LGBT Heterophobic War?

None of the things the LBGT group has done is something other political organizations- including Christian ones- haven't done. When people are upset with someones ideas- like Obama- they tend to band up and try to influence others with large and elaborate displays. In response to Obama's Iran-Nuke deal, there's a group of veterans trying to raise up enough money and awareness to shut down Obama. Christian Conservatives mount their own types of capmaings against politicians or the like who do things like counter Israel in foreign policy. The NYPD has engaged in slow-downs (because it's illegal for them to strike or protest anymore) to get their political point across. Interestingly enough, before Gay Marriage was approved you had large numbers of people who did not believe in it trying to shut them down, using interest groups and the like to pitch forward ways of either side-tracking or disabling the new legislation- such as applying for exemption status through freedom of religion. This stuff happens all the time...

 

I may be wrong but I did not read any of this to conclude that the owners 'lost' the early contributions before Go fundme took down the webpage. That money is still being litigated and has not yet been received so it is not yet income to be reported or taxed. I do see the 'double whammy' point you are trying to make, but the actions regarding taxation are entirely separate from the controversy on the nature of the income itself. its a little ironic but that's all.

What you are to conclude from who I do and do not ask for links, is that 1. I read your post and did not read most posts in this topic. I skip pages of posts routinely to avoid tedious debates that go on for pages. 2. I was intrigued enough by what you wrote, to feel 'dated' by what I had followed, and wanted the links for context, and wanted to make up my mind about the facts and the law. 3. I believe that a 'debunking' is more effective with links to prove the assertions and facts set forth and provide relevant context.

 

Because AH HI say so and AH HI have spoken. Let none contradict my sacred word

NOW I see the charm of religion, it's fun to be God. (Oh, sorry GAA HAWD)

Yep. I knew something was up when I saw the tanks rumbling out of Plato's

Yep, you better WATCH yourself. You're gonna wake up one morning with a RAGING hard on for Mr T and just kick your poor wife right out of bed.

Come ON man, do you REALLY think you can go on with this BS about how gays are 'recruiting' and corrupting our children and not have people say "What is he talking about, people don't get "recruited" into being attracted to one sex or another, I would never willingly have sex with a man no matter how attractive somebody tried to make it. You have to have at least a little inclination that way to begin with to think that it could, and....oh...wait.....now I see. Hey, denial IS more than a river in Egypt"

I must have missed the answer to this one, and I've always really wondered at it

There is one, and ONLY one REAL answer as to why someone would feel such a totally irrational hatred to people who have never bothered them and don't want to. With all due respect they should get help and come to terms with themselves, this much self-hatred is amazingly unhealthy

 

well this is whats going on... gay couple sued bakery... bakery became wedge issue for all to pick a side...

one side decided to raise money for bakery, using a website... website was then contacted by lawyers representing gay couple... website stopped collecting money... website said they would pay bakery amount collected already, or refund people who gave money... website was once again contacted by lawyers, this time with the force of the oregon BOLI, website is now holding funds and has ceased making announcements due to pending legal action against them...

oregon BOLI stated as a result of the money being collected, they may raise penalties against couple to exceed that amount by the original fine estimated, so they don't benefit or have any less of a punishment... meanwhile they will still have to pay the IRS income taxes since this is not a legal "donation".... so correct, while this is in limbo, they have not collected the money to pay taxes, but they will if they ever DO collect it...

now to further expand on the IRS... lets say the BOLI rules the money collected by gofundme should be used in the legal settlement, as well as a fine by the bakery... they will still have to pay the IRS even if they never physically hold the asset, since the asset is in their name it becomes their legal responsibility... now to take that even further, lets say through appeals and the new lawsuit filed against the BOLI for corruption, this money is still sitting in limbo, and 2015 taxes are now due in april of next year, they WILL be required to file this as income, despite never having received it, and having it held up by the legal process, the IRS rules do not care if its in limbo and they are unable to access it, as thats a separate court issue, they will STILL have to pay taxes on it come april 2016...

now with the new lawsuit filed to get this case thrown out for corruption and coordination of the BOLI with a gay rights activist group, this could keep the fine in limbo along with the gofundme money pending outcomes of the other lawsuit used to stop gofundme from collecting more money, or distributing it to the bakery, in jeopardy for months or years to come... because now multiple legal things must be solved...

best case scenario for the bakery... gofundme is allowed to simply give money back to those who pledged it... thus freeing up their legal liability to the IRS for income reasons, as well as lowering the potential increase the BOLI wants to levy against them... since another group has started collecting money for them, except they claim its not for the bakery, they claim its for defending religious rights, yadda yadda yadda, but in essence it will be used to help pay fines against them, thats another legal matter to discuss down the road...

anyhow... its a big hot mess... people are making wild accusations and claims... either way as it stands, the couple will probably never see one cent of the money... however, unless its returned, they are legally required to pay income taxes on it... thats why the goal was $200,000 for $150,000 penalty... to cover taxes... but it got stopped at just over 100k?

so all this goes to the point I was responding to, "daniel light" had said the bakery made more money by getting sued than they will pay... and thats clearly not going to be the case...

anyhow... there it all is... I think its time for another pizza...

 

Any argument gay people used for marrying 2 men/women can be applied to polygamy, so I hope all gay people are on board that train. It's only a matter of time before we redefine marriage again.

Claiming marriage should only be between 2 people is as short sighted and bigoted as claiming it should only be between a man and woman. Just wait. What will be most amusing are gay people claiming polygamy is somehow "wrong". Can't wait.

 

this is more humor than seriousness... but... does the attractiveness of Mr T increase with the rise of gold prices? I mean he does have a lot of gold chains on...



that is one wealthy man when gold is high...

 

does not mean it will stay that way.

 

Actually, it probably does.

Even if the Courts were convinced to reverse their stance on amendments to State Constitutions, they would not overturn the right of
States who have voted for SSM to have SSM.
And to pass a national amendment on prohibiting gay marriage would be extremely difficult at this point with polls showing more support for gay marriage than opposition.

 

Those against interracial marriage think like you to. They are also laughed at for their idiotic comments and not taken seriously either. Enjoy your irrelevance, you deserve it.

 

lol, nice try. I was a Sunday school teacher for years. I was my university’s Campus Crusade for Christ lesson planner. I’ve read the Bible multiple times, often with my concordance close at hand.

Yes, yes, we're all aware that the quickest way to find a cultural relativist is to mention anything from the OT in front of a Christian. Slavery isn't okay anymore, polygamy isn't okay anymore, infanticide isn't okay anymore, etc. etc.

A few things you need to be aware of:

1) Christians (with the exception of a handful of anarchist Christians) tend to agree that some of the OT laws should still stand. Murder, for example, should still be illegal, according to most Christians. They wildly disagree, however, when it comes to exactly which laws should still be in effect. The NT's relationship with OT law is complicated, to say the least, and we still have religious conservatives today fighting to reinstate OT laws as U.S. laws -- until recently, they were successful in outlawing homosexual activity in parts of this country. Thankfully they are a minority. Your sentiment is certainly the popular one among modern Christians; however, . . .

2) From the time Christianity seized political power until the time of the secular and humanistic influences of the Age of Enlightenment, you’d be hard pressed to find a Christian government that didn’t outlaw things like blasphemy, and it was typically punishable by death. And before the “but Catholics” excuse comes in, I’m talking about both Protestants and Catholics. Calvin and Luther were no different. And even though most Christians today do not believe that it should be punishable by death . . .

3) Several Christians, even on this forum, still think that blasphemy and similar crimes should be punishable under the law. And they have some NT backing, because . . .

4) The NT lists several sins that are still “worthy of death” (Romans 1, I’ll look up the verses later if you need them). In the very same book, the NT says that all government authorities are ordained by God and that they carry the sword as his executioners on earth to punish wrongdoers (Romans 13, I’ll look up the verses later if you need them).

Yes, the beauty of the world’s first godless Constitution, written and signed by a bunch of guys who blatantly violated the divine right of kings advocated in Romans 13 and rebelled against the authorities that God had ordained, is that it allowed such coexistence. I’m sure you believe that Christianity deserves the credit, even though Christianity had over a millennium and a half to produce such a government and failed miserably. I credit the Age of Enlightenment and the notion of a secular government.

You should brush up on your history. Even after the Constitution was pinned, individual states still had laws punishing the freedom of religion for years to come. My own state still outlaws atheists from holding office, and while it would likely be overturned in a Supreme Court case, I’ve heard it invoked at least once during my lifetime by Republicans trying to force someone’s name off of a voting ballot.

 

Gays suck, they should be rounded up and shipped to France. They would thrive there.

 

Not just gay people...there is precedent for it. Polygamy was common in many societies (even some societies today) and was sanctioned in the Bible. Christians should not have a problem with polygamy, even if they do have a problem with homosexuality.

...back to what it was before. Which was polygamy.

We've already re-defined marriage before. It's not new:

 

The beauty of the Constitution is that it can be changed. Thats why you have blacks living beside whites instead of one being owned by the other as property.

Christians appear to want a theocracy, where no laws contradict biblical law. The Constitution would need to be modified again to give that to you.

 

Losing path?? What a pathetic joke, they've already won.

 

Yes, it will. Sorry.

 

Thank you for your opinion, but such a insult to morality cannot stand long.

 

I sort of agree with you, but I would say more PC reactionary than bigoted. It is more a visceral emotional thing I think than a strongly-held belief. I saw this play out on twitter just last night. One of the boy banders had bungled an intro to a song at a concert by saying it is about finding that perfect girl , said none of you know what I mean because you are all girls, except for the guys they understand it, and twitter went crazy calling him homophobic and making all sorts of personal attacks on him and then his boy band army responded and it was still trending earlier today but has since died down.

 

I bet thats what people said about Interracial marriage as well.

 

Equating the two is even more appalling then the immorality of gay marriage.

 

I never met a homo disgusted by a hetero in public. I've heard heteros yell "disgusting" to homos.

 

It is an example of the redefinition of marriage. It's already happened before. The fact that you are so totally accepting of interracial marriage is proof that yes, "immorality" can indeed stand. For generations.

The polls don't lie. Behold your future.

 

Your idea of what is moral is irrelevant as is your comments.

 

Read the thread. The gays have won approval for same sex marriage, they have won that battle, but they continue the war and their overreach is starting to turn the tide of support from gays.

 

According to who? What polls are you citing to support that claim?

 

There is a process for changing the Constitution, that process has not been employed by the LGBT and "progressives" because it is a losing process for their agenda. The gays and "progressives" circumvent the process.

Wrong, that's your spin on the issue. Just like you do not want to be a Christian and held to Christian standards, Christians want to be free to practice their religion just as the Constitution allows. Live and let live, its as simple as that.

And the fight to abolish slavery and the civil rights movement of the 1950's-1960's was led and directed by Christians such as Reverend Martin Luther King.