REL GENRL ‘Prop 8:The Musical’:Hollywood Cast Makes Video Mocking Gay Marriage Opponents
- Thread starter skip8
- Start date
dissimulo
Membership Revoked
skip8
Inactive
How about a musical celebrating Shell Fish & Gay Sex...?
"Drench Me in Cocktail Sauce"?
SouthernGal
"Don't retreat...reload"
Oh, good. I looked at the list of "players" and did not recognize any of them. So much for that.
almost ready
Inactive
Would it be illegal
for prop8 proponents to make a musical mocking gay marriage?
for prop8 proponents to make a musical mocking gay marriage?
Discriminating against people because of their sexual orientation.
What wise and tolerant people they (the Christains) are.
The cast of this little ditty already did that...
Did you miss the references to lawyers, tatoo removal, and how gay marriage would save the economy?
I guess you did.
SouthernGal
"Don't retreat...reload"
I asked you on another thread (and never received an answer): What "type" of Christian should we be? Tolerate everything? Jesus stopped the stoning of a prostitute but then told her to "go and sin no more". Jesus rebuked the Pharisees; Jesus got ANGRY and drove the money lenders from the Temple. Jesus most certainly did not tolerate or condone everything.
I am sure Jesus loves homosexuals. I am pretty sure, however, that Jesus would not condone the "gay" parades; the indoctrination of four and five year olds in kindergarten; the beating of an elderly woman by homosexual thugs. So, keep your "wise and tolerant" crap to yourself.
Here's another question you refused to answer. Why is it only WHITE Christian churches were and are targeted? You people don't have the balls to take on the black churches, the muslims, and the buddhists? Or, is it only WHITE CHRISTIANS that you hate?
Sligo
Inactive
I thought the video was funny and right on target. BTW, the god hates shrimp website is hilarious on one hand and right on too. If we are going to use the Bible to beat one group of people or another into submission with, then we should really follow ALL the laws of the Bible and boycott Red Lobster and the like, because, shellfish is ALSO an "abomination". We can't pick and choose our verses when we want to bully a group of people and keep them from their CIVIL RIGHTS. Maybe we should try something new: separation of Church and State. Allow gay people the 1000+ federal and state civil rights they do not have now, and don't call it Marriage. That way, everyone can be happy.
I never asked or knew what was going on in my own parents bedroom, and I certainly don't want to know or care what's going on in anyone else's. It's just none of my business. As for my own, well, when I meet my Creator, we'll take care of that ourselves. Peace.
I never asked or knew what was going on in my own parents bedroom, and I certainly don't want to know or care what's going on in anyone else's. It's just none of my business. As for my own, well, when I meet my Creator, we'll take care of that ourselves. Peace.
SouthernGal
"Don't retreat...reload"
That's the fallacy, sligo - that we care what goes on IN THE BEDROOM. The homosexuals won't KEEP it in the bedroom. If they kept it in the bedroom (and out of the streets and the schools and the legal system) no one would KNOW or CARE. I'm not interested in hearing about my friend's adultery; and I'm not interested in seeing or hearing about the homosexual agenda. The "tolerant" ones are the ones out in the streets, beating up old women.
what about Muslims? what do you think about their attitude towards homosexuals,
mocking is not the word
Sligo
Inactive
But, Southerngal, I believe that homosexuals have every LEGAL right to have civil unions along with the federal protections that go with them. The term marriage can be kept for religious ceremonies. Everyone has the right to fall and be in love - that's why God made us. About schools, I don't believe that ANYONE'S agenda should be pushed. I went to a school PAID FOR by my parent's that pushed the agenda that my parent's PAID to have pushed. That's okay. In public school, not okay. But ALL children should be taught, at home, that it's good to love. Values and morals should be taught AT HOME, except for the "don't hit the kid next to you" kind of values. The only thing that should be taught at public schools is Reading, Writing, Math, Science, History, etc. No sex-ed, no religion, etc.
I'm not thrilled when I see the Pride parades with the half-naked men. But I am educated enough to KNOW that this is a MINORITY of the homosexual population, and mature enough to tell my children this, in a calm manner. I was also mature enough to not purchase video games for them after the first Nintendo because their vocabulary changed with it: "it's okay, I have six more lives". I was able to tell them that they only had ONE life and explain that I was not going to participate in purchasing anything for them that told them anything different. This was over 20 years ago. They got it. I TAUGHT my kids. I also taught my kids that everyone has the right to exist equally, whether or not I approved.
I'm not thrilled when I see the Pride parades with the half-naked men. But I am educated enough to KNOW that this is a MINORITY of the homosexual population, and mature enough to tell my children this, in a calm manner. I was also mature enough to not purchase video games for them after the first Nintendo because their vocabulary changed with it: "it's okay, I have six more lives". I was able to tell them that they only had ONE life and explain that I was not going to participate in purchasing anything for them that told them anything different. This was over 20 years ago. They got it. I TAUGHT my kids. I also taught my kids that everyone has the right to exist equally, whether or not I approved.
Last edited:
What is the point of gay marriage, to reproduce, fill the planet with gays rather than heteros, are gays a race apart?
what is the point of being gay, gratuitous sex with no commitment?
Ragenomore
Senior Member
SG,
What old lady are you referring to? The old lady who knowingly walked in the midst of an anti prop 8 demonstration after the gays had lost the right to marry and were actually upset about it and yelled at her and tore up her cross? She was not physically hurt so stop saying she was. Wow, she was scared. So would I be if I knowingly walked on the wrong side of the street, which is what she did.
What old lady are you referring to? The old lady who knowingly walked in the midst of an anti prop 8 demonstration after the gays had lost the right to marry and were actually upset about it and yelled at her and tore up her cross? She was not physically hurt so stop saying she was. Wow, she was scared. So would I be if I knowingly walked on the wrong side of the street, which is what she did.
SouthernGal
"Don't retreat...reload"
SG,
What old lady are you referring to? The old lady who knowingly walked in the midst of an anti prop 8 demonstration after the gays had lost the right to marry and were actually upset about it and yelled at her and tore up her cross? She was not physically hurt so stop saying she was. Wow, she was scared. So would I be if I knowingly walked on the wrong side of the street, which is what she did.
Did they attack her or not? Yes, they did.
As far as I know, there is still free speech in this country. The homosexuals are the ones who can't "tolerate" that.
Did she attack anyone first? No.
Did she EVER attack anyone? No.
Spin all you want - we all saw the video.
Are the radical homosexuals going INTO churches and disrupting services, with AXES AND KNIVES? Yes, they are.
We're seeing what the homosexual agenda is all about.
skip8
Inactive
The only way for our country and culture to perpetuate and survive is with offspring from a man and a woman, in traditional marriage. And the birthrate needs to be close to 2.0 or higher, at the minimum, to replace each-other as a couple, and keep our culture alive.
Homosexual civil unions (which everyone has pretty-much agreed is allowed) can't participate in the above, so shouldn't traditional marriage have some benefits and exclusivity for the sake of regenerating our culture?
It appears the homosexual agenda will not be satiated until all aspects and benefits of traditional marriage are given to homosexuals, and the straights must then also celebrate and validate the gay life-style and values.
What's up with that gays?
Homosexual civil unions (which everyone has pretty-much agreed is allowed) can't participate in the above, so shouldn't traditional marriage have some benefits and exclusivity for the sake of regenerating our culture?
It appears the homosexual agenda will not be satiated until all aspects and benefits of traditional marriage are given to homosexuals, and the straights must then also celebrate and validate the gay life-style and values.
What's up with that gays?
The only way for our country and culture to perpetuate and survive is with offspring from a man and a woman, in traditional marriage. And the birthrate needs to be close to 2.0 or higher, at the minimum, to replace each-other as a couple, and keep our culture alive.
Homosexual civil unions (which everyone has pretty-much agreed is allowed) can't participate in the above, so shouldn't traditional marriage have some benefits and exclusivity for the sake of regenerating our culture?
It appears the homosexual agenda will not be satiated until all aspects and benefits of traditional marriage are given to homosexuals, and the straights must then also celebrate and validate the gay life-style and values.
What's up with that gays?
Actually, I agree with you 100%, in principle.
Marriage is a religious ceremony, and should be performed in houses of worship. If a particular religion chooses not to include gay unions in this celebration, that is their right. They are private institutions for the most part, and should be free from legal challenges if they choose to discriminate (as ANY private entity should be!)
However, civil unions, with ALL of the LEGAL benefits of marriage, are a civil right. PERIOD! I pay alot of taxes to this country, and if I want a civil union as described above, who the hell is anyone else to tell me I shouldn't have it? I have rights too, ya know!
I will also admit freely that I do NOT represent all gays in my opinions on this matter. I am not a radical.
I don't like radical ANYONE. Christian, Jew, Homo, Mormon, etc. etc etc.
Unfortunately, so many radical Christians, Jews, Mormons, Muslims, etc. etc. etc. have decided, based on their RELIGIOUS beliefs, that we should be denied CIVIL unions. "How could you let those people have the same rights as us???!!! We reproduce, therefore we're better than them" has been the attitude.
So, we decided to go for the whole shebang. MARRIAGE!!!!
To that end, if everyone against "marriage" were to back off and allow civil unions, we'd back off and take it.
Now, who is gonna back off first?
skip8
Inactive
Your argument is off to a bad start.
Marriage is a legal process, with a resulting legal document...a contract...the marriage license, and the marriage can be performed by a justice of the peace at a court house.
No religion is required...period.
Last edited:
Ragenomore
Senior Member
Please provide me with links showing both situations. I know nothing about AXES AND KNIVES. The only thing I saw with the old lady is that she walked into a anti prop 8 demonstration simply to annoy a bunch of gay guys, which of course, she succeeded in doing.
Jumpy Frog
Browncoat sympathizer
I'm sure the Musical will be be just fabulous. 
I never knew why we had a Gay Pride musical smiley until now. Such foreward think on the boards part.
I never knew why we had a Gay Pride musical smiley until now. Such foreward think on the boards part.
Walker10
Veteran Member
It's not discrimination citybear, it's a recogniton that homosexual sex is not normal behavior for humans. If it were, the human body would be designed to accomodate homosexual sex the same as it's designed to accomodate heterosexual sex. That single fact is enough to close the argument on whether homosexual sex is 'normal' or not.
Is recognizing the fact that any of a wide varieties of abnormal behavior, such as paranoia or schizophrenia discrimination, or is it a simple recognition that something is wrong with a person afflicted with one of these disorders?
Walker10
Veteran Member
Same with me, and probabaly the same with most of us. But that's not what the homosexuals want. They want it to be in your face, they want to shove it down our throats whether we want it or not and they have repeatedly demonstrated that. Would oyu like me to post some graphic photos of that to prove the point?
Walker10
Veteran Member
Walker10
Veteran Member
The only way for our country and culture to perpetuate and survive is with offspring from a man and a woman, in traditional marriage. And the birthrate needs to be close to 2.0 or higher, at the minimum, to replace each-other as a couple, and keep our culture alive.
Homosexual civil unions (which everyone has pretty-much agreed is allowed) can't participate in the above, so shouldn't traditional marriage have some benefits and exclusivity for the sake of regenerating our culture?
Very well said skip. Traditional marriage and the childbearing and rearing that result is that which perpetuates our civilization and therefore should hold a special place in our society. It shouldn't be cheapened by a reasonable facimile of pretending two people of the same sex are actually married.
What's up with that gays?
Simply put, they are mentally sick individuals.
It is as simple as that.
It is not a good idea to let the 'inmates' run the asylum. People have to display enough backbone to standup to these folks in a loving but firm manner and insist that if they will not seek the help needed to overcome their mental disorder, that they must at the very least keep it confined to their bedrooms where they can wallow in their disorder, but not subject the general population to their perversions.
SouthernGal
"Don't retreat...reload"
They're there. Look them up yourself. They were posted here a few weeks ago.
no its usually in public toilets
Ragenomore
Senior Member
. . . . . .
Tuesday, November 11,2008
Gay anarchist 'action' hits church
Gay anarchist group infiltrates, protests outside Eaton County church
by Nathan Harris
(Nathan Harris/City Pulse) The "outside team" focuses its attention on traffic passing by the Mt. Hope Church in Eaton County.
A gay anarchist group infiltrated the Mt. Hope Church in Eaton County Sunday morning, disrupting a service by pulling a fire alarm, dropping leaflets and yelling at parishioners, a pastor said.
The group, Bash Back, was simultaneously picketing outside the church, beating on buckets and using a megaphone to shout “Jesus was a homo” and other slogans as confused churchgoers continued to enter the building.
Members of Bash Back issued a press release Tuesday saying that it targeted Mt. Hope, a church that claims a flock of around 5,000, because it is "complicit in the repression of queers in Michigan and beyond."
According to the Myspace.com page of the Lansing chapter, the network initially sprung up with the intent of increasing homosexual visibility within the anarchist community.
The “action” began early Sunday morning at the Northstar Center on Lathrop Street in Lansing where a group of around 20 protesters gathered. Pink bandanas, signs, a rainbow-colored “Bash Back!” flag and a pink, wooden cross were distributed among about half the group — the “outside team.” The rest — “inside team” — were dressed in conservative clothes and carried Bibles and stacks of fliers, intending to blend in to the church‘s 11:30 a.m. “contemporary-laid back service.”
City Pulse was alerted to the Bash Back event through a press release and had no prior knowledge of where the “action” would take place or what it would entail.
“We’re having an action today,” one of the organizers told this reporter at the Northstar Center. “You’re in for a treat.”
Bash Back began picketing outside the church doors soon after the 11:30 service began. The group also handed out fliers, which were much calmer in tone and targeted more at the curious than the angry.
“We specialize in confronting homophobia, transphobia and every and all other forms of oppression,” the fliers read. “We strive for the liberation of all people.”
After a few minutes of protesting in front of the church doors, the “outside team” was asked to move its protest to the street, about 100 yards from the building. The team, standing beneath a row of tall flags that flank the entrance to the fortress-like church, focused its energy on the passing cars.
About 40 minutes into the service, the “inside team” ran from the building to their cars and drove away.
The Rev. John Elieff, “Helps Minister” at Mt. Hope Church, said Bash Back members disrupted the service by bursting into the sanctuary, throwing fliers, hanging a banner from the balcony and pulling fire alarms.
“It was an unwelcome and violent demonstration,” he said.
When Eaton County Sheriff’s deputies arrived, they questioned the remaining protestors in the church parking lot. Elieff and other church staff questioned the Bash Back members why Mt. Hope Church had been singled out.
“I don’t know,” was an almost universal response.
Elieff acknowledged the group’s right to protest, but he said the church’s civil rights were infringed upon when the service was disrupted.
No one was arrested at the church, and, Elieff said, as far as he knew, no arrests have been made.
“I would have preferred that they had all been taken in,” he said.
Elieff called Bash Back’s description of the church as a “well-known anti-queer, anti-choice radical right-wing establishment” a “gross misinterpretation.”
He said the leadership of Mt. Hope Church attempts to identify the church as neither anti-homosexual nor anti-choice, but that homosexuality is one of many sins the Bible condemns.
“Mt. Hope Church struggles to follow Christ’s example of loving the sinner and not the sin,” he said.
http://www.lansingcitypulse.com/lansing/print-article-2302-print.html
Last edited:
dissimulo
Membership Revoked
First, we would have to determine what normal is. Is it only normal to have sex for procreation? If so, should people who have sex for enjoyment be barred from marriage? Is it only normal to have vaginal sex? If so, should people who have oral and anal sex be barred from marriage? In order to declare that the body is designed to only accommodate heterosexual sex, you would have to prove that the body was designed. If you can do that, I will be suitably impressed. If you can't, we can set aside your 'single fact' argument.
As for the rest of your comparison, even if homosexuality had the characteristics of a mental illness, we do not restrict the partnership rights of people with paranoia or schizophrenia, so why would we do so for homosexuals? Why do you want the government declaring what is normal and what is not? Why does it even matter if someone is normal or not?
dissimulo
Membership Revoked
Not a way to win people over. Not smart.
Jumpy Frog
Browncoat sympathizer
+1, Your as smart as those three wise guys that got lost and stopped at a barn to ask for directions about 2000 years ago.
Ragenomore
Senior Member
Agreed.
The post was a response to prove that someone lied when she said gays had AXES AND KNIVES.