Absurd, utterly absurd. - Page 3

ABRAXAAS · 2003-02-18, 03:45 PM

Yes Im saying its ok to sue someone for there religious beleifs if there forcing it on others ,its that line again once you cross over from your beleifs to the world of forcing those beleifs on someone it becomes a bad thing .

mistled · 2003-02-18, 03:46 PM

Originally posted by ABRAXAAS
Ok come on your telling me that if I post a nazi war rally speech stating that **** deserve to die that since these are not my words I cant be held responsible . he sure as hell didnt post that stuff not believing in it .

If you want to get down to it, the thing the guy ran only had references to it. I don't know about the rest of you, but if I see something like that that is obviously against something I believe (like if it was the US flag crossed out), I wouldn't go look at the references. What are these guys doing, looking to get pissed off??

Also, aren't these references about Levitical law?? This is like my breaking out Hammurabi's Code and getting bitched at because someone doesn't agree with one of the laws in it. The guy doesn't seem to be pushing for homosexuality to be made illegal, even though he might believe that it should.

I think the whole point of this thread was to point out the hypocracy in the fact that if someone thinks that homosexuality is wrong, they evil, but the people who think they are evil are just fine.

mistled · 2003-02-18, 03:48 PM

Originally posted by ABRAXAAS
Yes Im saying its ok to sue someone for there religious beleifs if there forcing it on others ,its that line again once you cross over from your beleifs to the world of forcing those beleifs on someone it becomes a bad thing .

You still haven't said how this is anymore forcing of beliefs on someone than any other advertisment.

ABRAXAAS · 2003-02-18, 03:50 PM

Im over exagerating to prove my point here.

basically . Beliefs in anything (ok)

using your beleifs to attack someone (bad)

its easy

archaic1128 · 2003-02-18, 03:51 PM

Please explain to me where and how he is forcing his religous beliefs on the homosexual community. I just don't see where he is FORCING his beliefs. It's kinda like posts in this forum, if you don't like the topic don't read or respond. Noone can force you to follow their beliefs unless you are willing to follow, period.

Lexington_Steele · 2003-02-18, 03:52 PM

Originally posted by {BOHICA}mistled
No one assaulted them. Quit trying to act like saying that I disagree with something someone does is the same as my assaulting them. I disagree with almost everything you type, but you aren't going to sue me for it are you??

First off that comment is out of context. I was responding to your scenario of someone calling you a bigot for your views.

If I say that being Christian is an immoral lifestyle I should expect to be attacked. That is directly assaulting Christians. If I made such comments I would not get away with it. I would bet that no major newspaper would allow me to run an ad that had a big picture of a cross with a big red slash through it.

ABRAXAAS · 2003-02-18, 03:54 PM

he's not forcing his religious beliefs on them hes using his beleifs to publicly attack gay people . and its wrong .

mistled · 2003-02-18, 03:56 PM

Originally posted by Lexington_Steele
I would bet that no major newspaper would allow me to run an ad that had a big picture of a cross with a big red slash through it.

But if you did, I don't think anyone should be allowed to sue you for it. They would get pissed, of course, but that should be all. I do try to play by the same rules for everyone. While neither his ad nor the one with the cross with a slash over it would be in good taste, I don't think that people should be sued over either one.

Lexington_Steele · 2003-02-18, 04:01 PM

Originally posted by afex
basing your opinions on the actions of radicals is always a good way to have an intelligent discussion.

if i went out right now and held a "its not ok to be gay" parade, i'd probably get sued/fined. chew on that one next time you see the gay parade on TV.

Holding a parade without the propper permits will get you fined and an "its not ok to be gay" parade would be less likely to be aproved by a city.

One promotes hate and the other does not.

You would probably get aproval for holding a "hereosexual pride" parade. You don't see gays holding "its not ok to be heterosexual" parades.

MrVicchio · 2003-02-18, 04:02 PM

Originally posted by Lexington_Steele
A homesexuals beliefs are not founded on hate. A homosexual hater's beliefs are founded on hate. Do you see the difference.

I am definately not for creating a social environment where hate is a family value.

Ahh equating religious belife with hate. And hwo did you arrive at that conclusion? "A man should not lie with another man as he would a woman" Damn thats is hate speech!

Bighoss · 2003-02-18, 04:02 PM

its easiest put this way. In our retarded society anything that isn't sugar coated is considered offensive, racist, and insulting.

I say we need to eat more soup and gravy. Everyone was a lot tougher then

these kind of discussions didn't exist.

archaic1128 · 2003-02-18, 04:05 PM

"he's not forcing his religious beliefs on them hes using his beleifs to publicly attack gay people . and its wrong ."

Ok, where does he personally attack someone? Did this guy physically attack someone for their lifestyle? Did this guy personally attack a "named person"? Did this guy state HE was going to kill them? I believe the answer is NO.

My point being that if someone or a group is allowed to sue for having read something that hurts their feelings there would be no end in the lawsuits. It's ridiculous that a court would even allow someone to be sued for hurting anothers feelings. Physically attacking someone or threating someone is a different issue entirely.

Bighoss · 2003-02-18, 04:07 PM

well put

Lexington_Steele · 2003-02-18, 04:10 PM

Originally posted by archaic1128
Assbraxus,
Did you ever stop to think maybe this guy was doing what the bible tells him he should do? That being go out and proclaim the word of god, teach people their wrong doings, try to convert the willing etc. So basically what your stating is it's OK to sue someone for religuos beliefs, no?

I could also quote verses in the bible that would suggeest tolerance of people with different lifestyles.

Picking and choosing what you wish to ignore for your own adjenda is not necessarily justified.

The bible says that slavery is ok. Would this guy be in the right for enslaving someone? Would that not also be following his religious beliefs?

The moment your beliefs are effecting other people your religious freedom changes.

This guy has every right to hate gays and believe what he wants. He does not have the right to publish an ad that promotes hatred in the community.

Bighoss · 2003-02-18, 04:14 PM

I think its funny that if a guy walked down the street wearing a pink thong and written on his back with black marker it said "GAY AND PROUD" he would be cheered but if a guy walked down the street dressed casually and had a sign saying "Hetero and proud" he would be considered evil.