Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : GOPwinger Lies/Distortions/Omissions/Perversions of Truth -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Land Shark who wrote (150025)	12/16/2008 10:24:19 AM
From: one_less	Respond to of 173976

another one. lol

To: Land Shark who wrote (150025)	12/16/2008 12:12:31 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 173976

Another "tolerant" guy hollering 'you're gay'. You're saying 'I'm calling you gay, but I don't mean to stain you with the gay label' by doing so. LOL Pretty pathetic there. And another thing, I'm tolerant of other lifestyles to be "PC". I'm tolerant because it's the right thing to do. I think you meant to say you AREN'T "tolerant" to be PC but because its right. Ah, but here's the deal. You're not tolerant at all. You only pretend to be "tolerant" of liberal victim mascot groups (the use of gay as an insult shows thats just a pretense), but you're the epitome of intolerance toward anyone who disagrees with you, particularly religous folks. You're extremly bigoted and hateful toward such folks. As for my alleged hatred and bigotry, I'm not angry at gay people. Don't hate them. I don't want to make their sexual activity illegal. I am pretty sure I have/had a couple cousins who are/were gay. I frankly feel sorry for them. I recall seeing one of those Morgan Spurlock shows on gay folks. In the program, he featured a bunch of gay folks in SF stressing they were born this way. They stressed they wouldn't choose gayness if it were a matter of choice for them. They all seemed very adamant on that. And accordingly very very unhappy. Pretty amazing that in SF, CA, the most liberal, most gay friendly place on earth, the gays came off as miserable and really unhappy about being what they were. Accordingly, I consider most gay people afflicted with desires they wish they didn't have and people to be pitied. Sort of like folks with addictive personalities. However, I see no reason to change the definition of marriage to prove how unbiased I am. If gay people want to form unions - hopefully faithful ones - more power to them. They don't need to change society's long held definition of marriage to make commitments to one another. Furthermore, many of you pro-gay marriage folks have revealed that you consider gay marriage a wedge issue to use to weaken and attack and stigmatize religion and that is your primary goal. Why should anyone but an anti-religious fanatic like yourself go along with that program?