100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: You can't enter if you aren't... | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Origin of Christmas - The Traditions and Controversies
For today's Christian, the origin of Christmas is, and should be, the birth of Jesus Christ as recorded in the Bible. Nothing more and nothing less. However, most of what we witness on December 25th each year has absolutely nothing to do with that blessed day, which probably occurred in late summer or early fall about 2,000 years ago. In fact, most of the customs and traditions of Christmas actually pre-date the birth of Jesus, and many of them are downright deceptive in their meaning and origin. Here are a few examples: The date of December 25th probably originated with the ancient "birthday" of the son-god, Mithra, a pagan deity whose religious influence became widespread in the Roman Empire during the first few centuries A.D. Mithra was related to the Semitic sun-god, Shamash, and his worship spread throughout Asia to Europe where he was called Deus Sol Invictus Mithras. Rome was well-known for absorbing the pagan religions and rituals of its widespread empire. As such, Rome converted this pagan legacy to a celebration of the god, Saturn, and the rebirth of the sun god during the winter solstice period. The winter holiday became known as Saturnalia and began the week prior to December 25th. The festival was characterized by gift-giving, feasting, singing and downright debauchery, as the priests of Saturn carried wreaths of evergreen boughs in procession throughout the Roman temples. http://www.allaboutjesuschrist.org/origin-of-christmas.htm |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Dragoness
on
Wed 04/22/09 09:03 PM
|
|
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. Actually the vote thing is not true either Bush won without the popular vote and he wasn't the only one. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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. Actually the vote thing is not true either Bush won without the popular vote and he wasn't the only one. Is it too much to ask to get a straight question to a straight answer in here? |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
DaveyB
on
Wed 04/22/09 09:11 PM
|
|
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 see you're determined to make my point for me. This is CenterLink formally known as "The National Association of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Community Centers". At least we now how a national organization you're doing little better. This organization is one that helps community centers for GLBT's get started. I seriously doubt they have much to do with any of poor battle choices you were talking about. You see we can go on all day long as there are thousands upon thousands of GLBT groups. Each one different each one with it's own way of doing business. And SOME of those GLBT groups make very poor choices in how they do things. Which is exactly what I've been trying to get you to understand for the last 2 days. Is the best you can do? You haven't even come close to justifying your all inclusive comments. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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. Actually the vote thing is not true either Bush won without the popular vote and he wasn't the only one. Is it too much to ask to get a straight question to a straight answer in here? what was the question? And don't you mean get a straight answer to a straight question? Think that might have been backwards or I am getting very sleepy. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
democracy is the wants of the majority trampeling the rights of the minority
-----------Thomas Jefferson------------------- that is why this country is supposed to be a republic not a democracy maybe a reading of the declaration of independence is also in order --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/index.htm -------------------------------------------------------------------- """""""""""""that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,""""""""""""" can you show me anywhere in any document related to us govt that says ...........with certain unalienable Rights, unless the majority disagrees and also can you show me in the constitution at the bill of right where it says unless the majority disagrees i do not think you will find that anywhere this is not a democracy and this country was founded on the rights of all not just the majority |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Dragoness
on
Wed 04/22/09 09:17 PM
|
|
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. Actually the vote thing is not true either Bush won without the popular vote and he wasn't the only one. Is it too much to ask to get a straight question to a straight answer in here? LOL Religion has been included more so than they should have been in politics, proof----money, legal proceedings, public prayer, christmas displays on government property, etc... It is ingrained deeply and has been given more power than it should have ever had if we would have followed the constructors ideals of how religion was to be treated. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
democracy is the wants of the majority trampeling the rights of the minority -----------Thomas Jefferson------------------- that is why this country is supposed to be a republic not a democracy maybe a reading of the declaration of independence is also in order --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/index.htm -------------------------------------------------------------------- """""""""""""that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,""""""""""""" can you show me anywhere in any document related to us govt that says ...........with certain unalienable Rights, unless the majority disagrees and also can you show me in the constitution at the bill of right where it says unless the majority disagrees i do not think you will find that anywhere this is not a democracy and this country was founded on the rights of all not just the majority Standing ovation!!!          
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Fanta46
on
Wed 04/22/09 09:26 PM
|
|
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 see you're determined to make my point for me. This is CenterLink formally known as "The National Association of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Community Centers". At least we now how a national organization you're doing little better. This organization is one that helps community centers for GLBT's get started. I seriously doubt they have much to do with any of poor battle choices you were talking about. You see we can go on all day long as there are thousands upon thousands of GLBT groups. Each one different each one with it's own way of doing business. And SOME of those GLBT groups make very poor choices in how they do things. Which is exactly what I've been trying to get you to understand for the last 2 days. Is the best you can do? You haven't even come close to justifying your all inclusive comments. So are the BSA! They have Community troops and a National organization that organizes their community events and their National fund raising! Sounds to me like you are in denial! I'll give you awhile to come to grips with the truth! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;
the religion part of the first amendment to pas a law that is based in religion is an establishment of theat religion (Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion) to say someone can not have a religous article on/in the area they are responsible for whether it is govt proberty or not is ( prohibiting the free exercise thereof) now that said no govt time or moneys should be spent on any paticular religious beliefs or celebrations now many will say in god we trust is establishing a religion (i must disagree) it does not say what god of what religion or if it is a god of any religion (if you want to be technical) but it is spelled with the capitol G thus it means the true God but i ask who's true God and what is their god is their god the supreme being or is it the money on which is printed in God we trust there are many gods to many people and even an athiest has a god of some kind whether they believe in a supreme being or not |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
democracy is the wants of the majority trampeling the rights of the minority -----------Thomas Jefferson------------------- that is why this country is supposed to be a republic not a democracy maybe a reading of the declaration of independence is also in order --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/index.htm -------------------------------------------------------------------- """""""""""""that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,""""""""""""" can you show me anywhere in any document related to us govt that says ...........with certain unalienable Rights, unless the majority disagrees and also can you show me in the constitution at the bill of right where it says unless the majority disagrees i do not think you will find that anywhere this is not a democracy and this country was founded on the rights of all not just the majority Standing ovation!!! Encore!!! Encore!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
adj4u...
You took the words right out of my mouth... [[[[[[Insert a HUGE round of applause]]]]]] These fundamental extremists see no wrong in hate for the reason of hating. It is as if they believe that allowing another to share the same rights is wrong or somehow removing their own. What right would it remove, from anyone, if they would allow gay marriage and the perks that come along with it? People can still hate... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; the religion part of the first amendment to pas a law that is based in religion is an establishment of theat religion (Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion) to say someone can not have a religous article on/in the area they are responsible for whether it is govt proberty or not is ( prohibiting the free exercise thereof) now that said no govt time or moneys should be spent on any paticular religious beliefs or celebrations now many will say in god we trust is establishing a religion (i must disagree) it does not say what god of what religion or if it is a god of any religion (if you want to be technical) but it is spelled with the capitol G thus it means the true God but i ask who's true God and what is their god is their god the supreme being or is it the money on which is printed in God we trust there are many gods to many people and even an athiest has a god of some kind whether they believe in a supreme being or not Are you going to start quoting bible verses and your interpretation of American Democracy? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I wonder if she would have gotten so much flack if she had not added the "in my country" part? Interesting question... Probably because people were so stuck on the basic answer I doubt they would have heard anything else. And I think that's true whether they support gay marriage or not. Most of the audience applauded her answer. At the worst one could only say half booed and half applauded. The question was posed by a gay judge! This is why I stated earlier, It was just another grab at media attention by the GLBT! There is no reason to suspect that the results of the beauty contest would have been any different had the question not been asked! Noo...many booed. You couldn't hear the boos on some stations. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; the religion part of the first amendment to pas a law that is based in religion is an establishment of theat religion (Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion) to say someone can not have a religous article on/in the area they are responsible for whether it is govt proberty or not is ( prohibiting the free exercise thereof) now that said no govt time or moneys should be spent on any paticular religious beliefs or celebrations now many will say in god we trust is establishing a religion (i must disagree) it does not say what god of what religion or if it is a god of any religion (if you want to be technical) but it is spelled with the capitol G thus it means the true God but i ask who's true God and what is their god is their god the supreme being or is it the money on which is printed in God we trust there are many gods to many people and even an athiest has a god of some kind whether they believe in a supreme being or not Okay, I guess I have to come down sometime...lol I disagree as I have earlier in some of this. But since it is your opinion that is okay. Do the other one again.... I got such a rush  j/k
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
DaveyB
on
Wed 04/22/09 09:33 PM
|
|
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 see you're determined to make my point for me. This is CenterLink formally known as "The National Association of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Community Centers". At least we now how a national organization you're doing little better. This organization is one that helps community centers for GLBT's get started. I seriously doubt they have much to do with any of poor battle choices you were talking about. You see we can go on all day long as there are thousands upon thousands of GLBT groups. Each one different each one with it's own way of doing business. And SOME of those GLBT groups make very poor choices in how they do things. Which is exactly what I've been trying to get you to understand for the last 2 days. Is the best you can do? You haven't even come close to justifying your all inclusive comments. So are the BSA! They have Community troops and a National organization that organizes their community events and their National fund raising! Sounds to me like you are in denial! I'll give you awhile to come to grasp with the truth! And the BSA is one cohesive group that sits at the head of ALL BSA groups. Again you refuse to show ANYTHING that says simply GLBT or is at the head of all GLBT groups. Of course you can't because no such group exists. Forget it you'll never admit that you just didn't understand what you were talking about and continue claiming you were speaking of some mystical group which goes simply by GLBT. It must be hard to never admit when you were wrong. I'm done wasting my time. I really had higher hopes in dealing with you. Ah well life goes on. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Try standing in her shoes, at that moment, burdened with appeasing EVERYONE, a nation! That is exactly why I thought it was an inappropriate question to ask of her. And if the judges didn't rip Perez a new one after the show I would be suprised. I personally have empathy for our new president as he faces much of the same kind of anxiety from the public, he can't win either way in most cases with so much anger and resentment out there. Opps. Off topic. I agree! Who, what, and why was an openly gay man picked to judge a woman's beauty pageant? Can you say, "NOT QUALIFIED!" A man can't do the job? I have no problem with the fact that he is openly gay, but I do have a problem with a loaded question like that, and judges going along with that question if they did. The man's intentions are what I would have questioned because he did a diservice to the gay community. Sure there maybe gays that will stand up for this clown, but I would wager not many, but I don't want to be judged by his actions. The Pageant people approved the question before the show. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 like it says in the profile "liberty for all" |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I wonder if she would have gotten so much flack if she had not added the "in my country" part? Interesting question... Probably because people were so stuck on the basic answer I doubt they would have heard anything else. And I think that's true whether they support gay marriage or not. Most of the audience applauded her answer. At the worst one could only say half booed and half applauded. The question was posed by a gay judge! This is why I stated earlier, It was just another grab at media attention by the GLBT! There is no reason to suspect that the results of the beauty contest would have been any different had the question not been asked! Noo...many booed. You couldn't hear the boos on some stations. Not even half! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Try standing in her shoes, at that moment, burdened with appeasing EVERYONE, a nation! That is exactly why I thought it was an inappropriate question to ask of her. And if the judges didn't rip Perez a new one after the show I would be suprised. I personally have empathy for our new president as he faces much of the same kind of anxiety from the public, he can't win either way in most cases with so much anger and resentment out there. Opps. Off topic. I agree! Who, what, and why was an openly gay man picked to judge a woman's beauty pageant? Can you say, "NOT QUALIFIED!" A man can't do the job? I have no problem with the fact that he is openly gay, but I do have a problem with a loaded question like that, and judges going along with that question if they did. The man's intentions are what I would have questioned because he did a diservice to the gay community. Sure there maybe gays that will stand up for this clown, but I would wager not many, but I don't want to be judged by his actions. The Pageant people approved the question before the show. So who approved a much hated, controversial, and unpopular man to be a judge at such a prestigious event in the first place? How do you reckon he was picked winx! |
|
|
|
|
