# As American as baseball, hot dogs, and apple pie.......?????



## ADub in T.C. (Nov 17, 2009)

I want to sell my Chevrolet after seeing last nights commercials. Know this will probably go to the jungle but oh well. Anyone else feel the same???


----------



## misbhavn (Nov 19, 2010)

Okay, I'll be the first...W T F are you talking about?!?!?


----------



## fishingwithhardheadkings (Oct 10, 2012)

Are you talking about the tundra commercial?


----------



## Spirit (Nov 19, 2008)

He's talking about the ad with the gay couples that says Families are changing in America but Chevy isn't ... or something to that effect.

Least I assume that's the one.


----------



## bassguitarman (Nov 29, 2005)

http://www.chron.com/news/article/Chevy-Olympic-ads-feature-gay-couples-5215141.php


----------



## Spirit (Nov 19, 2008)

This one.

Its definitely getting them press, and they do say that bad press is better than no press, but is angering a huge portion of your buying public really a smart move?


----------



## JShupe (Oct 17, 2004)

To the OP, so that commercial has moved you to want to sell your Chevrolet vehicle?


----------



## RB II (Feb 26, 2009)

I am absolutely confused as to why American media, broadcasting and so many businesses has such an infatuation with gays. It is like every other person is gay and they make up a major segment of the market. In fact, IIRC, they are less than 5% of the total population. Yet, every other TV show, public figure and advertisement, makes some positive reference to this deviant behaviour. It makes me sick to think what my grandkids will have to be subjected to. I am not a hugely religious guy, but I fear that God has already or will very soon turn his back on America.


----------



## BretE (Jan 24, 2008)

JShupe said:


> To the OP, so that commercial has moved you to want to sell your Chevrolet vehicle?


Pretty obvious to me that's what he's saying....


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

Next thing you know they will be wanting to play football!


----------



## Palmetto (Jun 28, 2004)

HydraSports said:


> I am absolutely confused as to why American media, broadcasting and so many businesses has such an infatuation with gays. QUOTE]
> 
> Its because they want everyone to think its normal. They just keep pounding into our brains, and eventually we'll accept it. Like a reverse "death by 1k cuts".
> 
> It grosses me out personally. I wish they'd just shut up.


----------



## TxBrewer (Jul 23, 2011)

Just an idea, but you may be allowing a commercial to impact your life more than what is healthy.


----------



## JShupe (Oct 17, 2004)

poppadawg said:


> Next thing you know they will be wanting to play football!


 BAAAZIIIIIIIIIIIIIINGAAA.

This thread is :an5::an5::an5::an5::an5:


----------



## Jolly Roger (May 21, 2004)

Chevy has just announced it's 2015 Broke Back Mountain Silverado 


Like a rock and runs deep.......


----------



## JShupe (Oct 17, 2004)

Jolly Roger said:


> Chevy has just announced it's 2015 Broke Back Mountain Silverado
> 
> Like a rock and runs deep.......


Does that come in a "California" edition?


----------



## bill (May 21, 2004)

I don't care. I'll buy anyone's newer Chevy or any other vehicle for a dollar. I'm not picky. Ford, Chevy, Dodge..if it's new, I got a dollar


----------



## TxBrewer (Jul 23, 2011)

Don't forget to boo whenever anyone sings America the Beautiful then. Written by a lesbian.


----------



## Category6 (Nov 21, 2007)

I own a GMC truck, I guess that means I'm gay. I'll begin the process of getting the wife out of the house immediately, and maybe take a class or two on sucking ****. I knew I should've bought a Ford.


----------



## JShupe (Oct 17, 2004)

Category5 said:


> I own a GMC truck, I guess that means I'm gay. I'll begin the process of getting the wife out of the house immediately, and maybe take a class or two on sucking ****. I knew I should've bought a Ford.


 I traded in my suburban for a Lexus just in the nick of time... whew.


----------



## Bocephus (May 30, 2008)

I just want to take a moment to publicly say here on this forum.....that I am Heterosexual.

I wonder when the news trucks & reporters will show up to glorify my coming out to the world about my sexuality ?

Whew....it feels so good to get that out in the open. I'm proud of who I am.

Bo


----------



## Jerry-rigged (May 21, 2004)

Err... there was like one second of a "two Dad" family in there. And you are going to sell you truck over this?

I mean, I support getting rid of a crappy chebbie, but really, it OK, you can say you don't like your truck.. you don't have to blame it on the gays... LOL


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

If I had a Chevrolet I'd sell it too. Not because of that commercial, but because it is a Chevrolet. Love my Tundra.


----------



## JShupe (Oct 17, 2004)

shaggydog said:


> If I had a Chevrolet I'd sell it too. Not because of that commercial, but because it is a Chevrolet. Love my Tundra.


 Dammit this is a gay thing not a Toyota thing...stay focused


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

JShupe said:


> Dammit this is a gay thing not a Toyota thing...stay focused


Sorry, a little ADD. Squirrel.


----------



## batmaninja (Jul 15, 2010)

TxBrewer said:


> Don't forget to boo whenever anyone sings America the Beautiful then. Written by a lesbian.


Brew I don't think you should be making sexual accusations about people that you have never even met, much less been intimate with. How do you know she was a lesbian? Do you boo at every song that was written by a ******, how about ones that call American, beautiful? Being a lesbian myself, I take offense to your broad accusations about dead peoples sexual orientation.


----------



## Johnboat (Jun 7, 2004)

*How about putting this in a Tundra commercial?*

Sergeant Leonard Siffleet was a commando fighting with the Australian Army in New Guinea when he was captured by natives, who turned him over to the occupying Japanese army. Trained as a radio operator in the Special Forces, Siffleet was part of a secret surveillance detachment sent to New Guinea to watch the coast and report back on enemy activities.After they were turned over to the Japanese, they were held for about two weeks, tortured, and then â€" on October 24, 1943, on the orders of Vice-Admiral Michiaki Kamada of the Imperial Japanese Navy â€" Siffleet was executed by beheading. He was beheaded by a Japanese officer, Yasuno Chikao. Chikao ordered another soldier to photograph him while he performed the execution. U.S. forces later recovered the photograph from the body of a Japanese major, in April 1944. Though the Japanese often executed prisoners by beheading (see Toshiaki Mukai and Tsuyoshi Noda above), this is the only known surviving photograph documenting the beheading of a prisoner.


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

Johnboat said:


> Sergeant Leonard Siffleet was a commando fighting with the Australian Army in New Guinea when he was captured by natives, who turned him over to the occupying Japanese army. Trained as a radio operator in the Special Forces, Siffleet was part of a secret surveillance detachment sent to New Guinea to watch the coast and report back on enemy activities.After they were turned over to the Japanese, they were held for about two weeks, tortured, and then â€" on October 24, 1943, on the orders of Vice-Admiral Michiaki Kamada of the Imperial Japanese Navy â€" Siffleet was executed by beheading. He was beheaded by a Japanese officer, Yasuno Chikao. Chikao ordered another soldier to photograph him while he performed the execution. U.S. forces later recovered the photograph from the body of a Japanese major, in April 1944. Though the Japanese often executed prisoners by beheading (see Toshiaki Mukai and Tsuyoshi Noda above), this is the only known surviving photograph documenting the beheading of a prisoner.


You really need to let some things go.


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

Johnboat said:


> Sergeant Leonard Siffleet was a commando fighting with the Australian Army in New Guinea when he was captured by natives, who turned him over to the occupying Japanese army. Trained as a radio operator in the Special Forces, Siffleet was part of a secret surveillance detachment sent to New Guinea to watch the coast and report back on enemy activities.After they were turned over to the Japanese, they were held for about two weeks, tortured, and then â€" on October 24, 1943, on the orders of Vice-Admiral Michiaki Kamada of the Imperial Japanese Navy â€" Siffleet was executed by beheading. He was beheaded by a Japanese officer, Yasuno Chikao. Chikao ordered another soldier to photograph him while he performed the execution. U.S. forces later recovered the photograph from the body of a Japanese major, in April 1944. Though the Japanese often executed prisoners by beheading (see Toshiaki Mukai and Tsuyoshi Noda above), this is the only known surviving photograph documenting the beheading of a prisoner.


Oh yea, did I mention. I LOVE my Tundra.


----------



## Duke (Dec 27, 2007)

Is there a Jungle for The Jungle? sad3sm


----------



## Johnboat (Jun 7, 2004)

*Oh I let it go. But the irony is strong*



shaggydog said:


> You really need to let some things go.


I have lots of Japanese stuff made by Yamaha, Shimano, etc. Men much older than me (they were part of the greatest generation) were the ones I used to hear all the time say they couldn't forget and forgive enough to buy anything Japanese or German. I give them a pass. They saw men die at the hands of those then enemies.

But someone is not going to buy an American car because of a "diversity" TV ad? Priceless. :headknock


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

Johnboat said:


> I have lots of Japanese stuff. Men much older than me (of the greatest generation) were the ones I used to hear all the time say they couldn't forget and forgive enough to buy anything Japanese or German. I give them a pass. They saw men die at the hands of those then enemies.
> 
> But someone is not going to buy an American car because of a "diversity" TV ad? Priceless. :headknock


I do my best not to let ads dictate what I buy. I try to buy based on research as to which product will do the best job for me. That being said, 2Cool has influenced me to buy several things.

I apologize for my second response to your initial post. my response was not in good taste.


----------



## TxBrewer (Jul 23, 2011)

batmaninja said:


> Brew I don't think you should be making sexual accusations about people that you have never even met, much less been intimate with. How do you know she was a lesbian? Do you boo at every song that was written by a ******, how about ones that call American, beautiful? Being a lesbian myself, I take offense to your broad accusations about dead peoples sexual orientation.


First I don't boo at any song, my comment was to anyone crazy enough to sell their truck based on a commercial because there was a same sex partnership. Maybe you missed the eye roll at the idea of it.

Second just do a google search on Katharine Lee Bates, it is commonly accepted historically that she was involved in a long term live in relationship with Katherine Coman.

Before taking offense at my post read it, understand it and then do the research on your own.

ETA - Ahh forget it, Ill give you a cliffs notes version:



> However Katherine Lee Bates was in a romantic and loving relationship with Katharine Coman, a fellow Wellesley professor, for twenty-five years. Bates lived at the end of the Victorian period, during which female sexuality was so suppressed and expressions of that sexuality were so limited and obscure that current twenty-first century sexual divisions (such as lesbian and gay, or even homosexual and heterosexual) are incompatible with the nineteenth century definition of the relationship and the love shared by Bates and Coman. So how do we define their relationship? Can we call them lesbians? Can we state with confidence that they were both heterosexual? Can we say anything at all about the love between Katharine Lee Bates and Katharine Coman?


From Rhys Hackford which cited in many of the best researched articles/books about Katherine Lee Bates.


----------



## spuds (Jan 2, 2005)

Went to a neighbor's party Saturday night. 

After midnight, and things started getting a little crazy. Two lesbian couples were making out, one couple in the kitchen and the other on the patio. BTW both couples were FINE! 

The gay guys that live around the corner, with the house that belongs in a magazine, had brought a hooka pipe and trying to get the tobacco block to light on the stove top. 

Another guy was walking around offering a platter of pot brownies!

I didn't partake of any of those activities, but still had a blast. :headknock 

What a lot of fun people. I talked to all of them at one time or another, well except the brownie guy, he was hard to hold a conversation with. :ac550:
But they're just people. 

Don't know about you, but I was brought up to "judge not...."

Oh, and one of the lesbian girls does landscaping, and drives a Ford pickup. :rotfl:


----------



## MB (Mar 6, 2006)

Once again ...

This is all nothing more than another *S*exually *O*bscene *D*emonic *O*ffering to *M*oloch ..

Just an observation .... Try replacing the word judgment with Discernment ... Things may clear up a little 

BTW: Sodom didn't end so well ... Did It ...

MB


----------



## roundman (May 21, 2004)

spuds said:


> Went to a neighbor's party Saturday night.
> 
> After midnight, and things started getting a little crazy. Two lesbian couples were making out, one couple in the kitchen and the other on the patio. BTW both couples were FINE!
> 
> ...


where did you wake up ? lol


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

spuds said:


> Went to a neighbor's party Saturday night.
> 
> After midnight, and things started getting a little crazy. Two lesbian couples were making out, one couple in the kitchen and the other on the patio. BTW both couples were FINE!
> 
> ...


Okay I definitely want to hang with Spuds


----------



## Jolly Roger (May 21, 2004)

JShupe said:


> Does that come in a "California" edition?


Yes, Chevy has announced that they have partnered with Packard Motor Car Company. They are going to blow everyone's mind with the new roll out. The first one to get off the line from the partnership comes in a stunning new color............................. The California Fudge Packard.


----------



## JShupe (Oct 17, 2004)

spuds said:


> Went to a neighbor's party Saturday night.
> 
> After midnight, and things started getting a little crazy. Two lesbian couples were making out, one couple in the kitchen and the other on the patio. BTW both couples were FINE!
> 
> ...


Spuds is a good dude have known him for a long time!!

You know those "fine" couples were gonna have a little apple pie later if you know what I mean!!!

JS


----------



## ADub in T.C. (Nov 17, 2009)

I would not have posted my original statement if the immediate thought of getting rid of the truck did not cross my mind. As far as letting commercials dictate my way of life.........that is by far not the case. To be honest I do not watch much television at all. I did so happen to see this commercial though. I simply choose not to support with my hard earned dollar companies that support things that go against my personal beliefs. I am not going to call and make a donation to Planned Parenthood because I do not agree with what they stand for. I don't listen to most of the popular music that our society condones because I do not condone the words of the artists or furthermore their heinous public actions............And lastly I do no longer want to drive a truck peddled by a company that says "I now pronounce you husband and husband......you may kiss your husband!!!''.............nuff said


----------



## ralph7 (Apr 28, 2009)

ADub in T.C. said:


> I would not have posted my original statement if the immediate thought of getting rid of the truck did not cross my mind. As far as letting commercials dictate my way of life.........that is by far not the case. To be honest I do not watch much television at all. I did so happen to see this commercial though. I simply choose not to support with my hard earned dollar companies that support things that go against my personal beliefs. I am not going to call and make a donation to Planned Parenthood because I do not agree with what they stand for. I don't listen to most of the popular music that our society condones because I do not condone the words of the artists or furthermore their heinous public actions............And lastly I do no longer want to drive a truck peddled by a company that says "I now pronounce you husband and husband......you may kiss your husband!!!''.............nuff said


I would have thought you much older than 29.

And I mean that as a compliment.


----------



## JShupe (Oct 17, 2004)

ADub in T.C. said:


> I would not have posted my original statement if the immediate thought of getting rid of the truck did not cross my mind. As far as letting commercials dictate my way of life.........that is by far not the case. To be honest I do not watch much television at all. I did so happen to see this commercial though. I simply choose not to support with my hard earned dollar companies that support things that go against my personal beliefs. I am not going to call and make a donation to Planned Parenthood because I do not agree with what they stand for. I don't listen to most of the popular music that our society condones because I do not condone the words of the artists or furthermore their heinous public actions............And lastly I do no longer want to drive a truck peddled by a company that says "I now pronounce you husband and husband......you may kiss your husband!!!''.............nuff said


That's why we live in this great country, your free to do whatever you would like w your hard earned money..... After your government gets their fair share of course.


----------



## Johnboat (Jun 7, 2004)

*Do you make your wife wear a burka?*



ADub in T.C. said:


> I would not have posted my original statement if the immediate thought of getting rid of the truck did not cross my mind. As far as letting commercials dictate my way of life.........that is by far not the case. To be honest I do not watch much television at all. I did so happen to see this commercial though. I simply choose not to support with my hard earned dollar companies that support things that go against my personal beliefs. I am not going to call and make a donation to Planned Parenthood because I do not agree with what they stand for. I don't listen to most of the popular music that our society condones because I do not condone the words of the artists or furthermore their heinous public actions............And lastly I do no longer want to drive a truck peddled by a company that says "I now pronounce you husband and husband......you may kiss your husband!!!''.............nuff said


You sound like someone messed with your Koran.


----------



## SeaY'all (Jul 14, 2011)

I just want to hear more about this party that Spuds attended.


----------



## troutslayer (Feb 7, 2006)

Ill keep driving my chevy



the rest suck


----------



## Spirit (Nov 19, 2008)

When I spend money, I definitely think about the values promoted by the company I am considering purchasing from. If I disagree with the causes they support I don't buy from that company.

After the bailout fiasco, I'd have had a hard time buying a Chevy anyway. But now I wouldn't even consider it.


----------



## DSL_PWR (Jul 22, 2009)

Very sad..

I think someone posted it earlier but in case not...


----------



## stammster - temporary (Jul 20, 2009)

I don't understand why everyone is getting worked up over that commercial. It seems like good advertising to me, to run a gay commercial during the Olympics...especially during the figure skating competition. Who else watches that stuff?


----------



## ADub in T.C. (Nov 17, 2009)

spirit said:


> When I spend money, I definitely think about the values promoted by the company I am considering purchasing from. If I disagree with the causes they support I don't buy from that company.
> 
> After the bailout fiasco, I'd have had a hard time buying a Chevy anyway. But now I wouldn't even consider it.


 That's why we live in this great country, your free to do whatever you would like w your hard earned money..... After your government gets their fair share of course. Today 06:27 PM

I would have thought you much older than 29.

And I mean that as a compliment. 

To Spirit ---I have owned my Chevrolet for a while now and felt loyal towards the bowtie because my grandfather owned a Chevrolet dealership in T.C. for years........(he is probably rolling over in his grave after seeing those commercials air by the way)

To Ralph7 ---Thanks

To JShupe --- I agree with you 100%

and to the post about the Man upstairs turning his back on America........I feel the time is very near with the way things are in our country. Sad but very true according to my beliefs.

Today 06:24 PM


----------



## Spirit (Nov 19, 2008)

I want to make it clear, I have nothing against gay people -- how one lives their life is their business. I don't think a person should hide the fact they are gay but I see no reason to announce it to the world either ... who gives a flying fig? 

My problem with this commercial ... and Chevy making it ... is that the majority of American families are not affected by this lifestyle and such a small portion - 3.4% according to Gallop - of the country is, I see no reason to make this type commercial. Chevy obviously agrees with the lifestyle since they chose to promote it. When a company tries to shove a view at me that is contrary to everything that has been accepted as right for eons ... and directly against the Bible ... that offends me and creates negativity.

It's not about gays, it's about this commercial and Chevy's decision to take a stance against traditional family values.


----------



## Fishtexx (Jun 29, 2004)

X2 ^^


----------



## HoustonKid (Dec 29, 2005)

I saw noting wrong with the commercial. It is advertising and Chevy would have you believe that they are changing with the times. Being gay does not bother them according to the commercial, and why should it? To each their own. It is a free country after all. Just like we can cling to our guns and religion, they can be with and love whoever they want. 

Makes no matter to me. EXPRESS YO SELF.


----------



## ADub in T.C. (Nov 17, 2009)

spirit said:


> I want to make it clear, I have nothing against gay people -- how one lives their life is their business. I don't think a person should hide the fact they are gay but I see no reason to announce it to the world either ... who gives a flying fig?
> 
> My problem with this commercial ... and Chevy making it ... is that the majority of American families are not affected by this lifestyle and such a small portion - 3.4% according to Gallop - of the country is, I see no reason to make this type commercial. Chevy obviously agrees with the lifestyle since they chose to promote it. When a company tries to shove a view at me that is contrary to everything that has been accepted as right for eons ... and directly against the Bible ... that offends me and creates negativity.
> 
> *It's not about gays, it's about this commercial and Chevy's decision to take a stance against traditional family values*.


 Precisely!!


----------



## ADub in T.C. (Nov 17, 2009)

HC said:


> I saw noting wrong with the commercial. It is advertising and Chevy would have you believe that they are changing with the times. Being gay does not bother them according to the commercial, and why should it? To each their own. *It is a free country after all. Just like we can cling to our guns and religion, they can be with and love whoever they want.
> *
> Makes no matter to me. EXPRESS YO SELF.


 And this is where the basis of my issue with this commercial 
is H.C......... Guns and religion are mocked and portrayed as conservative right wing ignorance by our media and the types of commercials that Chevrolet is now presenting to the public are seen as not only acceptable but try to make the public believe this is the new "moral fiber" of our country when in fact it is far from how the majority of the American public feels. We are made by our media to believe this is acceptable and normal when in fact it is neither.


----------



## Kenner 23 (Sep 14, 2009)

Chebby like the Dim party is trying to "Mainstream" the alternative lifestyle and if you read this entire thread it seems to be working. They are leading the Sheeple to slaughter one mind at a time.


----------



## Category6 (Nov 21, 2007)

I did some research, and it turns out driving a chevy and sucking a **** here and there is far less gay than driving a ford.


----------



## Bocephus (May 30, 2008)

Category5 said:


> I did some research, and it turns out driving a chevy and sucking a **** here and there is far less gay than driving a ford.


I drive a Toyota...

Just sayin !


----------



## Category6 (Nov 21, 2007)

Bocephus said:


> I drive a Toyota...
> 
> Just sayin !


you're good...no mention of Toyota and gayness in my research


----------



## Game-Over (Jun 9, 2010)

spirit said:


> My problem with this commercial ... and Chevy making it ... is that the majority of American families are not affected by this lifestyle and such a small portion - 3.4% according to Gallop - of the country is, I see no reason to make this type commercial.


According to the USFWS there are roughly 13.6 million hunters in the U.S. That is approximately 4.3% of the overall population.

http://wsfrprograms.fws.gov/Subpages/NationalSurvey/2011_Survey.htm

Do you have a problem with Chevy advertising to hunters? After all, the majority of the country doesn't hunt, so under your reasoning, "there is no reason to make this type of commercial" right?


----------



## Category6 (Nov 21, 2007)

spirit said:


> I want to make it clear, I have nothing against gay people -- how one lives their life is their business. I don't think a person should hide the fact they are gay but I see no reason to announce it to the world either ... who gives a flying fig?
> 
> My problem with this commercial ... and Chevy making it ... is that the majority of American families are not affected by this lifestyle and such a small portion - 3.4% according to Gallop - of the country is, I see no reason to make this type commercial. Chevy obviously agrees with the lifestyle since they chose to promote it. When a company tries to shove a view at me that is contrary to everything that has been accepted as right for eons ... and directly against the Bible ... that offends me and creates negativity.
> 
> It's not about gays, it's about this commercial and Chevy's decision to take a stance against traditional family values.


I just don't really understand why anyone is so hung up on who everyone else is sleeping with to be honest. It's a privilege reserved for God and God alone to pass judgement on how people conduct their affairs. It's very freeing to let all that go and just live your life.


----------



## KSHunter (Sep 22, 2011)

Looks like Government Motors has chosen to fall in line with the lib-tards in DC. I guess they are still paying for that bail-out.


----------



## Itsmejoe231 (Sep 6, 2006)

I thought all gays drove Saturns...


Because they are so close to Uranus.


----------



## Ernest (May 21, 2004)

Companies that ignore the alternative lifestyle community do so at their peril. 

Higher education levels, higher income, higher savings. Thus, they have consumer spending power exceeding their % of the population. 

Ford does the same thing. Ford recently put together a marketing campaign for their Jag, Land Rover, and Volvo brands that specifically targeted the alternative community. 

Actually, something like 200 of the Fortune 500 have marketing directed towards the alternative lifestyle community.


----------



## spuds (Jan 2, 2005)

roundman said:


> where did you wake up ? lol


LOL, home with my wife.

I guess I should mention my contribution to the party was a half dozen bottles of fine red, more my style.

BTW one of the wineries I order from, is owned and operated by lesbians.

I make purchases based on the product, not on issues that don't affect me. :headknock


----------



## DSL_PWR (Jul 22, 2009)

KSHunter said:


> Looks like Government Motors has chosen to fall in line with the lib-tards in DC. I guess they are still paying for that bail-out.


That's what I was thinking when I saw the commercial. Makes you wonder who pulled the strings to get that done.


----------



## Game-Over (Jun 9, 2010)

DSL_PWR said:


> That's what I was thinking when I saw the commercial. Makes you wonder who pulled the strings to get that done.


Prob that liberal woman who is in charge over there. What's next, commercials showing women driving to the voting booth? It's all a conspiracy I tell ya.

Or, it possibly could have been a business decision to advertise to a demographic that is nearly as large as hunters. A group, as Ernest pointed out, that has on avg, higher levels of disposable income. Why wouldn't a business target them?


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

ADub in T.C. said:


> I would not have posted my original statement if the immediate thought of getting rid of the truck did not cross my mind. As far as letting commercials dictate my way of life.........that is by far not the case. To be honest I do not watch much television at all. I did so happen to see this commercial though. I simply choose not to support with my hard earned dollar companies that support things that go against my personal beliefs. I am not going to call and make a donation to Planned Parenthood because I do not agree with what they stand for. I don't listen to most of the popular music that our society condones because I do not condone the words of the artists or furthermore their heinous public actions............And lastly I do no longer want to drive a truck peddled by a company that says "I now pronounce you husband and husband......you may kiss your husband!!!''.............nuff said


So you don't let commercials dictate your decisions, but immediately thought seriously about selling your track after seeing a commercial? Can you see where thats a little contradictory? You are 29. Lighten up and go hang with Spuds. You are way too uptight for a young man in the prime of his life. The commercial was about acceptance, not shoving something down your throat. Angry people see it as some kind of threat. Angry is not a good way to live.


----------



## ADub in T.C. (Nov 17, 2009)

poppadawg said:


> So you don't let commercials dictate your decisions, but immediately thought seriously about selling your track after seeing a commercial? Can you see where thats a little contradictory? You are 29. Lighten up and go hang with Spuds. You are way too uptight for a young man in the prime of his life. The commercial was about acceptance, not shoving something down your throat. Angry people see it as some kind of threat. Angry is not a good way to live.


Correct. I do not let commercials dictate my decision making, however I do let companies beliefs and what they support dictate my decisions poppadawg. Chevrolet has made it public that their decision is to support homosexual marriage in our country. It is decision that many people in our country do not accept regardless of whether they are 29 and in the prime of their life or not. Most of today's youth are conditioned to accept this way of life as normal when in fact we should be allowing them to make those decisions based on their own education, faith, and personal experience rather than what the media tells them is right and wrong. I am not an angry person by any stretch of the word. Ask anyone who knows me. I am however a person who lives with conviction and the belief that there are still some really great people and companies in America.......Chevrolet is just no longer on that list.


----------



## Game-Over (Jun 9, 2010)

ADub in T.C. said:


> I am however a person who lives with conviction and the belief that there are still some really great people and companies in America.......Chevrolet is just no longer on that list.


You must have a long list. Anheuser Busch, Amazon, Levi's, Oreo, Target, Burger King, Coca-Cola, Ford, Miller, Home Depot, UPS, FedEx, Comcast, DirecTV, etc....

The list is long, so long that you will prob have to sell more than just your truck in order to stick to your convictions. In addition, you will most likely have to seek alternatives to a majority of everyday items you use around the house.

Let us know when you are having your garage sale.


----------



## Ernest (May 21, 2004)

Even Toyota directs marketing to the gay and lesbian communities. They featured a girl on girl date in a commercial as far back as 2006. It was considered rather edgy at the time.


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

Many will scoff and mock what I am going to say. Times have changed a great deal since I was young. It is very clear that Satan has a great influence over what we now accept as normal. To God fearing people, it is very understandable why commercials that promote the gay or alternative lifestyle are offensive. Unfortunately we have been bombarded by this kind of trash for years now, so the ones that object to it seem like the minority now.

That is very unfortunate. One of these days, hopefully, the moral majority will speak up against the debauched thinking that permeates the world now. It is not that the majority are gay, it is that we should accept that way of life as normal. It is not normal, and is expressly forbidden in God's word.

Can we escape it, no. Can we avoid using all products that are promoted by companies that condone this lifestyle, probably not. But it some cases, at least in my case, I will look at some things that I will avoid.


----------



## ADub in T.C. (Nov 17, 2009)

shaggydog said:


> Many will scoff and mock what I am going to say. Times have changed a great deal since I was young. It is very clear that Satan has a great influence over what we now accept as normal. To God fearing people, it is very understandable why commercials that promote the gay or alternative lifestyle are offensive. Unfortunately we have been bombarded by this kind of trash for years now, so the ones that object to it seem like the minority now.
> 
> That is very unfortunate. One of these days, hopefully, the moral majority will speak up against the debauched thinking that permeates the world now. It is not that the majority are gay, it is that we should accept that way of life as normal. It is not normal, and is expressly forbidden in God's word.
> 
> Can we escape it, no. Can we avoid using all products that are promoted by companies that condone this lifestyle, probably not. But it some cases, at least in my case, I will look at some things that I will avoid.


Well put! It is obvious by the comments in this forum we are the minority. Sad day


----------



## MB (Mar 6, 2006)

Ernest said:


> Companies that ignore the alternative lifestyle community do so at their peril.
> 
> Higher education levels, higher income, higher savings. Thus, they have consumer spending power exceeding their % of the population.
> 
> ...


Ford sold Jag, land Rover in 2008 ...

http://m.autoblog.com/2008/03/25/breaking-ford-sells-jaguar-land-rover-for-2-billion-to-tata/

Ford sold Volvo in 2010 ...

http://m.nydailynews.com/1.200482#bmb=1

*MB*


----------



## Johnboat (Jun 7, 2004)

*OK Gals. Lets turn back the clock to the good old days*

Advertising sure used to show a woman her place.


----------



## ADub in T.C. (Nov 17, 2009)

Game-Over said:


> You must have a long list. Anheuser Busch, Amazon, Levi's, Oreo, Target, Burger King, Coca-Cola, Ford, Miller, Home Depot, UPS, FedEx, Comcast, DirecTV, etc....
> 
> The list is long, so long that you will prob have to sell more than just your truck in order to stick to your convictions. In addition, you will most likely have to seek alternatives to a majority of everyday items you use around the house.
> 
> Let us know when you are having your garage sale.


I like Shiner Bock, wear Cinch jeans, don't order much of anything off the Internet, eat mostly home processed deer meat, wild birds, and fish as well as home grown-organic-non-GMO fruits and veggies so do not eat much fast food at all, though I do support Chick-fil-a. Now I have been spotted at Home Depot before but mainly support my local independently owned hardware store 99% of the time.

Game-Over I am sure there are products I own that are made by companies who go against my beliefs. I am however trying to do my part to only support the companies that feel as I do. Though you are correct, I would have to sell house and home to eliminate all of the items necessary. But like I said, I am just trying to do what I can. If you know of any other companies that I listed or support that have beliefs contrary to those of my own please share that info so thÃ¤t I may be better informed and aware.


----------



## Spirit (Nov 19, 2008)

shaggydog said:


> Many will scoff and mock what I am going to say. Times have changed a great deal since I was young. It is very clear that Satan has a great influence over what we now accept as normal. To God fearing people, it is very understandable why commercials that promote the gay or alternative lifestyle are offensive. Unfortunately we have been bombarded by this kind of trash for years now, so the ones that object to it seem like the minority now.
> 
> That is very unfortunate. One of these days, hopefully, the moral majority will speak up against the debauched thinking that permeates the world now. It is not that the majority are gay, it is that we should accept that way of life as normal. It is not normal, and is expressly forbidden in God's word.
> 
> Can we escape it, no. Can we avoid using all products that are promoted by companies that condone this lifestyle, probably not. But it some cases, at least in my case, I will look at some things that I will avoid.


X 1,000,000,000!!!

Wrong will never be right no matter how loudly it is proclaimed as such. God's laws applies to all men whether they choose to accept the truth of that fact or not.


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

Sell that truck yet?


----------



## KeeperTX (Jul 8, 2013)

shaggydog said:


> Many will scoff and mock what I am going to say. Times have changed a great deal since I was young. It is very clear that Satan has a great influence over what we now accept as normal. To God fearing people, it is very understandable why commercials that promote the gay or alternative lifestyle are offensive. Unfortunately we have been bombarded by this kind of trash for years now, so the ones that object to it seem like the minority now.
> 
> That is very unfortunate. One of these days, hopefully, the moral majority will speak up against the debauched thinking that permeates the world now. It is not that the majority are gay, it is that we should accept that way of life as normal. It is not normal, and is expressly forbidden in God's word.
> 
> Can we escape it, no. Can we avoid using all products that are promoted by companies that condone this lifestyle, probably not. But it some cases, at least in my case, I will look at some things that I will avoid.


I agree! ********* want everyone to think it's normal, but it's not. And it never will be to God fearing people. What's worse is that kids are being placed with them and that should be illegal.


----------



## Category6 (Nov 21, 2007)

Johnboat said:


> Advertising sure used to show a woman her place.


I still spank my wife from time to time, she fights me but I think she actually likes it.


----------



## Category6 (Nov 21, 2007)

ADub in T.C. said:


> I like Shiner Bock, wear Cinch jeans, don't order much of anything off the Internet, eat mostly home processed deer meat, wild birds, and fish as well as home grown-organic-non-GMO fruits and veggies so do not eat much fast food at all, though I do support Chick-fil-a. Now I have been spotted at Home Depot before but mainly support my local independently owned hardware store 99% of the time.
> 
> Game-Over I am sure there are products I own that are made by companies who go against my beliefs. I am however trying to do my part to only support the companies that feel as I do. Though you are correct, I would have to sell house and home to eliminate all of the items necessary. But like I said, I am just trying to do what I can. If you know of any other companies that I listed or support that have beliefs contrary to those of my own please share that info so thÃ¤t I may be better informed and aware.


Your spirit in this deal is what makes this country so great, if you don't like it you don't buy it, and if enough people feel the same then they don't stay in business. Don't misinterpret their stance as being supportive of anything however. It's all about the $$$$. They got some advice from a marketing firm that had a nice powerpoint presentation, and they signed off on it. They don't give 2 shats about gays or straights or dogs or cats or choir boys, they only see the world through a P&L statement.


----------



## Ernest (May 21, 2004)

*Ford sold Jag, land Rover in 2008 ...Ford sold Volvo in 2010 ...*

And, before they sold these brands, they marketed these brands specifically to the alternative lifestyle community. Drrr. In the terms of this thread, that can only mean Ford supports sodomy, gay marriage, and likely is simply an agent of Satan. By extension, then all Ford drivers must also support sodomy and gay marriage.

Sell those Fords and Toyotas now, Boys. Once the word gets out, the used market is going to crash for all those ******** friendly conveyances.


----------



## BretE (Jan 24, 2008)

Ernest said:


> *Ford sold Jag, land Rover in 2008 ...Ford sold Volvo in 2010 ...*
> 
> And, before they sold these brands, they marketed these brands specifically to the alternative lifestyle community. Drrr. In the terms of this thread, that can only mean Ford supports sodomy, gay marriage, and likely is simply an agent of Satan. By extension, then all Ford drivers must also support sodomy and gay marriage.
> 
> Sell those Fords and Toyotas now, Boys. Once the word gets out, the used market is going to crash for all those ******** friendly conveyances.


2012 F-350 King Ranch....32K miles....first $55K takes it home!......


----------



## spike404 (Sep 13, 2010)

"So you don't let commercials dictate your decisions, but immediately thought seriously about selling your track after seeing a commercial?..."

Can't recognize hyperbole when you see it?

Here are some common examples of hyperboles:


I am so hungry I could eat a horse. 
I have a million things to do. 
I had to walk 15 miles to school in the snow, uphill. 
I had a ton of homework. 
If I canâ€™t buy that new game, I will die. 
He is as skinny as a toothpick. 
This car goes faster than the speed of light. 
That new car costs a bazillion dollars. 
We are so poor; we donâ€™t have two cents to rub together. 
That joke is so old, the last time I heard it I was riding on a dinosaur. 
They ran like greased lightning. 
He's got tons of money.


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

KeeperTX said:


> I agree! ********* want everyone to think it's normal, but it's not. And it never will be to God fearing people. What's worse is that kids are being placed with them and that should be illegal.


For many my age, we grew up realizing that a gay lifestyle was wrong. Unfortunately young folks now are seeing a gay lifestyle as acceptable, because it is being promoted as such.

It absolutely should be illegal for kids to be "adopted" by a couple in a same sex "marriage", which is a joke in itself. I know that many try to instill what is right and wrong into their children's minds, but it is difficult sometimes when the child sees things all around them that say differently. I can see where it could be very confusing to a child. It is really unfortunate.


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

spike404 said:


> "So you don't let commercials dictate your decisions, but immediately thought seriously about selling your track after seeing a commercial?..."
> 
> Can't recognize hyperbole when you see it?
> 
> ...


Some people get it, some don't. You don't.


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

Brete said:


> 2012 F-350 King Ranch....32K miles....first $55K takes it home!......


 Thats entirely too much for a ******** satanic truck. I'm thinking 19.99. Hell the exorcist will cost me 1000 bucks


----------



## Johnboat (Jun 7, 2004)

*Sounds very familiar, doesn't it*



shaggydog said:


> Many will scoff and mock what I am going to say. Times have changed a great deal since I was young. It is very clear that Satan has a great influence over what we now accept as normal. To God fearing people, it is very understandable why commercials that promote the gay or alternative lifestyle are offensive. Unfortunately we have been bombarded by this kind of trash for years now, so the ones that object to it seem like the minority now.
> 
> That is very unfortunate. One of these days, hopefully, the moral majority will speak up against the debauched thinking that permeates the world now. It is not that the majority are gay, it is that we should accept that way of life as normal. It is not normal, and is expressly forbidden in God's word.
> 
> Can we escape it, no. Can we avoid using all products that are promoted by companies that condone this lifestyle, probably not. But it some cases, at least in my case, I will look at some things that I will avoid.


Kind of reminds me what the terrorists think about America and Western culture that they call "the great Satan" and why they justify wanting to eliminate us from their fundamentalist vision of an Islamic paradise.


----------



## DSL_PWR (Jul 22, 2009)

shaggydog said:


> Many will scoff and mock what I am going to say. Times have changed a great deal since I was young. It is very clear that Satan has a great influence over what we now accept as normal. To God fearing people, it is very understandable why commercials that promote the gay or alternative lifestyle are offensive. Unfortunately we have been bombarded by this kind of trash for years now, so the ones that object to it seem like the minority now.
> 
> That is very unfortunate. One of these days, hopefully, the moral majority will speak up against the debauched thinking that permeates the world now. It is not that the majority are gay, it is that we should accept that way of life as normal. It is not normal, and is expressly forbidden in God's word.
> 
> Can we escape it, no. Can we avoid using all products that are promoted by companies that condone this lifestyle, probably not. But it some cases, at least in my case, I will look at some things that I will avoid.


Very well said, green to you..


----------



## KeeperTX (Jul 8, 2013)

Johnboat said:


> Kind of reminds me what the terrorists think about America and Western culture that they call "the great Satan" and why they justify wanting to eliminate us from their fundamentalist vision of an Islamic paradise.


Seriously???...:spineyes:

Quaran promotes violence (kill infidels) but the bible doens't.


----------



## Newbomb Turk (Sep 16, 2005)

poppadawg said:


> Thats entirely too much for a ******** satanic truck. I'm thinking 19.99. Hell the exorcist will cost me 1000 bucks


Just look who built it. Besides the reliability issues, some of these guys buy new ones every 2 years just to support that ford blue globe proudly displayed right on their grilles.
http://fordglobe.org/

*Ford GLOBE -- Changing the Corporate Culture*

Ford GLOBE is an ever-expanding grassroots network of hourly and salaried employees, retirees and contractors at Ford Motor Company, its subsidiaries and affiliates. We welcome new members. Your participation is what helps make the group what it is and what it will become. Whether this is your first shy, tentative outreach to like-minded individuals at Ford or one small part of an ongoing activist lifestyle, your presence and viewpoints are welcome in this group. Ford GLOBE respects each members choice on how "out" they wish to be.

Ford GLOBEâ€™s goals are mutually beneficial between GLOBE members and Ford Motor Company. By helping to maintain a safe, supportive work environment for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered people at Ford, enhancing their loyalty and productivity, Ford GLOBE helps Ford Motor Company to achieve its goal of becoming the worldâ€™s premier automotive company. 
Towards that end Ford GLOBE has launched these web pages to inform and educate both potential members and the general public of our activities, both inside and outside the company. Please feel free to browse our pages, ask questions or send us feedback at [email protected]. Be sure to visit Pride at Work to learn more about lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender labor and their allies.


----------



## monkeyman1 (Dec 30, 2007)

If I used Google, I bet I would find statements to the effect that Ford, Dodge and Toyota are all strongly and openly anti-homosexual, right? 

Edit: Oops...Newbomb Turk founds something!


----------



## CTone (Jul 23, 2013)

KeeperTX said:


> Seriously???...:spineyes:
> 
> Quaran promotes violence (kill infidels) but the bible doens't.


The bible I am familiar with, has all sorts of violence in it. Mostly god killing human beings of all sorts, or instructing his people to kill for him.
in exodus chapter 32, he had the tribe of Levi kill 3000 of his own chosen people. The god of the bible has shown to be very violent.
just saying:walkingsm


----------



## Spirit (Nov 19, 2008)

CTone said:


> The bible I am familiar with, has all sorts of violence in it. Mostly god killing human beings of all sorts, or instructing his people to kill for him.
> in exodus chapter 32, he had the tribe of Levi kill 3000 of his own chosen people. The god of the bible has shown to be very violent.
> just saying:walkingsm


In those days, blood was required for offering and sacrifice ... but Christ was the sacrificial lamb, on the alter of the great I Am, he gave his life to set the sinner free ... He bled and died upon the cross, to save a world that lost, Salvation's price was paid at Calvary. (Chorus to a song I wrote, , just seemed to fit there. ) Christ blood is why we are no longer under the old law of an eye for an eye, stoning and all the other harsh Old Testament laws. Blood was required for purification ... once Christ shed his blood, and the veil was rent in two, God entered into a New Covenant with man.

In the New Testament you find Christ message. You don't find wrath and vengeance in the New Testament ... you find promise, hope and love.


----------



## CTone (Jul 23, 2013)

spirit said:


> In those days, blood was required for offering and sacrifice ... but Christ was the sacrificial lamb, on the alter of the great I Am, he gave his life to set the sinner free ... He bled and died upon the cross, to save a world that lost, Salvation's price was paid at Calvary. (Chorus to a song I wrote, , just seemed to fit there. ) Christ blood is why we are no longer under the old law of an eye for an eye, stoning and all the other harsh Old Testament laws. Blood was required for purification ... once Christ shed his blood, and the veil was rent in two, God entered into a New Covenant with man.


I am familiar with the difference with the covenants; I was just bringing up the fact that the bible taken as a whole (which many christians do) is very violent. Many of the killings in the old testament where not of the purification variety, they were more of the â€œour god wants your land for the Israelitesâ€ variety. I think this type of killing would be more in line with the term â€œethnic cleansingâ€.
I don't what to get into any bible study, just pointing out what most folks would be considered violent behavior.
:walkingsm


----------



## BretE (Jan 24, 2008)

Newbomb Turk said:


> Just look who built it. Besides the reliability issues, some of these guys buy new ones every 2 years just to support that ford blue globe proudly displayed right on their grilles.
> http://fordglobe.org/
> 
> *Ford GLOBE -- Changing the Corporate Culture*
> ...


Yikes........immediate price drop.....$54K.......


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

Well I couldn't do a full count, but it seems like the "gays" have it in this argument. There were most "it doesn't bother me" comments than there were "it's wrong" comments. Welcome to the new 2gayCool Fishing forum... Have a fun and be happy.


----------



## spike404 (Sep 13, 2010)

shaggydog said:


> Some people get it, some don't. You don't.


 What is it that I do not, "get"?


----------



## BretE (Jan 24, 2008)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> Well I couldn't do a full count, but it seems like the "gays" have it in this argument. There were most "it doesn't bother me" comments than there were "it's wrong" comments. Welcome to the new 2gayCool Fishing forum... Have a fun and be happy.


You don't watch football so your views don't even count......


----------



## Ernest (May 21, 2004)

How come no one has mentioned Audi's direct endorsement of gay marriage in their recent ad? Marriage Equality Love. Anyone, anyone, Bueller, Bueller?


----------



## KeeperTX (Jul 8, 2013)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> Well I couldn't do a full count, but it seems like the "gays" have it in this argument. There were most "it doesn't bother me" comments than there were "it's wrong" comments. Welcome to the new 2gayCool Fishing forum... Have a fun and be happy.


Yiiippppeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!!!! Hooorrrraaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyy!!! Thatssssss like sssssssso awessssssssome! 
Now I need to go get my hair done.


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

spike404 said:


> What is it that I do not, "get"?


If it has to be explained you still would not get it.

I do not want to make this a bible discussion, but just to clarify things, God does not change. It is not only those that practice homosexuality that he condemns, he also condemns those that support it or condone it. It goes much farther than just practicing it. Look at Sodom and Gomorrah, and yes that is exactly where this world is headed.


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

Ernest said:


> How come no one has mentioned Audi's direct endorsement of gay marriage in their recent ad? Marriage Equality Love. Anyone, anyone, Bueller, Bueller?


I would drive that gay A8 with the V10 in it.


----------



## Ernest (May 21, 2004)

So, you are telling us you are a size queen? 

Might want to keep that to yourself.


----------



## Newbomb Turk (Sep 16, 2005)

Ernest said:


> How come no one has mentioned Audi's direct endorsement of gay marriage in their recent ad? Marriage Equality Love. Anyone, anyone, Bueller, Bueller?


Very well said, green to you..


----------



## Yams (Jul 16, 2008)

shaggydog said:


> For many my age, we grew up realizing that a gay lifestyle was wrong. Unfortunately young folks now are seeing a gay lifestyle as acceptable, because it is being promoted as such.
> 
> It absolutely should be illegal for kids to be "adopted" by a couple in a same sex "marriage", which is a joke in itself. I know that many try to instill what is right and wrong into their children's minds, but it is difficult sometimes when the child sees things all around them that say differently. I can see where it could be very confusing to a child. It is really unfortunate.


I dont think they see it as acceptable, persay, they simply realize they have no business telling someone else how to live their life.

I got enough to deal with in my own life and with my own family than to worry about who some guy or gal decides to cozy up to. I could care less. I think it is a huge distraction in our country that takes away from real issues that affect every single one of us.


----------



## Yams (Jul 16, 2008)

Itsmejoe231 said:


> I thought all gays drove Saturns...
> 
> Because they are so close to Uranus.


I just wanted to point out that this was the best post in this thread, and everyone ignored it.

Itsmejoe231 wins this thread.


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

Yams said:


> I dont think they see it as acceptable, persay, they simply realize they have no business telling someone else how to live their life.
> 
> I got enough to deal with in my own life and with my own family than to worry about who some guy or gal decides to cozy up to. I could care less. I think it is a huge distraction in our country that takes away from real issues that affect every single one of us.


You are exactly right in a lot of cases. I agree that everyone makes their own decisions, and everyone answers for them.


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

Sounds like a lot of theses auto makers are pro ****. OP how do you feel about a horse and buggy? I bet those Amish don't support it.


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

Category5 said:


> Your spirit in this deal is what makes this country so great, if you don't like it you don't buy it, and if enough people feel the same then they don't stay in business. Don't misinterpret their stance as being supportive of anything however. It's all about the $$$$. They got some advice from a marketing firm that had a nice powerpoint presentation, and they signed off on it. They don't give 2 shats about gays or straights or dogs or cats or choir boys, they only see the world through a P&L statement.


Horse pucky. Every human at GM supports them gays. Its a grand master plan for the promotion of Satan. They drink blood and sacrifice small puppys on their lunch breaks over there.


----------



## spike404 (Sep 13, 2010)

shaggydog said:


> If it has to be explained you still would not get it.
> 
> I do not want to make this a bible discussion, but just to clarify things, God does not change. It is not only those that practice homosexuality that he condemns, he also condemns those that support it or condone it. It goes much farther than just practicing it. Look at Sodom and Gomorrah, and yes that is exactly where this world is headed.


 I do not know what you are talking about. I never made any posts about religion. I made one post stating that the OP was using hyperbole when he stated he wanted to sell his Chevrolet because of the ad. That was it!

Repeat. I *never* made any religious posts. You, are confusing posters.


----------



## Category6 (Nov 21, 2007)

poppadawg said:


> Horse pucky. Every human at GM supports them gays. Its a grand master plan for the promotion of Satan. They drink blood and sacrifice small puppys on their lunch breaks over there.


LOL. No they don't, they just sit around a conference table and count their money. You're stupid, you old stupid sarcastic fool. (just kidding)


----------



## ADub in T.C. (Nov 17, 2009)

Category5 said:


> LOL. No they don't, they just sit around a conference table and count their money. You're stupid, you old stupid sarcastic fool. (just kidding)


And here my friends is the ultimate conclusion!!! What is good and right has been and will continue to be ignored for the almighty dollar! Chevrolet just told me that possibly making an extra dollar is more important than anything else....it is what the majority or companies in our country have lowered themselves to. Disappointing.


----------



## Category6 (Nov 21, 2007)

now you're starting to get it


----------



## Trouthunter (Dec 18, 1998)

> And, before they sold these brands, they marketed these brands specifically to the alternative lifestyle community.


Must not have had the sales selling to those of alternate lifestyles since they sold the companies huh?

TH


----------



## ADub in T.C. (Nov 17, 2009)

I have understood this for quite some time......I just thought Chevrolet would never go that direction. I was sadly mistaken.


----------



## Newbomb Turk (Sep 16, 2005)

roundman said:


> where did you wake up ? lol


Denton?


----------



## Category6 (Nov 21, 2007)

Darn near any company will go ANY direction if they think there's a dollar bill hiding somewhere down that way, especially if it's publicly traded. Believe in God, believe in family, believe in labrador retrievers, believe in fishing, but never believe in the idea that any corporation cares whether you live or die...as long as you buy.


----------



## Johnboat (Jun 7, 2004)

*$800 Billion is not chump change*

http://www.businessinsider.com/lgbt-community-untapped-market-consumer-brands-2013-6

Why? What is really at stake? Here are just a few numbers surrounding LGBT consumers and the differences in spending power of gay households vs. the American general market:

23% higher median household income1

24% more equity in their homes1

26% of gay men say they will pay more for top quality brands2

30% have taken a major vacation in the past year2

40% bought a new smart phone in the past year2

Estimates put the buying power of the LGBT community at over $800 billion annually.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/lgbt-community-untapped-market-consumer-brands-2013-6#ixzz2t2rv7AOo


----------



## Ernest (May 21, 2004)

Oh, noes the evil capitalists are chasing profits, not prophets. I, for one, am shocked.


----------



## Game-Over (Jun 9, 2010)

ADub in T.C. said:


> Chevrolet just told me that possibly making an extra dollar is more important than anything else....it is what the majority or companies in our country have lowered themselves to. Disappointing.


**** right, Chevrolet's responsibility is to it's shareholders, not your religious sensitivities.


----------



## ADub in T.C. (Nov 17, 2009)

So Ernest and Game-Over, do you agree with the "do anything for a dollar" mentality? Even if it goes against your personal standards? I am not trying to cause problems, I am just curious how this might apply directly?


----------



## Game-Over (Jun 9, 2010)

My personal standards do not come into play if I am the head of a public company. In that capacity I have a fiduciary duty to maximize the return to my shareholders in any way that is legally possible, not interject my personal feelings into company operations.


----------



## Johnboat (Jun 7, 2004)

*Who will you hurt with a boycott?*



ADub in T.C. said:


> So Ernest and Game-Over, do you agree with the "do anything for a dollar" mentality? Even if it goes against your personal standards? I am not trying to cause problems, I am just curious how this might apply directly?


Lots of straight, Christian, hard-working, fully employed taxpayers are busy making, transporting, selling and repairing GM products to feed their families. Just sayin'.


----------



## Category6 (Nov 21, 2007)

Game-Over said:


> My personal standards do not come into play if I am the head of a public company. In that capacity I have a fiduciary duty to maximize the return to my shareholders in any way that is legally possible, not interject my personal feelings into company operations.


Exactly. You would be remiss in your duties otherwise.


----------



## KennerTRP (Jan 10, 2006)

Wow. This is on hell of a thread. IMHO, drop the mouse and step back from the computor.


----------



## The Salty Raider (Sep 25, 2012)

I don't understand how gays can bother so many people.


----------



## TxBrewer (Jul 23, 2011)

The Salty Raider said:


> I don't understand how gays can bother so many people.


They are afraid they will catch the gay then pass on the gay to their families. Completely reasonable right :headknock


----------



## Category6 (Nov 21, 2007)

The Salty Raider said:


> I don't understand how gays can bother so many people.


Because them gays stir up all sorts of gay thoughts and feelings, which inevitably leads to numerous deviant behaviors up to AND including molesting nuns, stomping on puppies, stroking kittens against the grain, and who knows what else. Duh!


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

ADub in T.C. said:


> So Ernest and Game-Over, do you agree with the "do anything for a dollar" mentality? Even if it goes against your personal standards? I am not trying to cause problems, I am just curious how this might apply directly?


 Americas mores have evolved. Do anything for a dollar does not apply here. The commercial does not go against the majorities "standards". Thats the point. Tolerance for people that are different then the "norm" has become popular. With the recent uproar over Putins anti gay rhetoric GM is looking to cash in on a trendy topic.


----------



## ADub in T.C. (Nov 17, 2009)

Ok then the answer would be "yes if my position as head of a publicly traded company meant I had to approve ads that go against my morals in order to make money for the shareholders which in turn puts more money in my pocket I would do it rather than find a job that does not require me to do such"

And I definitely agree, there are thousands of GM employees who probably feel as I do. Hopefully they are as disappointed with their employer as I am. It is sad that they are forced to be labeled under Chevrolet's new advertising umbrella as employees of a company who approves of such behaviors.


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

Category5 said:


> Because them gays stir up all sorts of gay thoughts and feelings, which inevitably leads to numerous deviant behaviors up to AND including molesting nuns, stomping on puppies, stroking kittens against the grain, and who knows what else. Duh!


You left out the raping of midgets.


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

It's obviously a deeper subject than most of you shallow minded people can understand.

It's a political movement, that is far left of where we are now. I can't go into great detail unless this goes to the jungle. 

But there are quite of mess of minority groups that think they are special and are owed something by the rest of us. They already take out over $600 a week from my check towards taxes. What I am getting at is, these movements are about money and benefits, nothing more... Just another special interest group trying to get paid. and using their sexual preference to do it. That's why being anti-gay now is 'racist'...


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

ADub in T.C. said:


> And I definitely agree, there are thousands of GM employees who probably feel as I do. Hopefully they are as disappointed with their employer as I am. It is sad that they are forced to be labeled under Chevrolet's new advertising umbrella as employees of a company who approves of such behaviors.


I seriously doubt that. Most people are much more open minded.


----------



## Game-Over (Jun 9, 2010)

ADub in T.C. said:


> Ok then the answer would be "yes if my position as head of a publicly traded company meant I had to approve ads that go against my morals in order to make money for the shareholders which in turn puts more money in my pocket I would do it rather than find a job that does not require me to do such"


You do understand that as the head of a publicly traded company you basically have a legal obligation to put "making a dollar first" don't you? It's pretty much part of the job description. You don't get to the C suites without having a firm grasp of this.

Don't take the job if you aren't up to it. The ability to separate personal feelings from business decisions is partially why the CEO's get paid the big bucks.


----------



## ADub in T.C. (Nov 17, 2009)

Game-Over said:


> You do understand that as the head of a publicly traded company you basically have a legal obligation to put "making a dollar first" don't you?
> 
> Don't take the job if you aren't up to it. The ability to separate personal feelings from business decisions is partially why the CEO's get paid the big bucks.


I guess I would just much rather be able to look myself in the mirror without the disgust of knowing what I had to do get get where I am at.

Enjoyed this thread. Glad I posted. I'm done.


----------



## Game-Over (Jun 9, 2010)

Johnboat said:


> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_homosexuals_in_****_Germany_and_the_Holocaust


Never noticed this before but the word censor screwed up the link.


----------



## Category6 (Nov 21, 2007)

ADub in T.C. said:


> I guess I would just much rather be able to look myself in the mirror without the disgust of knowing what I had to do get get where I am at.
> 
> Enjoyed this thread. Glad I posted. I'm done.


It was a good one!!!!!! Not many get to the 100+ post mark, and I would've been bored darn near to the point of suicide today without it (I just finished a 18 day turnaround, so I haven't figured out what to do with myself on a day off again just yet). Well done Sir!


----------



## Game-Over (Jun 9, 2010)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> It's obviously a deeper subject than most of you shallow minded people can understand.
> 
> It's a political movement, that is far left of where we are now. I can't go into great detail unless this goes to the jungle.
> 
> But there are quite of mess of minority groups that think they are special and are owed something by the rest of us. They already take out over $600 a week from my check towards taxes. What I am getting at is, these movements are about money and benefits, nothing more... Just another special interest group trying to get paid. and using their sexual preference to do it. That's why being anti-gay now is 'racist'...


So that $600 a week goes solely to supporting minority groups? Hogwash.


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> It's obviously a deeper subject than most of you shallow minded people can understand.
> 
> It's a political movement, that is far left of where we are now. I can't go into great detail unless this goes to the jungle.
> 
> But there are quite of mess of minority groups that think they are special and are owed something by the rest of us. They already take out over $600 a week from my check towards taxes. What I am getting at is, these movements are about money and benefits, nothing more... Just another special interest group trying to get paid. and using their sexual preference to do it. That's why being anti-gay now is 'racist'...


You make waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay to much money.


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

Game-Over said:


> So that $600 a week goes solely to supporting minority groups? Hogwash.


I didn't say that... but that's just my taxes... There are a lot of special groups trying to get their hand in the pot. I am not picking on any color of people, I'm only talking about groups who think they're special.



shaggydog said:


> You make waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay to much money.


I get paid for what I know, not what I actually do


----------



## Game-Over (Jun 9, 2010)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> I didn't say that... but that's just my taxes... There are a lot of special groups trying to get their hand in the pot. I am not picking on any color of people, I'm only talking about groups who think they're special.
> 
> I get paid for what I know, not what I actually do


I don't know a single gay person who is "looking for money" from the gov. As a matter of fact, none of them would qualify for those types of benefits as they make too much $. The gimmiedat argument is a tough case to make when you consider the economic position most gays are in.


----------



## Category6 (Nov 21, 2007)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> It's obviously a deeper subject than most of you shallow minded people can understand.
> 
> It's a political movement, that is far left of where we are now. I can't go into great detail unless this goes to the jungle.
> 
> But there are quite of mess of minority groups that think they are special and are owed something by the rest of us. They already take out over $600 a week from my check towards taxes. What I am getting at is, these movements are about money and benefits, nothing more... Just another special interest group trying to get paid. and using their sexual preference to do it. That's why being anti-gay now is 'racist'...


I'm not shallow minded. I can take it, lay the truth down on me...let's dance you and I.


----------



## Bocephus (May 30, 2008)

This thread is gay !


----------



## Category6 (Nov 21, 2007)

Bocephus said:


> This thread is gay !


No...people that fornicate with others of the same sex are gay. This thread is provocative, but not gay. Also, use of the word fornicate is gay as hell.


----------



## batmaninja (Jul 15, 2010)

Game-Over said:


> I don't know a single gay person who is "looking for money" from the gov. As a matter of fact, none of them would qualify for those types of benefits as they make too much $. The gimmiedat argument is a tough case to make when you consider the economic position most gays are in.


Your right GO it isn't about money. Look at the Duck Dynasty nonsense. Phil got blasted for his religious views, which were antigay. The gays want their views accepted but will not tolerate differing views. Don't try and say that they don't think they are special, that is the definition of it.

To shine a light on one of the handouts -

In a first-of-its-kind ruling, a federal judge in Boston has ordered Massachusetts authorities to provide a taxpayer-funded sex-change operation for a transgender prisoner.
Chief U.S. District Judge Mark Wolf said he based his ruling on the recommendations of doctors at the commonwealthâ€™s Department of Correction who prescribed sex-reassignment surgery as â€œthe only form of adequate medical careâ€ for Michelle Kosilek.
Kosilek, who used to go by â€œRobert,â€ is serving life in prison without the possibility of parole for the 1990 murder of his wife.

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2012/09/04/judge-orders-sex-change-operation-for-federal-prisoner/

One thing we all can agree on, The Gays can Par-tay. Spud I think you may need a designated drink tester.


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

Game-Over said:


> I don't know a single gay person who is "looking for money" from the gov. As a matter of fact, none of them would qualify for those types of benefits as they make too much $. The gimmiedat argument is a tough case to make when you consider the economic position most gays are in.





Category5 said:


> I'm not shallow minded. I can take it, lay the truth down on me...let's dance you and I.


I will dance with you then... I'll start off with a slow two-step for you, no need in working up a sweat yet. I tried to keep it short, because I know most people will look at this and say "No way in hell I'm reading all of that".





 Here is a video of the unions talking **** about how Obama is working hard for them, and they need to "take the sons a *****es out". He was referring to the Tea Party when he said that... So what he was saying is that they have nothing in common with these people... http://www.teaparty.org/ By the way, they are singing a different tune now aren't they? They want Obamacare stopped.

Now, the illegals: They already benefit in many ways... They already get welfare, free medical through medicaid, all under the excuse that they do the work Americans won't do... That is total b.s. young people were the most likely candidate to sack your groceries, fetch the buggies out of the parking lot, haul hay in the summer... Now they have a hard time finding those job because someone else is doing it for less money. I could go on for days with this one, but you get the idea.

The democratic party... 




They find it hard to claim God at all... So the whole Declaration thing is lost to them.. "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights"

I don't like the term gimmidats... it sounds like a racial slur, and since they only make up 12.9% of the US it is unfair to blame them for the whole welfare, free phone, free medical fiasco. There is a website that breaks this down for you. http://www.statisticbrain.com/welfare-statistics/
There are lots of sites out there they say roughly half of Americans receive one form of help or another. I'm sure there are a lot of those who deserve it, the handicapped, the elderly and so on. But there are still a whole bunch that fraud the government.

So lets get to the queers... What does gay right mean? It means they have a right of some kind under law. They are now recognized as a group who need their very own affirmative action. Also, they feel the need to be married!!!!!!! The dumbest thing they could ever ask for. Marriage has been and always will be a religious sacrament between a man, his woman, and GOD!! Nowhere in the bile does it say that it's okay for two men to get married. So why is the federal government even involved in the marriage business? Money!! The gays have to fight tooth and nail to get the right to be called married so they can benefit from the lower tax bracket. They will get to be eligible for spousal benefits, etc. So you see, it is all about money.

It is a very big picture kind of thing, if you think about it. All of these groups in large make up the democratic party who we talked about earlier. It is no longer one political party against another, it has been for the last 20 years, the people who choose to work hard and get ahead against the lazy, racist, Godless, democratic party of the late 20th century.

disclaimer: I did not research every exact percentage because for every page that supports what I say, there is a page that says it's a lie. But I did post video links that support some of it. And frankly, if you're interested enough, Google is your friend.


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

****. America is a horrible place. Who knew. Here I am living like a king in what I thot is a fantastic country. If only I could be as miserable as you I could see the light. Talk about half empty. You sir have a dark soul. Good luck with that.


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

poppadawg said:


> ****. America is a horrible place. Who knew. Here I am living like a king in what I thot is a fantastic country. If only I could be as miserable as you I could see the light. Talk about half empty. You sir have a dark soul. Good luck with that.


I have a dark soul for bashing the democratic party??? You must really support the Looser-in-Chief then. I do not, and don't care who knows.


----------



## Category6 (Nov 21, 2007)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> I will dance with you then... I'll start off with a slow two-step for you, no need in working up a sweat yet. I tried to keep it short, because I know most people will look at this and say "No way in hell I'm reading all of that".
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'm sorry, I wasn't listening.


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

Category5 said:


> I'm sorry, I wasn't listening.


You asked me to dance, and that's all you got? Jeeezus, I thought you might have a rebuttal, or maybe a thought...

Guess I was wrong.


----------



## mastercylinder60 (Dec 18, 2005)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> So lets get to the queers... What does gay right mean? It means they have a right of some kind under law. They are now recognized as a group who need their very own affirmative action. Also, they feel the need to be married!!!!!!! The dumbest thing they could ever ask for. Marriage has been and always will be a religious sacrament between a man, his woman, and GOD!! Nowhere in the bile does it say that it's okay for two men to get married. So why is the federal government even involved in the marriage business?


Who frickin cares? What a long, boring diatribe about nothing. Mind your own business and leave the gay people alone.

They aren't bothering me, and they aren't bothering you. Find something more important in life to concern yourself with than homosexuals.


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

mastercylinder said:


> Who frickin cares? What a long, boring diatribe about nothing. Mind your own business and leave the gay people alone.
> 
> They aren't bothering me, and they aren't bothering you. Find something more important in life to concern yourself with than homosexuals.


Says the man who woke up in Dayton with "no memory" and a sore butt...


----------



## mastercylinder60 (Dec 18, 2005)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> Says the man who woke up in Dayton with "no memory" and a sore butt...


A typical juvenile response from a person who can't intelligently respond.


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

mastercylinder said:


> A typical response from a.person who can't intelligently respond.


I typed four or five paragraphs and posted videos for you, to illustrate how I believe it is all about money. You may not call that intelligently, but at least it wasn't a one liner attack that had nothing to do with the post. Now hurry up and go order a Michael Sam jersey before they all run out.


----------



## Leo (May 21, 2004)

Evidently that little thing called freedom that this country was built on only applies to the people that believe like you? The different people that inhabit this great country shouldn't really be any concern of yours, or anyone's for that matter. After seeing the Russian response to the gay's, maybe that's the place for you.


----------



## mastercylinder60 (Dec 18, 2005)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> Now hurry up and go order a Michael Sam jersey before they all run out.


How old are you? Go finish your math homework and go to bed.


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

Leo said:


> Evidently that little thing called freedom that this country was built on only applies to the people that believe like you? The different people that inhabit this great country shouldn't really be any concern of yours, or anyone's for that matter. After seeing the Russian response to the gay's, maybe that's the place for you.


I never said they gays didn't have the right to be gay, I said all of the hoopla is about money and furthering the agenda of a political party... Maybe you should read it.


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

mastercylinder said:


> How old are you? Go do your math homework and go to bed.


Well my dementia hasn't set in so bad I drive around aimlessly with no memory.


----------



## Leo (May 21, 2004)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> I never said they gays didn't have the right to be gay, I said all of the hoopla is about money and furthering the agenda of a political party... Maybe you should read it.


I don't disagree about the agenda part but the ones that I have known over the years have never had money issues. They don't get welfare, food stamps or Medicaid so what money issues are you talking about?


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

Leo said:


> I don't disagree about the agenda part but the ones that I have known over the years have never had money issues. They don't get welfare, food stamps or Medicaid so what money issues are you talking about?


Lower taxes like other married couples, in case you didn't know, we pay less taxes as a single person who makes the same money. Spousal benefits, like two guys married and they're both retired officers from the military, when one dies, they get the others benefits like a regular couple.

By the way, I have a gay niece, and a lady I've known for over twenty years who is still with the same partner. I am not trying not to completely bash gays, but this gay rights movement is about money, or benefits of some kind. If there was nothing to gain, there would be no movement.


----------



## mastercylinder60 (Dec 18, 2005)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> Well my dementia hasn't set in so bad I drive around aimlessly with no memory.


Is the 7th grade stuff the best you can do? If you are going to hate, please provide a reasonable explanation for your hate?


----------



## Leo (May 21, 2004)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> Lower taxes like other married couples, in case you didn't know, we pay less taxes as a single person who makes the same money. Spousal benefits, like two guys married and they're both retired officers from the military, when one dies, they get the others benefits like a regular couple.
> 
> By the way, I have a gay niece, and a lady I've known for over twenty years who is still with the same partner. I am not trying not to completely bash gays, but this gay rights movement is about money, or benefits of some kind. If there was nothing to gain, there would be no movement.


So freedom of choice has nothing to do with it it? you really think it's all about the money? What about equality? Where does that fit in? Some are more equal than others? Not gay but not buyin your argument.


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> They find it hard to claim God at all... So the whole Declaration thing is lost to them.. "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights"


Unless your gay. Then your group isn't entitled to the same rights as my group. Not very American. The argument that it all about money is silly. Life will be a lot happier if you don't see demons every where you look. Live and let live.


----------



## TxBrewer (Jul 23, 2011)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> So lets get to the queers... What does gay right mean? It means they have a right of some kind under law. They are now recognized as a group who need their very own affirmative action. Also, they feel the need to be married!!!!!!! The dumbest thing they could ever ask for. Marriage has been and always will be a religious sacrament between a man, his woman, and GOD!! Nowhere in the bile does it say that it's okay for two men to get married. So why is the federal government even involved in the marriage business? Money!! The gays have to fight tooth and nail to get the right to be called married so they can benefit from the lower tax bracket. They will get to be eligible for spousal benefits, etc. So you see, it is all about money.


The big step you are overlooking is that marriage is not only between a man, woman and God. Now that there are legal and financial planning (death, taxes and so on) it is bigger and therefore it is no longer ONLY between a man, woman and God. So whether the Bible says it is OK or not is no longer relevant when the marriage license is issued by the state.

If you want a marriage to be only between a man, woman and God then don't get a marriage license have a religious ceremony and you are married before God but not the state, if you want to be recognized by the state then you have to open it up to a broader interpretation.

But onto the bigger issue, why shouldn't gays and lesbians be allowed to marry? Other than you feel it is morally wrong what reason is there to prevent them from being married. And since it is issued by the state "because the bible says so" isn't enough.


----------



## Ernest (May 21, 2004)

*The gays have to fight tooth and nail to get the right to be called married so they can benefit from the lower tax bracket.*

For many tax brackets/situations, there is a marriage penalty. Not a benefit, a penalty. Particularly for those in the upper tax brackets.


----------



## batmaninja (Jul 15, 2010)

Brew, marriage laws have been in effect for a few years now and were written at a time where the Gays were even less than the 1-3% that is out there today. Therefore the marriage laws on the books did not touch on the many different scenarios that can derive from a same sex marriage. See the thread on the red solo cup ******* that got divorced in the Jungle. When ******'s get divorced who gets the kids, the house, the alimony? All of these items have been set through decades of precedents for regular marriage but a entire new set of laws will have to be set for same sex marriage. Why not just call it a civil union and be done with it? Please answer that for me.


----------



## Spirit (Nov 19, 2008)

Rather than changing the meaning of a religious ceremony, why not make all government unions "civil unions" ... and refer to them as "joined" rather than married. All unions are civil unions. If a couple want to be married, which is a religious union, outlined by God as being between a man and woman, then they get married in a church.

No one is shortchanged. All unions are equal. And religious beliefs are not raped.


----------



## Brew (May 21, 2004)

Huh??


----------



## Ernest (May 21, 2004)

Why would new laws be needed for child support or child custody? Wouldn't the factors to be considered be the same, irrespective of the gender of the folks involved? Take for example the best interests of the child when considering custody, possession, or access. Its the same, right? 

Why not just call it marriage and be done with it? 

That's what I don't get. My marital relationship is between me and my wife. That doesn't change if my neighbor marries someone of the same gender.


----------



## Category6 (Nov 21, 2007)

spirit said:


> Rather than changing the meaning of a religious ceremony, why not make all government unions "civil unions" ... and refer to them as "joined" rather than married. All unions are civil unions. If a couple want to be married, which is a religious union, outlined by God as being between a man and woman, then they get married in a church.
> 
> No one is shortchanged. All unions are equal. And religious beliefs are not raped.


This made my brain hurt...I'm so confused


----------



## Hullahopper (May 24, 2004)

monkeyman1 said:


> If I used Google, I bet I would find statements to the effect that Ford, Dodge and Toyota are all strongly and openly anti-homosexual, right?
> 
> Edit: Oops...Newbomb Turk founds something!


As far as Ford goes:

The Ford Motor company, either through its company policies or through donations, has been supportive of several gay and lesbian goals.

Examples, mostly from the Ford Motor Company site:

In a press release dated 2/1/05, Ford announced a pledge of $250,000 to the "Affirmations Lesbian and Gay Community Center in the Detroit suburb of Ferndale, one of the largest donations ever made from a fortune 500 company to a lesbian, bisexual and transgender (GLBT) organization.

In March, 2004, the co-founder of Ford's gay, lesbian or bisexual employees group (GLOBE) was honored by the Affirmations Lesbian and Gay Community center.

In April, 2004, Volvo Cars of North American (a division of Ford) was given an Advertising Research Foundation award for it's campaign targeting GLBT customers.

In June, 2004, Diversity Inc. named Ford as among the top 10 companies for GLBT workers.

In July, 2004, Ford became the first of the Big-3 auto companies to add "Gender Identity" as a protected category.

In July, 2002, Ford hired Witeck/Combs Communications to handle their advertising to the gay and lesbian market, according to the Witeck/Combs website.

http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/f/ford-gays.htm#.Uvu4CvldWvs


----------



## Spirit (Nov 19, 2008)

Makes sense to me. 

Eliminate Marriage Licenses. Institute Civil Union licenses. Everyone who goes to the courthouse for a license, upon completion and return would be legally joined. Gay, straight, bi, transgendered whatever - anyone can get a Civil Union license and be joined. To end your union, you get a divorce and you are no longer joined.

Marriage is defined in the dictionary as a union between a man and woman. Do not change the definition of marriage or its religious affiliations and meanings. Make unions truly equal for all ... Civil Unions for all legal adults regardless of sex or sexual orientation. 

A Marriage Ceremony would just be a religious event for the joined couple to enjoy with friends and family and have no legal ties whatsoever. (Like a Christening, or a Bar Mitzvah, or a Baptism.)


----------



## batmaninja (Jul 15, 2010)

Ernest said:


> Why would new laws be needed for child support or child custody?


Well E, the short answer would be that pole to pole and hole to hole, don't make no baby.


----------



## Game-Over (Jun 9, 2010)

batmaninja said:


> Brew, marriage laws have been in effect for a few years now and were written at a time where the Gays were even less than the 1-3% that is out there today. Therefore the marriage laws on the books did not touch on the many different scenarios that can derive from a same sex marriage. See the thread on the red solo cup ******* that got divorced in the Jungle. When ******'s get divorced who gets the kids, the house, the alimony? All of these items have been set through decades of precedents for regular marriage but a entire new set of laws will have to be set for same sex marriage. Why not just call it a civil union and be done with it? Please answer that for me.


That's not the best example. The state already had the legal framework set up to handle child custody issues. Those ******* chose to go out side of their marriage to get pregnant from a third party. No different than if you were shooting blanks and your wife decided to get pregnant by your neighbor. In a case like that you would have the same issues, is it you and your wife's kid or is it your wife and neighbors kid? I know the law presumes certain things, but that does not mean a paternity test can't overcome those presumptions. If they had gone the Dr. Supervised artificial insemination route then there wouldn't be the issues you bring up. It would have been handled like any other divorce.


----------



## TxBrewer (Jul 23, 2011)

batmaninja said:


> Brew, marriage laws have been in effect for a few years now and were written at a time where the Gays were even less than the 1-3% that is out there today. Therefore the marriage laws on the books did not touch on the many different scenarios that can derive from a same sex marriage. See the thread on the red solo cup ******* that got divorced in the Jungle. When ******'s get divorced who gets the kids, the house, the alimony? All of these items have been set through decades of precedents for regular marriage but a entire new set of laws will have to be set for same sex marriage. Why not just call it a civil union and be done with it? Please answer that for me.


There are several reasons but here are two big ones:

- You don't deny a class of people the right of marriage because you think figuring out the law would be difficult. Same sex couples have been getting married and divorced for years now, there are more than enough lawyers and courts out there to set the precedents many of which already have been set in those states and those exact issues have been addressed so I don't see how that should be an issue.

- The main reason is a civil union is not the same legally as being married. There are a whole list of items that a civil union does not provide in which a marriage does. Why should those be denied to same sex couples?


----------



## TxBrewer (Jul 23, 2011)

Game-Over said:


> That's not the best example. The state already had the legal framework set up to handle child custody issues. Those ******* chose to go out side of their marriage to get pregnant from a third party. No different than if you were shooting blanks and your wife decided to get pregnant by your neighbor. In a case like that you would have the same issues, is it you and your wife's kid or is it your wife and neighbors kid? I know the law presumes certain things, but that does not mean a paternity test can't overcome those presumptions. If they had gone the Dr. Supervised artificial insemination route then there wouldn't be the issues you bring up. It would have been handled like any other divorce.


There are also plenty of legally recognized contracts where a third party donor can be chosen to provide the material either sperm or egg depending on the couple and have zero legal obligation go the child. People get into trouble when they do not complete those documents and it becomes like the scenario you mentioned with the neighbor.

On top of that traditional marriage custody cases are rarely uncomplicated situations so let's not pretend that all of the sudden when same sex couples get divorced we will have a new issue with problematic custody issues.


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

A whole bunch of attempts, at making it look like I am bashing gays...

How about one of you queer defenders explain why they need gay rights if it isn't about money... 

I posted what I think it is all about, MONEY! In one form or fashion they want to get death benefits, retirements, be able to be insured by their partner.... and so on and so on.

If it isn't that, then one of you geniuses post up why it's not instead of attacking me. So far every one of you have failed to prove your side.


----------



## TxBrewer (Jul 23, 2011)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> A whole bunch of attempts, at making it look like I am bashing gays...
> 
> How about one of you queer defenders explain why they need gay rights if it isn't about money...
> 
> ...


Assuming you are correct and that is all it is about do you have a reason why they should not have those same rights as a traditional marriage? What makes their relationship less?


----------



## Game-Over (Jun 9, 2010)

TOTGA, is your marriage "only about the money"?


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

TxBrewer said:


> Assuming you are correct and that is all it is about do you have a reason why they should not have those same rights as a traditional marriage? What makes their relationship less?


I never said they shouldn't be aloud that, I only stated why they want it and I connected the dots between them and other groups that make up the democratic party of today. Now, as a whole group, I wish they'd disappear.


----------



## Category6 (Nov 21, 2007)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> A whole bunch of attempts, at making it look like I am bashing gays...
> 
> How about one of you queer defenders explain why they need gay rights if it isn't about money...
> 
> ...


Of course it's about money, I would assume any reasonably intelligent person knows that. But no one should confuse the two separate issues in play, #1 the right of an individual to be gay and not be persecuted, and #2 the gay rights issue. #1 is NOT about money, #2 is strictly about money.


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

Game-Over said:


> TOTGA, is your marriage "only about the money"?


Are you going to state your reason why I am wrong or just ask asinine questions?


----------



## TxBrewer (Jul 23, 2011)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> I never said they shouldn't be aloud that, I only stated why they want it and I connected the dots between them and other groups that make up the democratic party of today. Now, as a whole group, I wish they'd disappear.


So you think that the only reason a same sex couple wants to be married is money? Is that the only reason a man and a woman want to be married?

I am confused as to what your issue is. Also I think you are completely wrong on them only wanting to be married for the money.


----------



## batmaninja (Jul 15, 2010)

TxBrewer said:


> - You don't deny a class of people the right of marriage because you think figuring out the law would be difficult. Same sex couples have been getting married and divorced for years now, there are more than enough lawyers and courts out there to set the precedents many of which already have been set in those states and those exact issues have been addressed so I don't see how that should be an issue.


Yes indeed NAMBLA is following this closely along with their forked tongue lawyers. Along with the all of the kissing cousins in 'Bama and Appalacia that have had their rights infringed on.

Do Trannies hardware actually work or is it just for show? (I don't know) But it seems like that could open up some scenarios that could get a little legally tricky, starting with is it the mom or dad?


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

TxBrewer said:


> I am confused as to what your issue is. Also I think you are completely wrong on them only wanting to be married for the money.


So what do you think it is?


----------



## Seachaser (Dec 30, 2005)

Just a marketing stradegy! Looks like it worked!


----------



## Ernest (May 21, 2004)

Where does the money part come it? I've been married forever, and I've yet to see any money out of this deal. Its an expense in the form of a marriage penalty, not an income source.


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

Ernest said:


> Where does the money part come it? I've been married forever, and I've yet to see any money out of this deal. Its an expense in the form of a marriage penalty, not an income source.


You know, we've talked on the phone before. So I know that you're a pretty good guy. Knowing that, I would venture to say that your wife thinks she got a pretty good deal out the whole marriage thing.


----------



## Ernest (May 21, 2004)

No, your point was not that gay marriage allowed one partner to get money from the other partner. It was gay marriage gets the couple more money. I'm just saying, where is the new money? 

I don't have to be married to a women to give her money, and she does not have to be married to me to give me money. Where is the new money you claimed gay married couples will receive? New money. Not my money or her money, but new money. 

Given the income levels of homosexuals and the fact that a married couple in Texas only gets one homestead, isn't it quite possible that greater taxes will be collected on both the state and fed. level in Texas if gay marriage was permitted? Meaning, just the opposite of what you claimed?

Don't most gay couples that marry also think they got a "good deal" out of the marriage? So, I'm not understanding that point. No one is going to force gay people to marry if they don't want to marry.


----------



## batmaninja (Jul 15, 2010)

I don't follow your Homestead point at all. Couldn't the rich gays just have 2 homesteads one for the weekend getaway and one for the M-F.

Don't want to speak for The 1 but I Googled "benefits of being married" and this is the list I got.

Whether or not you favor marriage as a social institution, there's no denying that it confers many rights, protections, and benefits -- both legal and practical. Some of these vary from state to state, but the list typically includes:
*Tax Benefits*


Filing joint income tax returns with the IRS and state taxing authorities.
Creating a "family partnership" under federal tax laws, which allows you to divide business income among family members.
*Estate Planning Benefits*


Inheriting a share of your spouse's estate.
Receiving an exemption from both estate taxes and gift taxes for all property you give or leave to your spouse.
Creating life estate trusts that are restricted to married couples, including QTIP trusts, QDOT trusts, and marital deduction trusts.
Obtaining priority if a conservator needs to be appointed for your spouse -- that is, someone to make financial and/or medical decisions on your spouse's behalf.
*Government Benefits*


Receiving Social Security, Medicare, and disability benefits for spouses.
Receiving veterans' and military benefits for spouses, such as those for education, medical care, or special loans.
Receiving public assistance benefits.
*Employment Benefits*


Obtaining insurance benefits through a spouse's employer.
Taking family leave to care for your spouse during an illness.
Receiving wages, workers' compensation, and retirement plan benefits for a deceased spouse.
Taking bereavement leave if your spouse or one of your spouse's close relatives dies.
*Medical Benefits*


Visiting your spouse in a hospital intensive care unit or during restricted visiting hours in other parts of a medical facility.
Making medical decisions for your spouse if he or she becomes incapacitated and unable to express wishes for treatment.
*Death Benefits*


Consenting to after-death examinations and procedures.
Making burial or other final arrangements.
*Family Benefits*


Filing for stepparent or joint adoption.
Applying for joint foster care rights.
Receiving equitable division of property if you divorce.
Receiving spousal or child support, child custody, and visitation if you divorce.
*Housing Benefits*


Living in neighborhoods zoned for "families only."
Automatically renewing leases signed by your spouse.
*Consumer Benefits*


Receiving family rates for health, homeowners', auto, and other types of insurance.
Receiving tuition discounts and permission to use school facilities.
Other consumer discounts and incentives offered only to married couples or families.
*Other Legal Benefits and Protections*


Suing a third person for wrongful death of your spouse and loss of consortium (loss of intimacy).
Suing a third person for offenses that interfere with the success of your marriage, such as alienation of affection and criminal conversation (these laws are available in only a few states).
Claiming the marital communications privilege, which means a court can't force you to disclose the contents of confidential communications between you and your spouse during your marriage.
Receiving crime victims' recovery benefits if your spouse is the victim of a crime.
Obtaining immigration and residency benefits for noncitizen spouse.
Visiting rights in jails and other places where visitors are restricted to immediate family.


----------



## Ernest (May 21, 2004)

Your homestead exemption changes the amount you pay in property taxes. 

My point was, if the couple is not married and they have a house plus a vacation home, then both will be declared homestead by one of the couple, and they pay less property taxes. Once married, they only get one homestead. So, the property taxes on the vacation place go up. More money for the State of Texas.


----------



## Game-Over (Jun 9, 2010)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> Are you going to state your reason why I am wrong or just ask asinine questions?


You are arguing that the only reason they want to be able to get married is because of "money". I am asking you if that is the same position you took when you were getting married....did you do it for monetary benefits? Or, did you have different reasons?


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

And as an American citizen why should they not be allowed to participate in those benefits? And who gets to decide which Americans get what rights? Your group gets rights that "their" group does not? Does that sound like America to you?


----------



## mastercylinder60 (Dec 18, 2005)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> I never said they gays didn't have the right to be gay, I said all of the hoopla is about money and furthering the agenda of a political party... Maybe you should read it.


I will agree with you that there is too much "gay rights" in the news these days, but I think that all they are really looking for is acceptance in society, and there is nothing wrong with that. Homosexuality may be creepy to us heterosexuals, but homosexuality is as old as mankind, and it's not ever going to go away.

Just live and let live, and mind your own bidness.


----------



## flounderchaser (Aug 20, 2005)

Honda rules!!!


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

They been getting the hell beat out of them for generations. Figuratively and literally. Why wouldn't they want the same rights as you and yours? And who the hell are you to deny an American citizen the same rights you enjoy?


----------



## Privateer (Nov 28, 2009)

GM built the Sherman tank...read your history


----------



## Privateer (Nov 28, 2009)

do not give up on America because the white house has changed...stay with America because you can change the white house...


----------



## mastercylinder60 (Dec 18, 2005)

Privateer said:


> GM built the Sherman tank...read your history


Sorry, but GM did not build the Sherman tank.


----------



## Game-Over (Jun 9, 2010)

Yes they did. Fisher Body was merged with GM around 1920 or so.
http://www.military.com/veteran-job...tion/how-gm-divisions-tackled-war-effort.html

Try to stay on topic here. We've made it 20 pages with a pretty good convo.


----------



## TxBrewer (Jul 23, 2011)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> So what do you think it is?


The same reasons me and my wife got married along with other traditional marriages. When we got married it wasn't out of a desire for money and I don't think that same sex couples are any different in the reasons they want to get married.


----------



## Privateer (Nov 28, 2009)

mc...with all due respect...sthf up...google Sherman tanks built in 1942...


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

Who had money when they got married? And if it didnt work, who had money after it was over?


----------



## mastercylinder60 (Dec 18, 2005)

Game-Over said:


> Yes they did. Fisher Body was merged with GM around 1920 or so.
> http://www.military.com/veteran-job...tion/how-gm-divisions-tackled-war-effort.html
> 
> Try to stay on topic here. We've made it 20 pages with a pretty good convo.


Sherman tanks were the effort of many companies. Thanks for the info if it is accurate. I didn't know GM was ever involved in their production.

They do make the best trucks.


----------



## mastercylinder60 (Dec 18, 2005)

poppadawg said:


> Who had money when they got married? And if it didnt work, who had money after it was over?


Neither.


----------



## Privateer (Nov 28, 2009)

the situation I find cynical...or...ironic is... that the Democrats in rule of the government and country at the time of WWII was exactly what we needed then...funny how a great country can survive politics, revolution and 2cool...


----------



## Johnboat (Jun 7, 2004)

*"Do I look gay to you?"*

Remember this movie clip from "Philadephia" with Tom Hanks and Denzel Washington?


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

TxBrewer said:


> The same reasons me and my wife got married along with other traditional marriages. When we got married it wasn't out of a desire for money and I don't think that same sex couples are any different in the reasons they want to get married.


A marriage is not something between two same sex people. There may be a union between two same sex people, but is certainly is not a marriage. To call it a marriage is blasphemy against God.


----------



## Privateer (Nov 28, 2009)

movie clips...really?...dude


----------



## Privateer (Nov 28, 2009)

the only major American car manufacturer that NEVER took anything from the federal gov'mt is FORD...


----------



## mastercylinder60 (Dec 18, 2005)

Hark, what is this yonder yellow ball glowing in the western sky?


----------



## TxBrewer (Jul 23, 2011)

shaggydog said:


> A marriage is not something between two same sex people. There may be a union between two same sex people, but is certainly is not a marriage. To call it a marriage is blasphemy against God.


That may be your religious view, but legally a marriage can be same sex.


----------



## Game-Over (Jun 9, 2010)

Privateer said:


> the only major American car manufacturer that NEVER took anything from the federal gov'mt is FORD...


_"NEVER took anything from the federal gov'mt"? _ I wouldn't be so sure about that. They took out a gov subsidized loan funded by the Dept. of Energy before the bailouts began. If you want to talk Ford, GM, etc why don't you start a new thread?


----------



## Spirit (Nov 19, 2008)

TxBrewer said:


> That may be your religious view, but legally a marriage can be same sex.


Not in Texas.

And its also the view of Merriam-Webster's dictionary. Marriage is defined as between a man and woman.


----------



## Privateer (Nov 28, 2009)

Among the tanks, tank destroyers and other armored vehicles built by GM were the M-5 light tank, M-24 tank M-4 Sherman medium tank, Churchill Tank, T-70 Hellcat Tank Destroyer, M-18 Tank Destroyer and the Staghound.


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

TxBrewer said:


> The same reasons me and my wife got married along with other traditional marriages. When we got married it wasn't out of a desire for money and I don't think that same sex couples are any different in the reasons they want to get married.


Well I made my argument for that too. I may be wrong in your eyes because it is just my opinion.

Traditionally throughout history, since the Christian religion began... I could go back to the Jews if you like, but I am pretty sure they didn't favor gay marriage either. I have no idea about what the Pharaoh's allowed or the Romans, but you could contribute and Google it for us.

So my argument is that if "marriage" has been a religious "pact" between and couple and God, and that God rejects homosexuality in His book, then why would homosexuals want to be "married"?

If the federal government truly wanted the gays married, They should create a "union" like the Spirit suggested.


----------



## mastercylinder60 (Dec 18, 2005)

Privateer said:


> the only major American car manufacturer that NEVER took anything from the federal gov'mt is FORD...


Oops.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/joannmu...axpayers-money-the-answer-might-surprise-you/


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

TxBrewer said:


> That may be your religious view, but legally a marriage can be same sex.


Not in God's eyes. Obviously you look to man for your answers, as for me I will look to God every time.


----------



## Ernest (May 21, 2004)

Sounds like Shaggy and the religious crew is at least up for polygamy. Its in the Bible and not prohibited in the new testament, right? So, let go with polygamy over the short term. 

Marriage the way God intended. One man and as many women as he can support. If its good for Abraham, Jacob, David, and Solomon, its good for America. 

In that regard, my wife and I are seeking a deaf mute woman with extensive skills in cooking, cleaning, and automobile/boat repair and detailing. Lawn care would also be a valuable asset.


----------



## Game-Over (Jun 9, 2010)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> If the federal government truly wanted the gays married, They should create a "union" like the Spirit suggested.


I somewhat agree with Spirit. Why not remove the word marriage from state sanctioned unions? You get married (religiously) in your church. The state only recognizes state sanctioned unions, not religious marriages. Keep marriage in the church and out of gov.


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

Ernest said:


> Sounds like Shaggy is at least up for polygamy. Its in the Bible and not prohibited, right? So, let go with polygamy over the short term.
> 
> Marriage the way God intended. One man and as many women as he can support. If its good for Abraham, Jacob, Davis, and Solomon, its good for America.
> 
> In that regard, my wife and I are seeking a deaf mute woman with extensive skills in cooking, cleaning, and automobile/boat repair and detailing. Lawn care would also be a valuable asset.


You're very witty, and comical... But not really winning the argument.


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

Ernest said:


> Sounds like Shaggy and the religious crew is at least up for polygamy. Its in the Bible and not prohibited, right? So, let go with polygamy over the short term.
> 
> Marriage the way God intended. One man and as many women as he can support. If its good for Abraham, Jacob, Davis, and Solomon, its good for America.
> 
> In that regard, my wife and I are seeking a deaf mute woman with extensive skills in cooking, cleaning, and automobile/boat repair and detailing. Lawn care would also be a valuable asset.


Typical lawyer. You are good at twisting things. Surprised you didn't bring up incest also. Things changed with the new covenant.


----------



## Privateer (Nov 28, 2009)

do not let 2% of the population (gays) in America set the tone or agenda for the entire country or allow them to talk so fast and loud that they can disproportionately affect how the entire country grows...c'mon man!


----------



## Ernest (May 21, 2004)

Don't blaspheme. Suggesting polygamy is not the traditional definition of marriage is an insult to God. I look to God to guide me in collecting multiple wives. 

Did I mention I can supply sheep to the father of the lucky deaf mute? I can.

Shaggy, so Martin Luther was wrong when he stated in writing that polygamy was not prohibited in the New Testament? The father of the Prot. Reformation.


----------



## Privateer (Nov 28, 2009)

mastercylinder said:


> Oops.
> 
> http://www.forbes.com/sites/joannmu...axpayers-money-the-answer-might-surprise-you/


I wouldn't pay them back either...not till all of the welfare recipients do...still, no major govmn't bail-out needed for Ford


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> So my argument is that if "marriage" has been a religious "pact" between and couple and God, and that God rejects homosexuality in His book, then why would homosexuals want to be "married"?
> .


Read carefully here JR, because they are Americans and are entitled to the same rights as all other Americans. Again who the hell are you to say, no you are not allowed to participate in the same freedoms and rights that I have?


----------



## TxBrewer (Jul 23, 2011)

shaggydog said:


> Not in God's eyes. Obviously you look to man for your answers, as for me I will look to God every time.


I look to God for answers as well, but I also am not blind to the obvious issues within the church and my faith.


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

TxBrewer said:


> I look to God for answers as well, but I also am not blind to the obvious issues within the church and my faith.


I am not sure what you mean about the issues within the church, but if your church condones homosexuality they condone a practice that is detestable to God.


----------



## Game-Over (Jun 9, 2010)

Why is the bible/church even being brought into this conversation? The only documents that should be of concern here are the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.


----------



## TxBrewer (Jul 23, 2011)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> Well I made my argument for that too. I may be wrong in your eyes because it is just my opinion.
> 
> Traditionally throughout history, since the Christian religion began... I could go back to the Jews if you like, but I am pretty sure they didn't favor gay marriage either. I have no idea about what the Pharaoh's allowed or the Romans, but you could contribute and Google it for us.
> 
> ...


Traditionally throughout history groups of people have regularly been treated as second class citizens and refused their rights. Go back to the Jews in Egypt all the way to immigrants and blacks in the United States. That doesn't make those practices acceptable or right.

Treating homosexuals and lesbians as such will be looked back on in history the same way people look at racism and other forms of oppression of groups rights.

If you want to be lumped in with the type of people who blindly hate because people are different or don't conform with your view of right then so be it. Look back at how history views such people, I don't think you want to be with them.


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

poppadawg said:


> Read carefully here JR, because they are Americans and are entitled to the same rights as all other Americans. Again who the hell are you to say, no you are not allowed to participate in the same freedoms and rights that I have?


Would you take meds and a nap?


----------



## batmaninja (Jul 15, 2010)

Why not have BHO wave his magic little pen and make a "civil union" have the same rights under the law as marriage? Problem solved, everyone saves face and everyone is happy....until another group of 2% of the population decided they are in fact special too.


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

TxBrewer said:


> Traditionally throughout history groups of people have regularly been treated as second class citizens and refused their rights. Go back to the Jews in Egypt all the way to immigrants and blacks in the United States. That doesn't make those practices acceptable or right.
> 
> Treating homosexuals and lesbians as such will be looked back on in history the same way people look at racism and other forms of oppression of groups rights.
> 
> If you want to be lumped in with the type of people who blindly hate because people are different or don't conform with your view of right then so be it. Look back at how history views such people, I don't think you want to be with them.


Apples to oranges.


----------



## The Salty Raider (Sep 25, 2012)

shaggydog said:


> I am not sure what you mean about the issues within the church, but if your church condones homosexuality they condone a practice that is detestable to God.


Does your church allow people who are divorced to attend?


----------



## Game-Over (Jun 9, 2010)

batmaninja said:


> Why not have BHO wave his magic little pen and make a "civil union" have the same rights under the law as marriage? Problem solved,


Even if he could do that it would probably be a one way ticket to SCOTUS aboard the "seperate but equal" express.



shaggydog said:


> Apples to oranges.


How so? You seem to be arguing that because your religion is against it, so should be the state. What about citizens that do not follow your particular religion? Should they be denied the same rights that you have under the law because they don't follow your scripture?


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> Would you take meds and a nap?


What part of that dont you understand?


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

TxBrewer said:


> Traditionally throughout history groups of people have regularly been treated as second class citizens and refused their rights. Go back to the Jews in Egypt all the way to immigrants and blacks in the United States. That doesn't make those practices acceptable or right.
> 
> Treating homosexuals and lesbians as such will be looked back on in history the same way people look at racism and other forms of oppression of groups rights.
> 
> If you want to be lumped in with the type of people who blindly hate because people are different or don't conform with your view of right then so be it. Look back at how history views such people, I don't think you want to be with them.


Never said I hate them...


----------



## Privateer (Nov 28, 2009)

how did this thread morph from chevys to homos?


----------



## The Salty Raider (Sep 25, 2012)

Privateer said:


> how did this thread morph from chevys to homos?


Because obviously gays are trying to steal our government's tax revenue one chevy commerical at a time.


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

The Salty Raider said:


> Does your church allow people who are divorced to attend?


Yes.


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

poppadawg said:


> What part of that dont you understand?


You haven't contributed one intelligent thing to the whole discussion... You keep asking me "who the hell do I think I am to impose my rules on everyone."

I have never said one way or the other about what rules should apply to gays. You tell us why I am wrong. Lay it on us, contribute your wisdom.

I say it's about money and nothing else. You're welcome to prove me wrong if you'd like to try.


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

shaggydog said:


> I am not sure what you mean about the issues within the church, but if your church condones homosexuality they condone a practice that is detestable to God.


 Seperation of church and state.


----------



## TxBrewer (Jul 23, 2011)

shaggydog said:


> Apples to oranges.


The way people have been treated through history is directly comparable to how homosexuals and lesbians are being treated in America today.


----------



## TxBrewer (Jul 23, 2011)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> You haven't contributed one intelligent thing to the whole discussion... You keep asking me "who the hell do I think I am to impose my rules on everyone."
> 
> I have never said one way or the other about what rules should apply to gays. You tell us why I am wrong. Lay it on us, contribute your wisdom.
> 
> I say it's about money and nothing else. You're welcome to prove me wrong if you'd like to try.


But you refuse to answer a simple question, you think it's all about money for same sex marriage, do you believe traditional marriage is all about money as well?


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

TxBrewer said:


> The way people have been treated through history is directly comparable to how homosexuals and lesbians are being treated in America today.


How are they being treated?


----------



## Game-Over (Jun 9, 2010)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> Never said I hate them...


No you did not, and you have pointed that out a few times in this thread so I think TxBrewers assumptions may be incorrect. From what I can gather you have a religious objection to gay marriages, which I understand. But I also understand that we do not have a religious test to determine which rights we extend to certain groups. Rights are a blanket concept, they should make no distinction about what a particular religion says is permissible or not.


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

Game-Over said:


> Even if he could do that it would probably be a one way ticket to SCOTUS aboard the "seperate but equal" express.
> 
> How so? You seem to be arguing that because your religion is against it, so should be the state. What about citizens that do not follow your particular religion? Should they be denied the same rights that you have under the law because they don't follow your scripture?


I did not say anything about my religion. I stated what is in God's word the bible, even quoted the scriptures for you. Look them up in your own bible, it will say the same thing. Homosexuality is condemned in the bible. I would think that it is something that would not be encouraged by any religion.


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> You haven't contributed one intelligent thing to the whole discussion... You keep asking me "who the hell do I think I am to impose my rules on everyone."
> 
> I have never said one way or the other about what rules should apply to gays. You tell us why I am wrong. Lay it on us, contribute your wisdom.
> 
> I say it's about money and nothing else. You're welcome to prove me wrong if you'd like to try.


 You keep asking the same lame *** question over and over. The answer is because they are American citizens entitled to the same rights as you or any other American. Its about equal rights for all Americans regardless of who they sleep with. Do you get it now?


----------



## TxBrewer (Jul 23, 2011)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> How are they being treated?


Being denied the same rights as other couples. Having to fight state by state to get the same rights and protections as other Americans.

On top of that you have the hateful bigoted comments made by some people in this thread. (not saying you made them, but there are plenty of them here) that people accuse them of.


----------



## Game-Over (Jun 9, 2010)

shaggydog said:


> I did not say anything about my religion. I stated what is in God's word the bible, even quoted the scriptures for you. Look them up in your own bible, it will say the same thing. Homosexuality is condemned in the bible. I would think that it is something that would not be encouraged by any religion.


Like I commented earlier, the Bible is not a legal document as far as the US is concerned so it has no standing in what we are discussing. We are not discussing why the Bible is against homosexuality. We are discussing the legality of denying homosexuals the ability to marry under our Constitution.


----------



## Privateer (Nov 28, 2009)

2% people...12% of Americans have cancer...lets re-direct the conversation to s... that matters...


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

Game-Over said:


> Like I commented earlier, the Bible is not a legal document as far as the US is concerned so it has no standing in what we are discussing. We are not discussing why the Bible is against homosexuality. We are discussing the legality of denying homosexuals the ability to marry under our Constitution.


A union between a man and a man or between a woman and a woman is NOT a marriage. There is the sticking point. It may be a lot of things, but a marriage it is not. Call it something else and legalize it, but don't call it a marriage.


----------



## Game-Over (Jun 9, 2010)

Privateer said:


> 2% people...12% of Americans have cancer...lets re-direct the conversation to s... that matters...


If you don't think it matters then why did you join the conversation at post #197?


----------



## TxBrewer (Jul 23, 2011)

Privateer said:


> 2% people...12% of Americans have cancer...lets re-direct the conversation to s... that matters...


I didn't realize that people with Cancer are having their rights taken away. Amazing that the news never picked that up.

Wikipedia has the stat at 3.8% in a national survey, I will bet there are a fair amount that are still in the closet and won't answer honestly. Just an opinion.


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

TxBrewer said:


> But you refuse to answer a simple question, you think it's all about money for same sex marriage, do you believe traditional marriage is all about money as well?


Are we not discussing gay rights, not just marriage? Let's discuss this one topic and if you'd like we can start another thread about my views on the differences between gay marriage and traditional marriages, but please start that thread in the Jungle, where it belongs.


----------



## TxBrewer (Jul 23, 2011)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> Are we not discussing gay rights, not just marriage? Let's discuss this one topic and if you'd like we can start another thread about my views on the differences between gay marriage and traditional marriages, but please start that thread in the Jungle, where it belongs.


What a cop out. We are discussing plenty of aspects of traditional marriage as well as comparing the two. You are evading the question in a pretty weak way.


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

shaggydog said:


> A union between a man and a man or between a woman and a woman is NOT a marriage. There is the sticking point. It may be a lot of things, but a marriage it is not. Call it something else and legalize it, but don't call it a marriage.


Because it is another dagger in the back of Christian conservatives.


----------



## Game-Over (Jun 9, 2010)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> Because it is another dagger in the back of Christian conservatives.


Well at least you have admitted it. This has nothing to do with rights, but everything to do with your religion. As I stated before, the bible and your religion are not considered legal documents in this country. They should have no bearing on how we treat people under the law here.


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> Because it is another dagger in the back of Christian conservatives.


So you think that God's word is out of date.


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

TxBrewer said:


> What a cop out. We are discussing plenty of aspects of traditional marriage as well as comparing the two. You are evading the question in a pretty weak way.


because it's a dumbass question that is not "big picture"... it focuses in on one part of gay rights... Gay rights is a package deal, not just marriage. Instead of asking me stupid questions about how I view gay marriage enlighten me on why you think gays are fighting for rights?


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

Game-Over said:


> Well at least you have admitted it. This has nothing to do with rights, but everything to do with your religion.


No, you're wrong, that aspect of it has to do with the loosing of Christian rights. We took the bible off the step of the courthouse, we have to provide birth control to employees... I find it to be more of a tearing down of Christian rights to call it marriage.


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> because it's a dumbass question that is not "big picture"... it focuses in on one part of gay rights... Gay rights is a package deal, not just marriage. Instead of asking me stupid questions about how I view gay marriage enlighten me on why you think gays are fighting for rights?


Because the don't want to be second class citizens. You really don't understand that?


----------



## Privateer (Nov 28, 2009)

TxBrewer said:


> I didn't realize that people with Cancer are having their rights taken away. Amazing that the news never picked that up.
> 
> Wikipedia has the stat at 3.8% in a national survey, I will bet there are a fair amount that are still in the closet and won't answer honestly. Just an opinion.


they are having their lives taken away a-hole...not many rights available for the dying...


----------



## Game-Over (Jun 9, 2010)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> because it's a dumbass question that is not "big picture"... it focuses in on one part of gay rights... Gay rights is a package deal, not just marriage. Instead of asking me stupid questions about how I view gay marriage *enlighten me on why you think gays are fighting for rights?*


So you acknowledge that they are fighting for rights that we have? That would mean that you also acknowledge they are being denied rights that we have. How do you square denying rights to a group with the Constitution and BOR?


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

shaggydog said:


> So you think that God's word is out of date.


No Shaggy, I think it is one more way for liberals to mock us, and belittle our faith.


----------



## Game-Over (Jun 9, 2010)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> No Shaggy, I think it is one more way for liberals to mock us, and belittle our faith.


Do you believe that your faith should be the law of the land? That there is no room for people of different faiths or no faith to live in this country?


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

Would you be okay with it if someone denied your children rights afforded to all other Americans because they didn't like the way your kids looked or acted?


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

Game-Over said:


> So you knowledge that they are fighting for rights that we have? That would mean that you also knowledge they are being denied rights that we have. How do you square denying rights to a group with the Constitution and BOR?


I never said they should be denied... I just stated my opinion on some of the why's and wherefores..


----------



## The Salty Raider (Sep 25, 2012)

shaggydog said:


> Yes.


Now im not very religious at all but isn't divorce considered a sin??? and if im not mistaken, a sin is a sin. Basically there are no priorities or levels of sin correct?

So then wouldnt your church be condoning an act just as destesable by God?

Also I had an ethics teacher speak about homosexuality and the ideas of sin and he proposed a question that I have been fascinated by: "If your parents asked you to kill someone, what would you do?"


----------



## mastercylinder60 (Dec 18, 2005)

It's good to be a heathen.


----------



## Privateer (Nov 28, 2009)

Hello...Chevys?


----------



## Pistol58 (Oct 9, 2009)

I dont think its a coincidence that we are going over this very topic at Church for the past month or so. Focusing on 1 Corinthians 16:13-14.

"Be on your guard; stand firm in the faith; be courageous; be strong. 14 Do everything in love."

Here I stand!

Just as Natalie Grant did at the Grammys.

Just as Jesus Christ did for us.

Its not ok, and its not mainstream. Its sin. And modern media is trying to make it socially acceptable and conform our youth.

My son WILL know the difference between right and wrong.


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

Is believing all Americans are entitled to the same rights and laws a liberal thing? I thought it was the basis of American freedom. Remember:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> No Shaggy, I think it is one more way for liberals to mock us, and belittle our faith.


I guess I am just having trouble following your line of reasoning. I am well aware that many do think the bible is out of date. Unfortunately for them God does not change, and will not change. They can mock me all they want when it comes to my bible based beliefs, it will not change my way of thinking. Personally I think homosexuality is disgusting and could care less if they have rights or not. I have relatives that are homosexual. They live their life and I live mine. It is the wording that I am against. It makes a mockery of God and the bible.


----------



## Privateer (Nov 28, 2009)

I rest my case...homos rule everything now...politics, conversation, social networks, TTMB...America...


----------



## The Salty Raider (Sep 25, 2012)

Pistol58 said:


> I dont think its a coincidence that we are going over this very topic at Church for the past month or so. Focusing on 1 Corinthians 16:13-14.
> 
> "Be on your guard; stand firm in the faith; be courageous; be strong. 14 Do everything in love."
> 
> ...


Why should your religion control people who don't believe in it?

Also notice how in that scripture, it states to stand firm in your "FAITH"...never mentioned that it was truth or fact, or should be applied to law. It simply states to stand strong in what you believe in. I didn't read anywhere that you should dictate how other live their life.


----------



## Category6 (Nov 21, 2007)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> No, you're wrong, that aspect of it has to do with the loosing of Christian rights. We took the bible off the step of the courthouse, we have to provide birth control to employees... I find it to be more of a tearing down of Christian rights to call it marriage.


The1 - I asked you to dance last night, and I then turned my back on you. That was wrong. Let's just start over. Come to the house tonight and we can work this out (or over), or maybe meet at a nice restaurant and lick our wounds until we see eye to eye. I'm sure there's some common ground wherein we can get all up in this debate. Call me.


----------



## Spirit (Nov 19, 2008)

The Salty Raider said:


> Why should your religion control people who don't believe in it?
> 
> Also notice how in that scripture, it states to stand firm in your "FAITH"...never mentioned that it was truth or fact, or should be applied to law. It simply states to stand strong in what you believe in. I didn't read anywhere that you should dictate how other live their life.


Why should non-believers bastardize the sanctity of marriage? Marriage is a religious ceremony before God and man. We need to nullify all "marriages" that were done outside of a church and make them Civil Unions.

The government has no business in the marriage market ... separation of church and state.

Civil Unions could be between any consenting adults regardless of gender or sexual orientation.


----------



## Ernest (May 21, 2004)

*Unfortunately for them God does not change, and will not change.*

What Bible are you reading? There is a New Covenant. New, meaning different, meaning change. So, God does change the deal and has changed the deal.


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

The Salty Raider said:


> Now im not very religious at all but isn't divorce considered a sin??? and if im not mistaken, a sin is a sin. Basically there are no priorities or levels of sin correct?
> 
> So then wouldnt your church be condoning an act just as destesable by God?
> 
> Also I had an ethics teacher speak about homosexuality and the ideas of sin and he proposed a question that I have been fascinated by: "If your parents asked you to kill someone, what would you do?"


No, there are absolutely different levels of sin. Some are unpardonable. There are also circumstances in the bible that allow divorce. Adultery is one. We are all sinners, but can be forgiven of our sins because of the ransom of Jesus Christ, and through repentance.

Blasphemy is an unforgivable sin. To call a union between a man and a man or a woman and a woman, a marriage, is blasphemy.

Legally they may give homosexuals the same rights, but just don't call it marriage. God instituted the marriage arrangement. Leave it to man to mess it up.


----------



## Privateer (Nov 28, 2009)

if you're not ****...don't worry about it...if you are **** don't think I'm worried about it... if you drive a Chevy...we might have something in common...c'mon man!


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

Ernest said:


> *Unfortunately for them God does not change, and will not change.*
> 
> What Bible are you reading? There is a New Covenant. New, meaning different, meaning change. So, God does change the deal and has changed the deal.


Nope! The Law was done away with, but God's principals have never changed.


----------



## RRfisher (Mar 5, 2007)

spirit said:


> We need to nullify all "marriages" that were done outside of a church


Sweet, I'm a free man!


----------



## donf (Aug 8, 2005)

Who cares


----------



## Game-Over (Jun 9, 2010)

^ This is TTMB, not the jungle. Save the sophomoric garbage for down there.


----------



## Pistol58 (Oct 9, 2009)

The Salty Raider said:


> Why should your religion control people who don't believe in it?
> 
> Also notice how in that scripture, it states to stand firm in your "FAITH"...never mentioned that it was truth or fact, or should be applied to law. It simply states to stand strong in what you believe in. I didn't read anywhere that you should dictate how other live their life.


John 14:6 "I am the way, and the *TRUTH, *and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me"

John 17:17 Sanctify them in the *TRUTH; *your word is *TRUTH.*

I would invite you to come as my guest to a Sunday Service.


----------



## Spirit (Nov 19, 2008)

RRfisher said:


> Sweet, I'm a free man!


Sorry Charlie, you missed the make them Civil Unions part.


----------



## TxBrewer (Jul 23, 2011)

Privateer said:


> they are having their lives taken away a-hole...not many rights available for the dying...


I think we can all do without the name calling.

If you want to start a threat about cancer patients and how bad it is that they have a horrible illness send me a link and I will be happy to agree with you, but this thread is about gay marriage so if you don't want to discuss it you know where the exit button is.


----------



## Game-Over (Jun 9, 2010)

Pistol58 said:


> I would invite you to come as my guest to a Sunday Service.


Green to you. Just about the only post on here that boils it all down to what its supposed to be about. That's Christianity for you, no judgement with arms open wide.


----------



## Johnboat (Jun 7, 2004)

*Its like trying to tell a Muslim the Koran is erroneous*

Don't you get it? Open minded thinkers and those who embrace or at least accept inevitable social and cultural changes are part of the same "great Satan" being hated over there by fundamentalist Muslims and over here by fundamentalist Christians. Thankfully we have armed forces and homeland security to protect us from the ones over there and a Constitution that protects us from the ones over here.

I need some comic relief. Think I'll watch Modern Family on TV tonight. Its pretty funny.

I'm glad this kid doesn't read our posts:


----------



## TxBrewer (Jul 23, 2011)

spirit said:


> Why should non-believers bastardize the sanctity of marriage? Marriage is a religious ceremony before God and man. We need to nullify all "marriages" that were done outside of a church and make them Civil Unions.
> 
> The government has no business in the marriage market ... separation of church and state.
> 
> Civil Unions could be between any consenting adults regardless of gender or sexual orientation.


Except that Marriage is a legal term and has certain legal rights assigned to it that civil unions do not. As long as that is the case you can not prohibit people from the legal definition of marriage.

If the church doesn't want to marry them so be it, but they deserve the same legal rights as you and me.


----------



## Ernest (May 21, 2004)

So, just the rules changed, but not God. God planned all along to change the rules on his Chosen People. 1000's of years into the deal, God suddenly changes the rules. Tough break for those so called Chosen People, huh? Dedicate your life to something, and unbeknownst to you, the whole deal changes leaving you burning in hell. 

OK, so are the rules changed on polygamy or not? I'll need something from Jesus himself. He was the last prophet, so it needs to come from him. Not some dogma announced later by church officials like Paul. Jesus said .... 

Here is hint for you. Jesus never condemned polygamy, and it was practiced by early Christians. The Church then began condemning it years later. Not Martin Luther though. He was down for it and said so in writing.


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

TxBrewer said:


> I think we can all do without the name calling.
> 
> If you want to start a threat about cancer patients and how bad it is that they have a horrible illness send me a link and I will be happy to agree with you, but this thread is about gay marriage so if you don't want to discuss it you know where the exit button is.


This thread is about how marketing is trying to shove the "it's allright to be gay" and "how the face of families (gay) are changing" down our throat. Sorry I am not going to swallow that ****. Gays are not normal and they are not the face of the family these days. It is a shame that things have been allowed to get as far as the have.

This kind of marketing would have led a company to bankruptcy as little as 30 years ago. Satan is misleading the world and people are sitting by and watching it happen. Sorry, but Gay is not normal, and it should not be perceived as normal. It is disgusting.


----------



## TxBrewer (Jul 23, 2011)

shaggydog said:


> Nope! The Law was done away with, but God's principals have never changed.


Didn't God's principals change between the Old Testament to the New Testament?


----------



## Privateer (Nov 28, 2009)

chevy cars and trucks?...hello? stay focused people...


----------



## TxBrewer (Jul 23, 2011)

shaggydog said:


> This thread is about how marketing is trying to shove the "it's allright to be gay" and "how the face of families (gay) are changing" down our throat. Sorry I am not going to swallow that ****. Gays are not normal and they are not the face of the family these days. It is a shame that things have been allowed to get as far as the have.
> 
> This kind of marketing would have led a company to bankruptcy as little as 30 years ago. Satan is misleading the world and people are sitting by and watching it happen. Sorry, but Gay is not normal, and it should not be perceived as normal. It is disgusting.


This thread has been about gay marriage as far as I have been participating, particularly about one mans opinion that it is just about money but won't answer if he things traditional marriage is the same way.


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

Ernest said:


> So, just the rules changed, but not God. God planned all along to change the rules on his Chosen People. 1000's of years into the deal, God suddenly changes the rules. Tough break for those so called Chosen People, huh? Dedicate your life to something, and unbeknownst to you, the whole deal changes leaving you burning in hell.
> 
> OK, so are the rules changed on polygamy or not? I'll need something from Jesus himself. He was the last prophet, so it needs to come from him. Not some dogma announced later by church officials like Paul. Jesus said ....
> 
> Here is hint for you. Jesus never condemned polygamy, and it was practiced by early Christians. The Church then began condemning it years later. Not Martin Luther though. He was down for it and said so in writing.


You have a very LIMITED understanding of the bible.


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

TxBrewer said:


> Didn't God's principals change between the Old Testament to the New Testament?


The principals did not change. Never have, never will.


----------



## Game-Over (Jun 9, 2010)

shaggydog said:


> This thread is about how marketing is trying to shove the "it's allright to be gay" and "how the face of families (gay) are changing" down our throat. Sorry I am not going to swallow that ****. Gays are not normal and they are not the face of the family these days. It is a shame that things have been allowed to get as far as the have.
> 
> This kind of marketing would have led a company to bankruptcy as little as 30 years ago. Satan is misleading the world and people are sitting by and watching it happen. Sorry, but Gay is not normal, and it should not be perceived as normal. It is disgusting.


Then don't support those companies. You can't fault them for making a marketing decision based upon the purchasing power of the gay segment of our population. To paraphrase a comment earlier in this thread, companies exist to chase profits, not prophets.


----------



## Privateer (Nov 28, 2009)

TxBrewer said:


> This thread has been about gay marriage as far as I have been participating, particularly about one mans opinion that it is just about money but won't answer if he *things* traditional marriage is the same way.


spellcheck man...


----------



## TxBrewer (Jul 23, 2011)

shaggydog said:


> The principals did not change. Never have, never will.


So the church still considers the sins listed in the old testament and the punishments attributed to them as acceptable?


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

TxBrewer said:


> This thread has been about gay marriage as far as I have been participating, particularly about one mans opinion that it is just about money but won't answer if he things traditional marriage is the same way.


You need to begin with the original post, it was about marketing. You might have a better understanding of the thread. It has really wandered all over the place. Kinda like Moses and the Isrealites.


----------



## Privateer (Nov 28, 2009)

I'm about to go reddie on the next person that does not refer to chevy cars and trucks...


----------



## TxBrewer (Jul 23, 2011)

Privateer said:


> spellcheck man...


Really, you are going to become the spelling police?

And it would be grammar check since i used a property spelled word, just the wrong one.


----------



## Ernest (May 21, 2004)

Or, perhaps not. Perhaps I have an advanced understanding of the Bible, and your understanding is the one that is limited. 

I'm intrigued by the suggestion that you have a better understanding of the Bible than Martin Luther. So, go ahead and explain where Jesus condemned polygamy in the Bible. I'll wait.

Meanwhile, I'll wax my Chevy z-71, the preferred vehicle of male heterosexuals.


----------



## Privateer (Nov 28, 2009)

TxBrewer said:


> Really, you are going to become the spelling police?
> 
> And it would be grammar check since i used a property spelled word, just the wrong one.


do not even comment on one of my posts until you have 8 digits in your rep points newb...


----------



## TxBrewer (Jul 23, 2011)

shaggydog said:


> You need to begin with the original post, it was about marketing. You might have a better understanding of the thread. It has really wandered all over the place. Kinda like Moses and the Isrealites.


I wonder if the Israelites would have been as eager to follow Moses if they knew they were in for 40 years of wandering the desert.

I have read the OP and most of the responses, the level of bigotry some people have shown is saddening.


----------



## TxBrewer (Jul 23, 2011)

Privateer said:


> do not even comment on one of my posts until you have 8 digits in your rep points newb...


Now that is an intelligent post, name calling and giving orders. What's next telling me what threads I can't read till I have enough approval of fellow members?

Sorry I don't respect your self-perceived authority.


----------



## Privateer (Nov 28, 2009)

you know what I said...


----------



## ralph7 (Apr 28, 2009)

> [


That's a good thing you did.
A _really_ good thing!


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

TxBrewer said:


> I wonder if the Israelites would have been as eager to follow Moses if they knew they were in for 40 years of wandering the desert.
> 
> I have read the OP and most of the responses, the level of bigotry some people have shown is saddening.


Read the full account. Many died because of they began to "murmur" against Aaron and Moses.

And yes, I guess it is sad to some that I defend God's word. I didn't write it, but I believe it. If any of those that are doing what is bad in His eyes and turn back from their course of action, they can be forgiven, even homosexuals. What I think really does not matter, what God thinks does matter. Take it however you want to.


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

Okay, well nobody has disproved my theory that it's all about money. Lot of people keep insisting that I am trying to control gay people. So here is my take on the whole gay rights issue, it's really big picture kind of stuff and my A.D.D. may kick so take it for what it's worth.


I don't give a **** what rights you give gays. Let them have their union, let them enjoy all the benefits that a male/female couple enjoy. Give them their own bathrooms, and whatever else they're asking for.

I think there should be a flat tax system so that everyone pays the same percentage. My buddy makes more than I do, but being single with no kids he get to pay in another $2000 this year while I will be sitting fat and happy when I get my return. Make welfare recipients pay taxes and stop rewarding them for plopping out babies.

Let my friend Lucy marry her partner that she has been with for over 25 years.

When my gay niece comes over, I hug her and tell her that I love her.

As a Christian I am supposed to love the sinners and not the sin. Or I would have to cast the stone at myself all day.

I think the Republican party should have been pandering to the gays for a long time now. With the gays on our side, maybe we could have avoided this catastrophe called Obama. Who someone is committed to should have nothing to do with Conservatives. 

Like it has been said already, they have a good amount of disposable income, and who they're sleeping with is none of our business. 

But, as a Christian, it is a slap in my face to call it "marriage".......


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

Honestly, I thought you might be ADD. It has been explained over and over why its not about money. Its about rights as an American citizen. Being married might leave you better off, it might leave you poorer, it might not make any difference at all. It takes a long time to acquire substantial wealth for the vast majority of people. The theory that people(other than gold diggers) get married for financial reasons is flawed. Acouple of thousand extra in tax refunds is not exactly a financial bonanza. I don't understand why you dont see the obvious. Its not the money, its about being an American with all the rights and privileges that come with being an American. Why would any American be willing to accept less. Or be expected to.
Basically, everybody disproved your theory


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> But, as a Christian, it is a slap in my face to call it "marriage".......


This is exactly my point. Thank you. It should be a slap in the face to a God fearing Christian that a union between two gay people is called a marriage.


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

Ernest said:


> Or, perhaps not. Perhaps I have an advanced understanding of the Bible, and your understanding is the one that is limited.
> 
> I'm intrigued by the suggestion that you have a better understanding of the Bible than Martin Luther. So, go ahead and explain where Jesus condemned polygamy in the Bible. I'll wait.
> 
> Meanwhile, I'll wax my Chevy z-71, the preferred vehicle of male heterosexuals.


God's original purpose was one woman for one man, that is why He created one woman, Eve as Adam's wife. Adam had only one wife. Yes polygamy is spoken of in the bible and was tolerated by God until Jesus arrived.

It was God himself that said at Genesis 2:24 24â€¯That is why a man will leave his father and his mother and he must stick to his wife and they must become one flesh.

This is what Jesus said at Matthew 19: 4-6 4â€¯In reply he said: â€œDid YOU not read that he who created them from [the] beginning made them male and female 5â€¯and said, â€˜For this reason a man will leave his father and his mother and will stick to his wife, and the two will be one fleshâ€™? 6â€¯So that they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has yoked together let no man put apart. He does not speak in the plural.

Then you might want to look at Paul's words to Timothy at 1Timothy 3:2 where he was speaking of those that took the lead in the congregation. 2â€¯The overseer should therefore be irreprehensible, a husband of one wife, moderate in habits, sound in mind, orderly, hospitable, qualified to teach, Notice he was clear about a husband having one wife.

This is confirmed at 1 Corinthians 7: 2,3 ; 2â€¯yet, because of prevalence of fornication, let each man have his own wife and each woman have her own husband. 3â€¯Let the husband render to [his] wife her due; but let the wife also do likewise to [her] husband

Again, no plural. Twist all you want to, but God's intent was one wife for one husband.


----------



## RRfisher (Mar 5, 2007)

poppadawg said:


> Honestly, I thought you might be ADD. It has been explained over and over why its not about money. Its about rights as an American citizen. Being married might leave you better off, it might leave you poorer, it might not make any difference at all. It takes a long time to acquire substantial wealth for the vast majority of people. The theory that people(other than gold diggers) get married for financial reasons is flawed. Acouple of thousand extra in tax refunds is not exactly a financial bonanza. I don't understand why you dont see the obvious. Its not the money, its about being an American with all the rights and privileges that come with being an American. Why would any American be willing to accept less. Or be expected to.
> Basically, everybody disproved your theory


Man, I swear if I don't laugh at your posts (you're a funny dude), I agree with them. Green to you sir. Sorry to ghey this thread all up.

Anyway, everybody go have a few drinks and check in a a couple hours and lets really see how this thread goes.


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

poppadawg said:


> Honestly, I thought you might be ADD. It has been explained over and over why its not about money. Its about rights as an American citizen. Being married might leave you better off, it might leave you poorer, it might not make any difference at all. It takes a long time to acquire substantial wealth for the vast majority of people. The theory that people(other than gold diggers) get married for financial reasons is flawed. Acouple of thousand extra in tax refunds is not exactly a financial bonanza. I don't understand why you dont see the obvious. Its not the money, its about being an American with all the rights and privileges that come with being an American. Why would any American be willing to accept less. Or be expected to.
> Basically, everybody disproved your theory


I'm honestly surprised that you can even spell A.D.D.


----------



## JShupe (Oct 17, 2004)

I just need something clarified, if I buy a used suburban am I ok? 

JS


----------



## RRfisher (Mar 5, 2007)

JShupe said:


> I just need something clarified, if I buy a used suburban am I ok?
> 
> JS


Have the tranny (pun) checked, they have a bad history.


----------



## Gottagofishin (Dec 17, 2005)

You have to wonder about people in a gay thread who can't bring themselves to type "gay" and have to type some sort of homonym.

As for being an insult to "marriage", it's a civil marriage as opposed to a Christian marriage, or a Jewish marriage, or any other religious marriage. The two can either coexist or exist independently. For most of us, we get a marriage license that satisfies the civil aspect, and get married in church that satisfies the religious aspect. It's very efficient that way.

However, a couple can be married by a JP with no reference to religion. A perfectly legal marriage that few of us object to. Conversely, a couple can be married in a church and blessed by the religion and God of their choice without a civil marriage license. Also perfectly acceptable to most of us, even though it might create some legal issues for the couple.

You folks are getting wrapped up in a bunch of semantics that don't really matter and for which there is ample precedence. As long as it doesn't prevent you from expressing your beliefs in your preferred way, why do you care? There are dozens of other versions of marriage that don't coincide with your personal beliefs.


----------



## batmaninja (Jul 15, 2010)

I don't think it is fair to beat up on just the good book here. Other religions are opposed to it, far more than all forms of Christianity. Specifically radical Islam. 

Judaism, Mormonism, and Islam are all pretty clearly opposed to sword fights, much less marriage. Buddhism and Hinduism aren't sssssuper Ok with it either, although I couldn't find a clear stance on marriage. 

But Wiccan, Pagan and Satanism, they all seem to think it is a grand idea!:birthday2


----------



## mastercylinder60 (Dec 18, 2005)

^^ lol. Subtle humor is a work of art.


----------



## poco jim (Jun 28, 2010)

13 pages this afternoon, lmao, you guys are a little to much into this. Jeez!


----------



## spuds (Jan 2, 2005)

shaggydog said:


> God's original purpose was one woman for one man.....


How do you think God feels about the situation that I pointed out earlier about babies' sex misidentified, and in fact, what we have walking around this earth is females with male DNA, and males with female DNA?

Just because the hospital mistakenly dressed the newborn in pink or blue is how God expects them to live their life?

Wouldn't living with the opposite sex, then be against God's law?

Or as in creationism, should science be ignored on this issue as well?


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

spuds said:


> How do you think God feels about the situation that I pointed out earlier about babies' sex misidentified, and in fact, what we have walking around this earth is females with male DNA, and males with female DNA?
> 
> Just because the hospital mistakenly dressed the newborn in pink or blue is how God expects them to live their life?
> 
> ...


Huh? Way off subject.


----------



## KSigAngler (Mar 6, 2011)

This ad is simply promoting the idea of diversity, and the stance that we should accept all of those in this diverse country (which ultimately will only increase in the future)
Its a permanent trend, and its going no where. 

So don't get so worked up about it.


----------



## Johnboat (Jun 7, 2004)

*Wisdom*



KSigAngler said:


> This ad is simply promoting the idea of diversity, and the stance that we should accept all of those in this diverse country (which ultimately will only increase in the future) Its a permanent trend, and its going no where. So don't get so worked up about it.


If this had been on the first page of responses, this thread would have been over then.


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

This will be my final post on this thread. If what I say offends you I really do not care. I will not support something that is morally wrong, not normal , and unnatural. Satan sets this as a trap to try to get people to think it is something that should be acceptable and overlooked. It is not acceptable.

Do I hate gays? No, but I do not get involved in their lives. Do I think gays should have rights? Yes, but only as individuals, the same rights that I have. Should gays have rights as a married couple? Absolutely not. In no way, shape or form, is what they have would be considered a marriage. It is not a marriage.

Here is an analogy that some may understand. Let's say a man wants to join the military. His dad was in the military, his granddad was in the military, and he wants more than anything to follow in their footsteps. He goes to enlist and because of a medical condition, he is turned down. He tries again and again, but cannot get in any of the armed forces. 

Should this man get military benefits? He wants to be in the military and made an attempt to do so, but it just wouldn't happen. What do you think those that served in the military would think if the government granted this man benefits and he was allowed to be treated as he had been in the military, even allowing him to be treated in a VA facility? Do you think this would fly in the face of those that served, some being disabled or chronically sick because of their service?

This is the way a God fearing person feels when you talk of a marriage between two men or between two women. It should not happen, and it should not be accepted.

There is only one being that is really pleased by discussions like this, and that is Satan. He is "misleading the entire world." If you promote or accept homosexuality, you are promoting Satan's traps.


----------



## rugger (Jul 17, 2009)

Really hard to argue legal matters with people that only use fundamentalist Christian arguments.


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

I read Stans driving a vette these days. Saw a classic he liked and sucked it right down to the bowels of the Earth. Didnt pay for it or nothing. His surely is one shifty bastard. I'm gonna be watching out for him.


----------



## The Salty Raider (Sep 25, 2012)

shaggydog said:


> This will be my final post on this thread. If what I say offends you I really do not care. I will not support something that is morally wrong, not normal , and unnatural. Satan sets this as a trap to try to get people to think it is something that should be acceptable and overlooked. It is not acceptable.
> 
> Do I hate gays? No, but I do not get involved in their lives. Do I think gays should have rights? Yes, but only as individuals, the same rights that I have. Should gays have rights as a married couple? Absolutely not. In no way, shape or form, is what they have would be considered a marriage. It is not a marriage.
> 
> ...


 I think you are entirely misguided on what people on here are saying in response to you. I first want to make clear that I personally have no problem with you believing in a book and wanting to follow Godâ€™s message. I want to also make clear what the newer generations hear when they hear someone say that as a god fearing person you dont want to accept two men or women getting married. It sounds alot like black people shouldnt go the the same schools as whites. It really sounds that stupid.

I believe that your analogy is self-serving and is insulting to gays as well. Being gay isnâ€™t a medical condition and so I donâ€™t understand how it would apply to this analogy. If the military turned this fictional person down for no reason, then the military is wrong. If the guy canâ€™t see or has bad asthma, then sure it makes logical sense for them to not let him in. But to make the analogy that gays have some sort of condition that should prevent them from getting married is absurd and you sir sound like a bigot.

Just to be clear: Gay people who want to marry have no desire to redefine marriage in any way. When woman got the right to vote, they didnâ€™t redefine voting. When African-Americans got the right to sit in the same restaurants alongside whites, they did not redefine eating out. They were simply invited to the table.

But since we are on the subject of marriages and what not. Why doesnâ€™t anyone ever try to speak out against green card marriages?? Would those people not be getting married for personal profit?? Why isnâ€™t anyone jumping up and down screaming about that? Also divorce then is just as bad a sin as being gay so why arenâ€™t people who get divorced stripped of their rights in the same way? I believe then that if you get married and then divorced, you no longer have a right to get married. That's fair in god's eyes right? Also marrying someone who has been divorced is adultery so people who remarry are going to hell right?? If so, some of you on here should really start saying your hell maryâ€™s then.

I say marry the person you love or the thing you love. I donâ€™t care if you marry a mannequin, a man, a woman, a turtle. Doesnâ€™t matter to me, just make sure that when you do marry it, you really love that thing.


----------



## spuds (Jan 2, 2005)

shaggydog said:


> Huh? Way off subject.


Sorry it was over in the gay Disney thread.


spuds said:


> My daughter works as a neonatal ICU nurse, a preemie baby nurse for those of you who don't get out much.
> 
> You guys may want to believe that God is infallible, but it is not that unusual to have a baby born with both sex organs. The hospital could run DNA tests to deterime which sex the baby is, but it generally takes too long and is too expensive, so they ask the parents what do you want to do?
> 
> ...


Most of our gay and lesbians friends aren't looking for anything extra or special. If they want to call it marriage, how does your religious beliefs trump theirs?


----------



## TxBrewer (Jul 23, 2011)

The Salty Raider said:


> I think you are entirely misguided on what people on here are saying in response to you. I first want to make clear that I personally have no problem with you believing in a book and wanting to follow Godâ€™s message. I want to also make clear what the newer generations hear when they hear someone say that as a god fearing person you dont want to accept two men or women getting married. It sounds alot like black people shouldnt go the the same schools as whites. It really sounds that stupid.
> 
> I believe that your analogy is self-serving and is insulting to gays as well. Being gay isnâ€™t a medical condition and so I donâ€™t understand how it would apply to this analogy. If the military turned this fictional person down for no reason, then the military is wrong. If the guy canâ€™t see or has bad asthma, then sure it makes logical sense for them to not let him in. But to make the analogy that gays have some sort of condition that should prevent them from getting married is absurd and you sir sound like a bigot.
> 
> ...


:cheers: (closest I could find to applause) Well said.


----------



## rugger (Jul 17, 2009)

TxBrewer said:


> :cheers: (closest I could find to applause) Well said.


X2


----------



## batmaninja (Jul 15, 2010)

The Salty Raider said:


> Just to be clear: Gay people who want to marry have no desire to redefine marriage in any way. When woman got the right to vote, they didnâ€™t redefine voting. When African-Americans got the right to sit in the same restaurants alongside whites, they did not redefine eating out.


False. That is what is exactly what they want!!!!!

There hasn't been one post about wanting to limit gay rights. In fact just the opposite. Many people have stated, give them all the rights of a hetero couple to the gays, just do it through a civil union. Don't bastardize the long held definition of marriage, which at its heart is a religious term. Simple. If you bastardize the definition of marriage you open the flood gates for all kinds of loopholes. Like people marrying turtles.

Your analogies to voting and eating out are nonsense. Marriage is a contract, your examples are far from contracts. Furthermore the gays are specifically trying to redefine the long held terms of a CONTRACT, which is the exact opposite of what you are stating. :rybka:


----------



## rugger (Jul 17, 2009)

So are you against a certain branch of religions allowing gay marriage? They have the right to believe in their religion and practice it just as much as anyone here does...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blessing_of_same-sex_unions_in_Christian_churches


----------



## KSigAngler (Mar 6, 2011)

rugger said:


> Really hard to argue legal matters with people that only use fundamentalist Christian arguments.


Agree..


----------



## KeeperTX (Jul 8, 2013)

I'm a gay heterosexual.
If you're a ********, stay in the closet. Nobody wants to know what you do behind closed doors. Gay rights have nothing to do with civil rights! America is tired of hearing about people who are gay. If you're gay and proud of it, good, keep it to yourself. That's all.


----------



## CTone (Jul 23, 2013)

KeeperTX said:


> I'm a gay heterosexual.
> If you're a ********, stay in the closet. Nobody wants to know what you do behind closed doors. Gay rights have nothing to do with civil rights! America is tired of hearing about people who are gay. If you're gay and proud of it, good, keep it to yourself. That's all.


I would think that most gay people would be happy to keep to themselves, but since they are being discriminated against by government(state), then they feel they must protest, just like you would if your rights were being crushed.


----------



## Gottagofishin (Dec 17, 2005)

The Salty Raider said:


> I think you are entirely misguided on what people on here are saying in response to you. I first want to make clear that I personally have no problem with you believing in a book and wanting to follow Godâ€™s message. I want to also make clear what the newer generations hear when they hear someone say that as a god fearing person you dont want to accept two men or women getting married. It sounds alot like black people shouldnt go the the same schools as whites. It really sounds that stupid.
> 
> I believe that your analogy is self-serving and is insulting to gays as well. Being gay isnâ€™t a medical condition and so I donâ€™t understand how it would apply to this analogy. If the military turned this fictional person down for no reason, then the military is wrong. If the guy canâ€™t see or has bad asthma, then sure it makes logical sense for them to not let him in. But to make the analogy that gays have some sort of condition that should prevent them from getting married is absurd and you sir sound like a bigot.
> 
> ...


I do have to draw the line at different species and inanimate objects, but otherwise very well said.


----------



## Gottagofishin (Dec 17, 2005)

shaggydog said:


> ... Do I think gays should have rights? Yes, but only as individuals, the same rights that I have. Should gays have rights as a married couple? Absolutely not. ...


I'm guessing you don't see the ironic flaw in your logic do you?


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

Yeah, while we're giving gays all the rights they are asking for, lets go on and give amnesty to all the illegals too. And then we need to legalize Sharia Law.


----------



## rugger (Jul 17, 2009)

We're talking about legal US citizens here..no need to bring up another, completely separate topic to distract from the conversation.


----------



## CTone (Jul 23, 2013)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> Yeah, while we're giving gays all the rights they are asking for, lets go on and give amnesty to all the illegals too. And then we need to legalize Sharia Law.


Several different issues. Sharia is Islamic religious law and like all religious laws has no place in the united states, (see 1st amendment).
Residents of these united states have equal protection under the law, gay or straight, black or white, Christian or Muslim.


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

CTone said:


> Several different issues. Sharia is Islamic religious law and like all religious laws has no place in the united states, (see 1st amendment).
> Residents of these united states have equal protection under the law, gay or straight, black or white, Christian or Muslim.


I totally agree but if you think these other groups and liberal judges aren't watching and waiting, think again.

But as I said earlier, I think gays deserve every right straights have, and single people should pay the same taxes and not be penalized for being single.


----------



## fishguru00 (Aug 10, 2011)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> I totally agree but if you think these other groups and liberal judges aren't watching and waiting, think again.
> 
> But as I said earlier, I think gays deserve every right straights have, and single people should pay the same taxes and not be penalized for being single.


are you saying single people pay higher taxes than married people?


----------



## DSL_PWR (Jul 22, 2009)

shaggydog said:


> This will be my final post on this thread. If what I say offends you I really do not care. I will not support something that is morally wrong, not normal , and unnatural. Satan sets this as a trap to try to get people to think it is something that should be acceptable and overlooked. It is not acceptable.
> 
> Do I hate gays? No, but I do not get involved in their lives. Do I think gays should have rights? Yes, but only as individuals, the same rights that I have. Should gays have rights as a married couple? Absolutely not. In no way, shape or form, is what they have would be considered a marriage. It is not a marriage.
> 
> ...


Green to you! Says I have to spread some..



The Salty Raider said:


> Just to be clear: Gay people who want to marry have no desire to redefine marriage in any way.


Actually they do. They want equal rights for insurance, benefits, etc. Is that not redefining things?


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

fishguru00 said:


> are you saying single people pay higher taxes than married people?


Yes, all things equal. Say I make $50,000 and my friend makes $50,000

I pay less tax because I am married.


----------



## The Salty Raider (Sep 25, 2012)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> Yes, all things equal. Say I make $50,000 and my friend makes $50,000
> 
> I pay less tax because I am married.


If you file jointly. You two can still file separately and pay the exact same as if you were single. So if we made gays file separately, would you not be so butt hurt?


----------



## RRfisher (Mar 5, 2007)

The Salty Raider said:


> If you file jointly. You two can still file separately and pay the exact same as if you were single. So if we made gays file separately, would you not be so* butt hurt*?


nice


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

The Salty Raider said:


> If you file jointly. You two can still file separately and pay the exact same as if you were single. So if we made gays file separately, would you not be so butt hurt?


I guess I'm talking to a retard...


----------



## TxBrewer (Jul 23, 2011)

DSL_PWR said:


> Actually they do. They want equal rights for insurance, benefits, etc. Is that not redefining things?


Is that really a bad thing? You mean they want to be treated like everyone else? What a concept.


----------



## The Salty Raider (Sep 25, 2012)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> I guess I'm talking to a retard...


and i guess im talking to a bigot


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

The Salty Raider said:


> and i guess im talking to a bigot


I would expect someone your age have better reading comprehension than you're showing.

I have already stated in my earlier post, that I am for equal rights for all...

Including single people who are not in a relationship. I said I think it is unfair that they pay a higher percentage of income tax than a married person.

I'm not real sure what's so hard to understand about that, but if you need I could get some Crayola's out draw you a pretty little picture.


----------



## Jerry-rigged (May 21, 2004)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> Yes, all things equal. Say I make $50,000 and my friend makes $50,000
> 
> I pay less tax because I am married.


No, you pay less tax, not because you are married, but because you have a dependent. And I could be wrong, but I think the "wife" depended credit is not as big as the "Child" Depended credit.

So Married, one dependent (wife no kids) >tax than single one dependent (kid)

And if your wife works, then you pay EVEN MORE tax because her income will count with yours to put you in a higher tax bracket.

When I started my taxes, after inputting family info and my income, my computer said I would be getting over $12k back. Then I started inputting my Wife's income from her three jobs and that number went down, down, down... LOL I got worried that I would have to pay, for a bit.


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

Jerry-rigged said:


> No, you pay less tax, not because you are married, but because you have a dependent. And I could be wrong, but I think the "wife" depended credit is not as big as the "Child" Depended credit.
> 
> So Married, one dependent (wife no kids) >tax than single one dependent (kid)
> 
> ...


Here's a simple link for you, read it and get back to me.

http://www.bankrate.com/finance/taxes/tax-brackets.aspx


----------



## The Salty Raider (Sep 25, 2012)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> I would expect someone your age have better reading comprehension than you're showing.
> 
> I have already stated in my earlier post, that I am for equal rights for all...
> 
> ...


Look, first off I'm not trying to get into a "who has the biggest chickenboy" contest here, so i hope you dont think that. I hope that people understand I am simply expressing an opinion no different than you.

In regards to your opinion, I get the sense that you believe that the only reason a gay person could possibly want to get married is because they would want a tax benefit of some kind and I disagree with you on that. Also in the same breath, I would ask you, who isn't trying to screw the government out of a few pennies? Even the government is trying to take advantage of itself.

I would hope that anyone who gets married, does it out of true love and just genuinely want to be with each other but I can assure you that the gays are already exploiting tax laws and benefits regardless of if they can marry one another or not.

Do a google search for "marriages of convenience" and I think you will be a little surprised. There is a growing trend in this country where gay and lesbian couples are marrying one another for various benefits. In other words, a gay couple (2 men) will each marry a woman in a lesbian relationship. By doing so they have all successfully gained the ability to access each and every benefit you have spoke of. This is essentially no different than a green-card marriage. I was surprised myself to hear how common place this is in California currently.

As far as my butt hurt comment to you, I was merely trying to make a pun and I apologize if you took it the wrong way. I was trying to show you that the tax benefits are triggered by the way that you file your taxes and not the simple fact that you are married.

Also I believe you said "Including single people who are not in a relationship." in your last post. <<<Could you explain to me what other type of single people there are out there? are there single people in a relationship these days??? (See that's a joke!!!!!)

Look this will probably be my last post on this topic. I've always been the guy who avoids talking about religion and other sensitive topics in public because of how serious people take it and everyone has different opinions. I have actually enjoyed hearing everyone's take on this subject but I think its time that we all agree to disagree.

I for one am headed home to crack open a nice cold one and hopefully get a lil lovin from my sweetie pie. I hope everyone has just as great of a night as well regardless of who you are or what you believe in!!!!


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

The Salty Raider said:


> Look, first off I'm not trying to get into a "who has the biggest chickenboy" contest here, so i hope you dont think that. I hope that people understand I am simply expressing an opinion no different than you.
> 
> In regards to your opinion, I get the sense that you believe that the only reason a gay person could possibly want to get married is because they would want a tax benefit of some kind and I disagree with you on that. Also in the same breath, I would ask you, who isn't trying to screw the government out of a few pennies? Even the government is trying to take advantage of itself.
> 
> ...


I will say this... I have no idea why a gay couple would want to get married. Now as far as being treated equally to everyone else, I'm all for it. But I am more for equal taxation for everyone, not just married people, gay or straight.

But like I said earlier, I am not arguing "gay marriage" I am only discussing my opinion on "gay rights"... There is a whole list of "rights" that gays are fighting for, not just marriage. And I don't care if they get it, more power to them.


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> Here's a simple link for you, read it and get back to me.
> 
> http://www.bankrate.com/finance/taxes/tax-brackets.aspx


Its not that simplistic. Google marriage tax penality and get back to us.


----------



## batmaninja (Jul 15, 2010)

Well you sure backed away from your statement that Gays don't want to change the definition of marriage, Salty. Personally I think this is about changing what is seen as "normal" or natural, along the same lines as Shaggy. In states that allow gay marriage, now the Gays are fighting that cake decorators HAVE To decorate gay cakes, that wedding photographers HAVE to take pictures at gay weddings. No matter if those people have religious objections about the gays. So as I pointed out, oh a few pages ago, like with Phil Robertson it isn't about equality, it is about shouting down those that object to it. 


Single people, not in a relationship. Have you heard of Raider Rash? It is typically a by product of single people, not in a relationship, but in alot of relationships. :fish:


----------



## batmaninja (Jul 15, 2010)

The complaint seeks to force Masterpiece Cakeshop to "cease and desist" the practice of refusing wedding cakes for gay couples, and to tell the public that their business is open to everyone.

If Phillips loses the case and refuses to comply with the order, he would face fines of $500 per case and up to a year in jail, his attorney said.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/06/0...ery-for-allegedly-refusing-them-wedding-cake/

Yes, Lets throw people in jail that don't believe the same as us. Equality for Everyone!!!!!!!!! :an5:


----------



## rugger (Jul 17, 2009)

So, what if they want to change the definition of gay marriage to include same sex couples, and its allowed within their branch of religion, do you have a problem with that?


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

rugger said:


> So, what if they want to change the definition of gay marriage to include same sex couples, and its allowed within their branch of religion, do you have a problem with that?


Dumber than a box of rocks...


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

batmaninja said:


> Well you sure backed away from your statement that Gays don't want to change the definition of marriage, Salty. Personally I think this is about changing what is seen as "normal" or natural, along the same lines as Shaggy. In states that allow gay marriage, now the Gays are fighting that cake decorators HAVE To decorate gay cakes, that wedding photographers HAVE to take pictures at gay weddings. No matter if those people have religious objections about the gays. So as I pointed out, oh a few pages ago, like with Phil Robertson it isn't about equality, it is about shouting down those that object to it.
> 
> Single people, not in a relationship. Have you heard of Raider Rash? It is typically a by product of single people, not in a relationship, but in alot of relationships. :fish:


One example of a couple of whacko's isnt representation of an entire group. You will always have whacked out fringes. It is simply about not being excluded from what the majority of Americans take for granted


----------



## Category6 (Nov 21, 2007)

y'all are still going eh?


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

Yeah. You started it, where the hell you been?


----------



## sea sick (Feb 9, 2006)

I thought this was the mountain lion thread,,,,darn,,,,,


----------



## Leo (May 21, 2004)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> Yeah, while we're giving gays all the rights they are asking for, lets go on and give amnesty to all the illegals too. And then we need to legalize Sharia Law.


Then it would be all about the money again..OMG, they would get to pay taxes!


----------



## Leo (May 21, 2004)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> I would expect someone your age have better reading comprehension than you're showing.
> 
> I have already stated in my earlier post, that I am for equal rights for all...
> 
> ...


Do you work for the IRS? You really have a hard time dealing with the tax thing.


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

Leo said:


> Do you work for the IRS? You really have a hard time dealing with the tax thing.


So are you one of those gimmidat obummer supporters? Is that why taxes don't worry you? Guess when you get more than you put in, you don't have to worry about it. All I know is, if I'm paying for steaks and rims just say thank and move on down to the sports forum.


----------



## Leo (May 21, 2004)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> So are you one of those gimmidat obummer supporters? Is that why taxes don't worry you? Guess when you get more than you put in, you don't have to worry about it. All I know is, if I'm paying for steaks and rims just say thank and move on down to the sports forum.


You seem to want people to pay more taxes, I thought the deal was to pay less, I don't get it


----------



## TxBrewer (Jul 23, 2011)

batmaninja said:


> The complaint seeks to force Masterpiece Cakeshop to "cease and desist" the practice of refusing wedding cakes for gay couples, and to tell the public that their business is open to everyone.
> 
> If Phillips loses the case and refuses to comply with the order, he would face fines of $500 per case and up to a year in jail, his attorney said.
> 
> ...


Just curious what would you think about a photographer or a cake maker refusing to make a cake for an interracial couple because you think that blacks and whites shouldn't marry?


----------



## Category6 (Nov 21, 2007)

poppadawg said:


> Yeah. You started it, where the hell you been?


I was actually fishing all day...super busy


----------



## Jerry-rigged (May 21, 2004)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> Here's a simple link for you, read it and get back to me.
> 
> http://www.bankrate.com/finance/taxes/tax-brackets.aspx


Wow, THANKS!

I didn't realize I could file my taxes based on a simple 3x5 chart. Here I though I had to fill out lots of forms, pay for tax software, and spend several nights imputing data to figure out how much tax I owed... When the IRS call me laughing on April 16th, I'll be sure to point then at your chart...


----------



## Jerry-rigged (May 21, 2004)

TxBrewer said:


> Just curious what would you think about a photographer or a cake maker refusing to make a cake for an interracial couple because you think that blacks and whites shouldn't marry?


I would think that as a free independent business owner, I should have the right to refuse service to anyone, for any reason I choose. IF you don't agree with me, don't come to my shop. If enough people agree with you, I go OOB. If enough people agree with me, I prosper.

See also: Chick Filet


----------



## rugger (Jul 17, 2009)

rugger said:


> So, what if they want to change the definition of gay marriage to include same sex couples, and its allowed within their branch of religion, do you have a problem with that?


1) I wasn't directing the question directly at you

2) You can chill with the insults, I can assure you I'm anything but dumb

3) Nobody has answered my question still.

In fact, it seems to me that people are having a really tough time understanding your point. So why don't you go ahead and take out a paper and some crayons and draw us a little picture.


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

Jerry-rigged said:


> Wow, THANKS!
> 
> I didn't realize I could file my taxes based on a simple 3x5 chart. Here I though I had to fill out lots of forms, pay for tax software, and spend several nights imputing data to figure out how much tax I owed... When the IRS call me laughing on April 16th, I'll be sure to point then at your chart...


Just another d.a. comment with no thought, I swear some people type faster than they think...


----------



## The Salty Raider (Sep 25, 2012)

batmaninja said:


> Well you sure backed away from your statement that Gays don't want to change the definition of marriage, Salty. Personally I think this is about changing what is seen as "normal" or natural, along the same lines as Shaggy. In states that allow gay marriage, now the Gays are fighting that cake decorators HAVE To decorate gay cakes, that wedding photographers HAVE to take pictures at gay weddings. No matter if those people have religious objections about the gays. So as I pointed out, oh a few pages ago, like with Phil Robertson it isn't about equality, it is about shouting down those that object to it.
> 
> Single people, not in a relationship. Have you heard of Raider Rash? It is typically a by product of single people, not in a relationship, but in alot of relationships. :fish:


I'm not backing off any statement I made. Gays dont want to redefine marriage, they want to redefine who those marriage laws apply to. If you see that as redefining marriage then cool but honestly it doesn't change the definition of marriage in my eyes. If two gay people are in love and want to get married then go for it. It doesn't change my mind about what marriage is. Honestly I find divorce more offensive. When some guy has been married 3 or 4 times, I feel like they are slapping God in the face and just making a mockery of what marriage stands for. I do find divorce a sin and so does God so should people who get divorced have the right to remarry taken away from them? If not why say 'till death do us part'? then you divorce 5 years later and no one blinks an eye. That upsets me more than when two people are together for 65 years and just happen to be the same sex.

I also think its wrong that gays would try and force cake decorators and wedding vendors to HAVE to serve them. Businesses should always have control and the ability to dictate whoever they want as a customer and I will defend any business no matter how dumb they are when it comes to these sort of topics. But I believe that opens the door for these other religions to use that as a loop hole as well. Just look up in Minnesota right now to see how muslims are refusing to check out customers in grocery stores who bring pork to the check out line. Alot of Christians would see that as Muslims trying to make Christians bend over backwards but isn't the same as a Christian business owner not wanting to serve gays? I think its where your loyalties lie really.

But again you aren't going to get me to change my mind on this topic and I know I'm not going to change your mind on the topic or anyone elses so I am just walking away from the situation, not backing down from statements. I find it ridiculous that we are all on a fishing forum arguing about gays getting married when its not gonna make one difference on the world.

PS- What they did to Phil was so wrong on so many levels. There are a lot of people in my family who feel the exact same way as he does on the subject and I feel that they have a right to their opinion. I might find that opinion wrong, but who am I to say who is right or wrong!


----------



## The Salty Raider (Sep 25, 2012)

batmaninja said:


> Well you sure backed away from your statement that Gays don't want to change the definition of marriage, Salty. Personally I think this is about changing what is seen as "normal" or natural, along the same lines as Shaggy. In states that allow gay marriage, now the Gays are fighting that cake decorators HAVE To decorate gay cakes, that wedding photographers HAVE to take pictures at gay weddings. No matter if those people have religious objections about the gays. So as I pointed out, oh a few pages ago, like with Phil Robertson it isn't about equality, it is about shouting down those that object to it.
> 
> Single people, not in a relationship. Have you heard of Raider Rash? It is typically a by product of single people, not in a relationship, but in alot of relationships. :fish:


I'm not backing off any statement I made. Gays dont want to redefine marriage, they want to redefine who those marriage laws apply to. If you see that as redefining marriage then cool but honestly it doesn't change the definition of marriage in my eyes. If two gay people are in love and want to get married then go for it. It doesn't change my mind about what marriage is. Honestly I find divorce more offensive. When some guy has been married 3 or 4 times, I feel like they are slapping God in the face and just making a mockery of what marriage stands for. I do find divorce a sin and so does God so should people who get divorced have the right to remarry taken away from them? If not why say 'till death do us part'? then you divorce 5 years later and no one blinks an eye. That upsets me more than when two people are together for 65 years and just happen to be the same sex.

I also think its wrong that gays would try and force cake decorators and wedding vendors to HAVE to serve them. Businesses should always have control and the ability to dictate whoever they want as a customer and I will defend any business no matter how dumb they are when it comes to these sort of topics. But I believe that opens the door for these other religions to use that as a loop hole as well. Just look up in Minnesota right now to see how muslims are refusing to check out customers in grocery stores who bring pork to the check out line. Alot of Christians would see that as Muslims trying to make Christians bend over backwards but isn't the same as a Christian business owner not wanting to serve gays? I think its where your loyalties lie really.

But again you aren't going to get me to change my mind on this topic and I know I'm not going to change your mind on the topic or anyone elses so I am just walking away from the situation, not backing down from statements. I find it ridiculous that we are all on a fishing forum arguing about gays getting married when its not gonna make one difference on the world.

I went to Texas Tech so yes I absolutely know about raider rash. Had a few buddies catch it. The worse part about raider rash is that it doesn't stop half the people from going out and finding "love" the next night. Talk about scary!!!!!

PS- What they did to Phil was so wrong on so many levels. There are a lot of people in my family who feel the exact same way as he does on the subject and I feel that they have a right to their opinion. I might find that opinion wrong, but who am I to say who is right or wrong!


----------



## Category6 (Nov 21, 2007)

rugger said:


> 1) I wasn't directing the question directly at you
> 
> 2) You can chill with the insults, I can assure you I'm anything but dumb
> 
> ...


Here's one


----------



## batmaninja (Jul 15, 2010)

The Salty Raider said:


> In regards to your opinion, I get the sense that you believe that the only reason a gay person could possibly want to get married is because they would want a tax benefit of some kind and I disagree with you on that. .
> 
> Do a google search for "marriages of convenience" and I think you will be a little surprised. There is a growing trend in this country where gay and lesbian couples are marrying one another for various benefits. In other words, a gay couple (2 men) will each marry a woman in a lesbian relationship. By doing so they have all successfully gained the ability to access each and every benefit you have spoke of. This is essentially no different than a green-card marriage. I was surprised myself to hear how common place this is in California currently.


Sooooo, let me see if my feeble mind is able to wrap my arms around your profound comment here Salty. What you are saying is that gay couples are currently getting married not because of love, in fact far from it, they are bastardizing the long held sanctity of marriage for, benefits 

I got a bad case of ADHD here, and have a hard time staying focused but I would have sworn that someone already tried to make that statement and well, several people disagreed with him. Thanks for proving that point is in deed fact, so we can put that discussion to bed.

Brew, the cake shop owner also didn't make cakes for Halloween citing is Christian beliefs. Should he be forced, by our government, using the disguise of equality, to make a Satanic cake? He offered to make the gays a cake, he just drew the line at a wedding cake.

And for the record the judge ruled in favor of the gays and under the penalty of fines and jail time, the business owner must make gay wedding cakes, not sure about Pagan holiday cakes.


----------



## Blk Jck 224 (Oct 16, 2009)

TxBrewer said:


> Don't forget to boo whenever anyone sings America the Beautiful then. Written by a lesbian.


What's wrong with lesbians? 



Category5 said:


> I guess I'm gay. I'll begin the process of getting the wife out of the house immediately, and maybe take a class or two on sucking ****.
> 
> I knew it! The gay interpretations of Craigslist ads was suspicious, but this proves it. Just come completely out of the closet & be done with it!


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

Category5 said:


> I was actually fishing all day...super busy


Did the fish cooperate?


----------



## Category6 (Nov 21, 2007)

poppadawg said:


> Did the fish cooperate?


oh yes, state water snapper are off the chain


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

The Salty Raider said:


> I'm not backing off any statement I made. Gays dont want to redefine marriage, they want to redefine who those marriage laws apply to. If you see that as redefining marriage then cool but honestly it doesn't change the definition of marriage in my eyes. If two gay people are in love and want to get married then go for it. It doesn't change my mind about what marriage is. Honestly I find divorce more offensive. When some guy has been married 3 or 4 times, I feel like they are slapping God in the face and just making a mockery of what marriage stands for. I do find divorce a sin and so does God so should people who get divorced have the right to remarry taken away from them? If not why say 'till death do us part'? then you divorce 5 years later and no one blinks an eye. That upsets me more than when two people are together for 65 years and just happen to be the same sex.
> 
> I also think its wrong that gays would try and force cake decorators and wedding vendors to HAVE to serve them. Businesses should always have control and the ability to dictate whoever they want as a customer and I will defend any business no matter how dumb they are when it comes to these sort of topics. But I believe that opens the door for these other religions to use that as a loop hole as well. Just look up in Minnesota right now to see how muslims are refusing to check out customers in grocery stores who bring pork to the check out line. Alot of Christians would see that as Muslims trying to make Christians bend over backwards but isn't the same as a Christian business owner not wanting to serve gays? I think its where your loyalties lie really.
> 
> ...


Gays DO want to redefine marriage. A marriage is between a man and a woman, it is not between two people of the same sex. So if you call a union between two people of the same sex, a marriage, it is certainly a redefinition.

As individuals they should have the same rights as you or I do. They should not have the same rights as married couples (a man and a woman), because that is not a marriage.

I am still amazed at how many people on this site are condoning something that is unnatural and disgusting. And it is. I certainly do not want my grandchildren growing up thinking that it is something that is normal and should be accepted. It is a long way from normal.


----------



## Category6 (Nov 21, 2007)

Which does God hate more, gay marriage or straight divorce? If you answer anything other than IDK or equally, where is the supporting documentation other than just feelings? I can say with almost absolute certainty that he hates gay divorce most of all. It's very confusing.


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

Category5 said:


> Which does God hate more, gay marriage or straight divorce? If you answer anything other than IDK or equally, where is the supporting documentation other than just feelings? I can say with almost absolute certainty that he hates gay divorce most of all. It's very confusing.


The bible expressly condemns homosexual behavior. While God "hates a divorcing", the bible does give reasons for a divorce. It does not condemn divorce.


----------



## Category6 (Nov 21, 2007)

http://www.wfaa.com/sports/dale-hansen/Dale-Hansen-Unplugged--244822291.html


----------



## Category6 (Nov 21, 2007)

conÂ·demn transitive verb \kÉ™n-Ëˆdem\
: to say in a strong and definite way that someone or something is bad or wrong

: to give (someone) a usually severe punishment

: to cause (someone) to suffer or live in difficult or unpleasant conditions

Full Definition of HATE

1
a : intense hostility and aversion usually deriving from fear, anger, or sense of injury
b : extreme dislike or antipathy : loathing <had a great hate of hard work>

I suppose you can take whichever definition is applicable to your argument, e.g. condemn means condemned to hell, but at face value they're not too different these two words. If you argue condemn means condemn to hell, what about the part where Christ died on the cross to absolve us our sins as long as we accept Him and ask forgiveness? The reconciliation of this argument is wrought with contradiction.


----------



## batmaninja (Jul 15, 2010)

*Way to go Kansas!*

Gay rights advocates are outraged over a bill â€" passed by Kansas lawmakers earlier this week â€" that would allow businesses and state government employees to deny services to same-sex couples if â€œit would be contrary to their sincerely held religious beliefs.â€

The bill â€" H.B. 2453 â€" passed the GOP-led House in a 72 to 49 vote on Wednesday and now heads to the Republican-controlled state Senate. If it succeeds there, it could then be signed into law by Republican Gov. Sam Brownback.

"Same-sex marriage advocates have increasingly treated people who believe in traditional marriage as the legal equivalent of bigots and even racists,â€ Frank Schubert, political director for the National Organization for Marriage, told Time earlier this week. â€œThey brook no disagreement with their ideology and they tolerate no dissent. Therefore legislation like this in Kansas becomes necessary to assure that people are not forced to personally be part of something they cannot in good conscience support."

http://news.yahoo.com/kansas-bill-gay-same-sex-segregation-210533466.html


----------



## The Salty Raider (Sep 25, 2012)

Category5 said:


> Which does God hate more, gay marriage or straight divorce? If you answer anything other than IDK or equally, where is the supporting documentation other than just feelings? I can say with almost absolute certainty that he hates gay divorce most of all. It's very confusing.


A sin is a sin. Where is your documentation that god acknowledges certain sins are worse than others? If your parents asked you to murder someone, what do you do? No matter if you choose to kill someone or not, you have broken one of the ten commandments. Also why do you feel that I should have to justify my opinion to you? You say with certainty that he hates certain sins more than others, where is your documentation? Name the scripture that states god hates gays.



shaggydog said:


> The bible expressly condemns homosexual behavior. While God "hates a divorcing", the bible does give reasons for a divorce. It does not condemn divorce.


I guess getting married in order to gain US citizenship is a valid reason to marry then. Also you realize that I have never once said gays should go to heaven or hell.

Remember: Just because America would allow gays to get married, doesnt mean god is going to automatically let them into heaven.

Also I just don't see how all these people in prison who have murdered people and raped people and been despicable human beings all their life get to now accept jesus into their life and all is forgiven yet someone who is gay yet never committed a crime is immediately sentenced to hell??

Also isn't the first commandment not thou shall not kill, yet more people have been murdered in the name of god than any other reason?


----------



## Category6 (Nov 21, 2007)

you missed my point salty


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

batmaninja said:


> Gay rights advocates are outraged over a bill â€" passed by Kansas lawmakers earlier this week â€" that would allow businesses and state government employees to deny services to same-sex couples if â€œit would be contrary to their sincerely held religious beliefs.â€
> 
> The bill â€" H.B. 2453 â€" passed the GOP-led House in a 72 to 49 vote on Wednesday and now heads to the Republican-controlled state Senate. If it succeeds there, it could then be signed into law by Republican Gov. Sam Brownback.
> 
> ...


It starts getting real nuts when this kind of thing happens. An independent business owner is one thing, but when an individulal representing the state can decide who gets services based on his personal beliefs, thats gestopo whack job crazy.


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

Category5 said:


> http://www.wfaa.com/sports/dale-hansen/Dale-Hansen-Unplugged--244822291.html


I watched him unplugged when he commented on this. While I like Dale Hansen, it does not mean I always agree with him. And it does not matter who it is, if what they espouse is in direct conflict with God, I will side with God every time.

Gods thoughts are much higher than mans, and His thoughts are perfect.


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

The Salty Raider said:


> IAlso I just don't see how all these people in prison who have murdered people and raped people and been despicable human beings all their life get to now accept jesus into their life and all is forgiven yet someone who is gay yet never committed a crime is immediately sentenced to hell??


Not to mention all those criminals in prison have the right to get married. And what about slavery? Gays should burn in hell, but owning a slave, no problem? And shellfish, am I gonna burn in hell for eating the the fried shrimp platter? That dozen oysters on the half shell?


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

You people jump all over the place with different senarios to try to defend gays. The only thing I have tried to do is show what the bible says, and how God feels about that type of behavior. Accept it as normal if you want to but it is a long way from normal.

Sorry, it is not something I will ever accept as normal. Does not mean I hate gays, I let them live their lives however they want, but I will never accept that lifestyle as normal, and that a union between two people of the same sex as a marriage. 

God feelings about people that condone that type of behavior, are the same as people that practice that type of behavior.

Amos 5:15 15â€¯Hate what is bad, and love what is good, 

God hates what is bad and commands us to do so also. There is no fence straddling. Either you are with God or you are against him. I know where I stand.


----------



## batmaninja (Jul 15, 2010)

or put another way


----------



## Gottagofishin (Dec 17, 2005)

I'm reminded of the old George Carlin question... "Can God make a rock so big that even He can't move it?"


----------



## Fish&Chips (Jan 27, 2012)

Sorry batmaninja but there are too many testimonies of those who used to be gay. I'd have to agree with shaggydog on this. Even if new legislation would recognize it as marriage, it doesn't mean that it's right or normal. God's laws are perfect.


----------



## rugger (Jul 17, 2009)

shaggydog said:


> You people jump all over the place with different senarios to try to defend gays. The only thing I have tried to do is show what the bible says, and how God feels about that type of behavior. Accept it as normal if you want to but it is a long way from normal.
> 
> Amos 5:15 15â€¯Hate what is bad, and love what is good,
> 
> God hates what is bad and commands us to do so also. There is no fence straddling. Either you are with God or you are against him. I know where I stand.


Useless argument for those that don't believe what you believe.

What if, in my religion, gays are not seen as sinful? What if my religion teaches that God doesn't have a problem with homosexuality. What if my religion doesn't follow your bible? What's your argument then?


----------



## rugger (Jul 17, 2009)

Fish&Chips said:


> Sorry batmaninja but there are too many testimonies of those who used to be gay. I'd have to agree with shaggydog on this. Even if new legislation would recognize it as marriage, it doesn't mean that it's right or normal. God's laws are perfect.


huh? Testimonies from who? People whose family scared them back into the closet? Give me a break....

Get one thing straight. You can agree or disagree with homosexuality, that is up to you. But don't try to tell me that homosexuality is a choice. It's not a "fad", it's not "cool."


----------



## Ernest (May 21, 2004)

*What if my religion doesn't follow your bible? What's your argument then?*

What do you mean, what's the argument? The same as before:

You are a heretic worshiping a false god and will ultimately burn in hell for all eternity. I know because my Bible tells me so, and its the word of the one true God. Meanwhile, check out this link to a bunch of hot topless chicks to slake your lust.

(Assuming you call that an argument.)


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

rugger said:


> Useless argument for those that don't believe what you believe.
> 
> What if, in my religion, gays are not seen as sinful? What if my religion teaches that God doesn't have a problem with homosexuality. What if my religion doesn't follow your bible? What's your argument then?


We would not be worshiping the same God.


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

I find gay acts disgusting


----------



## Category6 (Nov 21, 2007)

I've engaged in some pretty deviant straight acts that even I find disgusting in retrospect...it happens.


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

Category5 said:


> I've engaged in some pretty deviant straight acts that even I find disgusting in retrospect...it happens.


Not me, those were the good 'ol days...


----------



## rugger (Jul 17, 2009)

Ernest said:


> *What if my religion doesn't follow your bible? What's your argument then?*
> 
> What do you mean, what's the argument? The same as before:
> 
> ...


I mean legally. Isn't this a country where everyone is allowed to worship any God they want? This was more a question directed to people thinking gay marriage should be outlawed and then using their religion as an argument.


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

Category5 said:


> I've engaged in some pretty deviant straight acts that even I find disgusting in retrospect...it happens.


We are all sinners. I know I fall far short of the mark. I will continue to do the best I can. And even though I know I sin every day, I will always defend God and His word.


----------



## Fish&Chips (Jan 27, 2012)

*If this is what you want, then have at it.*

It's all yours.


----------



## Fish&Chips (Jan 27, 2012)

*What about this warning?*

Is this video fake?


----------



## Category6 (Nov 21, 2007)

here's something far more disturbing than gay people...my little deviant dogs.


----------



## txjustin (Jun 3, 2009)

Fish&Chips said:


> Sorry batmaninja but there are too many testimonies of those who used to be gay. I'd have to agree with shaggydog on this. Even if new legislation would recognize it as marriage, it doesn't mean that it's right or normal. God's laws are perfect.


Where are these testimonials?


----------



## batmaninja (Jul 15, 2010)

*Yall are really testing my Googling abilities on this*

Ok, stay with me hear. Remember Antoine Dodson, the brother of a girl that got accosted in her home. Hide yo kids, hide yo wife. Ring any bells. Weh heeh heeh heelll......

The previously openly gay man famous for having his bed intruder comments during a local newscast auto-tuned has decided heâ€™s straight and impregnated a woman.

â€˜I have to renounce myself, I'm no longer into homosexuality I want a wife and family, I want to multiply and raise and love my family that I create,â€™ Mr Dodson wrote.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...r-Dodson-impregnated-woman.html#ixzz2tJn5wIjf

I went ahead and assumed that we are not talking about gay for pay Justin.


----------



## Ernest (May 21, 2004)

*Mr Dodson announced he was straight at the same time he proclaimed himself the â€˜True Chosen Hebrew Israelite descendant of Judahâ€™ on Facebook.*

Sounds like a real stable, normal guy now. I Just hope he holds to the Lord commandment to go forth and multiply.


----------



## rugger (Jul 17, 2009)

haha!

There's actually scientific evidence that being gay is probably genetic. In fact, studies show that gay men are more likely to have gay brothers, and the same thing goes with women.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/...ly-partly-due-to-gay-gene-research-finds.html

The study started back in 2007 at the university of chicago

http://www.foxnews.com/story/2007/10/17/chicago-researchers-look-for-gay-gene/

And just a couple days ago scientist have confirmed that the link between homosexuality and genetics is very strong.

http://au.ibtimes.com/articles/538819/20140214/gay-gene-homosexuality-dna-genes-men.htm#.Uv5VAfldVZk

There is beginning to be substantial scientific evidence supporting the notion that being gay isn't a choice.


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

rugger said:


> haha!
> 
> There's actually scientific evidence that being gay is probably genetic. In fact, studies show that gay men are more likely to have gay brothers, and the same thing goes with women.
> 
> ...


Gay is a choice and I think you have made yours. You can quote man's thoughts all you want. I think I will stick with the higher reasoning of God. Be gone with you.


----------



## rugger (Jul 17, 2009)

shaggydog said:


> Gay is a choice and I think you have made yours. You can quote man's thoughts all you want. I think I will stick with the higher reasoning of God. Be gone with you.


Good, solid reasoning. Thanks for the response.


----------



## Category6 (Nov 21, 2007)

nothing on my dogs?


----------



## WillieT (Aug 25, 2010)

My dogs, too, will have a moment. Just can't seem to get through to them either.


----------



## TxBrewer (Jul 23, 2011)

rugger said:


> 1) I wasn't directing the question directly at you
> 
> 2) You can chill with the insults, I can assure you I'm anything but dumb
> 
> ...


I don't see where I insulted you by asking the question. I do see where you are making it personal though. I notice you didn't answer the question though.


----------



## TxBrewer (Jul 23, 2011)

Jerry-rigged said:


> I would think that as a free independent business owner, I should have the right to refuse service to anyone, for any reason I choose. IF you don't agree with me, don't come to my shop. If enough people agree with you, I go OOB. If enough people agree with me, I prosper.
> 
> See also: Chick Filet


I agree with you that they shouldn't be forced to, the question comes in with equal protection as defined by the equal rights act in which same sex couples are included. If every business in a town agreed to not sell to same sex couples the government would step in on legal grounds. I was just curious how far we are comfortable with it going.


----------



## rugger (Jul 17, 2009)

TxBrewer said:


> I don't see where I insulted you by asking the question. I do see where you are making it personal though. I notice you didn't answer the question though.


oops, I meant to quote the1thatgotaway when he called me dumber than a box of rocks. My fault


----------



## The Salty Raider (Sep 25, 2012)

batmaninja said:


> Sooooo, let me see if my feeble mind is able to wrap my arms around your profound comment here Salty. What you are *saying is that gay couples are currently getting married not because of love, in fact far from it, they are bastardizing the long held sanctity of marriage for, benefits  *
> 
> I got a bad case of ADHD here, and have a hard time staying focused but I would have sworn that someone already tried to make that statement and well, several people disagreed with him. Thanks for proving that point is in deed fact, so we can put that discussion to bed.


No that is not what I am saying. The point I was making is that there are green card marriages, there are cases in which straight people are marrying a gay person so that the gay person can have a cover life (lavender marriages) and yes there are instances in which two gay people marry all in order to cheat the system. Does that take place... yes it does! Are gays the only ones doing it..NO they are not!!!

My point is that a gay man's purpose to marry another gay man is not for tax benefits or to try and cheat the system because if thats *ALL* they want, they can already cheat the system. You make it seem like all they want to do is cheat the system and thats it..like a man can't possibly be happy loving another man.

Funny how no one wants to touch on the fact that divorce is a sin though...lets just conveniently forget about that


----------



## JShupe (Oct 17, 2004)

Anyone have any chevy's for sale?


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

Satan snagged a few vettes earlier in the week. Rat bastard just sucked them down to the bowels of hell. I blame it all on GM's **** commercial. But you have to admit the dark lord has good taste.


----------



## Category6 (Nov 21, 2007)

My son totaled mine 2 weeks ago, he still has his GMC since the alternator went out and he had to borrow mine. Maybe I'm not gay but he is, who cares. I still ain't got a truck.


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

rugger said:


> oops, I meant to quote the1thatgotaway when he called me dumber than a box of rocks. My fault


Thank you for proving my point


----------



## Category6 (Nov 21, 2007)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> Thank you for proving my point


hmmmmmmmm.....that's kind of funny, I don't care who you're *******.


----------



## poppadawg (Aug 10, 2007)

The1ThatGotAway said:


> Thank you for proving my point


Seriously? I quit playing cause I thought your IQ was too low.


----------



## The1ThatGotAway (Jun 24, 2009)

poppadawg said:


> Seriously? I quit playing cause I thought your IQ was too low.


I know you had to google IQ just to make sure you spelled it right.


----------



## Leo (May 21, 2004)

I'm surprised the thread has taken this long to get to the nanny nanny noo noo level.


----------



## Stalkin Spots (Jan 12, 2014)

First, I apologize if this has already been said, but I don't have time to read through this entire thread. I have more important things to do like annual maintenance on my boat so I can get back to fishing.

While I personally do not agree with alternative lifestyles, I don't find the need to rally against those who do. I do, however, take issue with shoving it down my throat. Why is it that as a conservative I am intolerant for not accepting gays, atheists, etc, but liberals are enlightened for not accepting my right to worship my God and carry my guns?

*When is tolerance going to be repaved as a two-way street?*

As far as Chevy is concerned, they will either reap the rewards or suffer the consequences of their marketing. Let's be honest..... Target marketing is nothing new.


----------



## batmaninja (Jul 15, 2010)

I think a lot of points got proved in this thread hwell:

Cant wait for next years Chevy commercial, I hear they are partnering with My Little Pony to launch a rainbow edition of camaros.


----------



## Buckshot Magee (Dec 13, 2009)

I was mislead by the thread title, however unsuprised that the obsession with all things gay continues. 

Wow, 432 posts! I wonder if people who post on gay websites are as fascinated with fishing as those who post on 2Cool are fascinated with anything gay?


----------



## Newbomb Turk (Sep 16, 2005)

batmaninja said:


> I think a lot of points got proved in this thread hwell:
> 
> Cant wait for next years Chevy commercial, I hear they are partnering with My Little Pony to launch a rainbow edition of camaros.


Ford was way ahead of the game..... They own ponycar..
http://specialmustang.com/cgi-bin/s...ainbow Of Colors&optn=&name=Rainbow of Colors

http://www.allfordmustangs.com/forums/classic-talk/350643-1968-mustang-rainbow-custom-series.html

www.Fordglobe.org


----------

