Marriage? Gay Marriage? Polygamy? State or Church?

The fact that the Westboro Baptist Church protested tributes to Heath Ledger because he played a gay character in one movie is a fine example of how they have trouble seperating fact and fiction. I won't bother to waste any more words on that cult.

Westboro Baptist Church is the scourge of organized cults. I did a google search, and their homepage isn't westborobaptist.com or wbc.com, it's "godhatesfags.com". They get a lot of publicity, but someone really needs to fuck them up.

I appreciate their existence solely because anytime they're brought up on a forum, several people will unwittingly admit to not being in favor of freedom of speech - though they would never otherwise admit it.

There's a difference between believing they don't have the right to say whatever they want and hating them for what it is that they're saying. I can't imagine too many people with functioning brains would think they shouldn't be "allowed" to say the things they do, but then again I'm possibly overrating the functioning of brains here at the NLSC. No offense to anyone except Pinoys and vinceair.

What we have learn so far:

1. Marriage should be between man and woman. Otherwise it's akward and against real tradition.
2. If you can't be faithful,then DON'T MARRY!

And also " Gold digging" women want to marrie and then they want divorce.Why? To get man's 50 % of course.

1. Marriage should be between man and woman. Otherwise it's akward and against real tradition.

That is nice reasoning to back your claim.

Haven't you learned that yet, asdf? It's akward!

vinceair certainly didn't waste any time justifying Jae's post...

What we have learn so far:

1. Marriage should be between man and woman. Otherwise it's akward and against real tradition.
2. If you can't be faithful,then DON'T MARRY!

And also " Gold digging" women want to marrie and then they want divorce.Why? To get man's 50 % of course.

You should really stop sucking so much dick if you're against gays.


Wow, that felt awesome.

I appreciate their existence solely because anytime they're brought up on a forum, several people will unwittingly admit to not being in favor of freedom of speech - though they would never otherwise admit it.

How so? We're just exercising our freedom of speech to criticise their stance and actions. Just because you have the right to say what you want doesn't make what you say right. They have the right to express their views and spread their message, others have the right to disagree and criticise them for it. Freedom of speech is not some all-conquering trump card that negates any criticism and is most certainly a two way street.

And as Jae said, there's a difference between denying them their freedom of speech and exercising our own to criticise their point of view and the way they spread their message. Personally, I think protesting someone's funeral is a rather low act and if anyone did the same thing to them for whatever reason, they'd probably throw a tantrum.

There's a difference between believing they don't have the right to say whatever they want and hating them for what it is that they're saying. I can't imagine too many people with functioning brains would think they shouldn't be "allowed" to say the things they do, but then again I'm possibly overrating the functioning of brains here at the NLSC. No offense to anyone except Pinoys and vinceair.

How so? We're just exercising our freedom of speech to criticise their stance and actions. Just because you have the right to say what you want doesn't make what you say right. They have the right to express their views and spread their message, others have the right to disagree and criticise them for it. Freedom of speech is not some all-conquering trump card that negates any criticism and is most certainly a two way street.

And as Jae said, there's a difference between denying them their freedom of speech and exercising our own to criticise their point of view and the way they spread their message. Personally, I think protesting someone's funeral is a rather low act and if anyone did the same thing to them for whatever reason, they'd probably throw a tantrum.

Nah, I'm talking about the "hate speech" people who think it should be illegal to say anything negative about someone who's black, gay, female etc.

There's usually a few of them in any given thread about Phelps, wondering if some sort of "legal action" can be taken against them.

Gender Quiz

http://www.gagirl.com/quiz/fem-mas.html

I was a good Masculine - Feminine mixture

Okay...?

Not appropriate?

What does it have to do with this thread?

Well if you are comfortable about who you are, you might have different views about the thread topic. If it's stupid I'll delete the post.

Gay =/= feminine
Straight =/= masculine

That's a bit more black and white then I see it, but ok.

I was saying that it *isn't* black and white. the "=/=" is intended to mean not equal to.

Ohhh, you mean this: ≠

I found it confusing. You could've gone with this: != to mean not equal to.

or he could just have typed "not equal to".

All of these things are very true. I look back and am also a bit confused as to why I didn't just type out 'not equal to'. Right. Anyway- GAYS!

... tend to generally be less smelly than the non gay variety males?

I'm really starting to hate these ads.

Google Chrome flags the NLSC (more specifically the ad service) as offering malware btw.