WorldNetDaily publisher Joseph Farah is taking a break from his critical work on behalf of birthers and believers in various conspiracies to explain that laws preventing discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation are actually Very Discriminatory Indeed -- not against a religion (fundamentalist Christianity), but against one of the very sexual orientations that such silly laws purport to protect! Because now, being against marriage equality is its
Re: Alt-text. Wrong. I read it because it was required for my HS Senior English. Apparently, we were judged to be deficient in depression.
Re: the "New York farm family". I'm not gonna read the WorldNut article because life is too short, but I'm guessing that the Giffords routinely rent out their barn for various events, e.g., wedding receptions. Because if they don't, and the gay couple just randomly rolled up to their door and said "Hey, want to rent us your barn, that you don't regularly rent out?", I have trouble seeing a legal matter, even in the People's Republic of New York State. Assuming that they do regularly rent it out, or at least try to, as somebody recently commented, substitute "black" for "gay" and see what that does.
<blockquote>I only see that kind of coercion demanded among two groups of people today &ndash; those who believe in the unlimited power of the state as their &ldquo;god&rdquo; and others who believe their god wants them to kill or subjugate all &ldquo;infidels.&rdquo;</blockquote> This statement is so true, but not in the way that Farah intended it.
&quot;unlimited power of the state as their &#039;god&#039; &quot;
IOW, when you regard your government as operating under a charter from your god, then you want the state to do &quot;God&#039;s work.&quot; Thus &quot;state = god.&quot; Furthermore, you want it to have unlimited power to coerce the entire population to &quot;obey&quot; your preferred god-concept. For instance by interpreting and enforcing law according to your (very narrow and fundamentalist) reading of Biblical principles.
&quot;subjugate all &#039;infidels&#039;&quot;
Pot, meet kettle. #Checkthemirrorfarah. No further discussion needed.
See? This just provides further evidence that &quot;Rick Santorum&quot; was right. Once you open up the definition of marriage you&#039;ll have people with all kinds of weird sexual fetishes demanding official recognition of their proclivities.
<i>Are they not permitted to hold their own sexual orientation, one that acknowledges their God&rsquo;s definition that marriage is a union of one man and one woman?</i>
Maybe he&#039;s on to something! I&#039;m a member of the Don&#039;t-Like-Guns-Killin&#039;-Folks Church, and your Open Carry shenanigans are interfering with my religious practices.
<em>Some people are trying to get the state to force those with different values, morals and religious idea to serve them in ways that violate their consciences.</em>
Can we at least get some new bigotry? This hoary old chestnut was worn-out back when the Atlanta Crackers were still playing baseball.
<blockquote>Yet, isn&rsquo;t that precisely what is happening to the Giffords? Are they not being coerced to accept and approve someone else&rsquo;s sexual orientation? Are they not permitted to hold their own sexual orientation, one that acknowledges their God&rsquo;s definition that marriage is a union of one man and one woman?</blockquote>
Assuming &quot;not&quot; is a rhetorical affirmation... No. No and No. Yes and Yes.
Conrad libelz!
...which would be a great name for a law firm...
Or a white caucus, amirite?
Re: Alt-text. Wrong. I read it because it was required for my HS Senior English. Apparently, we were judged to be deficient in depression.
Re: the &quot;New York farm family&quot;. I&#039;m not gonna read the WorldNut article because life is too short, but I&#039;m guessing that the Giffords routinely rent out their barn for various events, e.g., wedding receptions. Because if they don&#039;t, and the gay couple just randomly rolled up to their door and said &quot;Hey, want to rent us your barn, that you don&#039;t regularly rent out?&quot;, I have trouble seeing a legal matter, even in the People&#039;s Republic of New York State. Assuming that they do regularly rent it out, or at least try to, as somebody recently commented, substitute &quot;black&quot; for &quot;gay&quot; and see what that does.
Less an orientation than a fetish.
<blockquote>I only see that kind of coercion demanded among two groups of people today &ndash; those who believe in the unlimited power of the state as their &ldquo;god&rdquo; and others who believe their god wants them to kill or subjugate all &ldquo;infidels.&rdquo;</blockquote> This statement is so true, but not in the way that Farah intended it.
&quot;unlimited power of the state as their &#039;god&#039; &quot;
IOW, when you regard your government as operating under a charter from your god, then you want the state to do &quot;God&#039;s work.&quot; Thus &quot;state = god.&quot; Furthermore, you want it to have unlimited power to coerce the entire population to &quot;obey&quot; your preferred god-concept. For instance by interpreting and enforcing law according to your (very narrow and fundamentalist) reading of Biblical principles.
&quot;subjugate all &#039;infidels&#039;&quot;
Pot, meet kettle. #Checkthemirrorfarah. No further discussion needed.
How long must my people wait for this country to elect a white President? How long, Lord, how long?
Atlanta Crackers at the plate -- with an assortment of cheeses.
See? This just provides further evidence that &quot;Rick Santorum&quot; was right. Once you open up the definition of marriage you&#039;ll have people with all kinds of weird sexual fetishes demanding official recognition of their proclivities.
<i>Are they not permitted to hold their own sexual orientation, one that acknowledges their God&rsquo;s definition that marriage is a union of one man and one woman?</i>
Sexual orientation = religion?
Talk about comparing apples and schmucks!
Maybe he&#039;s on to something! I&#039;m a member of the Don&#039;t-Like-Guns-Killin&#039;-Folks Church, and your Open Carry shenanigans are interfering with my religious practices.
<em>Some people are trying to get the state to force those with different values, morals and religious idea to serve them in ways that violate their consciences.</em>
Can we at least get some new bigotry? This hoary old chestnut was worn-out back when the Atlanta Crackers were still playing baseball.
&quot;a same-sex couple&rsquo;s attempt to hire their barn as a wedding-reception venue&quot;
Sheez, not wasting any time going from the gay sex to the sex with animals, are they?
I stopped watching after the first 7.
If you are having a wedding reception in a fucking barn there is more things to worry about than it being same sex
<blockquote>Yet, isn&rsquo;t that precisely what is happening to the Giffords? Are they not being coerced to accept and approve someone else&rsquo;s sexual orientation? Are they not permitted to hold their own sexual orientation, one that acknowledges their God&rsquo;s definition that marriage is a union of one man and one woman?</blockquote>
Assuming &quot;not&quot; is a rhetorical affirmation... No. No and No. Yes and Yes.
LSAT here I come!
Wingnut bigots always oppose same-sex marriage until they&#039;re in one.