First Crossdresser Working in the White House

[Arthur Dent]

Wow, sure sucks when a Conservative uses the very same tactics you liberals have been using all these years. Why is it ok for yall to be the perpetual victim yet no one else of a differing view can be victimized?

could it have something to do with an agenda?

or, or maybe it's that vaunted liberal "tolerance" we hear so much about?

i am sure Cruz had no idea who this two bit, no name dip**** actress was. I haven't seen her in anything even worth mentioning.

Case in point of this being used to further divide the people. And it works marvelously!

 

[Dead Duck]

Ellen Page is a heterophobic gay midget actress that is always poised and ready to jump down anyone's throat that doesn't support her agenda.

She is NOBODY.



Be gay, applaud yourself for being gay, go to your gay bar with your gay friends and your gay drinks. But don't shove your gayness upon those who disagree with your gay lifestyle. Aaaaarrrrggggg!








Cruz did fine.
If you disagree with his politics, great but the guy eloquently dealt with a nasty liberal troll. And he did it with style.

 

[IndyDave1776]

By saying Christians are being persecuted for their beliefs. But they really aren't. I don't see any armed forces going into their churches, their television broadcasts, any of their means to spread the message. I don't see any police arresting them for their beliefs. I don't see any government censorship. Great majority of lawmakers are Christian, so much so Christians are over represented. In hindsight they get more protections from the government, so they are technically a special class. So Cruz, naturally, learned a lot from the liberals. Playing victim, crying wolf, asking for big-government to step in to protect something that has the most protection out of any group of citizens already.

You're missing the point. Most of the vocal rabble-rousers will scour the planet for examples of violation of their preferred causes. Cruz's point is that in this case some people don't want to participate in their choices so they scream up a lung about discrimination while actual persecution albeit not domestic, is met with crickets from the same people who would be up in arms if baby seals rather than Christians were being driven from their homes and executed for their faith, right along with the LGBT crowd. It tends to support the notion that it is political pandering from the left rather than any conviction based on principle.

By the way, how is it any less discriminatory for a Christian to be required to supply goods and services for an event which clearly violates his religion than for a member of a preferred class to have to find a provider who will voluntarily do so?

I would also point out that there is an addition problem no one seems to have noticed in that the baker has only three choices at this point now that choosing not to participate is not an option:

1. Violate his own conscience.
2. Risk losing everything he spent his life working for.
3. Shoot, shovel, and shut up, and hope he doesn't get caught.

If you see a fourth alternative, please speak up.

 

[Redtbird]

hedralphobic

I checked on Dictionary.com and also on Google, but both sources pointed me towards the word HYDROPHOBIC.

Can you provide a definition of this word "Hedralphobic"?

Thanks

hedralphobic

I checked on Dictionary.com and also on Google, but both sources pointed me towards the word HYDROPHOBIC.

Can you provide a definition of this word "Hedralphobic"?

Thanks

 

[Dead Duck]

hedralphobic

I checked on Dictionary.com and also on Google, but both sources pointed me towards the word HYDROPHOBIC.

Can you provide a definition of this word "Hedralphobic"?

Thanks

OK -
I can misspell with the best of them.

Fixed!

 

[Redtbird]

Heterophobia (-phobic): A fear or intense hatred directed towards straight people.

Guess it's that "Straight Priviledge" then.

Thanks, I've added a new word to my vocabulary.

 

[Grease]

By saying Christians are being persecuted for their beliefs. But they really aren't. I don't see any armed forces going into their churches, their television broadcasts, any of their means to spread the message. I don't see any police arresting them for their beliefs. I don't see any government censorship. Great majority of lawmakers are Christian, so much so Christians are over represented. In hindsight they get more protections from the government, so they are technically a special class. So Cruz, naturally, learned a lot from the liberals. Playing victim, crying wolf, asking for big-government to step in to protect something that has the most protection out of any group of citizens already.

Do do you outright lie now or do you just not know wtf you are talking about?

there have been several instances where Christians have lost everything they own because they didn't pander to the gays. In the case of the Christian bakery, they were persecuted by a JUDGE I.e. The Govt and then placed under a GAG order by the JUDGE again, THE GOVT......

but hey, I understand that does not fit your gay agenda or mesh with your outright bull****. This whole rise in gay culture is I think, just natures way of "autocorrecting" an over populated planet. Man by nature is a virus and gays are a cancer in mankind or maybe they are the white blood cells of nature fighting to kill the virus.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

I think he was talking about real persecution going on in the Middle East not the faux persecution little miss movie actress (whatever her name is) is worried about that's not happening in the U.S.

 

[Bollorollo]

Wow lots of hate going on in this posting! I hope many people who are gay or are like the person in the picture posted are carring a firearm for protection from all this hate which might come their way to attack them for the simple fact of being alive and being something someone might hate...

 

[IndyDave1776]

Wow lots of hate going on in this posting! I hope many people who are gay or are like the person in the picture posted are carring a firearm for protect from all the hate which might come their way to attack them for the simple fact of being alive and being something someone might hate...

WTF? Seriously? Wanting to be left the f*ck alone and hating are two different things.

 

[foszoe]

Oooooooooooommmmmmmmmmmm

 

[Grease]

Wow lots of hate going on in this posting! I hope many people who are gay or are like the person in the picture posted are carring a firearm for protect from all this hate which might come their way to attack them for the simple fact of being alive and being something someone might hate...

i sincerely hope they are not! You are hoping that a mentally ill person has it's hands on a firearm....nice. Responsible.....

 

[MisterChester]

You're missing the point. Most of the vocal rabble-rousers will scour the planet for examples of violation of their preferred causes. Cruz's point is that in this case some people don't want to participate in their choices so they scream up a lung about discrimination while actual persecution albeit not domestic, is met with crickets from the same people who would be up in arms if baby seals rather than Christians were being driven from their homes and executed for their faith, right along with the LGBT crowd. It tends to support the notion that it is political pandering from the left rather than any conviction based on principle.

By the way, how is it any less discriminatory for a Christian to be required to supply goods and services for an event which clearly violates his religion than for a member of a preferred class to have to find a provider who will voluntarily do so?

I would also point out that there is an addition problem no one seems to have noticed in that the baker has only three choices at this point now that choosing not to participate is not an option:

1. Violate his own conscience.
2. Risk losing everything he spent his life working for.
3. Shoot, shovel, and shut up, and hope he doesn't get caught.

If you see a fourth alternative, please speak up.

There will always be blowhards and their causes. While that may be Cruz's point, that door swings both ways. Not everyone wants to become subject to federal laws and constitutional amendments he wants to add. They are not being persecuted by the government. They are being criticized by half of the media and private individuals, which is fine.

If the Christian doesn't want to sell me something, then I'll take my business elsewhere. Too many people want to make a big deal out of it. Shut up and go somewhere else, their conviction is more important than paying bills, and that's their choice.

I don't think the choice resides in the hypothetical baker. The customer has the money, therefore the decision to initiate anything is their's to choose. The customer should find a more welcoming business, or if they really like this baker then they'd have to deceive the baker into making something for them. Baker doesn't consciously violate their belief, customer gets what they want, ignorance is bliss! I personally wouldn't do that but I could see that happen in weird instances.

 

[Bollorollo]

 

[churchmouse]

Wow lots of hate going on in this posting! I hope many people who are gay or are like the person in the picture posted are carring a firearm for protect from all this hate which might come their way to attack them for the simple fact of being alive and being something someone might hate...

Wow......is that what you get from this....seriously.

 

[MisterChester]

Do do you outright lie now or do you just not know wtf you are talking about?

there have been several instances where Christians have lost everything they own because they didn't pander to the gays. In the case of the Christian bakery, they were persecuted by a JUDGE I.e. The Govt and then placed under a GAG order by the JUDGE again, THE GOVT......

but hey, I understand that does not fit your gay agenda or mesh with your outright bull****. This whole rise in gay culture is I think, just natures way of "autocorrecting" an over populated planet. Man by nature is a virus and gays are a cancer in mankind or maybe they are the white blood cells of nature fighting to kill the virus.

Yeah, because nothing bad has ever ever happened to gays by religious zealots, right? BTW, that baker was subject to a city law, not state or federal. If he moved his business to a neighboring town that didn't have it he would have won. Hooray 10th Amendment! Sorry buddy, the baker should have done his homework.

Man, I've heard some dumb theories before, but this made me spit my drink. Thanks for the laugh. There aren't enough gay people to autocorrect an over populated planet. The planet isn't even over populated... We have a population density problem, not an over population problem. If gays are a cancer, then I can think of a few illnesses that would describe folks that don't know how to mind their own business.

 

[IndyDave1776]

There will always be blowhards and their causes. While that may be Cruz's point, that door swings both ways. Not everyone wants to become subject to federal laws and constitutional amendments he wants to add. They are not being persecuted by the government. They are being criticized by half of the media and private individuals, which is fine.

If the Christian doesn't want to sell me something, then I'll take my business elsewhere. Too many people want to make a big deal out of it. Shut up and go somewhere else, their conviction is more important than paying bills, and that's their choice.

I don't think the choice resides in the hypothetical baker. The customer has the money, therefore the decision to initiate anything is their's to choose. The customer should find a more welcoming business, or if they really like this baker then they'd have to deceive the baker into making something for them. Baker doesn't consciously violate their belief, customer gets what they want, ignorance is bliss! I personally wouldn't do that but I could see that happen in weird instances.

It sounds like we are largely in agreement. As for the protections that some of us want, I see it as buying a fire extinguisher before the house burns. We agree on how it should be, but in practice, the baker had everything he had spend his life working for confiscated for having the temerity to refuse to do something against his convictions. We are on the same page that if convictions outweigh profit, that is the baker's choice. That said, being financially zeroed out by a court constitutes government persecution in my reckoning.

I would also add that federal intervention would be completely unnecessary if we could stop this trend of finding 'rights' including and especially the 'right' to other people's work and the 'right' to regulate what they believe and how they may exercise that belief in the spaces between the lines of the Constitution which somehow trumps the enumerated rights.

That said, I am happy to see that we are largely on the same page regarding the final outcome of right and proper.

I take it that you do not believe that people have the right to their own lives and to choose their own actions? After all, you have registered your objection and now have reinforced that objection. Would you like to face the choice between serving a person, group, or organization whose actions which stand as the focal point of the occasion stand in direct conflict with your own values? You really think that it is right and proper for people to be forced to do things against their will since someone else's claim on their lives and their persons somehow outweighs their own claim to their own lives and persons?

OK comrade. I think I understand where you are headed with this.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Yeah, because nothing bad has ever ever happened to gays by religious zealots, right? BTW, that baker was subject to a city law, not state or federal. If he moved his business to a neighboring town that didn't have it he would have won. Hooray 10th Amendment!

Man, I've heard some dumb theories before, but this made me spit my drink. Thanks for the laugh. There aren't enough gay people to autocorrect an over populated planet. The planet isn't even over populated... We have a population density problem, not an over population problem. If gays are a cancer, then I can think of a few illnesses that would describe folks that don't know how to mind their own business.

This is indeed true, but on the other hand, try enacting a 'Jim Crow' city ordinance and see how THAT plays out in federal court.

 

[17 squirrel]

Wow......is that what you get from this....seriously.

Hate ? I haven't see any yet either. Shakin the bush Boss, no hate here.

 

[MisterChester]

It sounds like we are largely in agreement. As for the protections that some of us want, I see it as buying a fire extinguisher before the house burns. We agree on how it should be, but in practice, the baker had everything he had spend his life working for confiscated for having the temerity to refuse to do something against his convictions. We are on the same page that if convictions outweigh profit, that is the baker's choice. That said, being financially zeroed out by a court constitutes government persecution in my reckoning.

I would also add that federal intervention would be completely unnecessary if we could stop this trend of finding 'rights' including and especially the 'right' to other people's work and the 'right' to regulate what they believe and how they may exercise that belief in the spaces between the lines of the Constitution which somehow trumps the enumerated rights.

That said, I am happy to see that we are largely on the same page regarding the final outcome of right and proper.

We can definitely agree on the final outcome. How we debate about getting there is the fun part!