LITEROTICA PODCAST
LIT CAMS (200 Free Tokens)ADULT TOYSVOD MOVIES

Reactions to the 2014 SOTU Address

julybaby04 said:
Hmm, thought you were ignoring me.....

Disabilities are not a choice.

Just because your "opinion" is different from mine does not make it correct either, however I do not view those with differing opinions as dumb nor close-minded....just an individual having a differing opinion.

An example of a choice is that simply because of those differing opinions, you CHOOSE to insult. I suppose, in your mind, it makes you feel better in some strange way, but in reality, it just is insulting another person

If you believe being gay is not a choice and there is some sort of "rights" that go along with that lifestyle, then that is your opinion.

I believe it is a choice and therefore it no different than choosing what kind of car to drive, for example.

I am quite sure you will have some wonderful insult to hurl my way because of my opinion and that is fine. You have your way of dealing with opposing views and I have mine.
Click to expand...

Please explain to me how equal rights are the same as special rights.

And it's not a difference of opinion; recognizing that homosexuality isn't a choice isn't an opinion at all, it's just reality. You don't even need science to prove it to you. Anyone with any common sense at all can figure it out. I'm heterosexual. I'm not sexually attracted to women, no matter how hard I try to make a different choice. I could no more change that than I could change the size of my feet. Are you saying that you could easily change your sexual orientation just be making a choice? I'm genuinely asking. Leave the Bible out of it, and really think about it honestly. Why would anyone choose to be gay if they weren't born that way? They're persecuted, ridiculed, denied basic rights, beaten, killed and/or driven to suicide. What exactly are they getting out if it that would cause them to make that choice just for the hell of it?
 
The end result...obama people want and want but are unwilling to work.we want to do the absolute minimum yet feel entitled to $15/hr
 
The same thing Johnny Knoxville gets for riding a grocery cart down a steep hill. Attention!
 
I don't think "Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" are found in the Constitution.
 
julybaby04 said:
If you believe being gay is not a choice and there is some sort of "rights" that go along with that lifestyle, then that is your opinion.

I believe it is a choice and therefore it no different than choosing what kind of car to drive, for example.

.
Click to expand...

When did you decide to be heterosexual?
 
Lorilei said:
Please explain to me how equal rights are the same as special rights.

And it's not a difference of opinion; recognizing that homosexuality isn't a choice isn't an opinion at all, it's just reality. You don't even need science to prove it to you. Anyone with any common sense at all can figure it out. I'm heterosexual. I'm not sexually attracted to women, no matter how hard I try to make a different choice. I could no more change that than I could change the size of my feet. Are you saying that you could easily change your sexual orientation just be making a choice? I'm genuinely asking. Leave the Bible out of it, and really think about it honestly. Why would anyone choose to be gay if they weren't born that way? They're persecuted, ridiculed, denied basic rights, beaten, killed and/or driven to suicide. What exactly are they getting out if it that would cause them to make that choice just for the hell of it?
Click to expand...


Again, expecting to have the bashing continue (and not from you, the about post was very respectful and I truly appreciate that...:) ), but leaving the Bible out of the discussion, I think there is probably an aspect of choosing to be homosexual that exists.

I will preface this by saying, much to everyone's surprise here, I am sure, I have MANY friends who are homosexual (including one cousin). I have had discussions with them (not all, but some) about why they feel they are like they are. Some say born that way (and I spoke to them about my beliefs in God and belief it is not inborn), but for others, there was a "reason" for them. A couple spoke of being abused as a child. My cousin, in particular, spoke directly to that.

I am not a scientist. I do have my belief in God, which is how I live my life. I do, however, believe that everything is not know by ANYONE. To say it could not be a choice...for anyone, I think it a stretch.

I do think it is a choice, even if born with the tendencies, it is a person's own choice to act on them....same as with a person who is born with alcoholic tendencies, it is their choice to drink.

I am sure there will be much discussion on how dumb, bigoted, judgemental, etc, I am, but this is why I believe it is a choice.
 
julybaby04 said:
Color of skin means everyone deserves equal rights.

Male or female means everyone deserves equal rights.

Choices in life does not equate to equal rights (i.e., who one chooses to sleep with).

As a matter of fact, some choices mean actually losing rights that most already have, such as someone who makes the choice to murder another individual, they lose all rights (except to that of a speedy trial, a lawyer, not having to say anything, etc.).

The Constitution is there to make sure that people have the right to life (which liberals do not uphold in their support of abortion), liberty, and pursuit of happiness. It does not guarantee happiness nor does it guarantee the right of citizens to have "extra" rights simply because of who they choose to sleep with.

Disagree as you wish, but choices people make do not equate to rights.
Click to expand...
Interracial marriage is a choice, but people who choose to enter in to such a marriage have equal protection under the constitution.

So we're back to the "gays make the choice to be gay" just like "murderers make the choice to murder" argument.

What is it homophobic people like you are always equating homosexuals with murderers?

But regardless, what "extra rights" do homosexuals want? "Extra" implies rights that you wouldn't have.

And you need to go read the constitution again.

Anyway, keep denying the science that has established the hereditary link for homosexuality. Enjoy the company of those who excommunicated Galileo for his scientific knowledge and those who insisted blacks were subhuman.
 
It never ceases to amaze me how the ones who howl the most about "extra rights" and "choice" are inevitably fundie Christians who chose to be religious bigots and demand an "extra right" for themselves to force compliance with their view of the Bible upon others.
 
about_average said:
Interracial marriage is a choice, but people who choose to enter in to such a marriage have equal protection under the constitution.

So we're back to the "gays make the choice to be gay" just like "murderers make the choice to murder" argument.

What is it homophobic people like you are always equating homosexuals with murderers?

But regardless, what "extra rights" do homosexuals want? "Extra" implies rights that you wouldn't have.

And you need to go read the constitution again.

Anyway, keep denying the science that has established the hereditary link for homosexuality. Enjoy the company of those who excommunicated Galileo for his scientific knowledge and those who insisted blacks were subhuman.
Click to expand...


Disagree with the homosexual lifestyle does not make someone afraid of homosexuals.
 
julybaby04 said:
Disagree with the homosexual lifestyle does not make someone afraid of homosexuals.
Click to expand...

*sigh*

Here's what you're not getting. No one needs you to "agree". No one's asking you to live, or even endorse "the lifestyle". Which is only in quotes because it's not a lifestyle choice.

I grudgingly accept your right to your personal opinion, even though I disagree with it with every quivering fiber of my being. I think you're wrong with a capital W.

However.

When I disagree with you, I'm not revoking basic rights from any group of Americans. I'm not revoking your commitment to your partner. I'm not getting rid of any legal and financial perks that you get from being in a legally recognized relationship.

When you "disagree" with equal rights for same-sex marriage, you're discriminating. You're being a bigot. You are denying a segment of our population of the same rights you enjoy, just because you "don't agree" that they should love the person they love. You're acting against their love and commitment.

Shame on you.

No one is forcing you to marry someone you don't want to, and more importanly, no one is PREVENTING you from marrying someone you want to. You're getting tax benefits. You're probably getting insurance benefits. If your partner is involved in a medical emergency, you won't be questioned about your decisions about his care. You say you have friends and family who are gay. You might not be gay, but did you choose you fell in love with? No. Love is love. And rights are rights.
 
Last edited:
Lorilei said:
*sigh*

Here's what you're not getting. No one needs you to "agree". No one's asking you to live, or even endorse "the lifestyle". Which is only in quotes because it's not a lifestyle choice.

I grudgingly accept your right to your personal opinion, even though I disagree with it with every quivering fiber of my being. I think you're wrong with a capital A.

However.

When I disagree with you, I'm not revoking basic rights from any group of Americans. I'm not revoking your commitment to your partner. I'm not getting rid of any legal and financial perks that you get from being in a legally recognized relationship.

When you "disagree" with equal rights for same-sex marriage, you're discriminating. You're being a bigot. You are denying a segment of our population of the same rights you enjoy, just because you "don't agree" that they should love the person they love. You're acting against their love and commitment.

Shame on you.

No one is forcing you to marry someone you don't want to, and more importanly, no one is PREVENTING you from marrying someone you want to. You're getting tax benefits. You're probably getting insurance benefits. If your partner is involved in a medical emergency, you won't be questioned about your decisions about his care. You say you have friends and family who are gay. You might not be gay, but did you choose you fell in love with? No. Love is love. And rights are rights.
Click to expand...

I'd like to hump this post.
 
Lorilei said:
*sigh*

Here's what you're not getting. No one needs you to "agree". No one's asking you to live, or even endorse "the lifestyle". Which is only in quotes because it's not a lifestyle choice.

I grudgingly accept your right to your personal opinion, even though I disagree with it with every quivering fiber of my being. I think you're wrong with a capital W.

However.

When I disagree with you, I'm not revoking basic rights from any group of Americans. I'm not revoking your commitment to your partner. I'm not getting rid of any legal and financial perks that you get from being in a legally recognized relationship.

When you "disagree" with equal rights for same-sex marriage, you're discriminating. You're being a bigot. You are denying a segment of our population of the same rights you enjoy, just because you "don't agree" that they should love the person they love. You're acting against their love and commitment.

Shame on you.

No one is forcing you to marry someone you don't want to, and more importanly, no one is PREVENTING you from marrying someone you want to. You're getting tax benefits. You're probably getting insurance benefits. If your partner is involved in a medical emergency, you won't be questioned about your decisions about his care. You say you have friends and family who are gay. You might not be gay, but did you choose you fell in love with? No. Love is love. And rights are rights.
Click to expand...


I did say that I have friends and one family member who are gay. I also said I have spoken to them (not all, but most) about my beliefs as this discussion has happened before with them. They know I love them dearly and They also accept me for how I feel.

Isn't that what it is all about? I have not tried to change them, I love them, I just don't agree with their lifestyle and they know this. There is no anger nor anything else between us. We each respect each other's opinions and are fine with it.
 
Julybaby04, since you've lectured us time and again how marriage is reserved for one white man and one white woman, I suggest you not watch the Super Bowl, lest a new Cheerios commercial absolutely wreck your day.
 
julybaby04 said:
Disagree with the homosexual lifestyle does not make someone afraid of homosexuals.
Click to expand...
Yeah, you're right. Let me rephrase, since apparently that one word caused you to go blind and not see the rest of my post.

Interracial marriage is a choice, but people who choose to enter in to such a marriage have equal protection under the constitution.

So we're back to the "gays make the choice to be gay" just like "murderers make the choice to murder" argument.

Why is it bigots (thanks Lorilei) like you are always equating homosexuals with murderers? - a '?' means it's a question

But regardless, what "extra rights" do homosexuals want?- a '?' means it's a question "Extra" implies rights that you wouldn't have.

And you need to go read the constitution again.

Anyway, keep denying the science that has established the hereditary link for homosexuality. Enjoy the company of those who excommunicated Galileo for his scientific knowledge and those who insisted blacks were subhuman.
 
From Common Dreams:

American State of the Union: A Festival of Lies

by Glen Ford

“Believe it,” said the current Prevaricator-in-Chief, in the conclusion to his annual litany lies. President Obama’s specialty, honed to theatrical near-perfection over five disastrous years, is in crafting the sympathetic lie, designed to suspend disbelief among those targeted for oblivion, through displays of empathy for the victims. In contrast to the aggressive insults and bluster employed by Republican political actors, whose goal is to incite racist passions against the Other, the sympathetic Democratic liar disarms those who are about to be sacrificed by pretending to feel their pain.

Barack Obama, who has presided over the sharpest increases in economic inequality in U.S. history, adopts the persona of public advocate, reciting wrongs inflicted by unseen and unknown forces that have “deepened” the gap between the rich and the rest of us and “stalled” upward mobility. Having spent half a decade stuffing tens of trillions of dollars into the accounts of an ever shrinking gaggle of financial capitalists, Obama declares this to be “a year of action” in the opposite direction. “Believe it.” And if you do believe it, then crown him the Most Effective Liar of the young century.

Lies of omission are even more despicable than the overt variety, because they hide. The potentially most devastating Obama contribution to economic inequality is being crafted in secret by hundreds of corporate lobbyists and lawyers and their revolving-door counterparts in government. The Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade deal, described as “NAFTA on steroids,” would accelerate the global Race to the Bottom that has made a wasteland of American manufacturing, plunging the working class into levels of poverty and insecurity without parallel in most people’s lifetimes, and totally eviscerating the meager gains of three generations of African Americans. Yet, the closest Obama came to even an oblique allusion to his great crime-in-the-making, was to announce that “new trade partnerships with Europe and the Asia-Pacific will help [small businesses] create even more jobs. We need to work together on tools like bipartisan trade promotion authority to protect our workers, protect our environment and open new markets to new goods stamped ‘Made in the USA.’" Like NAFTA twenty years ago – only far bigger and more diabolically destructive – TPP will have the opposite effect, destroying millions more jobs and further deepening worker insecurity. The Trans Pacific Partnership expands the legal basis for global economic inequalities – which is why the negotiations are secret, and why the treaty’s name could not be spoken in the State of the Union address. It is a lie of omission of global proportions. Give Obama his crown.

The president who promised in his 2008 campaign to support a hike in the minimum wage to $9.50 by 2011, and then did nothing at all to make it happen, says this is the “year of action” when he’ll move heaven and earth to get a $10.10 minimum. He will start, Obama told the Congress and the nation, by issuing “an executive order requiring federal contractors to pay their federally-funded employees a fair wage of at least $10.10 an hour because if you cook our troops' meals or wash their dishes, you should not have to live in poverty.” Obama neglected to mention that only new hires – a small fraction, beginning with zero, of the two million federal contract workers – will get the wage boost; a huge and conscious lie of omission. The fact that the president does not even propose a gradual, mandated increase for the rest of the two million shows he has no intention of using his full powers to ameliorate taxpayer-financed poverty. We can also expect Obama to issue waivers to every firm that claims a hardship, as is always his practice.

What is Obama’s jobs program? It is the same as laid out at last year’s State of the Union, and elaborated on last summer: lower business taxes and higher business subsidies. When you say “jobs,” he says tax cuts – just like the Republicans, only Obama first cites the pain of the unemployed, so that you know he cares. “Both Democrats and Republicans have argued that our tax code is riddled with wasteful, complicated loopholes that punish businesses investing here, and reward companies that keep profits abroad. Let's flip that equation. Let's work together to close those loopholes, end those incentives to ship jobs overseas, and lower tax rates for businesses that create jobs right here at home.” Actually, Obama wants to lower tax rates for all corporations to 28 percent, from 35 percent, as part of his ongoing quest for a Grand Bargain with Republicans. For Obama, the way to bring jobs back to the U.S. is to make American taxes and wages more “competitive” in the “global marketplace” – the Race to the Bottom.

In the final analysis, the sympathetic corporate Democrat and the arrogant corporate Republican offer only small variations on the same menu: ever increasing austerity. Obama bragged about reducing the deficit, never acknowledging that this has been accomplished on the backs of the poor, contributing mightily to economic inequality and social insecurity.

Obama offers nothing of substance, because he is not authorized by his corporate masters to do so. He takes his general orders from the same people as do the Republicans. That’s why Obama only speaks of minimum wage hikes while Republicans are in power, rather than when his own party controlled both houses of Congress. Grand Bargains are preferred, because they are the result of consensus between the two corporate parties. In effect, the Grand Bargain is the distilled political will of Wall Street, which feeds the donkey and the elephant. Wall Street – the 1 percent – believes the world is theirs for the taking, and they want all of it. Given this overarching truth, Obama has no choice but to stage a festival of lies.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C
But, is it drugs?
Replies
4
Views
253
bboner4u
bboner4u
J
Lien Geller
Replies
0
Views
98
JoeOzo
J
R
Looking for a story
Replies
0
Views
30
Rocksolid0202
R
S
Searching for story
Replies
0
Views
68
SereneGrizzly
S
gxnn
A 60-y-o man dressed as a lady having sex with 1691 men
Replies
1
Views
425
Treeview
Treeview
Back
Top