Posted on 04/10/2015 9:05:00 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
Camille Beredjick, why are you so racist?
Its obvious you only disagree with him because he is black.
The use of the “ hateful personal beliefs” ... is an excellent example of being HATEFUL of others personal beliefs. It is absolutely unnecessary and is indeed provocative of creating a environment of HATE. Let it be what it is. simply an opinion agreeing with the Biblical admonitions of God concerning sin.
Asking narcissistic maniacs to look at themselves in the mirror will not yield the desired results. These spoiled brats won’t be satisfied until everyone is either LGBT compliant or dead.
There’s only one way to deal with a tyrant.
Bingo.
From the site:
“About Camille Beredjick
Camille is a twentysomething working in the LGBT nonprofit industry.”
yeah, I usually get all my moral ideology from twentysomething hipsters. The 48 years of my life... the wars... the raising of family (of which are probably older than her) all the things I’ve done and experienced... I am so glad I have a twentysomething lesbian hipster to tell me what I should believe.
As Easter approaches, let us remember the role that Jesus Christ and God play in our lives. Let us also remember that Jews, Christians and Muslims all believe in God, and while there are ideological differences in who Jesus was, we should find peace in the fact that we are all God’s children. Jesus is my role model, and he preached love, he preached acceptance. He also was a man of values and principles, and he ended up being crucified for it. But, he rose again to advocate godly principles of loving our fellow man, caring about our neighbors, developing our God-given talents to the utmost so that we become valuable to the people around us, and maintaining high ideals that govern our lives.
I agree...
Folks, this article was written by a someone who is barely even an adult.
Why are we giving credence to articles written by children who have no life experience outside of facebook and starbucks?
Why in the heck wasn’t Ben Carson or Allen West our 1st Black president?
“Should transgender people be legally protected from discrimination? “I think federal law should protect all American citizens from discrimination,” he replied.”
This is a nonsense answer. Everyone protected from any discrimination? So an alcoholic can get a job as a school bus driver? A convicted pedophile can get a job as a day care worker? A bank robber can get a job as a bank teller?
That’s what it means if the law protects everyone from discrimination.
Even when everyone is gay, they still won’t be pleased. They are inherently miserable because deep down inside, their conscience tells them what they are doing is wrong. That’s why their lives are a perpetual quest for the affirmation they crave, but no amount of it can ever erase the guilt.
This whole gay rights propaganda campaign isn’t designed to conince us homosexuality is OK. They are really trying to convince themselves.
I think you are right. He is such a nice guy and he saves baby’s lives. I have seen nice people run for office not knowing the kind of crap that will be thrown in their direction. The inexperienced think that they will be able to make a difference only to be served up the Wrath of Satan.
LOL...poor Ben is going to be sent to some kind of re-education camp for using the phrase “you people”!
Abstaining from saying that homosexuality leads to pedophilia and bestiality has two issues: First, it conflates the idea of personal homosexual behavior leading to pedophilia and bestiality behavior by that individual with the actual statement being made, that legal enforcement of acceptance of homosexuality leads to legal enforcement of acceptance of pedophilia and bestiality. Second, it ignores the fact that there are now demands coming from various sectors that validate the dire predictions of demands for legal enforcement of acceptance of such derivative issues.
Abstaining from saying that prison “turns people gay” ignores the statistical evidence that this may be true. If the statistics are wrong, refute the argument, don't just attempt to shout down the speaker.
Respecting the separation of church and state completely mischaracterizes the first amendment and explicitly ignores the religious freedom and freedom of association rights enumerated in that amendment. This is worded explicily to try and make the reader validate the bull crap interpretation that the left promulgates.
Accepting that it’s okay not to agree with a law, particularly when that law does not personally affect you is simply demanding that only people who are being targeted by the LGBT crowd can complain, no matter that the laws and rulings being pushed severely limit existing freedoms in contravention of the constitution. This is despite the fact that, according to this suggestion, ONLY those individuals that have been denied some service by a specific restaurant have the right to speak out - which means 99.999 percent of the LGBT crowd are similarly required to shut the heck up.
Abstaining from advocating for other people’s rights to be taken away based on your religious beliefs assumes that (1) compelling a person to participate in an event is a "right" and (2) that the right to compel participation overrules the unalienable rights enumerated in the first amendment.
The list of suggestions is an unveiled attempt to simply shout down a religious point of view, based on malice and hatred against traditional societal morals.
I’d hope Carson would call them out on their tyrannical bull-ogna. But I don’t know if he has a stomach for the battle.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.