Just getting sick of TV & ghayism

[breakingcontact]

And the Nazis locked gays in concentration camps.


Pick your poison.

Wow. What does that have to do with anything?

Adultery is wrong and in old testament times theyd stone people to death for it.

So we should accept it now?

 

[kusai]

IMHO, as most have previously stated. I have absolutely no problem and not my business what you do in your personal life and in your bedroom, but no need to make a propaganda out of it and make everyone agree on it forcefully.
Same applies to 2A, if you choose not to exercise your right then its personal choice, but making a propaganda out of it and forcing everyone to give up their rights so that a few can feel safe and comfortable is totally BS.

 

[Younggun]

Wow. What does that have to do with anything?

Adultery is wrong and in old testament times theyd stone people to death for it.

So we should accept it now?

If you had read the previous post you would be able to figure it out....or should be able to anyways.

Adultery and stoning and the acceptance of it is unrelated.

 

[breakingcontact]

If you had read the previous post you would be able to figure it out....or should be able to anyways.

Adultery and stoning and the acceptance of it is unrelated.

I did read the previous post and i see you are now being rude. Pick your poison? Really?

OP (i return to that to give this thread some context) was about gay agenda being pushed on television.

Do you think the gay agenda is being pushed on TV?

If so,

Why do you think it is being pushed?

Who do you think is pushing it?

What is their end goal?

 

[pistolpadre]

come on, group hug here.. I have immense respect for both of you, and while young'n's view's surprise me.. (BIG OL RICHARD HEAD) I really am laughing here, B.C. didn't have to go all 'you're being rude' either..

youngun, I'd wager this is age related, and while your views are more the norm of today, that's the proof of our (BC and self) argument.. society has (driven by GLAD, and the liberal media) pushed a sin into exceptance, to support the will of a minority that has managed to overturn a long standing moral code in an extrodenrly short period of time.. and yes it is about the errosion of values.. honestly not homophobic, but look at how long the view of this life style was considered an abomination, and how short a period of time it took to reverse it.. there's more than 'enlightenment' at work here, it's a host of things, and bottom dollar says none of them have to do with the family values we hold dear..

 

[pharmaco]

Ha. Thats funny. I state my position in an articulate, supported and nuanced manner and this is your retort?

Typical. Attack the person instead of their view when you have no argument.

Or you're wrong and upset about it.


Re-read my post a few times. I'm attacking your logic, reasoning, and cutting through the "nuance" of your argument to its ultimate meaning.
Your entire position is based on how you feel. You know, kinda like those oogie boogie liberals.
I'll be honest, people like you are just as much a part of the problem as people "pushing the gay agenda."

Our freedoms are being stripped away because mouth-breathing ruhpublicans are too busy crying about the death of a 1950s republitopia that never existed. Liberals are not ruining the world. Intellecually lazy republicans/democrats willing to blame all of their problems on one party and vest all of their faith in the other are the problem.

In order for the public to be dumbed down and forced to focus on non-issues like this, they need two sides motivated purely by emotion. You're just the flip side of the coin in this ridiculous issue. It takes two to tango. I.e. the sides you seem so happy to join in your culture war.
Congrats.


The only personal attack was calling you a pseudo-intellectual. Because the shoe fits.

 

[itchin]

Its not that people think its great now a days. Its people are starting to not give a shit what others do in private.

 

[Younggun]

come on, group hug here.. I have immense respect for both of you, and while young'n's view's surprise me.. (BIG OL RICHARD HEAD) I really am laughing here, B.C. didn't have to go all 'you're being rude' either..

youngun, I'd wager this is age related, and while your views are more the norm of today, that's the proof of our (BC and self) argument.. society has (driven by GLAD, and the liberal media) pushed a sin into exceptance, to support the will of a minority that has managed to overturn a long standing moral code in an extrodenrly short period of time.. and yes it is about the errosion of values.. honestly not homophobic, but look at how long the view of this life style was considered an abomination, and how short a period of time it took to reverse it.. there's more than 'enlightenment' at work here, it's a host of things, and bottom dollar says none of them have to do with the family values we hold dear..

My views probably are surprising, but a little more complicated than what comes across on the forum.

I don't particularly like the idea of homosexuality, I support Phil in his statements about sin and his right to that opinion. As well as aligning with most other "old fashioned" ways of thinking.

However, I am very mindful of letting religion dictate too much when it comes to government and just what government should regulate. I support the right of people to do many things that I personally disagree with if I can't see that the act itself causes harm to another. The right to be stupid I suppose.

When it comes to gays I just can't find that that a same sex couple harms me. As much as I don't like seeing pride parades, most gays are not involved in them, just a matter of blowing them up on the news. A minority in a minority group screaming their heads off.

BC considers it a simple good/bad, right/wrong situation. I feel differently. To start saying one group can't do something or should be shit out over their way of life opens the door for it to happen to other groups, like gun owners.

Yes, things are ugly right now. But I will not sacrifice my principles and attempt to regulate another group while arguing that I should not be regulated.

Anyways, I'd be happy to discuss this further with anyone via PM but I'm gonna do my best to refrain from posting in this thread from here on out. I new from the first post it would go nowhere and should have listened to myself.

 

[breakingcontact]

Or you're wrong and upset about it.


Re-read my post a few times. I'm attacking your logic, reasoning, and cutting through the "nuance" of your argument to its ultimate meaning.
Your entire position is based on how you feel. You know, kinda like those oogie boogie liberals.
I'll be honest, people like you are just as much a part of the problem as people "pushing the gay agenda."

In order for the public to be dumbed down and forced to focus on non-issues like this, they need two sides motivated purely by emotion. You're just the flip side of the coin in this ridiculous issue. It takes two to tango. I.e. the sides you seem so happy to join in your culture war.
Congrats.


The only personal attack was calling you a pseudo-intellectual. Because the shoe fits.

It's not how I feel. It's just wrong. That isn't based on my "feelings". I don't "feel" adultery, alcoholism, beating your wife, being a debt beat dad is wrong. It just "is" wrong. I do appreciate how you try to attack me personally though, trying to provoke me into an emotional response, but there isn't one. I don't hate people wrapped up in sin. I want better for them. Continue your attacks though, it's expected and doesn't bother me.

Do you think the gay agenda is being pushed on TV?

If so,

Why do you think it is being pushed?

Who do you think is pushing it?

What is their end goal?

 

[breakingcontact]

Anyways, I'd be happy to discuss this further with anyone via PM but I'm gonna do my best to refrain from posting in this thread from here on out. I new from the first post it would go nowhere and should have listened to myself.

That's a nice way to exit. (no sarcasm)

 

[pharmaco]

It's not how I feel. It's just wrong. That isn't based on my "feelings". I don't "feel" adultery, alcoholism, beating your wife, being a debt beat dad is wrong. It just "is" wrong. I do appreciate how you try to attack me personally though, trying to provoke me into an emotional response, but there isn't one. I don't hate people wrapped up in sin. I want better for them. Continue your attacks though, it's expected and doesn't bother me.

Do you think the gay agenda is being pushed on TV?

If so,

Why do you think it is being pushed?

Who do you think is pushing it?

What is their end goal?

OK, then please be creative and find a synonym for the word "feelings" to describe how you arrived at the realization that those things are wrong.
You can claim that it's not based on your feelings until you're blue in the face, but that is what it is, plain and simple.
I already explained why I think it's being pushed.

Unintelligent members of our society are provided with easily digestible controversy and told what to be angry about.
The sides of your cultural war were decided in campaign rooms by politicians.
How very noble.

 

[breakingcontact]

pharmaco,

Who do you think is pushing it?

What is their end goal?

If you really think the alternative sexuality set is voting to protect your gun rights more than conservative Christians, you are not awake.

 

[deemus]

To the original poster, yes im tired of it on tv. i dont like it being forced on society, any more than herioen addiction or (insert other sin here).

Like phil, my aversion is due mainly to religous convictions. And my Netflix has alowed me to miss most of it.

Like several said, its no worse than other sins (to me) but i dont want to see that or other things i consider bad on tv. its one reason i watch either sports or action movies most of the time.

 

[sonuvaTXgun]

come on, group hug here..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I0spFY1I2NQ&feature=youtube_gdata_player

-TXG-

 

[London]

If you really think the alternative sexuality set is voting to protect your gun rights more than conservative Christians, you are not awake.

I'm glad you agree they need to come on over to our side and be allies rather than needless enemies. That's what you're saying, right?

About | Pink Pistols National

 

[breakingcontact]

I'm glad you agree they need to come on over to our side and be allies rather than needless enemies. That's what you're saying, right?

About | Pink Pistols National

Not what i was saying.

I said what i was saying.

 

[Chirpy]

So, this is dead on to the original topic.

My 11 year old daughter got the "Under the Dome" TV mini series for Christmas. She read the book, as have my wife and I, and we figured it was on network TV, so we were safe.

Low and behold on of the changes for television, a lesbian couple with a teenage daughter! So all the cliches get trotted out, especially as it's an interracial couple to boot. So the mean old farmers make fun of them, daughter is ashamed and tries to hide it so cool kids like her, of course one mom is pressed into service as the doctor to literally save the town.

None of it in the book, and it's only purpose is to further the agenda.

For those that deny there is an agenda, find a copy of Marshall Kirk's 1989 "After the Ball". It's the roadmap on how to use popular media to drive acceptance of homosexuality and then once that is achieved to make it more noble than being biologically normal.

Of course now it's more history than plans, as they are pretty much done.


Sent from magic cutting board

 

[breakingcontact]

So, this is dead on to the original topic.

My 11 year old daughter got the "Under the Dome" TV mini series for Christmas. She read the book, as have my wife and I, and we figured it was on network TV, so we were safe.

Low and behold on of the changes for television, a lesbian couple with a teenage daughter! So all the cliches get trotted out, especially as it's an interracial couple to boot. So the mean old farmers make fun of them, daughter is ashamed and tries to hide it so cool kids like her, of course one mom is pressed into service as the doctor to literally save the town.

None of it in the book, and it's only purpose is to further the agenda.

For those that deny there is an agenda, find a copy of Marhall Kirk's 1989 "After the Ball". It's the roadmap on how to use popular media to drive acceptance of homosexuality and then once that is achieved to make it more noble than being biologically normal.

Of course now it's more history than plans, as they are pretty much done.


Sent from magic cutting board

Thanks for this. The radicals 100% know that they have to get to the kids. So they definitely focus their aims on recruiting and converting the young.

 

[Younggun]

I watched that show when it first came on but quite watching due to things I didn't care for.

Namely, the couple you mentioned as well as the you kids who were going beyond limits I'm comfortable with. There were done other things I disliked also, seems there was some anti gun innuendo mixed in from time to time as well.


The most offensive show I have come across is Glee, my wife like it, I will leave the house or go to another room. I could write pages on what I dislike in that show.

 

[TheCytochromeC]

for "record".. you get this when you're supposed to.. I was an agnostic for years, thought people only believed out of fear or reward.. when I honestly asked for intervention it happened.. not fear, forgiveness, and not reward, but love.. it'll 'work' when it's supposed to.. you wanting it to helps speed the process up though..

I don't doubt it's a life changing event. In fact now that I think REALLY hard about it, I might have been baptized twice. You know what they say, "If at first you don't succeed; dive, dive again."

Don't mind me though, I'm just a lost little sheep without a shepherd