Defense of Marriage Act 'Struck Down 5-4' By Supreme Court

Originally posted by Robtard
I still greatly dislike black culture and the propaganda associated, but those are still people, people who deserve justice. Even if I don't like them.

(meanwhile my best friend is black, lel)

Would you buy it?

Of course we still abhor Negro "culture" and its cabal of socialist periodicals, but they are still "people," "people" who deserve to return to Africa, hence why we in the Klu Klux Klan support Marcus Garvey's movement to resettle his "people" in their ancestral continent. Even if we hate him.

(meanwhile my best groundskeeper is black, Ged's truth).

Originally posted by Oliver North
are you Paula Deen?

hey-o!

BUT I ONLY SAY IT IN A NON MEAN WAY!

Originally posted by Cyner
Just means that me and this friend have come to an understanding and can exchange different ideas and opinions on the matter.

So in other words the propaganda is working on you.

Originally posted by Oliver North
Can you cite one instance of a church successfully being sued for refusing to marry two same sex individuals?

Nope, just one where a church lost it's tax exempt status because of it. Plenty of private business stories about it though. As it's legalized in more places I'm sure the issue will crop up. It's definitely a legitimate worry and complaint

You would like me to be more aggressive in calling you immoral and bigoted?

Absolutely! The sarcasm angle makes you seem passive aggressive and petty. I know you're not too bad of a person so I'd rather you speak more forward about it.

wow... I'm actually totally happy to let those be the closing arguments of our debate as there is nothing I could ever say that would demonstrate how laughable I find your position that comes near to that.

That's fine. You certainly don't have to agree with me. I find your position just as misguided as you find mine.

Personally, I don't think Churches should be tax exempt, but that's not really germane here.

Originally posted by Robtard
I still greatly dislike black culture and the propaganda associated, but those are still people, people who deserve justice. Even if I don't like them.

(meanwhile my best friend is black, lel)

Would you buy it?

I sure would, because that's how I feel about current US black culture, and that's also how blacks in academia and politics feel about current US black culture.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
Personally, I don't think Churches should be tax exempt, but that's not really germane here.

I completely agree, and think that any church becoming a 501C3 is wrong for doing so.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
So in other words the propaganda is working on you.

I've never hated people for doing what they think is right. Disagreeing on some matters doesn't mean you don't care about people.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
Personally, I don't think Churches should be tax exempt...

This Mormon agrees with you. But that's only because we don't qualify as a non-Prophet organization. 1234

313 131 313

Originally posted by Cyner
That's fine. You certainly don't have to agree with me. I find your position just as misguided as you find mine.

ok, cool, I should clarify here then, because while I do think you are factually incorrect and lack even a pop-science level understanding of the concepts you brought up, my position is not actually that you are misguided.

I think you are a bad person. I think what you believe is evil and deliberately harmful to people who you callously admit to disliking because they are different. I think you bring up nonsense to defend this position because of your own fear of being anally penetrated, or possibly your fear of the fact you want to be anally penetrated. EDIT: In this way you aren't misguided, because your beliefs don't come from simply being mistaken, but are a deliberate way of justifying hate.

I have no choice but to believe your friend has pitiable levels of self-loathing if he would put up with what you must think of him and say in conversation, or, I would have no choice if I thought this friend actually existed.

Originally posted by Cyner
I sure would, because that's how I feel about current US black culture, and that's also how blacks in academia and politics feel about current US black culture.

Come on.

Originally posted by Robtard
Come on.

What? All the good ******* know their place.

Originally posted by Oliver North
I think you bring up nonsense to defend this position because of ... your fear of the fact you want to be anally penetrated.

Daaayum! That's even more direct than my closet picture.

This is a question for you, Oliver North:

Do you think there is a liberal bias in the scientific community (with at least some of those biases being negative)?

Originally posted by Robtard
Come on.

black academics hate black people /fact

YouTube video

errr, I know you can't watch this, but it is Neil deGrasse Tyson talking about how he wants to empower black people and his talks with other black academics who wanted nothing more than to support black culture.

Originally posted by Oliver North
black academics hate black people /fact

YouTube video

errr, I know you can't watch this, but it is Neil deGrasse Tyson talking about how he wants to empower black people and his talks with other black academics who wanted nothing more than to support black culture.

I'd also mention that in some black sub-cultures, it is looked down upon to be part of the "cracka-ass system" such as getting an education and working for the man.

So what Cyner says is not wrong...at least for some. Robtard made the mistake of characterizing Cyner's position as "all black people".

Originally posted by dadudemon
Do you think there is a liberal bias in the scientific community (with at least some of those biases being negative)?

I think most scientists are liberal, for sure (American "Liberal", center-left by more international standards).

I don't have a lot of experience with that impacting their research, and there are enough people from different political backgrounds that politically motivated conclusions get nailed as such very quickly.

Originally posted by dadudemon
So what Cyner says is not wrong...at least for some. Robtard made the mistake of characterizing Cyner's position as "all black people".

No, you've got that backward.

Robtard made up what he felt was an absurdly offensive view about black people as a parallel to Cyner's views on homosexuality. Cyner then said in effect "yes, this is what I believe".

Originally posted by dadudemon
I'd also mention that in some black sub-cultures, it is looked down upon to be part of the "cracka-ass system" such as getting an education and working for the man.

So what Cyner says is not wrong...at least for some. Robtard made the mistake of characterizing Cyner's position as "all black people".

Rob made the mistake of saying "culture" and not "people", the latter being closer to what Cyner said anyways. He didn't say he didn't like gay culture, he said he didn't like gay people.

Originally posted by Cyner

I completely agree, and think that any church becoming a 501C3 is wrong for doing so.

Originally posted by dadudemon
So what Cyner says is not wrong...at least for some. Robtard made the mistake of characterizing Cyner's position as "all black people".

Nope.

Originally posted by Oliver North
I think most scientists are liberal, for sure (American "Liberal", center-left by more international standards).

I don't have a lot of experience with that impacting their research, and there are enough people from different political backgrounds that politically motivated conclusions get nailed as such very quickly.

The reason I ask: I believe Cyner approaches the subject under the assumption that the niche/fringe group is representative of the whole in the scientific community so any such factual notions you'd bring to the table regarding this subject make you not only incorrect but a puppet of their political propaganda.

So, in that regard, you're just as factually incorrect (from his perspective) as you view him. So while your position is definitely more well written and acidic towards him, his perspective on you and your position is not really different. Basically, I'm explaining his position better than he could because the next 2 pages of [insert insulting label, here, that might get m in trouble] will not really get to that meaning/answer.

Originally posted by dadudemon
The reason I ask: I believe Cyner approaches the subject under the assumption that the niche/fringe group is representative of the whole in the scientific community so any such factual notions you'd bring to the table regarding this subject make you not only incorrect but a puppet of their political propaganda.

So, in that regard, you're just as factually incorrect (from his perspective) as you view him. So while your position is definitely more well written and acidic towards him, his perspective on you and your position is not really different. Basically, I'm explaining his position better than he could because the next 2 pages of [insert insulting label, here, that might get m in trouble] will not really get to that meaning/answer.

I am aware that people see the world through subjective lenses, yes