same-sex weddings. But they would have to obey city laws prohibiting discrimination against gay men and lesbians. Fearful that they could be forced, among other things, to extend employee benefits to same-sex married couples, church officials said they would have no choice but to abandon their contracts with the city. "If the city requires this, we can't do it," Susan Gibbs, spokeswoman for the archdiocese, said Wednesday. "The city is saying in order to provide social services, you need to be secular. For us, that's really a problem." Several D.C. Council members said the Catholic Church is trying to erode the city's long-standing laws protecting gay men and lesbians from discrimination. The clash escalates the dispute over the same-sex marriage proposal between the council and the archdiocese, which has generally stayed out of city politics. Catholic Charities, the church's social services arm, is one of dozens of nonprofit organizations that partner with the District. It serves 68,000 people in the city, including the one-third of Washington's homeless people who go to city-owned shelters managed by the church. City leaders said the church is not the dominant provider of any particular social service, but the church pointed out that it supplements funding for city programs with $10 million from its own coffers. "All of those services will be adversely impacted if the exemption language remains so narrow," Jane G. Belford, chancellor of the Washington Archdiocese, wrote to the council this week. The church's influence seems limited. In separate interviews Wednesday, council member Mary M. Cheh (D-Ward 3) referred to the church as "somewhat childish." Another council member, David A. Catania (I-At Large), said he would rather end the city's relationship with the church than give in to its demands. "They don't represent, in my mind, an indispensable component of our social services infrastructure," said Catania, the sponsor of the same-sex marriage bill and the chairman of the Health Committee. The standoff appears to be among the harshest between a government and a faith-based group over the rights of same-sex couples. Advocates for same-sex couples said they could not immediately think of other places where a same-sex marriage law had set off a break with a major faith-based provider of social services. The council is expected to pass the same-sex marriage bill next month, but the measure continues to face strong opposition from a number of groups that are pushing for a referendum on the issue. The archdiocese's statement follows a vote Tuesday by the council's Committee on Public Safety and the Judiciary to reject an amendment that would have allowed individuals, based on their religious beliefs, to decline to provide services for same-sex weddings. "Lets say an individual caterer is a staunch Christian and someone wants him to do a cake with two grooms on top," said council member Yvette M. Alexander (D-Ward 6), the sponsor of the amendment. "Why can't they say, based on their religious beliefs, 'I can't do something like that'?" After the vote, the archdiocese sent out a statement accusing the council of ignoring the right of religious freedom. Gibbs said Wednesday that without Alexander's amendment and other proposed changes, the measure has too narrow an exemption. She said religious groups that receive city funds would be required to give same-sex couples medical benefits, open adoptions to same-sex couples and rent a church hall to a support group for lesbian couples. Peter Rosenstein of the Campaign for All D.C. Families accused the church of trying to "blackmail the city." "The issue here is they are using public funds, and to allow people to discriminate with public money is unacceptable," Rosenstein said. Rosenstein and other gay rights activists have strong support on the council. Council member Phil Mendelson (D-At Large), chairman of the judiciary committee, said the council "will not legislate based on threats." "The problem with the individual exemption is anybody could discriminate based on their assertion of religious principle," Mendelson said. "There were many people back in the 1950s and '60s, during the civil rights era, that said separation of the races was ordained by God." Catania, who said he has been the biggest supporter of Catholic Charities on the council, said he is baffled by the church's stance. From 2006 through 2008, Catania said, Catholic Charities received about $8.2 million in city contracts, as well as several hundred thousand dollars' worth this year through his committee. "If they find living under our laws so oppressive that they can no longer take city resources, the city will have to find an alternative partner to step in to fill the shoes," Catania said. He also said Catholic Charities was involved in only six of the 102 city-sponsored adoptions last year. Terry Lynch, head of the Downtown Cluster of Congregations, said he did not know of any other group in the city that was making such a threat. "I've not seen any spillover into programming. That doesn't mean it couldn't happen if [the bill] passes," he said. Cheh said she hopes the Catholic Church will reconsider its stance. "Are they really going to harm people because they have a philosophical disagreement with us on one issue?" Cheh asked. "I hope, in the
silver light of day, when this passes, because it will pass, they will not really act on this threat."
|
|||
Archimedes |
|||
|
200 Gay Posts
|
|||