Freedom for those who do what we like

Indiana and Arkansas have been in the spotlight recently, having passed laws stating a private business owner can deny service to anyone they choose to. This is, in the simplest terms, saying they have a right to TURN AWAY MONEY. Nowhere is sexual orientation, race, gender or religion mentioned. What it does is protect a baker who, due to religious conviction, decides he won’t bake a cake for a gay wedding, or a restaurant owner who refuses service to vegetarians because he uses all kinds of meat in his cooking, or a lawn care professional when they tell someone who happens to be gay, or a different race, or a different religion, they can’t mow their yard because their booked.

We used to be a society where, if you were denied service and felt it was wrong, you told your friends, they told theirs, and so on. If enough people believed your version, the business just began to lose money, and either changed their practices, or went out of business. You affected them simply by convincing others, without whining on TV or suing, to avoid that business. It’s the same as a restaurant that serves bad food, people find out and just don’t go there. Today, however, we live in a society where, despite the First Amendment, and now two states passing additional laws, people who feel “discriminated against” sue to “punish the bigot.” I’m sorry, if I went to a bakery owned by a gay or lesbian couple, and asked for a cake honoring traditional marriage, and they said they won’t do it, I WOULDN’T WANT THEM TO at that point, for fear they’d not do as good a job as they do on other items. Second, I wouldn’t sue them for turning away customers, I’d simply let it be known that they turned me away due to my faith and my request, and let people decide if they want to do business there, leaving it to the market who succeeded and who didn’t.

To show how this is not the case any more, and how one group has decided to force another to not only tolerate, but to accept them, I give you two cases. First, a court ruled that a baker had “illegally discriminated” against a gay couple. Keep in mind that this is a private citizen who decided to turn away a paying customer. Rather than simply letting their friends and family know, and instead of simply encouraging anyone they could to do business elsewhere (free market economics) they sued, and a judge ruled that a private citizen could not act on their beliefs. This case however, is the opposite, and not about only one baker. No, in this case, thirteen bakeries turned away a request to make a cake with a message that stated gay marriage is wrong. Nothing was vulgar or profane about the message, it was simply a message that a majority of people, based on their religious affiliation, agree with. None of these bakeries were sued, some of them were very insulting, one even saying they’d made the large cookie, but they would “put a phallus on it.” How is it that the first instance of a private business turning away a customer is “illegal” or “wrong,” but not the other thirteen cases?

Simply put, the media and too many in government have decided that only one group is protected. This isn’t the only situation either. We have seen instances where people state only whites can be racist, only men can be sexist, and believe it. This is the problem today. If you claim to want equality, then you cannot do anything the other guy can’t, and then expect him not to react as you would. If you can call someone evil, ignorant, a bigot, or worse, then they can call your “lifestyle choice” wrong, or immoral. If you can turn away a customer wanting a cake supporting traditional marriage, then he can turn your request for a cake for a gay wedding away. Simply put, no one can have a “right” that others do not have. That is called privilege, rights are for everyone, and too many today have either forgotten that, or chosen to remain ignorant in their demand for “rights” that only they enjoy.

Smokey out

Two for today

It seems that I am not commenting as much on actual news and politics any more, as I am on people who fully expect the world to do as they demand, while they do as they please, and no one is allowed to question them on it.

The first for today, is once again something from DC, in this case, Harry Reid responding to someone pointing out that he blatantly lied about Mitt Romney during the 2012 elections. During a speech in the summer of 2012 Reid said “Let him prove that he has paid taxes, because he hasn’t.” referring to Romney, accusing him of never paying taxes. Romney, of course, responded, and I believe, made his returns available. Now, having been proven to have lied, and never responded when Romney called him on his statement, his only responses is “Well, they can call it whatever they want. Romney didn’t win, did he?” after being called a “McCartheyite” (referring to Senator McCarthey from the 1950’s). I’m sorry, had a Republican accused Obama of never paying taxes, only to have Obama prove he had, there would have been calls for all but public hanging, yet Reid jokes about ruining a man’s election run, and nothing is done?

I believe there are good people in the House and Senate, but they are in an extreme minority, their voices silenced. Sadly, there is little to be done, as to impose term limits, or have any legal action when our “illustrious leaders” break the very laws they pass, must be put in place by those same people. We are left with but one option, vote someone else into their office. I personally worked on a campaign in Tyler, TX in the 2004 election, where an incumbent Democrat was defeated. For those who don’t know, that area is a largely Democrat part of Texas, and Mr. Sandlin was the incumbent, which in a national election means you normally need to work very little to be re-elected, but he was defeated. So, the question here is simple, is it worth enough to you to work to oust those simply working to keep a cushy job and power, or not?


Next, we move to more of a societal issue, that being the attitude of (most) atheists today. Like any group, it’s not 100% of them believe or act as this next bit demonstrates, but sadly, those who simply want to live their lives are lumped in with the bad apples, and most of the “not bad apples” do little to nothing to correct the view of their group. In a great display of irony, these are the very people who trumpet the “not all XXX are bad” line regarding groups where horrible things are done in group XXX’s name. They say nothing about those members of the group who do those things, just “they’re not all bad, so stop complaining,” but when it comes to a lone Christian making a comment, or a lone wacko doing something terrible who might have been Christian, they jump all over “Christianity did this” completely ignoring their previous mantra of “it was a small percentage of the group” and so on.

In this case, it was an article postulating the possible discovery of the childhood home of Jesus of Nazareth. Note, from the author’s words, no claim that “this is Jesus’ house” was ever made. The question was asked, the evidence presented, and theories presented, that’s it. From there, the “Friendly Atheist” begins to liken this article’s theory to pure lunacy. Yes, I can say that while there is no proof that X happened in my home 100 years ago, there’s no proof it didn’t, so it may have, about anything, and as you can’t prove the negative, well, that’s the point. However, this “friendly” post about the article ridicules Christians and the entire article, all but saying “Jesus is a myth, so to find his home is impossible,” while comments simply spiral out of control attacking the mere fact that there are people who are Christians.

I have personally been called stupid, ignorant, and worse, simply because I am a Christian (also for being a Republican, a Conservative, and simply for being from the American south, but those are topics for a different day) as if this ends all discussion. So, my question is this, why is this even tolerated? The very people screaming that I, as a Christian, must “tolerate” people who believe differently than I do, or who’s “lifestyle choice” (and it’s not a choice either) is not in accordance with my beliefs, but for me to point out the childishness of their words is “attacking them on a personal level.”

Yes, I am a Christian, and no, I am not a scientist, so I can’t, and thus, won’t speak on the science behind the origins of life on this planet, or how humans have gotten to the place we are today, based on historical evidence of physical and mental changes. I don’t argue for or against the “big bang” for two reasons, there will never be fool proof evidence without time travel, and as I point out regularly, the physical act of creation could very well have been exactly what is called the big bang, simply caused by God commanding it to happen. I don’t question that humans have changed, or evolved, over time, because we are now on average taller, less hairy, smarter, and so much more, but I do question abiogenisis and the “we just evolved, there is no God” argument. When I do, I often get the “no one alive today was there? Great argument idiot” response, no reasoned discourse, but animosity and hateful attacks.

In a nutshell, you want respect, you earn it, you don’t demand it. I respect the Office of President of the U.S., just not the man in it right now. Second, to claim that “life just appeared and evolved to where we are today,” in my mind, is to boil human life, and all life on the planet, down to a “cosmic accident,” which to me, is just wrong, and often leaves me wanting to slap the living daylights out of the person refusing to act like an adult, then simply say “you’re an accident of the cosmos, so I choose to slap accidents of the cosmos” to simply get them away from me, but I then choose to remain an adult, and let them show themselves for the intellectual infants they are.

I am an educated and, I like to think, intelligent man, and I welcome civil and reasoned debate. However, when you stoop to name calling and emotional attacks on someone, you not only prove to be that same intellectual infant, you take all credibility away from your argument. Research, bring facts, use logic, and remain respectful. You’ll find more often than not, while you and the person you’re arguing with, or debating, but you will be able to part amicably, and continue your debates. Who knows, you both may just learn something, even if neither of you ever convinces the other.

Smokey out

Welcome to the ADD News!

First on the list, budget proposals by the self declared emperor Obama. Is it any wonder that a budget that, primarily is “more taxes and more spending” with little substance outside of that is rejected? We can only expect Obama to begin decrying the House and Senate for “taking food from babies” or “denying help to those who need it” while those he speaks of helping are those who WON’T WORK not those who can’t, as we’ve all seen his ignoring of our Veterans who WANT TO WORK, but can’t, and still get nothing from his administration.

Next on the block, an idiot who didn’t learn fast enough. It seems a man who had a six figure salary with a seven figure stock package decided to attack Chic Fil A many times. He went through the drive through multiple times, only ever getting a free cup of water, only to then video his berating of the poor person at the window. He told her she was working for a hateful company, told her he wanted to slow down the line, wanted to take money, wanted to hurt the company, because he felt they were hateful. The girl in the video? She was courteous and gracious, and even accepted his apology. He was, however, fired from his job after the video he tried to delete went viral, then fired again when his new employer found out who he was. Now? Well, he’s in an RV on food stamps trying to sell his memoirs. Seems to me he came off as the hateful jerk, and Chic Fil A the company just trying to serve their customers.

Moving on, a child is forced to shave his head due to a “distracting” hair cut that HONORS HIS MILITARY FAMILY! Yes, a child is forced to shave his head or be suspended because he had a “high and tight” hair cut. I’m sorry, but I’ve worn this cut for more than a decade! I also watched as students in my graduating class (20 years ago, yes) had hair cuts that wouldn’t pass at even the most lenient of jobs. I can’t help but ask, had he braided his hair with pink ribbons to support gay rights, would they have done the same? Also, notice the district throwing the school under the bus, and the too late apology, as the CHILD WAS FORCED TO SHAVE HIS HEAD before they acted.

This one’s just for a link. It seems Ted Cruz is signing up for Obamacare. I can’t help wonder what his campaign speeches will be like.

This one needs no introduction, other than, what did we expect? It seems a passenger was BEATEN for not blindly praising Michael Brown. According to this story, a passenger on a bus was asked about the Brown case, and when he responded that he hadn’t thought about it much, he was BEATEN by the questioner. Yes, we now live in a world where someone can ask you about a case where someone tried to take a Police Officer’s weapon, and was subsequently shot, and when you don’t side with the CRIMINAL THUG, you are beaten. Notice the photo, they’re smiling! I can’t help but wonder, if I was ATTACKED AND HAD GUNS PULLED ON ME, only to react to save my life, would I be jailed based on my attacker’s race? Apparently, we must ask this now.

Not much to say on this one. It seems that while schools FORCE Christians to hide their faith, they also FORCE children to read the quran. This one is about a US Veteran finding his grand-daughter was being forced to learn islam, and his reaction. Personally, since so many people sue for less, I’d have demanded the ISD pay for a private school education for my child or grand-child.

Finally, we explore the idiocy of the left. It seems Kroger has publicly said they will simply follow the laws of the states their stores are in, but that isn’t enough for some. In open carry states, Kroger refuses to deny those who embrace their rights entry into the stores, so “Moms demand action” is putting out ads comparing someone with an assault rifle (which no open carry advocate carries, only those trying to make 2nd Amendment supporters does) to a child eating ice cream. They cite incidents at Kroger stores where guns were used to kill, ignoring that the people who killed others should not have been free at all. But beyond all of that, they scream about “rights” when it comes to gays or something else the majority of a state doesn’t want, then scream to stop something the majority does. It’s very simple folks. If your state has a law you don’t like, vote against it and/or those in power supporting it. If you lose, accept that you are in the minority or move away. If a company does something you don’t like, don’t shop there, and encourage others not to. If the company does well, accept that you are in the minority or act like a toddler denied candy, and hurt your argument/side.


I don’t expect anyone to comment other than in agreement or to say how ignorant or bigoted I am. If the latter, remember that by not engaging in reasoned, civil and logical debate, you only prove yourself a mental 2 year old, but after all, calling me names is all you have, right?

Smokey out

Here we go again

We’ve seen many instances of people being labeled “bigots” or worse simply because they believe differently. I have personally experienced this in a few ways, being told I’m an “intolerant bigot” because I believe homosexuality is not natural. Speaking from a purely biological stance, it’s not. Two men or two women cannot have a child without assistance from the other gender, it’s as simple as that. I’ve been called a bigot and zealot by a total stranger for simply praying over my meal in a restaurant. And the highlight of my life so far, I was actually called an insensitive racist jerk in a debate over Keynesian vs Supply Side economics in a class!

In regards to an Anti-Gay bill

That is a post about a bill in Indiana that would protect business owners who refuse service to someone based on their religious beliefs. Personally, the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, in my mind, does that very thing, but as we’ve seen a baker sued into closing his business because he wouldn’t take someone’s money, and pastors threatened with their sermons being labeled as “hate speech,” so we know that the push for “equality” isn’t above denying the very freedom they scream for to those they disagree with.

But, it’s simpler than that. When a bill comes up that you support or don’t, VOTE or if it’s not on a ballot for you, call your elected official(s) and let your views be known. I’ve seen people screaming that this law or that, which “should be law to protect groups who need tolerance” was “stopped by bigots who hounded the House/Senate,” but when it comes to a law they don’t like, they simply demand their way be the only way. You can’t have it both ways, you can’t demand all laws you like be passed and enforced without question, while demanding all laws you disagree with be stopped without question. If you don’t like what those in power are doing, vote them out! If you don’t like that way the popular vote seems to go each time in your area, sadly, your choices are to move or just deal with it.

Finally, every private business has one right that needs no law, the right to refuse service to anyone, at any time, for any reason. If you don’t like who they aren’t serving, don’t spend your money there, and encourage others like you to do the same. Help a business you do support compete, economics will either force them to change or to go out of business. But, suing and forcing someone to either fold or go away does nothing to strengthen your cause, it just makes you look like a petulant child throwing a tantrum because you couldn’t have more candy.

Smokey out

Why is this OK, but even suggesting different is “wrong” or “bad?”

It seems that not only are the “enlightened” members of the anti-gun lobby happy to simply vilify all gun owners, they’ve now moved to outright scare tactics, although I’m not surprised in the least, nor does the setting surprise at all. It seems that a group recently set up a “gun store” in New York City, one of the bastions of gun control with signs about “being there to help” on the door, only to start telling tales of how each gun was used in a crime (video in the linked page,) so aside from how they are selling firearms that were used in crimes, or at least should have been confiscated by Police, why is this OK?

I get angry at this for multiple reasons, yet it seems that no matter what, these idiots are praised by the media and the idiots in DC. First, this is blatant misinformation and manipulation, yet when anyone suggests that young girls considering abortion be shown images of their child via sonogram, to prove the child has a heartbeat and brain activity, we’re “forcing our views on children,” or “manipulating them so they choose what we want them to,” which is bad and wrong, naturally, while their choice to blatantly mislead and manipulate people is “working for a better society.”

Yes, I am pro-Second Amendment and pro-life, so naturally, my own beliefs go against the people I’m referring to above, but beyond that, the blatant hypocrisy astounds me almost as much as the “confusion” those same people show when you point this out. I have no doubt that they would claim that removing guns is more important than anything so they’re allowed to do anything they must to do so, while my believe that life begins at conception (which many doctors share) is “just belief and I shouldn’t force it on others.” Why is what they think and believe so much more important than those who disagree with them? Simply put, because the media and the government share their agenda.

Let’s look at their agenda versus those against them. This article highlights that their stance is firmly in the disarm everyone who isn’t in the military or law-enforcement camp. Never mind that they are the same ones screaming for more accountability every time a cop has to use any form of force, they want only cops and soldiers to have guns. Statistics are also useless, since these are the same people who will tell you they’d rather watch their entire family tortured and killed, then die themself, rather than “dirty their soul by using a gun.” Crimes committed while also using a handgun to aid in the commission of said crimes are relatively low these days, and that is somewhat in part due to more and more people legally owning and carrying weapons of their own. Think about this, what would you do if you wanted to rob a store, go to the one where the owner has a shotgun on the wall behind him, or the one where you know the owner actively supports gun-control? Criminals know that they are more likely to succeed when their victims can’t fight back, and that number is dwindling, so why is it that the gun-control people don’t mention it, it hurts their case, simply put.

On my topic, abortion, you see plenty of coverage of protests and marches for the “pro choice” lobby, signs with “not your body, not your choice” or the like all over the place, simply because anyone who dares disagree is quickly shouted down and hounded out of the area. Yes, I know it’s not my body, but I also know that the pro-choice lobby lies more than anyone else, and I can’t abide by that. Planned Parenthood was begun in the 1960’s as a way to control the African American population, but saying that now is “twisting history to deny women a choice that could save their lives.” Likewise, suggesting that students be taught abstinence ALONG SIDE CONTRACEPTION is “forcing religion on them.” Never mind that the screamers instantly accuse you of wanting to teach “abstinence only, forcing Christianity on students” which is not what most people suggest, and never mind that abstinence is the only 100% effective way to not get pregnant, any attempt to suggest that anything they say is biased is twisting the facts and they are just working to protect choice.

So, the question here is simple. Will you sit and continue to be lied to and manipulated, will you just ignore that a large percentage of your country is being lied and/or lying, or will you stand up and demand that those who scream for equality and tolerance begin practicing what they demand of others? It’s not an easy road, as when you point out that they are intolerant you’ll be branded a bigot, racist, chauvanist, or worse. Pointing out that they are lying, or even minimally twisting the facts to suit their own agenda is “accusing them of being evil and you should be shot for it.” The world will only get worse until enough people stand up and demand that those screaming for something practice that. Those who want to take something from the populous “for their own good,” no lie to do so.

So, what will you do?

Smokey out

Everyone is equal, minorities and women are more equal

George Orwell almost got it right. In his book, Animal Farm, the pigs got to a point where they were “more equal” than the other animals, simply because they “ran things” and “things would fall apart without them.” Well, while this has happened before, and likely will again, we are now moving toward a society where it’s not that they’re in charge, but that they’re not white, or not male, that makes them “more equal” than everyone who is a white male. I find it amazing that not only is this being all but ignored as far as discrimination, racism and sexism is concerned, as the media can’t shut up when it’s the other way, but that the idiots actually believe that only a white person can be racist and only a male can be sexist. Not only would you be laughed at or attacked for suggesting that women can be sexist or non-whites can be racist, I’ve actually see a comment to the tune of “how cute, you still believe the dictionary has definitions of words.” Yes, you read that right, I have seen an argument where someone actually said that the dictionary definition of racism is incorrect, and when asked why, they said “because that’s how it is.” This is where we’ve come to, a society where because women WANT it to be a certain way, we’re expected to make it that way. The idiots scream about equality, then also want to be treated special by men. Or, as actually happened to me, they will start screaming that they “don’t need a man to hold a door for them” (I was actually holding it for several people, men and women,) only to then scream about how rude you are if you close the door so they can do it themself. Well, I’m tired of it, and I’m tired of it being shoved down my throat from all directions. Look at the Superbowl commercials if you want more proof.

Click here to view the Always Superbowl Commercial

Always put out a commercial where they show both men and women (teens mostly or very young adults) perpetuate the stereotype of running like a girl, throwing like a girl, and fighting like a girl. They then go on to show young girls, simply running, throwing and so on. A young boy is asked if by showing the stereotype, if he just insulted his sister, showing that the point of the commercial is that we shouldn’t teach that boys and girls are different. Sorry to say, THEY ARE! I’m sorry, despite a VERY small percentage of women on the planet, men are physically bigger and stronger, while women are (mostly) better at nuturing jobs such as nurse or teacher. It’s just the way it is. I’ve seen women do things that, physically, I’d have a hard time doing, and I’ve had male nurses and teachers, but those are exceptions, not the rule. This doesn’t mean we should make fun, or not respect each other. Just because I’m a foot taller and able to lift more in a dead lift from the ground, doesn’t make me a “better person,” it means I’m physically stronger and larger, that’s it. Why do we need this “don’t say this or that” to take priority over math, science, history, and so on? Simply, because we are now being forced to do so, because a small portion of the population want us to.

Moving to another example, on the opposite end of the spectrum, we have T-Mobile’s wi-fi calling commercial.

Click here to view the T-Mobile wi-fi calling Superbowl Commercial

Right up to the end, this was a somewhat chuckleworthy commercial simply showing two celebrities competing over who could wi-fi call from the most remote bit of their house. At the end, though, Silverman hands the child to the parents and says “sorry it’s a boy.” Now, I’m sure we’ll soon be told she only mean sorry she’d not paid attention to them, or “sorry, I got distracted,” but having watched her “comedy” and such, I have a hard time with that. Add to this, she didn’t pause, so it wasn’t “sorry, it’s about” as if “sorry, I should have done this sooner” but rather “sorry it’s about” as if the parents should be upset they have a son. Why is it that today we are inundated with “don’t say this” or “you can’t say that” when it would be “offensive” to females, but no one cares about verbalizing anything up to out right hatred for males? The current push for “equality” is no different than it was when it started, it’s a push for supremacy. There are many sub groups, from the mild who simply want the right to say what they want to and also to censor others, to the extreme who support forced castration of all males, after they gather a sperm sample to use for artificial insemination (yes, there are people who support that,) and no one cares. But, let a male say something completely in jest and the world explodes! Plain and simple, men and women ARE DIFFERENT! I am physically stronger and larger than most of the women I know, so by default, I can lift more than them, and perform strenuous physical activity longer than them. On the flip side, women are generally more nurturing and caring, so tend to do well in careers such as medicine or education. This is not the rule though. I’ve had male teachers, been seen by male nurses, and seen women perform physical acts that made me wonder if they weren’t a robot.

You want equality and tolerance, that’s fine, but you can’t demand others tolerate everything from you, while trying to keep them from saying anything you don’t want them to. Remember, it’s Liberty and Justice for ALL, not only certain groups.

Smokey out

“Tolerance” today

Southpark mocked the tolerance push years ago by showing a situation where Mr. Garrison, a very out homosexual got worse and worse, while the children upset by this were sent to “tolerance camp,” run as a concentration camp. In the end, it was actually Garrison who flipped, saying he wanted to be called out so he could sue and get rich, but also pointed out that there are limits to what we should be forced to tolerate.

I have had many friends from all walks of life in my 37 years, and while there are some I don’t discuss certain topics with, I don’t judge or hate them for something I disagree with or believe wrong. There are also parts of the current push that I actually agree with. Sexual orientation, gender, race, none of these should be used when hiring, save the very few jobs where you will work for a religious organization. Yes, a Church can refuse to hire you if you are gay, and it’s against their beliefs. Likewise, they can hire only those who are of the same faith, or even more, only those who attend that specific church, and it’s legal. Likewise, a private business can turn away any customer they choose, yet we have seen a bakery forced to close completely because the owner simply stood up for what he believed in.

I’m going to make this as clear as I can. The First Ammendment states “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” Yes, it goes on to address freedom of speech, the press, and more, but that’s the ONLY mention of religion. If I choose to not take your money for services I provide, because I believe you are living an immoral life, that is NOT ILLEGAL! It’s a business choice, and could cause me to go out of business due to lack of customers, but it is NOT a reason for the business to be driven out by the government. Likewise, it is not a violation of the First Amendment to have a cross, or nativity scene, or menorah, or star of David, on public land. Simply put, the First Amendment states that the US Government cannot give preference to one faith over others, nor can they in any way restrict anyone from fully embracing their faith, PERIOD!

Today, sadly, there is a push for “tolerance” from groups such as Code Pink and their ilk. They want to silence all dissenting voices, even trying (and they may have succeeded) to have Christians arrested for simply speaking NEAR (not at) a rally they organized. In the base meaning of the word, to tolerate literally means to endure. You tolerate an unruly or obnoxious child at the supermarket only as long as it takes to get away. You do more than that when it’s your child.

Now, on to what prompted this little rant. I have seen this before, and likely will again, but the image below circulates, and never fails to get people talking, often with those who believe the “activists” throwing items and screaming at the Priest are in the wrong shouted down.

In that image you see a Priest sitting and enduring an assault on his person by “tolerant” gay activists who are, in fact, breaking the law. Why are they not arrested? Because to do so would be “wrong” or an “attempt to silence them” or “deny them their rights.” We’ve been told this for so long that today, when the homosexual community wants the “right” to marry, people believe it’s a right for others already, and it’s not. I do not have a “right” to get married, why do they get that right put into law? Now that it’s there? While many will say I’m trying to stir up unrest or worse, we WILL see a Church sued, and likely have their 501C-3 status revoked for refusing to perform a gay wedding. This is not about freedom, it’s about doing what many claim others want to do, forcing beliefs on others.

I could care less what you do in the privacy of your own home, but when you tell me I’m not allowed to even think it’s wrong, you are nearing nazi brownshirt levels of ignorance and hate. I am a Christian, and I believe that homosexuality is wrong. I’m also a college graduate, and I know that, biologicaly, two men or two women cannot, without the use of technology, and something from a member of the opposite sex, reproduce. Yes, the act of sex is physically enjoyable, but it’s sole purpose is procreation! So, how is something that completely prohibits reproduction, without the help of others from the gender you don’t find attractive, not wrong? Answer? Ask that of any “activist” and they’ll point out frogs that change gender, or how animals all over the world have homosexuals in their ranks, or the fallacy of Greek pedophilia and homosexuality (rant for another time), or they’ll just start screaming at you for being ignorant.

We need to reclaim civil society people. Be who you want, I will believe what I believe, and you won’t do anything to change that by attacking and insulting me. Will I let my beliefs influence me in hiring/firing? Only if I work for a religious organization and I’m told to. If I’m in a situation where I’m hiring for a secular company, my sole concern is can you do the job, and can you do it better than others applying, THAT’S IT!

All of this said, remember one point. All of the examples of “gays striking back at their oppressors” are aimed at Christians, period. They refuse to discuss that Christianity preaches that homosexuality is wrong, but that we are not to hate them, while ignoring that shariah law still demands homosexuals be BURIED UP TO THEIR NECK IN THE STREET AND STONED UNTIL DEAD! Why is this? Could it be that they know Christians won’t attack them, and often will just walk away, while islam will KILL THEM? That is exactly it, as well as our current government and the “main stream” media screaming that islam is peaceful and all but saying Christians are doing everything and rigging it to blam islam.

Smokey out