Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Do you think that the boy scouts should allow homosexuals as scout masters?

Posted on 03/26/2013 5:52:31 PM PDT by cradle of freedom

Where do you libertarians stand on gays as boy scout masters?


TOPICS: Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: boyscouts; bsa; gay; homosexualagenda; libertarians; whatcouldgowrong
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240241-257 next last
To: Smokin' Joe

If you support this:
Section 1.3 “Personal Relationships”:
Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the government’s treatment of individuals, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration or military service laws.

If so then you are indeed a libertarian, and you do seem to embrace that position, don’t you?
as you say—”OH, I SHOULD BE A STATIST BECAUSE SOME OF THE PEOPLE WHO JUST WANT GOVERNMENT TO LEAVE THEM ALONE HAPPEN TO BE FAGGOTS?”


221 posted on 03/30/2013 5:46:24 PM PDT by ansel12 (The lefts most effective quote-I'm libertarian on social issues, but conservative on economics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 217 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
YOU keep asserting that I support homosexuality.

I do not, never have, and never will support homosexuality.

I think government should be put back in its box, and then it can't tell boy scouts they have to have queer scoutmasters.

If thinking government has no damned business in people's private affairs makes my outlook somewhat libertarian, then it does, but at no time have I ever been a member of the Libertarian Party, nor have I even read their platform.

No political party gets donations from me, only individual candidates.

You want to know what I think, you come to me and quit making crap up based on a label YOU choose to try to stick on me.

222 posted on 03/30/2013 5:49:00 PM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 216 | View Replies]

To: Smokin' Joe

You say you don’t support them, but then say that you oppose our laws against them, and then you spout the libertarian line of, (in your bold letters) “OH, I SHOULD BE A STATIST BECAUSE SOME OF THE PEOPLE WHO JUST WANT GOVERNMENT TO LEAVE THEM ALONE HAPPEN TO BE FAGGOTS?” Aren’t you calling for homosexual “equality” there, for an end to laws which limit it?

You also lie about sodomy laws having been defeated by the straights, when the truth is that the straights were fighting for them against the homosexuals and libertarians, and the Liberty Caucus.


223 posted on 03/30/2013 5:56:04 PM PDT by ansel12 (The lefts most effective quote-I'm libertarian on social issues, but conservative on economics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 222 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
I didn't have a dog in that fight, one way or another. I was not yet sexually active. Can't you read? I merely said that heterosexuals supported repeal or amendment of the laws, and stated why. No one supported letting faggots run wild. Not back then, but like I said, they were pretty low profile in those days, because the judge would have looked the other way if something happened to them.

For the umpteenth time, the law made illegal and included in definitions of "sodomy" certain acts not involving anal sex between a husband (man) and wife (woman), and those were the parts of the law heterosexuals were against. If you had read previous posts, those specific acts were spelled out.

224 posted on 03/30/2013 5:56:53 PM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 220 | View Replies]

To: Smokin' Joe

You can’t seem to grasp that by supporting the homosexual agenda of removing the laws against them, then you are supporting their agenda.

How can that confuse you?

You keep saying ‘I don’t support homosexuality’, BUT, ‘I support their agenda’.


225 posted on 03/30/2013 5:58:47 PM PDT by ansel12 (The lefts most effective quote-I'm libertarian on social issues, but conservative on economics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 222 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
So, you think the government should be able to regulate your private (heterosexual) relations with your spouse in your bedroom?

What does that make you? Even the Nazis didn't go that far.

226 posted on 03/30/2013 6:00:30 PM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 223 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
Funny, but you can't seem to grasp that I can say the Russians fought the Nazis at Kursk, but I wasn't in the fight. If you can understand that pointing out history doesn't mean that I had a part in it either way, then maybe you could understand my original post.

I wasn't involved in the issue. I was in high school when the legal battle was pointed out to us in a Judicial Process class--during the Vietnam War.

227 posted on 03/30/2013 6:06:13 PM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 225 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

Slanderer. I have repeatedly said I oppose the homosexual agenda. On this thread and elsewhere. You asserting otherwise doesn’t change my stance. so quit lying about me.


228 posted on 03/30/2013 6:08:26 PM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 225 | View Replies]

To: Smokin' Joe

I have no interest in supporting or promoting legalizing oral sex of any kind whatsoever. If anyone wanted to do that, in private, then no one would know or care.

That’s one thing. And your statement that such practices were becoming more “popular” in the 1960s merely illustrates the increasing degradation and depravity of society that was already well along at that time. And the fact that faggots supported the overturning of sodomy laws is even more evidence.

I don’t care what anyone else is saying about you, or anything else. My discussion today is with you, about sodomy laws, the homonazi agenda which is part and parcel of the open sexuality depravity destroy the family agenda of the communists. And the Libertarian Party is an assistant in that endeavor.


229 posted on 03/30/2013 6:12:15 PM PDT by little jeremiah (Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point. CSLewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 214 | View Replies]

To: Smokin' Joe
I didn't have a dog in that fight, one way or another. I was not yet sexually active. Can't you read? I merely said that heterosexuals supported repeal or amendment of the laws, and stated why.

I keep pointing out that you are a liar, aside from the fact that you keep ignoring your lying about the 2010 pro-homosexual efforts of the Liberty Caucus in Texas in fighting the republican platform inclusion of an anti gay-marriage, sodomy clause, (see my post 157 to you), you keep making the obscene lie that it was the normal people fighting the sodomy laws because of oppression of heterosexual sex, when in reality that was the ACLU and the homosexual movement and the libertarians and the left.

As this quote shows about the sodomy laws, you don't have an honest bone in your body. ""That fight wasn't even about Libertarians, it was about getting the government out of straight people's bedrooms.""

230 posted on 03/30/2013 6:12:41 PM PDT by ansel12 (The lefts most effective quote-I'm libertarian on social issues, but conservative on economics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 224 | View Replies]

To: Smokin' Joe

There is no political party that supports the Constitution unless it’s the Constitution Party, which I haven’t looked into. Tiny little 3rd parties that always lose aren’t useful.

I don’t see any easy or quick solution. I wish I did.


231 posted on 03/30/2013 6:14:23 PM PDT by little jeremiah (Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point. CSLewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 217 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah

Well, I’m not a member of the Libertarian Party.


232 posted on 03/30/2013 6:14:43 PM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 229 | View Replies]

To: Smokin' Joe

Member or not member, the point is do you agree with their platform.


233 posted on 03/30/2013 6:17:39 PM PDT by little jeremiah (Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point. CSLewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 232 | View Replies]

To: Smokin' Joe
Slanderer. I have repeatedly said I oppose the homosexual agenda. On this thread and elsewhere.

If you support laws against homosexuality and agree with me and conservatives, and don't agree with the libertarians and the Liberty Caucus, then what are we arguing about??

234 posted on 03/30/2013 6:18:47 PM PDT by ansel12 (The lefts most effective quote-I'm libertarian on social issues, but conservative on economics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 228 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
I read your stupid post, what horsecrap. I had to look up the Liberty Caucus, didn't know about them. I live in North Dakota, and don't get involved in Texas politics. That's for Texans, and frankly, I was unaware of the whole issue because I live near the other border, (the one with Canada). any law fought in 2010 was about 40 years after the laws I was referring to, and I wasn't involved in the fight over them.

Bye.

235 posted on 03/30/2013 6:19:04 PM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 230 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah

I haven’t read their platform, so I can’t say. If they are for homosexuals, that is a deal breaker for me. If they support abortion, no way. See how simple that is?


236 posted on 03/30/2013 6:20:36 PM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 233 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

You tell me, you started it.


237 posted on 03/30/2013 6:21:23 PM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 234 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah
I don’t see any easy or quick solution. I wish I did.

I don't see a solution either, just thought I'd ask.

Every small party seems to have a deep flaw in it that will keep it in the weeds for a long time. The country needs to return to the Constitution yesterday.

238 posted on 03/30/2013 6:25:31 PM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 231 | View Replies]

To: C. Edmund Wright

I agree with that libertarian position, except when it comes to dealing with faggots, freaks, abortionists, and democrats.


239 posted on 03/30/2013 6:28:00 PM PDT by Jay Redhawk (Zombies are just intelligent, good looking democrats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Smokin' Joe

So now you are pretending that you don’t know anything about the Texas Issue, yet you proceeded to defend the homosexual side in the 2010 issue with a stupid argument.

To: ansel12
“In 2010, the Republican Liberty Caucus of Texas denounced the new state Republican Party platform that supported criminalization of sodomy
Most legal definitions of “sodomy” were not limited to buggery, but included acts of oral stimulation that are often practiced between a man and woman (husband and wife). That was the stated reason for the removal of those laws.
155 posted on 3/28/2013 1:25:33 AM by Smokin’ Joe


To: Smokin’ Joe
Nice try, but dishonest in it’s intent, the Liberty Caucus was fighting for the homosexual agenda.

It was cute the way you cut off the last few words of that sentence that you pretended to quote.

“”In 2010, the Republican Liberty Caucus of Texas denounced the new state Republican Party platform that supported criminalization of sodomy and making same-sex marriage a felony.””
157 posted on 3/28/2013 2:22:29 AM by ansel12


To: ansel12
Yep I did cut it off because I was pointing out that the sodomy laws were removed because the heterosexual public didn’t like the idea that a husband could be prosecuted for getting a Lewinsky from his wife, and that was included in the definition.
The remainder was not germane to my comment.

159 posted on 3/28/2013 3:11:54 AM by Smokin’ Joe


240 posted on 03/30/2013 6:34:10 PM PDT by ansel12 (The lefts most effective quote-I'm libertarian on social issues, but conservative on economics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 235 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240241-257 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson