You will be made to care, part...oh, god!

Bird Dog

Bird Dog
PREMO Member
I'm alos guessing most of you are 55+ and are out of touch with more modern thinking
Yes on my part......
Created jobs
Paid a lot of taxes...many years of 50% +
Contributed to a lot of good causes
Raised 4 wonderful citizens
Never sucked off the government titty

No, Liberal thinking.....

Living the dream........sucks to be you
 
Last edited:

This_person

Well-Known Member
Good for you. No one should care what other people are interested in or do sexually as long as it is between consenting adults.
Actually, it's not really up to you what people care about, but that's a whole different thread.

In terms of the whole "marriage" issue, no one was concerned about what anyone was doing sexually (as long as it was between consenting adults). What got people's interest was what the government was doing administratively with respect to what unions were eligible to be registered as "marriage" for all of the perks and negatives that go with that registration. I do not recall a single person calling for laws on sexual behavior between consenting adults in the 21st century (you know, "modern thinking"). Do you?
 

hotbikermama40

New Member
Actually, it's not really up to you what people care about, but that's a whole different thread.

In terms of the whole "marriage" issue, no one was concerned about what anyone was doing sexually (as long as it was between consenting adults). What got people's interest was what the government was doing administratively with respect to what unions were eligible to be registered as "marriage" for all of the perks and negatives that go with that registration. I do not recall a single person calling for laws on sexual behavior between consenting adults in the 21st century (you know, "modern thinking"). Do you?
Good catch on that
 

Sapidus

Well-Known Member
Actually, it's not really up to you what people care about, but that's a whole different thread.

In terms of the whole "marriage" issue, no one was concerned about what anyone was doing sexually (as long as it was between consenting adults). What got people's interest was what the government was doing administratively with respect to what unions were eligible to be registered as "marriage" for all of the perks and negatives that go with that registration. I do not recall a single person calling for laws on sexual behavior between consenting adults in the 21st century (you know, "modern thinking"). Do you?
Well again you are wrong. Even in the last ten years one jurisdictions still had laws on the books about sodomy and marital rape so.....
 

This_person

Well-Known Member
Well again you are wrong. Even in the last ten years one jurisdictions still had laws on the books about sodomy and marital rape so.....
And, a woman may not drive in Nashville without a man 20 feet in front of her waiving a red flag. We have many laws on the books that are not enforced. What's your point?
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
Really, those two ideas are confusing for you? Because most sane people can see that they are two distinct statements.
What you are arguing, fool, is that people *shouldn't* be allowed to practice their religion, and they *should* be made to participate in someone else's beliefs.

Don't you even read your own posts? I mean, I get it - they're stupid and boring - but geez....
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
Good for you. No one should care what other people are interested in or do sexually as long as it is between consenting adults.
Except for the part where you're arguing that indeed a business owner should be forced to participate in someone else's sexuality and life choices.
 

littlelady

God bless the USA
Is that what childishness, ignorance, and general retardation is called these days: "modern thinking"?
Sap is the youth of today. If he is not youthful, that is even worse. This is what we are facing. God bless America. In the famous words of posters on here...lock and load, y'all.
 
Last edited:

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
Except for the part where you're arguing that indeed a business owner should be forced to participate in someone else's sexuality and life choices.


BUT ..... That IS OK .... Because it is Politically Correct Group Think
 

Gilligan

#*! boat!
PREMO Member
Why to be a teeny tiny part of a collective think tank so I don't have to worry about having an opinion!
Well shoot. That's all there is too it? Heck, ahma start being a modern thinker.

Right after I finish this beer.

Or the rest of the case...

or...
 

Sapidus

Well-Known Member
BUT ..... That IS OK .... Because it is Politically Correct Group Think

I don't know how it can be any clearer. Unless you are the one getting married or performing the ceremony or having and abortion or the one performing it you are not a participant. Without you the ceremony or abortion would still happen. You are being asked to do your job which is provide flowers, bake a cake or rent your land.

No matter how opposed that makes you feel you are not participating in the act.
 
Top