call to ban and bury "gay" books

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Well yeah, some feel that you must vote the lesser of two evils. I just wonder what his opponent stood for.
 
martha said:


Where the hell were they when this clown was elected?

He's not from any district I'm in. I forget exactly which town he's from but it's not Birmingham. I don't know how these damn clowns get elected because it's not my district. I voted against Roy Moore in 2000, and well, gosh, Moore got elected, the guy I voted for didn't. I almost never vote for winning candidates, I'm so used to voting for losers it's crazy. That's what happens when you vote for even moderate liberals in an ultraconservative place like this. :mad: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored:
 
Macfistowannabe said:
Well yeah, some feel that you must vote the lesser of two evils. I just wonder what his opponent stood for.

Since it's not my district I don't know who his opponent was. But many of our elections really are the lesser of two evils. Alabama politics used to be worse in the sense that getting the endorsement of the Ku Klux Klan was an advantage, it could get you elected, and now Klan-associated candidates get the cold shoulder from the official parties because the black vote is something to be reckoned with now, but wasn't in the era before the Voting Rights laws were passed. But we've still got guys I'd definitely call "stinking Dixiecrats". :mad: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored:
 
Last edited:
verte76 said:
I know that there are some evangelical Christians who wouldn't vote for these clowns as well. :mad: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored:

That's good :up:. And I'm certainly not about to label everyone who's of the same religion as this guy as nutty because of his actions. Thankfully, there's people out there who are smarter than this guy.

Originally posted by Macfistowannabe
There are some protestants (a very small percentage) who claim that Catholics won't go to heaven - total bull.

No kidding. I was raised in the Protestant faith and I certainly don't agree with that. If there is a heaven after all this is said and done, I personally feel anybody, as long as they were a good, kind-hearted person, will be up there, be they Catholic or Prostestant or whatever else.

Angela
 
I'm a Catholic who was raised a Protestant, but hey, I think God loves all of us. That's one thing I feel secure about saying. He doesn't like sin, but that's something we all do, no matter what we do in the area of religion/worship. I don't have time for narrow-minded idiots like, unfortunately, too many of our guys in Montgomery are. Incidentally, another Alabama interlander who's a Republican, U2Alabama, agrees with me about the clowns in Montgomery, I don't think he likes them any more than I do. I can say that without feeling like I'm putting words in his mouth. He said as much in his posts.
 
Last edited:
That whole "lesser of two evils" excuse can be such a cop-out. I have a hunch that this guy was elected because people actually wanted him to represent them. I had to suffer through years of Bob Dornan, the biggest lame-ass in Congress at the time, because my fellow Orange Countians actually liked the guy. :rolleyes:
 
martha said:
That whole "lesser of two evils" excuse can be such a cop-out. I have a hunch that this guy was elected because people actually wanted him to represent them. I had to suffer through years of Bob Dornan, the biggest lame-ass in Congress at the time, because my fellow Orange Countians actually liked the guy. :rolleyes:

Oh, sure, some people think these :censored:holes are the greatest thing since sliced bread. I don't put anything past my Christian Right Alabamians who run these guys' campaigns and all of that jazz.
 
It's not really an excuse, you have to know what this guy stands for, then you have to know what his opponent stands for. I don't always vote on my favorite guy in the world, because often times, I don't even have a favorite. Out of principle, I would rather support a man who I have fewer disagreements with, unless he was some kind of nazi not too long ago.
 
I didn't exactly love Roy Moore's opponent, but gosh, Moore turned me off so much that I didn't mind casting a vote for the guy.
 
I actually admire Roy Moore, but I can see why a liberal believer might find him to be an embarassment.
 
Well first of all, Macfistowannabe, we all know that creationism is a science and should be taught in biology alongside evolution. :wink:

Ok now that I got that sarcasm out of my system.....
This is an absolutely shameful assault on the first amendment, in addition to its flagrant bigotry. In 50 years, people are going to look back at this evangelical prejudice sweeping the nation now and equate it with the black mark that was Jim Crow through the 1960s. We needed the 1967 case Loving v. Virginia to legalize inter-racial marriages in VA, and this anti-gay marriage, anti-gay literature is equally offensive. People who write bills like this make me embarrassed to be American, and instill in me the desire never to venture south of the Mason/Dixon Line (domestically). ARGH!



Macfistowannabe said:
If we were to ban gay books, we'd have to ban lustful books long before it, along with evolution books. That pretty much means burn down a few libraries. This guy's agenda hardly makes sense. He can disagree with homosexuality if he wants, but banning books is not going to stop it.
 
Hey hey hey, tennispunk! Let's not go equating this stuff you hate with a particular geographic area!

Fact: the only school district still under federally-mandated desegregation orders is in the oh-so-enlightened area north of the mason-dixon.
 
well i hate grits, can i equate those with the south? :wink:

more seriously though.....i have a lot of friends up here from the south and from texas. in fact, i venture to say that i haven't met anyone in chicago who's from the south who i dislike. but then, these are the people who LEFT the south. :)

cheers!



pwmartin said:
Hey hey hey, tennispunk! Let's not go equating this stuff you hate with a particular geographic area!

Fact: the only school district still under federally-mandated desegregation orders is in the oh-so-enlightened area north of the mason-dixon.
 
Not sure how I offended you tennispunk. Feel free to hit me again for whatever I did.
 
I'm a Southerner *and* a liberal. U2Dem and I are living proof that you can indeed be a Southerner and liberal. The idiot who's proposing this garbage is from my home state, yes, but he's going to hear from me and it's not exactly going to be flattery. :mad: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored:
 
A_Wanderer said:
what the hell is a pansexual :confused:

From here :

One who can love sexuality in many forms. Like bisexuality, but even more fluid, a pansexual person can love not only the traditional male and female genders, but also transgendered, androgynous, and gender fluid people.
 
Macfistowannabe said:
Not sure how I offended you tennispunk. Feel free to hit me again for whatever I did.

Hey dude
you didn't. i intended the sarcasm to drip off the screen. oh well.
damn the internet and it's lack of inflection!

back to the point....that guy also refers to a "homosexual agenda." is this like Hitler referring to the Jewish agenda? people are so frustrating!
 
Alright, cool. I'm not exactly for what this guy is doing either, he's taking his stance a few steps too far. We live in an age where we can get practically anything we want legally, especially since we have the internet and all. This guy in particular is probably not the kind you want running a state, I can definately agree with that. I see his actions as an embarrassment to any conservative who thinks realistically. Or at least, a conservative who doesn't single out homosexuality over much worse ideas, such as murder, bestiality, and pedophilia. I also see how it can offend liberals as well.
 
Moonlit_Angel said:


Heh, oh, I can just imagine some of the stuff you'll say. Rock on. And hopefully you won't be the only one sending a nasty letter. :).

Angela

Oh, no, not when you've made an ass out of yourself in public like this. :mad: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored: :censored:
 
Macfistowannabe said:
I'm not exactly for what this guy is doing either, he's taking his stance a few steps too far.

How far should he take it then? Just how much of this do you think is right?



Macfistowannabe said:
Or at least, a conservative who doesn't single out homosexuality over much worse ideas, such as murder, bestiality, and pedophilia. I also see how it can offend liberals as well.

This is the second time you've cleverly linked homosexuality to these other things. This is a familiar-sounding tactic that bigots use to link homosexuality to these things.
 
Actually, I have to be honest martha. You took my statement way out of context. I think it's wrong to make homosexuality look any worse than murder and such. Disagree? This guy has every right to an opinion, but banning gay books is unrealistic. Many of the people who oppose gay marriage don't hate gays, and are not homophobes. They simply believe that homosexuality is a sin. Thanks for listening.
 
Macfistowannabe said:
Many of the people who oppose gay marriage don't hate gays, and are not homophobes. They simply believe that homosexuality is a sin.

They simply belive that imposing their religion on others is an acceptable motivation for public policy.

Way back before we both were born, some believed that blacks and whites should not be allowed to marry because it was a sin. They simply believed that.
 
martha said:


They simply belive that imposing their religion on others is an acceptable motivation for public policy.
Nothing is wrong with having faith inspire your beliefs. If all humans were capable of following the Ten Commandments, we would be living in Utopia.

martha said:

Way back before we both were born, some believed that blacks and whites should not be allowed to marry because it was a sin. They simply believed that.
I'm well aware of that, and if they quoted the Bible, they took it out of context. This was not of God. The only thing in the Bible I can think of that says not to marry foreigners was in the Old Testament, simply as a warning to that it would lead into worshipping false gods, as quite a few gentiles did at the time.

If you take Martin Luther King into account, he said that he dreamed of living in a nation where his children wouldn't be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character. Homosexuality is not a skin color, but a content of character.
 
The letters to the editor page was full of irate letters about Allen today. Someone compared him to Hitler. Someone else is starting a campaign to get him kicked out of the Legislature. No supportive letters were published; I wonder if any were written.
 
verte76 said:
The letters to the editor page was full of irate letters about Allen today. Someone compared him to Hitler.
Letters are all good, but the comparison to Hitler is a bit of a cheapshot. I don't believe he's got plans for concentration camps any time soon.
 
Macfistowannabe said:
Homosexuality is not a skin color, but a content of character.

You say that based on what? Your opinion? Not everyone agrees that homosexuality is related to character at all, and many believe it is something inborn, completely separate from "character." It may be a genetic issue that is not clear yet at this stage in the game.

Either way, you cannot make a conclusive claim supporting one or the other.
 
Back
Top Bottom