ISIS jihadis throw Iraqi man off a roof for being gay

So, this is now a personal attack toward me and my faith? To read your post one would gleen that you are more concerned about punishing Christians for not working events that celebrate the homosexual lifestyle than addressing a Democrat supported group that actually KILLS those who live the gay lifestyle.

Why do Democrat voters not care that gays are being killed by radical Islamists?

 

leftists have little idea of what is going on internationally which is another reason why Barrack Obama should never have been elected President.

Leftists have no problem attacking minority groups, as has happened before in their history, and will happily look the other way, or even assist, when these groups are being singled out for persecution.

The poster is not only silent on Christian persecution elsewhere, often called a Genocide, but is quite prepared to attack them in his in country as well, despite the advantages this religion has given to the United States. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/13/christians-flee-growing-persecution-africa-middle-east

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...lee-persecution-warn-Catholic-aid-groups.html

 

There is no greater GOD-GIVEN-RIGHT than the right to life. That not only goes for the baby in the womb but those who live their lives however they choose. Whether you choose to have sex with same-sex partners or with a chocolate cream pie, it does not suspend your right to life. Why do the actions of Democrat supporters reject the right to life?

 

Many seem to reject the right to life well outside the womb also if it doesn't coincide with their fashionable beliefs of the day.

The notion that 'ideas have consequences' seems foreign to them.

 

You accidently altered the meaning of what I said. Lets compare what I said in full, to what you abridged and see if maybe my meaning becomes more clear. I said, "You should be more interested in the loss of dignity and opportunity that your own bigotry causes here at home, than trying to divert attention to another demographic group you want to isolate and marginalize while you continue to do it to gays, lesbians and transgenders." Most of that disappeared and with the loss, came a twisted meaning. The adjective phrase "...that your own bigotry causes here at home" tells us all why I think HE should concentrate on the effect of his activity, which presumably happens in his country of origin. That is the area he is doing his damage to gays and lesbians in. I did not tell anyone else that they should ignore international gay rights issues. My use of the pronoun 'you' narrows the set of subjects I am addressing to one particular person. I described why I believed that he should do so.

I picked every single word in that sentence to communicate what I wanted to communicate. I expect them all to stay there when you address my post so that you can't amputate my purpose.

 

What is going on "internationally"?

There were over 50 Christian churches in Baghdad before Bush's invasion.

BTW.. was there any time in the past 60 years that you gave a rat's behind about Palestinian Christians?

 

Why do conservatives support groups that historically beat, harass and victimize gay children and teens to drive them to suicide and engage in psychological torture? Why are conservatives like yourself supportive of these crimes ?


Hyperbole and gross lying is fun, isn't it, Troll?

 

What "loss of dignity and opportunity that your own bigotry causes here at home" are you referring to?

I have no idea what you're talking about here. You understand how the quote system works, right? Why not use it?

The subject of the debate is "ISIS jihadis throw Iraqi man off a roof for being gay" and you would prefer to discuss issues in your own neighborhood. Why not start a thread on that then?

Done. And your post still doesn't make any sense.

- - - Updated - - -

I rest my case.

 

The subject of my post, within this thread, was a prior post of sec's, in which, a known provocateur and purveyor of bigotry and hatred here, tried to enlist the very constituency he has demonized, slandered and maligned for the past two years to help malign, demonize and slander then marginalize another group, namely Muslims. Thereby broadening the topic well beyond Isis and a man. I used the quote system to identify it. Its not pertinent to me, if you can't gasp my meaning as long as you use an accurate and unabridged quote to rather than intentionally pervert it. You will have to trust that the majority of posters here will see an irony that you will not.

Try to envision an active and vocal segregationist member of the KKK, who decides to plead with American supporters of the civil rights movement, to abandon the very party that proposed the voting rights act, the civil rights act, the equal opportunity employment commission, and decent funding for same, because that party will not advocate invading and occupying South Africa.

 

Without quotes this is meaningless. I can only go by your comments on this particular thread.

 

Okay. I bet I could find 15 posters within a day for whom the meaning is crystal clear, so notorious and omnipresent is the name of 'Sec', in openly homophobic and gay hostile threads. He is not someone who is the best advocate for compassion or action in the face of gay bashings and murder here or anywhere else even if he is an expert in using and exploiting stereotypes.

 

Again, I'm not aware of previous debates and can only go by what was posted on this thread.

However I do find that terms such as "bigot", "racist", Fascist", etc' are so overused that they have become meaningless, and that is a shame.

 

I will agree. So is homophobic. I do NOT use it lightly on people. I do not rush to use it with all opponents of same sex marriage, or all opponents of civil rights legislation. It takes a a lot of consistent animus, over several subjects for me to see sufficient evidence to warrant that label.

 

Leftists have sympathy towards anyone who is being unfairly mistreated, that is supposedly a natural human trait. If by Islamists conservatives mean all Muslims then they are treating them most egregiously unfairly. Muslims are much, MUCH greater victims of Islamic fundamentalism than non-muslims can even conceive of being and they should be our staunchest allies against them, yet conservatives would have us turn against them, which is exactly what the terrorists want. I think the conservatives are secretly in league with ISIS and working against us with them, as both of their end goals of a strict theocratic society are exactly the same,

 

We on the right believe it is the homosexual being thrown off the building that is being treated unfairly, not the Islamist doing the throwing.

 

Yes, y'all would much prefer them receive forced counseling, be unable to purchase goods, be unable to have a spouce or children and hide away in the closet for the remainder of their lives for fear of being called a child molester. Ah, your compassion is overwhelming!

 

It's all good, Democrats are OK with this, as this poor chap was a gay Republican, and so deserved to die, kind of like the way they are hating on Milo.

- - - Updated - - -

NO, I think the point is that you are more outraged over a damn cake than you are about actual murder, and in such you expose your hyper partisanship. Thats the point.

 

I am not outraged at all. I was just pointing out that Christians enjoy a legally protected status and are willing to use it to discriminate against other groups that don't follow their beliefs. That is not justice.

The fact that you were able to extract:

"are more outraged over a damn cake than you are about actual murder, and in such you expose your hyper partisanship"

from my post exposes either your inability to comprehend simple thoughts or unwillingness to understand.

The reality is that I do not have a political party.

 

What an absurd characterization of everyone on the right

 

More outraged by a CHRISTIAN who wont bake a cake than a murder carried out by a muslm.

 

Care to provide an actual example of such a legal status being applied?

 

"Constant"??? Care to provide just one example of these constant attempts to establish a state religion?
If I said I think we should have a state religion, did I just attempt to establish a state religion?

 

This message is hidden because dixon76710 is on your ignore list.

I love the ignore feature.

 

Yet accurate of the party's stance on LGBT rights. I agree though, absurd

 

57% Of Republicans Say Dismantle Constitution And Make Christianity National Religion

Proposal would allow state religion in North Carolina

Republicans in Idaho want to declare it a 'Christian state'