Yes, it is possible to be gay and religious, but...

No, learn to read. I said that the part of the law that I pasted covers homosexuals legally.

That is exactly the same as saying "Anyone who doesn't agree with this law is biggoted".

How, exactly? You may have a physically or mentally disabled individual who is also gay that might be covered? But, how would it cover your average homosexual?

I challenge you to prove that while we wait for your suspension. That was seriously wrong.

Are you sure the writers of the law didn't consider homosexuality, as well as other abnormalities in people, as "disabilities"?

Here's the full line:

The legislature hereby finds and declares that practices of discrimination against any of its inhabitants because of race, creed, color, national origin, families with children, sex, marital status, age, or the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability or the use of a trained dog guide or service animal by a disabled person are a matter of state concern, that such discrimination threatens not only the rights and proper privileges of its inhabitants but menaces the institutions and foundation of a free democratic state.

So, tell me again where it specifically covers homosexuals?

It would be pretty difficult for me to search and find cases where the law was used in that way, but I'm sure it applies.

And why was it wrong? Is it also wrong to call someone disabled when their legs don't work just because it offends them?

Convenient.

I already pasted the line of that that applies to homosexuals. I wouldn't want to paste it again, otherwise people might get some mega-vapors over it.

You know perfectly well why it is wrong. I'll not piss-match with you. Over the top you go chum.

No, it's the opposite of convenient, actually. I know that if I were a lawyer and was representing a homosexual that got fired for no reason, I'd cite that law. It's pretty straightforward.

Do you think that calling a disabled person "disabled" is offensive?

No, I honestly don't. I have never been around people as sensitive as you guys are.

Stank - you still stuck in the 60's? Homosexuality has not been referred to in legal terms as an 'illness' of any kind since the early 70's when the American Psychiatric Association removed it from the list of mental illnesses in '73.

Time to catch up, Stank!

I think we consider calling a gay person "disabled" is offensive.

*edited*

Just AR the bigot, don't respond to him...

Nope.

I think you need to learn what the word "any" means.

Stank - you know that's not the same and at this point, I can only guess you're laughing your ass off at the furor your lack of consideration is creating.

Yea, you consider a whole hell of a lot of things offensive.

*edited*

Is that the best you can come up with? As fag-bashing goes, I find that to be kind of anticlimactic.

As for the original post, these people will never be satisfied. They will always find some reason to hate homosexuals. We are an old standy-by. If things are slowing down and you need to rally the troops, just toss in something about the homosexuals and you will get an audience. In this case, the local news.


Any business that benefits from a government incentive or tax break forfeits the right to exist outside of employment law. If you want the welfare of tax dollars, you get to play by the rules.

You people are paranoid. I guess you never bother having any kind of real discussions here because everyone is so sensitive about every little thing. Instead of actually trying to understand what someone is talking about, you just declare them to be bigots and pretend they said something they didn't.

Excellent word play, Stank - but you're toying with a crowd that will give you little, if any support and you're probably going to get suspended for a few for this. Kudos!

Also, it is *not* a disability. Being homosexual might cause someone to be unable to achieve thier fullest, but not because they are gay... it would be because of other peoples reactions to homosexuality - like firing someone because they are gay. Get it?

Oh, I'm trying to understand, Stank - really I am. If you'd actually answer any of my questions in a clear, direct manner - we might actually make some progress that would allow me to understand your points.

So far, you've not done too well in that arena.

I am sure.