- Joined
- Jul 1, 2011
- Messages
- 67,218
- Reaction score
- 28,530
- Location
- Lower Hudson Valley, NY
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
That is a draft from 2009, here's the final version:
Anti-Homosexuality Act 2014
You'll note that Part III doesn't have a Section 14.
You're right about that.
But then there's Sections 11, 12 and 13
The question is...did YOU celebrate the disclosures of law abiding CCW holders.It reminded of when the Free Republic posted their enemy list that resulted in the death of Nick Berg. Somebody must have thought that a pretty neat idea, too.
Beheaded Man's Firm Was On Right-Wing 'Enemies' List (a/k/a FreeRepublic)
HERE IS THE ENEMY -- they have posted their names
The question is...did YOU celebrate the disclosures of law abiding CCW holders.
Nope, nor do I approve of the CCW holder 'outing' or for that matter the Ugandan 'outing'. As there is very little I can do about Uganda (and really...it IS curious why people suddenly pretend to care about homosexuals in Uganda when it is ignored when homosexuals get hung from bridges in Muslim countries) I simply think there is one of those famous 'teachable moments' where we can compare the pretense of care from situation to situation. Dig?I thought it was wrong. If the newspaper was conducting legitimate research they should have just published the location maps without the names, but as it stands it looks like an attempt at intimidation. But uh, I don't think it's wrong that CCW registration is public information.
So, did you celebrate the Nick Berg's death? Because that information on the Freepers enemy list wasn't public....it was hacked from a private organizations data base.
Nope, nor do I approve of the CCW holder 'outing' or for that matter the Ugandan 'outing'. As there is very little I can do about Uganda (and really...it IS curious why people suddenly pretend to care about homosexuals in Uganda when it is ignored when homosexuals get hung from bridges in Muslim countries) I simply think there is one of those famous 'teachable moments' where we can compare the pretense of care from situation to situation. Dig?
Which don't impose a duty to report.
Yes, but the require people to discriminate which is what you asked for originally.
Not against gays as individuals.
:lol:
Yeah, against gays as......????
Oh I wish I was so pure of heart. For me it depends on the day.I have to admit to seeing the right wing lose. However, I wouldn't enjoy seeing them be victims of violence.
You tell me.
Individuals
I think his sarcasm was because this is Uganda we are talking about and not Norway.
Get it?
Hard to imagine 200 people potentially dying as funny.
Not against gays as individuals.
can I support locking up Christians for following their faith and still have nothing against them as individuals?
can I do so with out being an asshole to them who supports oppressing them?
We were discussing private discrimination. The law does. Not allow and certainly doesn't require private entities to lock up gays.
The difference is that Christianity isn't perverse.
so its ok as long as I only support the government locking up Christians then I can still have nothing against them?
and the hell its not perverse
Definition of perverse (adj)
Bing Dictionary
per·verse
[ pər vúrss ]
1.inexplicably irrational: contrary to what is regarded as normal or reasonable, often for reasons that seem unaccountable or self-defeating
2.stubbornly unreasonable: deliberately and doggedly behaving in a way that seems contrary to good sense or your own best interests
3.cranky: cranky or peevish
its got a lot better a shot of falling under that definition then homosexuality dose
Christianity is none of those. Habitual sodomy falls under 2.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?