Started By
Message

re: Disney to have first gay cartoon character

Posted on 2/22/20 at 4:28 pm to
Posted by Korkstand
Member since Nov 2003
28703 posts
Posted on 2/22/20 at 4:28 pm to
quote:

No need. It’s evident to all that witness your ravings.


Who, pray tell, is my bigotry toward?
Posted by fr33manator
Baton Rouge
Member since Oct 2010
123937 posts
Posted on 2/22/20 at 4:37 pm to
quote:

Can you give me a rundown of what needs to be done to lock up my spot in heaven?



Hate to break it to you Chris...but there’s a

Posted by sgallo3
Dorne
Member since Sep 2008
24747 posts
Posted on 2/22/20 at 4:40 pm to
quote:

Disney to have first gay cartoon character


quote:

Almost every show, and now cartoons pushing the alphabet group agenda


does not compute. Disney has made a ton of cartoons and this is the first one with a gay character, u just killed ur own post
Posted by ZappBrannigan
Member since Jun 2015
7692 posts
Posted on 2/22/20 at 4:53 pm to


They added a ramp in the 90s.
Posted by Turbeauxdog
Member since Aug 2004
23155 posts
Posted on 2/22/20 at 6:00 pm to
Not surprised
Posted by Turbeauxdog
Member since Aug 2004
23155 posts
Posted on 2/22/20 at 6:01 pm to
quote:

I can't make a rational and logical argument


Concur
Posted by dallastigers
Member since Dec 2003
5680 posts
Posted on 2/22/20 at 6:21 pm to
quote:

Which part?

Anyone can get married. You don't need a government "granted" right for that.

The issue is whether the marriage is recognized and treated the same as a heterosexual marriage by the state/fedgov. And since we will never all agree on which marriages should qualify for certain benefits, I lean heavily toward government at all levels should stay the F out of marriage completely.


I kind of think some did need a govt granted right by way of Supreme Court to get married on top of marriage in other states or countries being recognized according to some state's legal definition of marriage at time of ruling (there are still limitations of marriage that affect some & state differences the FED accepts). Anyway you are the one that mention there being a right, so I was just asking where this right for each state to recognize and license same sex marriages outside of Supreme Court overruling years & years of its own precedent including the one a year or 2 before this ruling that said Fed should recognize each state's definition but kept part of DOMA that other states didn't have to.

Its same sex versus different sex marriages regardless of sexuality unless there is a specific gay test or gay radar to determine when members of same sex can be married. Pretty sure gay people were married before including to each other as long as 1 male and 1 female, and pretty sure that a govt recognized marriage doesn't require love or magically create love for those that get married. Also even as some denied spousal benefits I also know that through the years many gay couples benefited from not having relationship regulated or taxed as a marriage by state or federal govt.

quote:

So are you on board with denying government benefits and services from people with "defects"? If so, who determines what constitutes a defect? Talk about a slippery slope.



The slippery slope is you deflecting with this when facts I mentioned had nothing to do with changing benefits or penalties of govt licensed & regulated marriages but what is normal and not normal in regards to society, reproductive biology, and evolution of our species especially in what is pushed to our very young children. If not deflecting I assume then that you are not on board with the Iceland cure of Down syndrome or any similar attempt to cure homosexuality through abortion in the future. I also assume you are on board with religious freedom, and the right for private citizens and businesses to not have beliefs forced upon them by the govt or be harassed by other citizens for having different beliefs. Thats a freedom that I know you love and a right that's easy to find in constitution.
Posted by ZappBrannigan
Member since Jun 2015
7692 posts
Posted on 2/22/20 at 7:24 pm to
Oh for fricks sakes you gasbags.

Let the gays marry, states had the chance to recognize Civil Unions but then immediately disallowed them the same protections marriage had.

It's not the end of the world, Western Civilization has not fallen, and God apparently doesn't give a shite since he hasn't come down to say "HOL'UPAMIN". So stop trying to speak for the later and let him break the seals on his own damn time.
Posted by dallastigers
Member since Dec 2003
5680 posts
Posted on 2/22/20 at 7:46 pm to
quote:

They haven't engaged in that institution because until recently, because bigots like you have fought tooth and nail to prevent it.



Gay sex produces kids? Marriage became highly regulated to ensure stability of property and a smooth hand over of property through divorce and/or inheritance and handing of kids back in the days of the frontier.

There was not a huge push towards full fledge national and media push of marriage equality until coincidently marriage penalty tax was reduced.

But here are some of the bigots you say fought tooth and nail to prevent it.

The first declined license was in 1970 in Minnesota.
Jerry Brown even signed a law banning it in California in 1977.
1982 9th circuit court of appeals wrote an opinion that included:
quote:

holds that for immigration purposes Congress intended its use of the words marriage and spouse to have their "ordinary meaning" which "contemplates a relationship between a man and a woman"
.
1996 Clinton signed DOMA into law.
1996 Obama supports domestic partnership (2009 his aides deny he fill out questionnaire himself that showed support for gay marriage around same time).
In 1998 Obama undecided on gay marriage
Leftist state Hawaii upheld ban in 1999.
Another leftist state California passed prop 22 in 2000 defining marriage as only between a man and a woman.
In 2002 a Democrat introduced the federal marriage amendment to define marriage as between a man and a woman and then to also to deny benefits of marriage being given to unmarried couples.
In 2004 Obama supports civil unions but insists marriage is not a basic civil right
quote:

He says homosexuality is not a choice and “for the most part, it is innate.” Obama distinguishes marriage from other civil rights, saying, “We have a set of traditions in place that I think need to be preserved.”

Even after Democrats show support in national platform in summer of 2008 California passes Prop 8 (Terminator had earlier vetoed 2 bills supporting gay marriage),and Obama campaigns for President as being against gay marriage.
quote:

He also says, repeatedly, that he is against gay marriage. “I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman. Now, for me as a Christian — for me — for me as a Christian, it is also a sacred union. God’s in the mix,” he tells pastor Rick Warren at the Saddleback Presidential Forum in April.

In 2011 Obama only stops defending section 3 of DOMA while announcing they will work with Congress to defend the rest of DOMA.
In May 2012 Obama would only say to robin Roberts he thought as a personal ideal gays should be allowed to marry (also afterBiden forced his hand a few days earlier) while still waiting until after inauguration in Jan 2013 to call it an equality issue and comparing it to civil rights movement.

quote:

Obama’s evolution has roughly tracked public opinion. National opposition to same-sex marriage began a sharp decline after President Bill Clinton signed the Defense of Marriage Act, which defined marriage as between a man and a woman, into law in 1996. A majority of the public began to favor same-sex marriage sometime between 2010 and 2011, according to analysis by FiveThirtyEight.


Like illegal immigration Democrats were against gay marriage until they thought it would get them votes in elections.
Posted by dallastigers
Member since Dec 2003
5680 posts
Posted on 2/22/20 at 8:07 pm to
quote:

Oh for fricks sakes you gasbags.

Let the gays marry, states had the chance to recognize Civil Unions but then immediately disallowed them the same protections marriage had.

It's not the end of the world, Western Civilization has not fallen, and God apparently doesn't give a shite since he hasn't come down to say "HOL'UPAMIN". So stop trying to speak for the later and let him break the seals on his own damn time.


Maybe your earlier focus on roommate hummers has distracted you, but you appear to lack ability to perceive nuances in a discussion.

Below is closer to my view and more negative about Obergefell v. Hodges
quote:

I have more of a problem with how it was done, how its been used to harass others in private lives, businesses, or churches, and that marriages are still being regulated by govt especially the huge legal process when it ends more than I have a problem with a state acknowledging a piece of paper that 2 people are in legally binding relationship.



Now back to your visions of roommate hummers
Posted by USMEagles
Member since Jan 2018
11811 posts
Posted on 2/23/20 at 7:47 am to
quote:

I'm just asking since you were trying to downplay clam diving from sex to masturbation.


I should have been more consistent about that downplaying in what I posted. It's difficult because people have all bought into this concept of "gay sex."

Don't need to argue with the Bible when you've already beaten the dictionary.
Jump to page
Page First 11 12 13
Jump to page
first pageprev pagePage 13 of 13Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram