namelesstavern.net

Sorry if this is a repost - I can't find anything about it on a search.

If you haven't watched this, you should.

http://www.victoryfund.org/files/listening.html

I wonder how she manages to keep smearing vaseline on her teeth with all the garbage that gets spewed from between them...

This is basically how your average Republican thinks.

It really doesn't surprise me. There's still a lot of people around here that thinks the way she does. It really gets me how she tries to play off as being a Christian in part of her reasoning when obviously she has no clue as to what Christ taught.

I also don't understand why a politician would say such a thing to a large group of people like that. Obviously with that many ears, it would get out and destroy her political career... or at least I hope it does. Luckily, she doesn't represent my district.

It's no different from the things I hear in the atheist circles about religion or religious people. I can't tell you how many times I've heard "Religion is responsible for more deaths than (enter your most deadly circumstance here)" or something along that line of thought. What it boils down to is intolerance. Human beings are intolerant by nature. Even those that claim to be "enlightened" are intolerant of those they consider "ignorant, racist, sexist, bigoted...blah blah blah". Hate crimes are an example of intolerance toward people categorized by intolerant behavior. The day we stop categorizing is the day we start moving away from bigotry and "isms". All citizens should be equal under the laws of this nation. The problems start when you classify people and start drawing lines of distinction based on anything. Promoting a "GLBT" (or whatever it is) agenda is the same as promoting a Muslim agenda or a black agenda. Arguing about what side of the line you are on is missing the real point in that it's the LINE that is the problem.

Eziekial wrote: I can't tell you how many times I've heard "Religion is responsible for more deaths than (enter your most deadly circumstance here)" or something along that line of thought.

well, that part is truth tho. lots of wars have been fought over religion, and you'd be silly to claim otherwise

Eziekial wrote:It's no different from the things I hear in the atheist circles about religion or religious people. I can't tell you how many times I've heard "Religion is responsible for more deaths than (enter your most deadly circumstance here)" or something along that line of thought. What it boils down to is intolerance. Human beings are intolerant by nature. Even those that claim to be "enlightened" are intolerant of those they consider "ignorant, racist, sexist, bigoted...blah blah blah". Hate crimes are an example of intolerance toward people categorized by intolerant behavior. The day we stop categorizing is the day we start moving away from bigotry and "isms". All citizens should be equal under the laws of this nation. The problems start when you classify people and start drawing lines of distinction based on anything. Promoting a "GLBT" (or whatever it is) agenda is the same as promoting a Muslim agenda or a black agenda. Arguing about what side of the line you are on is missing the real point in that it's the LINE that is the problem.

Well if humanity is inherently judgmental, and everyone's intolerance is equal why do we have to change the hatecrime laws? We aren't going to get better.

"a savage hypocracy"

I'm not sure kids today have had a single thought of their own since South Park went on the air.

who's your creampuff?

is that the woman that spoke of gays being more of a security threat than terrorists?


hysterical how the news report i heard said that she would not alpologize for the statement.... and i immediately thought... "OF COURSE she's not going to apologize.... WHO would she apologize to, SHE IS IN OKLAHOMA!!!!!"

Same lady, yes. Sad that there are people that deluded in positions of power and authority. Pretty scary.

-Arlos

Is she the one with the gay son?

Yep, gay son and a Baptist minister husband. *shudder* poor kid

Arlos, you said it. See, this is what burns me... she is supposed to be representing the people of her state (ALL OF THEM), but, obviously, she is neither fit nor capable of fulfilling that obligation. She, like the vast majority of politicians, has no business having the position she does.
Even as early as a decade ago, it would have been much more difficult to have captured this conversation and even moreso to expose it and make it public.

Long ago, by chance, I happened upon a very late night public television broadcast while I was studying... uh, like in '92 I think... involving the "before" and "after" footage of several political figures, as in conversations during the time they thought they weren't being filmed and/or filming was over.
It was put on by an underground reform coalition (read: bunch of university students hellbent on exposing political scandals and conspiracies). , it took them over a year to secure the video footage, and months to get a long enough spot on public TV in which to air the whole thing (appx 3 hours long, aired around 2am).

Those politicians got caught, but very, very few people have ever actually seen that footage, and by the time it was aired, it was old news.

The fact that this was made globally public in less than 24 hours, and that nearly a million people have been made aware, is nothing short of amazing to me.

Our unalienable right to the pursuit of happiness only applies if the same things make us all happy. Didn't you all get the memo?

ha.

what that woman spoke of is PRECISELY what i grew up with from pre-school to my first 2 years of college....

i still remember being shown a video in church on wednesday night when i was in middle school of the San Francisco gay pride parade as the totally generalizable example of every gay person and of how deeply - out of control/pedophilic/sinful/evil.... etc. etc. these people are....

i grew up with what it would seem like an equivalent hatred for gay people that i imagine that people might have had for those of color deacdes ago. i had friends and knew friends of my brothers who would drive 45 mins! into downtown houston to Montrose (the gay community in Houston) just to beat up gay people and tell stories about it on monday at school. (i graduated high school in 1993)

that's the primary reason my skin crawls when people tell me a Baptist Minister might hold a powerful Federal office.

Trielelvan wrote:she is supposed to be representing the people of her state (ALL OF THEM)

I'm not so sure about that, she is suppose to represent the majority, not "all of them", but I'm picking out one line, was just saying that it seems to me folks in power only care about staying in power so they only need to answer to the majority.

Isn't it more like she's supposed to make her decisions based on the majority opinion as long as those decisions aren't unconstitutional? She isn't supposed to represent the majority at the expense of the minority, she is supposed to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority.

This is such a simplistic matter to me that I fail to understand how people can become so misguided as to believe as she does. Okay, you're religious, and your religion says gay people are going to hell? That's fine, believe that if you want. However, we live in a country that was founded on, above all else, liberty, that is, personal freedom, religious freedom, rights, etc. You are suggesting that people who do not live a lifestyle condoned by your religion are inherently bad people who are damaging our society and country, and should be seen as a threat. As a result, you don't seem to see them as equal members of our society, instead, you see them as being closer to criminals whose only crime is doing something that you don't believe is right. News flash: we are not a Christian country. A Christian country would not be a free country. Which would you rather have?

Yes, perhaps we are a Christian majority, but do you honestly think that that justifies taking away the rights of your fellow citizens? That's exactly what you seem to want to do. I would not want to live in such a country, even if I was a hardcore Christian.

That's more or less how I'd reply to her I think >_<

KaiineTN wrote:Isn't it more like she's supposed to make her decisions based on the majority opinion as long as those decisions aren't unconstitutional? She isn't supposed to represent the majority at the expense of the minority, she is supposed to protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority.

well

the theory is that

the way it's supposed to work is that people campaign based on their beliefs

if their beliefs match yours, you vote for them, so that in effect, a government representative will naturally vote with the majorities interest.

this is of course warped over time because people realized that if they lied about their beliefs, and chose the popular things, they could get elected

and if enough of the elected folks voted certain ways, they could get their agendas pushed thru

Yeah, I wasn't saying she is right or wrong, I didn't even listen to the clip, I was just going from the posts here that she obviously is a box of rocks and all that matters to her is the power she has and she, as any politician, will do what it takes to maintain that power. If she preaches to the Christians and the majority are Christians, right or wrong, she'll maintain her power, even though she is, as it seems, a dumb ass bitch :\

i think you've got it. that's why she will never have to make an apology for what she said.

http://www.newsok.com/article/3218075/

Apparently over 300 people gathered at the Oklahoma State Capitol yesterday calling for an apology from Sally Kern. She didn't show up at the rally of course.

Oklahoma State Rep. Sally Kern wrote:The message of my speech would not change. I might use different analogies.

Truly despicable.