Posted on 10/30/2001 9:08:43 AM PST by Khepera
If my neighboring town elects a homosexual mayor, I would boycott them and contribute to his next opponent, but I would not seek to overturn their vote.
If a young lady seeks an abortion, I would not willingly pay a dime to help her. I would try fervently to talk her out of it. But, I would not detain her physically. The murder is legal.
Like I said, I'm really really sick of our nanny state and sue-happy populace.
Point of this is, as persons with strictly conservative views of morality (we probably shouldn't be here in the first place, but..)We are not welcome to speak out against this festival. Last person who tried was run out of town, economically speaking. Even the local "Catholic" church sells parking space for this event which, at its height, involves sexual acts in the streets, both of a hetero- and homo-sexual nature.
Those of us who do boycott this festival or pronounce our disregard of it in any way are considered "intolerant" and even "communist".
This double standard angers me. That I am considered intolerant, while I and my family hide in our own house and can't go outside for 48 hours for fear of being raped (all of us) while the partygoers are considered "reasonable people".
My husband just says it should be ... and I quote..."open season on the fa***t ba****ds". So I ask you, am I intolerant?
There was a time in this country when all manner of anarchy occurred that did no one any harm and the police were never called in. Children brought hand grenades to show-and-tell. People shot guns into the air. Fire works on the Fourth of July were essentially unregulated. People could actually do jumping jacks in parking lots. People would visit your home, trip on some hairline crack on your sidewalk, and blame themselves when they visited the doctor. Complete strangers would spank a misbehaving child.
We now live in a nanny state. It's a nightmare. It isn't America anymore. It's a politically correct Spanish Inquisition. Sad freegards....
The problem here is that nobody likes to be told that what they are doing is wrong, especially if what they are doing really is wrong and the person is well aware of the fact.
So, what's really going on is that nobody wants to be made to "feel bad" or "feel guilty" in any way. To counter the efforts by the majority to change their behavior through social disapproval or the law, these people (who started out as tiny minorities) attempt to change the definition of what it is they are doing, and then turn around and use social disapproval and the law against the majority, hence homosexual behavior is no longer a sin, it's just an alternative lifestyle, and you are "homophobic" if you think otherwise. An unborn baby becomes a fetus, and an abortion is simply "terminating a 'pregnancy'" or "evacuating a uterus", which is simply a "choice" that every woman has a "right" to choose, and you are "forcing" women to have children "against their will" if you express any views to the contrary. They change the definition of the behavior or the viewpoint, then turn any attempts to refute their definition into "being judgemental", which has now become the worst "sin" of all. In preaching "tolerance", these people have become the worst sort of totalitarian thought police.
You can see that the choice of weapons these people are using, (words and their meanings), to turn their immoral behavior into moral, to turn bad into good and good into bad, are the strongest items in their arsenal against morality and religion.
Let God sortem out.
IMO.... The "don't force your morality on others" crowd REALLY means "you're bringin' me dowwwnn maaaaan." "Hey, don't lay that heavy trip on me. I'm makin' my own scene here." ....or some such. Those who are so afraid of "moralizing" are afraid of their own consciences, not my heavy hand.
again, IMO, Man (gender-inclusive intent) left to his own devices will engage in animal behavior and seeks to escape the uncomfortable internal conflict that higher brain-function can cause. If allowed to make himself the center of the universe, that higher brain function is used to rationalize the animal, or base behavior.
If someone challenges me on the "forced" nature of my evil-christian-prosteletizing-hate-speech (pluueeeaaase) I will probably start by asking them how I'm "forcing" them.
Just a thought, .... you may want to consider moving to one of our more backward (red) states. And don't look behind you as you leave.
He needs to study the concept of rights a bit, and everything would become much clearer to him, I think.
Acts that transgress his "high morality" are acts that violate another's rights. Acts that transgress his "low morality" are acts that he disapproves of, that he wouldn't commit himself, but that do not violate anyone's rights.
And he's absolutely correct that rights should be protected with the force of law, but that law has no place in what he calls "low morality"--or actually, in any morality at all.
The fact that he's not willing to incarcerate homosexuals is a good sign. Somebody ought to ask him whether he thinks dopeheads should be jailed.
He's trying. He's even getting close, as a matter of fact. Somebody ought to just give him a tiny boot over the edge, and he'd discover that he's really a libertarian, not a conservative.
Properly constructed, laws are designed to define and protect people's rights and obligations to respect the rights of others. Laws forbidding things such as adultery, homosexuality, pornography, drug use, are prime examples of the State MISUSING its law making powers to impose Judeo Christian morality upon free citizens consensually engaging in the refernced acts.
If you truly believe that your moral beliefs should be imposed by law and force of arms on others when they do you no personal harm (excepting perhaps to your delicate moral sensibilities), perhaps you would be better off in a fundamentalist Islamic country. Apparently they love forcing their beliefs on others too.
Adultery is a broken contract and thus punishable by law. You should be more careful, your inconsistency shows your lack of clear principles.
I guess perhaps the man might injure himself on the parking lot and sue us. Due to the sue-happy nature of this country, I was also trained not to apologise. But I did anyway.
It works both ways. What really drives Christians nuts is a homosexual who sues to be a scout master, a teacher, etc. who is in regular contact with their children, and they aren't even allowed to know it. The school and or scout club aren't even allowed to inform anyone if they find out.
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.