Re: Coalition For Marriage : Tue May 22, 2012 9:40 pm  

Dally wrote:

You don't think the anti-religion lobby on here display obstinacy and intolerance then!? At least the OP doesn't combine his views with foul-mouthed ignorance.

He most certainly did.

Re: Coalition For Marriage : Tue May 22, 2012 9:41 pm  

Sheldon wrote:

He most certainly did.

So not foul-mouthed then?

Re: Coalition For Marriage : Tue May 22, 2012 9:43 pm  

Sheldon wrote:

He most certainly did.

So not foul-mouthed then?

Re: Coalition For Marriage : Tue May 22, 2012 9:47 pm  

Which is more offensive?

If I called you a loving friend.

Or

Questioning and actively fighting against your (legal) way of life?

Words versus actions, and remember the words have only come through your actions.

Re: Coalition For Marriage : Tue May 22, 2012 9:55 pm  

What about the OPs right to legally follow his religious beliefs? As I said, whether or not you agree with his views he has not been foul-mouthed. That cannot be said for others. So, I would say he holds the higher (relatively speaking) moral ground.

Re: Coalition For Marriage : Tue May 22, 2012 10:00 pm  

Dally wrote:

What about the OPs right to legally follow his religious beliefs? As I said, whether or not you agree with his views he has not been foul-mouthed. That cannot be said for others. So, I would say he holds the higher (relatively speaking) moral ground.

Then tell him/her not to marry a same sex person, the rest is bigotry.

Of course you would, if nobody would have been foul-mouthed you'd have claimed his grammar was superior.

[tb]

Re: Coalition For Marriage : Tue May 22, 2012 10:03 pm  

Dally wrote:

What about the OPs right to legally follow his religious beliefs? .

What about it?

Re: Coalition For Marriage : Tue May 22, 2012 10:07 pm  

tb wrote:

What about it?

Why repeat the question I posed?

Re: Coalition For Marriage : Tue May 22, 2012 10:11 pm  

Sheldon wrote:

Then tell him/her not to marry a same sex person, the rest is bigotry.

Of course you would, if nobody would have been foul-mouthed you'd have claimed his grammar was superior.

I cannot understand your first sentence and so cannot comment.

As to your second sentence, I respect your right to hold the view nothwithstanding that it is pure fantasy.

Re: Coalition For Marriage : Tue May 22, 2012 10:17 pm  

Dally wrote:

I cannot understand your first sentence and so cannot comment.

As to your second sentence, I respect your right to hold the view nothwithstanding that it is pure fantasy.

I cannot understand how you cannot understand it.

I presume where back to the bible?