Posted on 01/03/2019 10:24:04 AM PST by SeekAndFind
This isn’t about “non-discrimination”, it’s about the destruction of Judeo Christian Western Civilization.
Liberalism destroys all it touches.
They should start a site for people that seek potential reproductive partners. Is it discriminatory to say that an XX female can only create a baby with a XY male?
Anybody know if there are gay “dating” (quick sex) sites? Do they have sections for normals? I’m betting they don’t.
Do bearded savage “dating” sites have sections for non-m*slims?
RE: Anybody know if there are gay “dating” (quick sex) sites?
There used to be Craigslist, but I don’t know whether it is still there.
Another lawsuit demanding a product be created for them.
Why do they go after the Christian dating sites when they have sites for the LGBT community? Zoosk, Match, Elite Singles, and others, cater to the gay community. This has nothing to do with meeting people. It has to do with destroying another Christian based business that never planned to cater to this crowd and has not stopped them from getting their sites in their way.
This is why Burger King doesn’t have a wine list. They don’t cater to that meal.
rwwood
That would be #NotMyGovernment.
I just canceled my eharmony account with 3 months remaining. Scam (IMHO). I was getting matches, but no activity. I emailed them complaing they were using fake/abandoned profiles. Of course, no reply. Getting back to the subject at hand. Good grief. If the gays and other LGBQZXY people want to stay in their zone, why don’t they just start their own dating site! This is just more displacement of God from our society. So much for a free country. I can’t believe I served honorably for over 2 decades to see us devolve into this mess. But then again, I might have been prophetic back in 1993 when I said this country is definitely finished the day they let gays openly serve. (That was during the time Clinton tried to open the service to them. A very tumultuous time in the service).
OK, one good thing from CA.
What’s worse? Activist state actors who violate the Constitution’s Section 1 of the 14th Amendment (14A) by abridging rights that the states have amended the Constitution to expressly protect, 1st Amendment protected religious expression in this example, …
… or citizens with religious convictions who evidently don’t know 14A and consequently can’t protect themselves from Christian-harassing state actors?
From the 14th Amendment:
"Section 1: All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States [emphasis added]; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
"Section 5: The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article."
Note that anti-free speech activists at UC Berkeley recently settled on a 14th Amendment-related case.
UC Berkeley settles landmark free speech lawsuit, will pay $70,000 to conservative group
In fact, patriots with religious convictions who value their constitutionally enumerated protections should consider that Acts 22:25-29 shows that Paul used his Roman citizenship to save himself from being flogged.
But as patriots can see from Section 5 of 14A above, until patriots elect a Congress that will actually do its job to make penal laws to discourage state actors from abridging constitutionally enumerated protections, the corrupt Congress is going to let anti-Christian activist states continue to get away with harassing faith-living patriots imo.
Insights welcome.
Why would a gay person want to date a morally straight Catholic?
Dating sites, even so-called “Christian” ones, aren’t any better than singles bars. They are skanky and subject to all kinds of abuse and dishonor God.
If you remember, the presumably “Christian” matching site E-Harmony was similarly sued over a decade ago in NJ by another homo and they likewise capitulated. I now call them “E-Sodomy.”
As if dating sites epitomize Judeo Christian Western Civilization.
I have problems with this on so many levels...
Not a big fan of dating websites in general. While it can bring two people together who may not have otherwise found each other, the potential for harm - emotional, physical, and financial - is so great it gives me pause. Yes, those problems exist for people meeting in traditional venues, but the online matching gives predators easier access.
That being said, a private organization should be able to limit it’s membership in anyway it likes, especially if there are other alternatives offering substantially the same thing. Fraternities should be able to admit just men, as long as Sororities offer a similar experience for women. Since there are dating sites that cater to homosexuals, I cannot see how they can force a dating site that caters to heterosexuals, especially considering the very nature of the web site.
They will just say that xx and xy are racist terms, or say that is unsettled science.
It's all about money anymore. Even Christians are inveigled by the love of it.
Do not doubt that sodomites and their compliant politicians WILL demand that churches do their bidding and “marry” same-sex sodomites. It is just a matter of time, and that time is getting short.
Another thing! Did you ever notice that California is always in the top 3 donor states $upporting FreeRepublic?
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.