CCSF: Supreme Court rules SSM a legal right

[CountryClassSF]

Sadness is less about the prospect of SSM than what they're going to try to do to religious rights now.

If this were truly about "love winning," we wouldn't have such sore winners essentially mocking others' fears.

[pbrower2a]

Sadness is less about the prospect of SSM than what they're going to try to do to religious rights now.

If this were truly about "love winning," we wouldn't have such sore winners essentially mocking others' fears.

Love won; bigotry and superstition lost.

Deal with your own fears. What do you fear? That people will be pressured into same-sex marriages? That gays and lesbians will abuse children under their care?

I can interpret same-sex marriage as pro-family, allowing many loving families that otherwise might never have formed or might have had at most shadowy existence to form. I also recognize that many loveless marriages contracted to conceal the homosexuality of one of the partners will not be so commonplace.

[CountryClassSF]

Love won; bigotry and superstition lost.

Deal with your own fears. What do you fear?

I know gays who make/would make wonderful parents. That's not the issue.

The issue is forcing people of faith to participate in things that violate their faith.  The issue is having to fear societal implications for expressing a conservative view of marriage.

Instead, we see mock crucifixes at gay pride parades, extreme hatred directed at Christians, endless smirking and boastfulness about the court ruling -- all on a message of tolerance and love.

[afleitch]

Instead, we see mock crucifixes at gay pride parades, extreme hatred directed at Christians, endless smirking and boastfulness about the court ruling -- all on a message of tolerance and love.

[CountryClassSF]

Yep, you've mentioned those posts thrice.  They weren't my threads though.

[afleitch]

Yep, you've mentioned those posts thrice.  They weren't my threads though.

So when I click on 'SCOTUS Decision: Gay Marriage Constitutional right and it says:

To: C19fan
Homofascist Gay Gestapo will take away OUR marriages next


20 posted on 6/26/2015, 3:04:28 PM by CountryClassSF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Then you aren't posting 'Homofascist Gay Gestapo will take away OUR marriages next' to someone called C19fan?

[CountryClassSF]

Yep, you've mentioned those posts thrice.  They weren't my threads though.

So when I click on 'SCOTUS Decision: Gay Marriage Constitutional right and it says:

To: C19fan
Homofascist Gay Gestapo will take away OUR marriages next


20 posted on 6/26/2015, 3:04:28 PM by CountryClassSF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Then you aren't posting 'Homofascist Gay Gestapo will take away OUR marriages next' to someone called C19fan?

My post, yes. My thread, no. OUR=YOUR. Can't fix typos on FR.

[afleitch]

Yep, you've mentioned those posts thrice.  They weren't my threads though.

So when I click on 'SCOTUS Decision: Gay Marriage Constitutional right and it says:

To: C19fan
Homofascist Gay Gestapo will take away OUR marriages next


20 posted on 6/26/2015, 3:04:28 PM by CountryClassSF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Then you aren't posting 'Homofascist Gay Gestapo will take away OUR marriages next' to someone called C19fan?

My post, yes. My thread, no. OUR=YOUR. Can't fix typos on FR.

Didn't say it was your thread. I said they were your posts. So you used the language 'Homofascist Gay Gestapo' despite complaining about 'intolerance' from gays.

Now you're saying OUR was actually just a typo and was supposed to say YOUR...

[CountryClassSF]

That term is used widely amongst gay conservatives. It was actually  coined by Tammy Bruce in "The New Thought Police".

The intolerance is those like the link I showed you last night from TIME magazine, who wants to breach the wall between separation of church and state and end tax exemptions.

If a gay activist was on DU, talking about the "Christian gestapo" (for example), that's not the same as trying to restrict religious freedom.

And yeah, I certainly didn't mean "our marriages" since I myself am not married. So there's no our.

[afleitch]

That term is used widely amongst gay conservatives. It was actually  coined by Tammy Bruce in "The New Thought Police".

The intolerance is those like the link I showed you last night from TIME magazine, who wants to breach the wall between separation of church and state and end tax exemptions.

If a gay activist was on DU, talking about the "Christian gestapo" (for example), that's not the same as trying to restrict religious freedom.

And yeah, I certainly didn't mean "our marriages" since I myself am not married. So there's no our.

I know gay conservatives who are out, as you say you are. There are a few on here actually. They don't use;

HOMOFASCIST
HOMO-TERRORISM
HOMO MARXISTS
HOMO REICH
(those two are amazing - both fascist and communist)
GAY GESTAPO

Why do you? Why do you use them?

[CountryClassSF]

That term is used widely amongst gay conservatives. It was actually  coined by Tammy Bruce in "The New Thought Police".

The intolerance is those like the link I showed you last night from TIME magazine, who wants to breach the wall between separation of church and state and end tax exemptions.

If a gay activist was on DU, talking about the "Christian gestapo" (for example), that's not the same as trying to restrict religious freedom.

And yeah, I certainly didn't mean "our marriages" since I myself am not married. So there's no our.

I know gay conservatives who are out, as you say you are. There are a few on here actually. They don't use;

HOMOFASCIST
HOMO-TERRORISM
HOMO MARXISTS
HOMO REICH
(those two are amazing - both fascist and communist)
GAY GESTAPO

Why do you? Why do you use them?

G.G. is used widely in gay conservative circles to describe those who want to pressure us into thinking as a communal group rather than as individuals.

Marxism and fascism can be engaged in whether one is heterosexual or homosexual or what have you.  I was describing, in using those terms, the people who wish to take that agenda and use it to harm religious freedom in a fascist way.  In terms of marxism, it is the broader leftist agenda that I was referring to.

As for the other two, they were in the immediate aftermath of the court ruling, and I was very, very upset.  I have mentioned, delicately, that I see parallels between what happened to the Indiana pizza shop during post-Weimar times, when businesses were forced to shut down because they were open about their faith.  

Sometimes, like many, I can use inartful words to describe things - words that were not used in Atlas forum.  Dan Savage, for example, used a homophobic slur to describe Christians once, and he's an anti-bullying advocate. Human beings can use inartful words from time to time.

[afleitch]

Sometimes, like many, I can use inartful words to describe things - words that were not used in Atlas forum.  Dan Savage, for example, used a homophobic slur to describe Christians once, and he's an anti-bullying advocate. Human beings can use inartful words from time to time.

A three year posting history peppered with 'inartful' words on Free Republic is not, to put it mildly 'time to time.'

[CountryClassSF]

A three year posting history peppered with 'inartful' words on Free Republic is not, to put it mildly 'time to time.'

I'm not sure why there is sudden focus on here on my FR posts, but perhaps here's one that was missed: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3124712/posts?page=108#108

And one where I highlighted a personal concern of mine about gays who do not wish to get married but wish to have the benefits without calling it a marriage: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3124121/posts?page=5#5  
People like me, for example, may not, in some states, be able to have those benefits in a domestic partnership unless I get married.

[afleitch]

And yet you talk about gay people in the third person again.

[CountryClassSF]

And yet you talk about gay people in the third person again.

I do not feel comfortable being out on that forum.

[afleitch]

And yet you talk about gay people in the third person again.

I do not feel comfortable being out on that forum.

So you use words like homo fascist, homo reich etc, all forms of hyperbole in a bombastic inflammatory style entirely in keeping with the tone of that forum and suggesting to the posters there that you are in fact 'not gay'. You use some of the most vitriolic, abusive homophobic language you could ever use against gay people, their rights and their loved ones. You try and explain all this away.

But on here you say you are openly gay and grace 'gay conservative circles' but try to be polite and use completely different language (in keeping with the tone of this forum) while claiming you are somehow victimised by us on here.

So two completely different people then?

[CountryClassSF]

And yet you talk about gay people in the third person again.

I do not feel comfortable being out on that forum.

So you use words like homo fascist, homo reich etc, all forms of hyperbole in a bombastic inflammatory style entirely in keeping with the tone of that forum and suggesting to the posters there that you are in fact 'not gay'. You use some of the most vitriolic, abusive homophobic language you could ever use against gay people, their rights and their loved ones. You try and explain all this away.

But on here you say you are openly gay and grace 'gay conservative circles' but try to be polite and use completely different language (in keeping with the tone of this forum) while claiming you are somehow victimised by us on here.

So two completely different people then?

Never claimed I was victimized. I've also explained that there are other gay conservatives that have used those terms, and they aren't used to describe all gays or LGBTs as a whole.

The victims are Baronelle Stutzman, who was forced to shut down her business, and Memories Pizza, who were subjected to vitriolic smear campaigns.

[The Other Castro]

I'm legitimately surprised you're still somehow not banned yet.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

I'm legitimately surprised you're still somehow not banned yet.

I'm legitimately surprised you people actually bother with him. It's even more annoying than CountryClassSF derailing this thread.

[The Other Castro]

I'm legitimately surprised you're still somehow not banned yet.

I'm legitimately surprised you people actually bother with him. It's even more annoying than CountryClassSF derailing this thread.

I wasn't arguing with him or anything like that, it's just ridiculous on the part of the modadmin.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

I'm legitimately surprised you're still somehow not banned yet.

I'm legitimately surprised you people actually bother with him. It's even more annoying than CountryClassSF derailing this thread.

I wasn't arguing with him or anything like that, it's just ridiculous on the part of the modadmin.

He has a right to his opinion. This is a private forum, and they can ban whoever they like for whatever reason, but the mods have generally treated this forum as if it were a public institution.

[CountryClassSF]

I split the latest batch of CCSF-related thread derailing into a separate thread. If people must discuss CCSF and his views on SSM, do so there.  And by people, I include CCSF.

Ok. Didn't intend to derail anything. Just responded to questions. No worries.

[CountryClassSF]

I'm legitimately surprised you're still somehow not banned yet.

Can I ask why? I give my opinion just like anyone else, and I fully acknowledge my background/views are unorthodox as a gay male for having the views that I do.  

The problem is, is that there are many people who feel that my opinion can't possibly be real because of that. I've even had people question my sexuality.  And now, people are hunting for things that I've posted on other forums. I mean really?

I've even offered to give personal information to moderators,  by which if I were divulge, there'd be public record of me being out as a gay man going back to around 2007-2008.  But I was told that wasn't necessary by a mod so okay...

That was an issue at one point, and now that I've offered to do that, now it's "oh well regardless of whether you're gay or not you said something on FR that offended me so we're going to talk about it here!"" Maybe I just can't win. lol
I've never advocated for a single member of this forum to be banned, despite vehemently disagreeing with their opinions on some issues. I wish the same respect were afforded to me.

[pbrower2a]

Love won; bigotry and superstition lost.

Deal with your own fears. What do you fear?

I know gays who make/would make wonderful parents. That's not the issue.

The issue is forcing people of faith to participate in things that violate their faith.  The issue is having to fear societal implications for expressing a conservative view of marriage.

Should I ever be compelled to recite the shahada at gunpoint, you would have a case.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

What about homosexuals who happen to be Christians?

[CountryClassSF]

What about homosexuals who happen to be Christians?

What about us?