ChatterBank1 min ago
Those gays and the hotel law suit
Do you think the outcome of the sueing by those two gay men against the christian hotel owners would have been the same if the hotel owners were of a different religion (that's equally against homosexuality) such as Islam?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by mollykins. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
Can't believe how fast this thread is growing!
It appears that we have two separate strains of agrument here -
those who are willing to let people live their lives in their own way - which includes staying in hotels, and accepting the backing of the legal system
those who are outraged by the fact that homosexuals exist at all, and find themselves horrified and disgusted that a homoesxual couple were actually given the same access to the same laws of the land that govern everyone.
Neither the twain shall meet - but to return to Molly's Question - the law is available to everyone, it doesn't pick and choose on the basis of sexuality or religious belef - it simply applies the rules.
The moral high ground is a crowded place today!
It appears that we have two separate strains of agrument here -
those who are willing to let people live their lives in their own way - which includes staying in hotels, and accepting the backing of the legal system
those who are outraged by the fact that homosexuals exist at all, and find themselves horrified and disgusted that a homoesxual couple were actually given the same access to the same laws of the land that govern everyone.
Neither the twain shall meet - but to return to Molly's Question - the law is available to everyone, it doesn't pick and choose on the basis of sexuality or religious belef - it simply applies the rules.
The moral high ground is a crowded place today!
-- answer removed --
Davethedog - I don;t actually regard dsicrimination and breaking the law as irrelavence and worthy of 'a little fun', and I suspect that the majority of posters - some who are in direct receipt of this kind of nazi-ism - don't regard it as such either.
It's only 'funny' when it's not happening to you ...
It's only 'funny' when it's not happening to you ...
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
Andy it should never of happened ever. You know nothing about me so don't make any f******g pesumption to lecture me.
It is an irrelevance for the simple reason its an abuse of a little hitlers power.
And the majority of posters such as you self seem to extract a salacious pleasure from its discussion. Especialy the sexuality, if these people had been anything but homosexual nobody would have raised the sex issue.
Ask your self this - Why did this story gain so much media hype? Because the papers know thier audience so well.
It is an irrelevance for the simple reason its an abuse of a little hitlers power.
And the majority of posters such as you self seem to extract a salacious pleasure from its discussion. Especialy the sexuality, if these people had been anything but homosexual nobody would have raised the sex issue.
Ask your self this - Why did this story gain so much media hype? Because the papers know thier audience so well.
I don't actually know Dris.
That was my immediate reaction on reading Davethedog's post - I should have added 'to ask' - i wouldn't presume that anyone can simply ask for a suspension because they take umbrage at a post.
I did find DTD's post vehement and nasty, and utterly unecessary - perhaps he will think about it, and have something to add.
As the length and speed of the growth of the post demonstrates, this has been a topic with plenty of opinion and thought, to which i have added my responses. I don;t think you can dismiss something like this as irrelavent - unless you see it as such, in which case no post is required - that's my response to threads that I don't think merit comment.
DTD is quite right, i know nothng about him - but equally he knows nothing about me - except that he has learned thatIi will not sit still to be abused and sworn at by anyone - even on a website.
That was my immediate reaction on reading Davethedog's post - I should have added 'to ask' - i wouldn't presume that anyone can simply ask for a suspension because they take umbrage at a post.
I did find DTD's post vehement and nasty, and utterly unecessary - perhaps he will think about it, and have something to add.
As the length and speed of the growth of the post demonstrates, this has been a topic with plenty of opinion and thought, to which i have added my responses. I don;t think you can dismiss something like this as irrelavent - unless you see it as such, in which case no post is required - that's my response to threads that I don't think merit comment.
DTD is quite right, i know nothng about him - but equally he knows nothing about me - except that he has learned thatIi will not sit still to be abused and sworn at by anyone - even on a website.
Thanks Andy for claryfing..You're quite right no-one should be 'personally abused' if they have a differing opinion neither should they accept it.A bit of banter is accepted i think on the whole but not when someone 'loses' it so to speak.
DTD -nothing personal from me to you as you did apologise to Andy -you're just the example to hand...
DTD -nothing personal from me to you as you did apologise to Andy -you're just the example to hand...
Latest Posts
News2 mins ago
ChatterBank19 mins ago
Crosswords21 mins ago
ChatterBank22 mins ago
ChatterBank29 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.