100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: You can't enter if you aren't... | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
dragoness...since you want to engage..let's engage if there was a winter soltice celebration..why should I expect them to include other religions with it??? inviting people to there celebration is great...i've been to some...but wouldn't expect them to cater to me and change their celebration i don't celevrate any holidays as religious of any kind....so should I be offended by others that do???? no Religious events and parades in public don't happen on a daily basis, I think she and I are more talking about just keeping the daily practice of religion to one's home and church. I don't see why that would be so bad, we have done it for decades. But now that everything seems to have to be a public show of faith, it's starting to get on peoples nerves. I don't mean mine in particular. People are complaining about Muslim prayers etc.. Just keep it private as much as possible. Parades and events are fine, no one is forced to endure them every day. I think i understand where you are coming from. Not sure where religion is becoming more public though... Nevertheless i agree to some extent. It would seem like proper manners to keep it more private. But at the same time we must not freak out when we see something public. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
HA HA HA WOW...if this isn't an eye opener??? "If we wanted to keep violence down, we would have a one world religion, a one world government, one race, we would all wear uniforms and shave our heads, and we would be medicated at all times." How about this... To keep violence down... Educated yourself. Respect others. Embrace difference. Reject fear. Oh..and maybe try this, "Do unto others as you would have them do onto you" The idea that the way to keep violence down is to make us all the same is disturbing and disgusting. It supposes that people are too ugly and fearful to not be violent to anyone who is different. Heck it goes beyond that and seems to justify violence against anyone who is different. That is very sad. I find it amusing where you took this. Kinda like you had a point, but decided to preach to the quire about it. I have always been for education. I have always been for tolerance. You either misunderstood my point, or are making a pathetic attempt at stiring up an argument. In order to promote tolerance, one must be tolerant. Prohibiting the exercise of religion, or some other belief, is intolerant. Even if you prohibited a Christian seminar because they didn't have jewish+muslim+satanist+every other religious representation. Seminars would be in the private domain. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
dragoness...so to respect all (which is impossible to do) then everything would be eliminated in public....parades, demonstrations, etc If all religions are represented fairly in the public event then there is no favoritism. Same amount of time being given for each religion available to man is fair, if not then we have to go with the opposite to be respectful to all. What if there weren't any people that wanted to represent any other religion? That isn't possible with all the other religions available and practiced in this country. 60 to 70% are christians. What if everyone was informed of this rally or get together, and no one from these religions happened to step forward? What if they were in the bible belt and all happened to be christians? This conversation is already hard to follow, could we at least keep it with in our known reality.... Oh I missed that from driven. There is still another religion practiced in that area regardless to how strong the Christian influence is. Right, now lets say the whole winter solstice thing was all inclusive, but it was a winter soltice not a Christmas celebration. Would be not be fair to let the celebrate a winter soltice if the next night the next night christians could celebrate christmas? Or do they all have to be in the same event? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
HA HA HA WOW...if this isn't an eye opener??? "If we wanted to keep violence down, we would have a one world religion, a one world government, one race, we would all wear uniforms and shave our heads, and we would be medicated at all times." How about this... To keep violence down... Educated yourself. Respect others. Embrace difference. Reject fear. Oh..and maybe try this, "Do unto others as you would have them do onto you" The idea that the way to keep violence down is to make us all the same is disturbing and disgusting. It supposes that people are too ugly and fearful to not be violent to anyone who is different. Heck it goes beyond that and seems to justify violence against anyone who is different. That is very sad. I find it amusing where you took this. Kinda like you had a point, but decided to preach to the quire about it. I have always been for education. I have always been for tolerance. You either misunderstood my point, or are making a pathetic attempt at stiring up an argument. In order to promote tolerance, one must be tolerant. Prohibiting the exercise of religion, or some other belief, is intolerant. Even if you prohibited a Christian seminar because they didn't have jewish+muslim+satanist+every other religious representation. Seminars would be in the private domain. I guess i don't understand the problem... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Too bad there are people that think that we can only exercise religion in our own homes... This, by definition, is intolerance of all, instead of tolerance of all...IMO BTW do you have control issues? Just wondering.... Hi Driven, Actually, why not excercise religion in your own home or church, why must it be in public? Do I really want to be tripping over some one meditating in the middle of the airport. Do I want to hear chanting outside my bedroom window, when I am trying to sleep? Are we so obsessed with our religions that we need to practice it everywhere, I wonder? It used to be that your religion was a private matter between you and your god, but it seems we wear it on our sleeves these days. I am glad that for the most part people where I live now are not in your face religious, they believe it's a private matter, and I think that is good thing. I believe it is a private matter as well. Just as our sexuality, we have bedrooms for that, do you really want public sex, I don't... oh wait we have that now too, but I guess I am a bit old fashioned, I don't want to see anyone going at it in the street. Just curious.. It is irresponsible to throw religion around. It is irresponsible to keep preaching when people don't want to listen. But, the first amendment sanctions this. If a kid gets caught praying quietly at a lunch table and get's in trouble for it, that is a breach of constitutional rights. As is the muslim being forbade to pray somewhere out of sight when the time comes to do so. It is illegal to prohibit the free exercise thereof... Remember? There is a balance, but this cannot be forced. See where i am going? Praying quietly at ones desk isn't a problem for me, nor is going somewhere private for Muslims, I though you mean outside my bedroom window.. grin.. Look as I see it if people really want peace, then just do it at home or in church. Don't we have enough anxiety between religions and the sexes etc? For what purpose must a child pray at school unless it's a religious school that forces it or requires it. What, the child can't pray before school? Muslims can't work their five times a day into morning and evening sessions at home or somewhere non public? I think that would be respectful of eachothers space if nothing more. I guess I just don't understand why religion has become such a public affair unless religions are in competition. I understand the free excercise thing, I just don't know why people feel the need to publically display everything... Can't we be free yet respectful of another person's space? Just wondering, not expecting that I am rambling about at this point to mean all that much. If we wanted to keep violence down, we would have a one world religion, a one world government, one race, we would all wear uniforms and shave our heads, and we would be medicated at all times. I am with you on publically displaying things. But that is something that we must just walk away from or even crack jokes at. Who cares? As long as they aren't throwing it in your face. Hell, i'm sick of seeing Paris Hilton or Britney Spears everywhere i go, but we shouldn't make it illegal for them to be celebrities... .... ....wait a minute....    Wait, I do want a law that says you can't tell us anything about Hilton of Spears, except once ever 6 months..grin. I'm not even going to go the way of one world order crapola, that won't work either. but I don't see why we can't respect each others space and leave religion in the home and church where it doesn't conflict with another persons privacy to practice theirs. Seems fair to me. Religious parades don't happen all that often so that's ok. Gay parades are not religious that I know of, but I don't like them myself, however they aren't all the time either so that's cool. Just religion and sex, those two things cause more arguments than anything else, so keep them private, except for weddings and special occasions.. why not? Im glad you don't buy into that one world order crap. But, if we respected everyone's space, and someone were religious, would we not have to respect that persons space as well? Does tolerance not go both ways? Ok lets see if I get what you are saying. I am pretty much talking about religious practices here. Sure we would have to respect anothers space, that is what i am saying. Each of us should practice our faith in our homes and churches. Parades etc are not daily things, so they are public.. Yes tolerance goes both way, but if your praying outside my window, I might hit you with a potted plant.. and i would be subject to tresspassing charges for entering your property without your permission.... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think we just have a breakdown on communication. Unfortunately i have some studying to do still... I;'ll come back tomorrow. Night all....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
dragoness...so to respect all (which is impossible to do) then everything would be eliminated in public....parades, demonstrations, etc If all religions are represented fairly in the public event then there is no favoritism. Same amount of time being given for each religion available to man is fair, if not then we have to go with the opposite to be respectful to all. again...why only religions??? every religion or non religion can celebrate now. who is stopping them?? what about gay rights parades??? what if they offend people...should they stop??? NO. they have a right to as well. what about the KKK or Black Panthers....they are going to offend people...but they have the rights as well. just like pro-life and pro-choice you seem to focus alot on religion only Gays would gladly have any other groups join in their gay and lesbian celebrations, they are not non inclusive ( know that is improper grammar). They are usually the outsiders. The other groups you mentioned are non inclusive groups they limit who can join and celebrate with them. Religion was the OP right? not all gays are welcoming either. i was in the dance world and still am and a majority of the dancers i know are gay....some a great and friendly to all...some want nothing to do with anyone that isn't gay. every church i know welcomes people to come in no matter who they are. every celebration i have been to, they encourage people to bring others. actually "those" christians i believe were some how responsible for something or another in the OP Hey there are gay guys that can't stand gay women there are gay women that can't stand men at all, not even male children.. extreme, but it happens, as it happens in the straight world, some folks won't hang out with you unless you own a fancy vehicle.. People are strange gay and straight. But because you feel churches are friendly might say more about the fact that you are straight, not gay, though I don't argue with the fact that there are churches that aren't like that, just not as many as you might think. Course maybe I would be pleasently suprised but when I come into these forums I don't see much hope in it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
HA HA HA WOW...if this isn't an eye opener??? "If we wanted to keep violence down, we would have a one world religion, a one world government, one race, we would all wear uniforms and shave our heads, and we would be medicated at all times." How about this... To keep violence down... Educated yourself. Respect others. Embrace difference. Reject fear. Oh..and maybe try this, "Do unto others as you would have them do onto you" The idea that the way to keep violence down is to make us all the same is disturbing and disgusting. It supposes that people are too ugly and fearful to not be violent to anyone who is different. Heck it goes beyond that and seems to justify violence against anyone who is different. That is very sad. never mind...biting my tongue on this one Just take the post for what it is, a response to the idea of a one world order. Nothing to get upset with, though Driven wasn't suggesting it as a good idea. But it's still just a response to it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Due to popular demand I feel a need to address something! The GLBT is an organization with members. They even have a historical web-site. When one, such as myself, talks about them they are not talking about every gay, lesbian, Bi-homosexual, or Transgender. They, me included are talking about an organization. IMO, an unethical organization whose methods for advancing the rights of G, L, B,& Ts has no boundaries or restraints. They will do anything no matter how reckless their methods are, or who, or what they hurt or destroy along the way. If, as a G, L, B, or T, you feel as though a debate about there lack of ethics is off limits or refers to all G, B, L, and T's then you are sadly mistaken. I am sure that not all G, B, L, and T's approve of such unethical and reckless methods they employ and as such would never think of joining or supporting such methods! If you are not a member then the debate about them should not concern your sensitivities. If you are a member I might suggest you rethink your membership and quit them, or become an active, non-complacent member and work to correct their Unethical and reckless methods. If you are a local group I might suggest you invent a new name and drop the association with the GLBT! Ok you're gonna have to come up with some demonstratable facts like where is this supposed website? Where are they physcially located? Who is their head. There are literally thousands of websites with those letters and through out the community those letters are used synonomously with referring to all GLBT's. Personally I think think this a load, but if you can come up with any of the above information I may concede that you may have been misled into believing what you just said. http://www.glbthistory.org/ Did you see this Davy? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
dragoness...so to respect all (which is impossible to do) then everything would be eliminated in public....parades, demonstrations, etc If all religions are represented fairly in the public event then there is no favoritism. Same amount of time being given for each religion available to man is fair, if not then we have to go with the opposite to be respectful to all. What if there weren't any people that wanted to represent any other religion? That isn't possible with all the other religions available and practiced in this country. 60 to 70% are christians. What if everyone was informed of this rally or get together, and no one from these religions happened to step forward? What if they were in the bible belt and all happened to be christians? This conversation is already hard to follow, could we at least keep it with in our known reality.... Oh I missed that from driven. There is still another religion practiced in that area regardless to how strong the Christian influence is. Right, now lets say the whole winter solstice thing was all inclusive, but it was a winter soltice not a Christmas celebration. Would be not be fair to let the celebrate a winter soltice if the next night the next night christians could celebrate christmas? Or do they all have to be in the same event? Is the event public? Most wiccan celebrations are very private and on private property. If it is a private celebration and not in the streets at a public game or event, etc... then no they do not have to be inclusive. Keeping religion private means that I do not have to "experience" a televised Christian prayer at a televised football game. Private domain is churches, rented buildings or areas, homes, Public domain is the lawn of capital building, the lawn of the civic park, the streets, publicized events of non religious base, etc... If this winter solstice celebration was happening at the capital building lawn they need to be completely inclusive to all religions and make time for all to speak and pray or whatever. If not in a public domain they can just go about their merry business and solstice celebrations are merry too. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
HA HA HA WOW...if this isn't an eye opener??? "If we wanted to keep violence down, we would have a one world religion, a one world government, one race, we would all wear uniforms and shave our heads, and we would be medicated at all times." How about this... To keep violence down... Educated yourself. Respect others. Embrace difference. Reject fear. Oh..and maybe try this, "Do unto others as you would have them do onto you" The idea that the way to keep violence down is to make us all the same is disturbing and disgusting. It supposes that people are too ugly and fearful to not be violent to anyone who is different. Heck it goes beyond that and seems to justify violence against anyone who is different. That is very sad. never mind...biting my tongue on this one Just take the post for what it is, a response to the idea of a one world order. Nothing to get upset with, though Driven wasn't suggesting it as a good idea. But it's still just a response to it. oh i took it for exactly what it is!!!! and driven's coment was sarcasm. but yes...i know EXACTLY what it is which is why i didn't post what i wanted to and get banned for it this whole thing is pointless IMO. i have tried to argue for everyone's rights and I'm done trying!!!!! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
dragoness...since you want to engage..let's engage if there was a winter soltice celebration..why should I expect them to include other religions with it??? inviting people to there celebration is great...i've been to some...but wouldn't expect them to cater to me and change their celebration i don't celevrate any holidays as religious of any kind....so should I be offended by others that do???? no Religious events and parades in public don't happen on a daily basis, I think she and I are more talking about just keeping the daily practice of religion to one's home and church. I don't see why that would be so bad, we have done it for decades. But now that everything seems to have to be a public show of faith, it's starting to get on peoples nerves. I don't mean mine in particular. People are complaining about Muslim prayers etc.. Just keep it private as much as possible. Parades and events are fine, no one is forced to endure them every day. I think i understand where you are coming from. Not sure where religion is becoming more public though... Nevertheless i agree to some extent. It would seem like proper manners to keep it more private. But at the same time we must not freak out when we see something public. Geesh anyone that isn't used to in your face religion, would suprise me. We have made religion more public in the last 20 years, I rarely heard about religion on the news or in the streets, but now Cnn has to have a segement on religion for pete sakes, we can't seem to focus on anything else but religion and viagra... Maybe it's me but in my 20's and 30's i just didn't hear about religion like we do today, people were more private about it. I wish it were the same today, makes for less fighting about it, i think. Ya, proper manners, I like that, I have my faith and I practice it in the privacy of my own home and my church.. ya I like that.. I'm not going to freak if I see a special event that is given by a particular religion for it's people even if others are invited. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Too bad there are people that think that we can only exercise religion in our own homes... This, by definition, is intolerance of all, instead of tolerance of all...IMO BTW do you have control issues? Just wondering.... Hi Driven, Actually, why not excercise religion in your own home or church, why must it be in public? Do I really want to be tripping over some one meditating in the middle of the airport. Do I want to hear chanting outside my bedroom window, when I am trying to sleep? Are we so obsessed with our religions that we need to practice it everywhere, I wonder? It used to be that your religion was a private matter between you and your god, but it seems we wear it on our sleeves these days. I am glad that for the most part people where I live now are not in your face religious, they believe it's a private matter, and I think that is good thing. I believe it is a private matter as well. Just as our sexuality, we have bedrooms for that, do you really want public sex, I don't... oh wait we have that now too, but I guess I am a bit old fashioned, I don't want to see anyone going at it in the street. Just curious.. It is irresponsible to throw religion around. It is irresponsible to keep preaching when people don't want to listen. But, the first amendment sanctions this. If a kid gets caught praying quietly at a lunch table and get's in trouble for it, that is a breach of constitutional rights. As is the muslim being forbade to pray somewhere out of sight when the time comes to do so. It is illegal to prohibit the free exercise thereof... Remember? There is a balance, but this cannot be forced. See where i am going? Praying quietly at ones desk isn't a problem for me, nor is going somewhere private for Muslims, I though you mean outside my bedroom window.. grin.. Look as I see it if people really want peace, then just do it at home or in church. Don't we have enough anxiety between religions and the sexes etc? For what purpose must a child pray at school unless it's a religious school that forces it or requires it. What, the child can't pray before school? Muslims can't work their five times a day into morning and evening sessions at home or somewhere non public? I think that would be respectful of eachothers space if nothing more. I guess I just don't understand why religion has become such a public affair unless religions are in competition. I understand the free excercise thing, I just don't know why people feel the need to publically display everything... Can't we be free yet respectful of another person's space? Just wondering, not expecting that I am rambling about at this point to mean all that much. If we wanted to keep violence down, we would have a one world religion, a one world government, one race, we would all wear uniforms and shave our heads, and we would be medicated at all times. I am with you on publically displaying things. But that is something that we must just walk away from or even crack jokes at. Who cares? As long as they aren't throwing it in your face. Hell, i'm sick of seeing Paris Hilton or Britney Spears everywhere i go, but we shouldn't make it illegal for them to be celebrities... .... ....wait a minute.... Wait, I do want a law that says you can't tell us anything about Hilton of Spears, except once ever 6 months..grin. I'm not even going to go the way of one world order crapola, that won't work either. but I don't see why we can't respect each others space and leave religion in the home and church where it doesn't conflict with another persons privacy to practice theirs. Seems fair to me. Religious parades don't happen all that often so that's ok. Gay parades are not religious that I know of, but I don't like them myself, however they aren't all the time either so that's cool. Just religion and sex, those two things cause more arguments than anything else, so keep them private, except for weddings and special occasions.. why not? Im glad you don't buy into that one world order crap. But, if we respected everyone's space, and someone were religious, would we not have to respect that persons space as well? Does tolerance not go both ways? Ok lets see if I get what you are saying. I am pretty much talking about religious practices here. Sure we would have to respect anothers space, that is what i am saying. Each of us should practice our faith in our homes and churches. Parades etc are not daily things, so they are public.. Yes tolerance goes both way, but if your praying outside my window, I might hit you with a potted plant.. and i would be subject to tresspassing charges for entering your property without your permission.... Oh goodie, but you could still chant in the street next to my bedroom, I would just have to practice throwing my potted plant a bit further.. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
dragoness...since you want to engage..let's engage if there was a winter soltice celebration..why should I expect them to include other religions with it??? inviting people to there celebration is great...i've been to some...but wouldn't expect them to cater to me and change their celebration i don't celevrate any holidays as religious of any kind....so should I be offended by others that do???? no Religious events and parades in public don't happen on a daily basis, I think she and I are more talking about just keeping the daily practice of religion to one's home and church. I don't see why that would be so bad, we have done it for decades. But now that everything seems to have to be a public show of faith, it's starting to get on peoples nerves. I don't mean mine in particular. People are complaining about Muslim prayers etc.. Just keep it private as much as possible. Parades and events are fine, no one is forced to endure them every day. I think i understand where you are coming from. Not sure where religion is becoming more public though... Nevertheless i agree to some extent. It would seem like proper manners to keep it more private. But at the same time we must not freak out when we see something public. Geesh anyone that isn't used to in your face religion, would suprise me. We have made religion more public in the last 20 years, I rarely heard about religion on the news or in the streets, but now Cnn has to have a segement on religion for pete sakes, we can't seem to focus on anything else but religion and viagra... Maybe it's me but in my 20's and 30's i just didn't hear about religion like we do today, people were more private about it. I wish it were the same today, makes for less fighting about it, i think. Ya, proper manners, I like that, I have my faith and I practice it in the privacy of my own home and my church.. ya I like that.. I'm not going to freak if I see a special event that is given by a particular religion for it's people even if others are invited. Part of this is that religion is threatened currently. People are becoming more enlightened to the "discrepencies" of religion. It is also becoming more obvious to all the underlying insidious effect religion has been having in politics, in the public domain, in children, in people in general. Only the slower moving back water areas are still hardcore with the religion and that is because they are the last to let go of "traditional" or what they feel is traditional acts. Traditional include the separation of the races, traditional includes the homosexual sin, etc... The more enlightened one becomes the more they can see that religion is not all it is cracked up to be. I am not anti-religion either. I am religion in it's place and not governing any more people than those who want it. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
dragoness...since you want to engage..let's engage if there was a winter soltice celebration..why should I expect them to include other religions with it??? inviting people to there celebration is great...i've been to some...but wouldn't expect them to cater to me and change their celebration i don't celevrate any holidays as religious of any kind....so should I be offended by others that do???? no Religious events and parades in public don't happen on a daily basis, I think she and I are more talking about just keeping the daily practice of religion to one's home and church. I don't see why that would be so bad, we have done it for decades. But now that everything seems to have to be a public show of faith, it's starting to get on peoples nerves. I don't mean mine in particular. People are complaining about Muslim prayers etc.. Just keep it private as much as possible. Parades and events are fine, no one is forced to endure them every day. I think i understand where you are coming from. Not sure where religion is becoming more public though... Nevertheless i agree to some extent. It would seem like proper manners to keep it more private. But at the same time we must not freak out when we see something public. Geesh anyone that isn't used to in your face religion, would suprise me. We have made religion more public in the last 20 years, I rarely heard about religion on the news or in the streets, but now Cnn has to have a segement on religion for pete sakes, we can't seem to focus on anything else but religion and viagra... Maybe it's me but in my 20's and 30's i just didn't hear about religion like we do today, people were more private about it. I wish it were the same today, makes for less fighting about it, i think. Ya, proper manners, I like that, I have my faith and I practice it in the privacy of my own home and my church.. ya I like that.. I'm not going to freak if I see a special event that is given by a particular religion for it's people even if others are invited. There are thousands of Christian Churches that welcome gays! Thousands! Some Christian denominations even allow gays to be clergy! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Due to popular demand I feel a need to address something! The GLBT is an organization with members. They even have a historical web-site. When one, such as myself, talks about them they are not talking about every gay, lesbian, Bi-homosexual, or Transgender. They, me included are talking about an organization. IMO, an unethical organization whose methods for advancing the rights of G, L, B,& Ts has no boundaries or restraints. They will do anything no matter how reckless their methods are, or who, or what they hurt or destroy along the way. If, as a G, L, B, or T, you feel as though a debate about there lack of ethics is off limits or refers to all G, B, L, and T's then you are sadly mistaken. I am sure that not all G, B, L, and T's approve of such unethical and reckless methods they employ and as such would never think of joining or supporting such methods! If you are not a member then the debate about them should not concern your sensitivities. If you are a member I might suggest you rethink your membership and quit them, or become an active, non-complacent member and work to correct their Unethical and reckless methods. If you are a local group I might suggest you invent a new name and drop the association with the GLBT! Ok you're gonna have to come up with some demonstratable facts like where is this supposed website? Where are they physcially located? Who is their head. There are literally thousands of websites with those letters and through out the community those letters are used synonomously with referring to all GLBT's. Personally I think think this a load, but if you can come up with any of the above information I may concede that you may have been misled into believing what you just said. http://www.glbthistory.org/ Ok this is the "GLBT Historical Society" you've just been saying GLBT which is far more generic. This particular SMALL group is essentially just San Fransisco. Surely you can at least come up with a national organization? Sounds like your just trying to justify your very generic statements by throwing out something with GLBT in it. Really I figured you for better than this, I'm disappointed. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Due to popular demand I feel a need to address something! The GLBT is an organization with members. They even have a historical web-site. When one, such as myself, talks about them they are not talking about every gay, lesbian, Bi-homosexual, or Transgender. They, me included are talking about an organization. IMO, an unethical organization whose methods for advancing the rights of G, L, B,& Ts has no boundaries or restraints. They will do anything no matter how reckless their methods are, or who, or what they hurt or destroy along the way. If, as a G, L, B, or T, you feel as though a debate about there lack of ethics is off limits or refers to all G, B, L, and T's then you are sadly mistaken. I am sure that not all G, B, L, and T's approve of such unethical and reckless methods they employ and as such would never think of joining or supporting such methods! If you are not a member then the debate about them should not concern your sensitivities. If you are a member I might suggest you rethink your membership and quit them, or become an active, non-complacent member and work to correct their Unethical and reckless methods. If you are a local group I might suggest you invent a new name and drop the association with the GLBT! Ok you're gonna have to come up with some demonstratable facts like where is this supposed website? Where are they physcially located? Who is their head. There are literally thousands of websites with those letters and through out the community those letters are used synonomously with referring to all GLBT's. Personally I think think this a load, but if you can come up with any of the above information I may concede that you may have been misled into believing what you just said. http://www.glbthistory.org/ Ok this is the "GLBT Historical Society" you've just been saying GLBT which is far more generic. This particular SMALL group is essentially just San Fransisco. Surely you can at least come up with a national organization? Sounds like your just trying to justify your very generic statements by throwing out something with GLBT in it. Really I figured you for better than this, I'm disappointed. I assumed you were an active member! Why, I ask myself, do I need to find the info for you? Is it a secret Organization or something? About Us CenterLink (formerly The National Association of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Community Centers) was founded in 1994 as a member-based coalition to support the development of strong, sustainable LGBT community centers. The organization has played an important role in supporting the growth of LGBT centers across the country and addressing the challenges they face, by helping them to improve their organizational and service delivery capacity and increase access to public resources. Based in Washington, DC, CenterLink works with other national organizations to advance the rights of LGBT individuals and to provide LGBT community centers with information and analysis of key issues. Serving over 168 LGBT community centers across the country in 45 states and the District of Columbia, CenterLink assists newly forming community centers and helps strengthen existing LGBT centers, through networking opportunities for center leaders, peer-based technical assistance and training, and a variety of capacity building services. Our efforts are based on the belief that LGBT community centers are primary change agents in the national movement working toward the liberation and empowerment of LGBT people. Serving over 1.5 million people, they are the heart and soul of the LGBT movement and are vital to our current well-being and dreams for the future. Whether they provide direct services, educate the public or organize for social change, community centers work more closely with their LGBT constituency and engage more community leaders and decision-makers than any other LGBT network in the country http://www.lgbtcenters.org/site/PageServer?pagename=home_about Would you like an address too? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think the core of the problem with the gays is thay have no respect for the will of the voters at all.This should get the attention of anyone who is a registered voter here regardless of your social status.I also know of no other group of people in the history of this nation that has caused such a ruckus and generally irritated the government like the gays have.Taking the votes and wishes of the voters and throwing them in the garbage is not what this country was founded on or what it is about today.Since when does a small majority of people trample over the wishes of millions and get away with it? This is where the problem lies. Our constitution was specifically designed to make sure the will of the many could NOT TRAMPLE the rights of the few. Which is exactly what is happening when you try to make gay marriage illegal. This is less about gay marriage and more about a small group of people trying to run this country like a dictatorship. This is the most laughable argument yet. It is the the powerful far right church who is trying to run the country as a dictatorship, totally ignoring our constitution. If your logic of thinking is that majority should not rule.You do not understand the logic this country was founded on.In the 200 plus years of this country there has never been elections won by winners with the less votes.I am not sure who would want this idiolical way of thinking since if the minority won every time we could pass all kinds of stupid laws nobody would want.You are also wrong about the government thinking that a few peoples wishes would trample over the wishes of hundreds or millions.Although everyone has certain rights our founding fathers were crystal clear about holding elections and letting the majority rule. If you theory of letting the minority win every time I suppose then Obama should be thrown out on his butt and Mccain thrown in the white house. Your theory of the church somehow governing the laws of this country is complete nonsense.I would love it if you could give me one single example where the government uses the church to enforce laws.Sorry bub but this isnt the 13th century anymore. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
II. How Did Christmas Come to Be Celebrated on December 25?
A. Roman pagans first introduced the holiday of Saturnalia, a week long period of lawlessness celebrated between December 17-25. During this period, Roman courts were closed, and Roman law dictated that no one could be punished for damaging property or injuring people during the weeklong celebration. The festival began when Roman authorities chose “an enemy of the Roman people” to represent the “Lord of Misrule.” Each Roman community selected a victim whom they forced to indulge in food and other physical pleasures throughout the week. At the festival’s conclusion, December 25th, Roman authorities believed they were destroying the forces of darkness by brutally murdering this innocent man or woman. B. The ancient Greek writer poet and historian Lucian (in his dialogue entitled Saturnalia) describes the festival’s observance in his time. In addition to human sacrifice, he mentions these customs: widespread intoxication; going from house to house while singing naked; rape and other sexual license; and consuming human-shaped biscuits (still produced in some English and most German bakeries during the Christmas season). C. In the 4th century CE, Christianity imported the Saturnalia festival hoping to take the pagan masses in with it. Christian leaders succeeded in converting to Christianity large numbers of pagans by promising them that they could continue to celebrate the Saturnalia as Christians.[2] http://www.simpletoremember.com/vitals/Christmas_TheRealStory.htm |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
HA HA HA WOW...if this isn't an eye opener??? "If we wanted to keep violence down, we would have a one world religion, a one world government, one race, we would all wear uniforms and shave our heads, and we would be medicated at all times." How about this... To keep violence down... Educated yourself. Respect others. Embrace difference. Reject fear. Oh..and maybe try this, "Do unto others as you would have them do onto you" The idea that the way to keep violence down is to make us all the same is disturbing and disgusting. It supposes that people are too ugly and fearful to not be violent to anyone who is different. Heck it goes beyond that and seems to justify violence against anyone who is different. That is very sad. never mind...biting my tongue on this one Just take the post for what it is, a response to the idea of a one world order. Nothing to get upset with, though Driven wasn't suggesting it as a good idea. But it's still just a response to it. oh i took it for exactly what it is!!!! and driven's coment was sarcasm. but yes...i know EXACTLY what it is which is why i didn't post what i wanted to and get banned for it this whole thing is pointless IMO. i have tried to argue for everyone's rights and I'm done trying!!!!! Rose, ya can't possibly control a group of people all responding rapidily like this. We are all aware of our rights to our opinions and therefore are expressing them. some times I am just responding to the words and not the poster, other times like now I am responding to you directly. She was responding to the idea. So what exactly was wrong with her reaction to the idea of one world order? |
|
|
|
|
