GOP presidential hopefuls, members of Congress appear in anti-gay documentary

  • metta

    Posts: 39107

    Feb 07, 2015 5:28 PM GMT
    GOP presidential hopefuls, members of Congress appear in anti-gay documentary




    http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2015/02/gop-presidential-hopefuls-members-of-congress-appear-in-anti-gay-documentary/


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFIctFKnZKQ
  • metta

    Posts: 39107

    Feb 07, 2015 5:30 PM GMT
    Among the participants are:
    Rep. Steve King,
    Rep. Trent Franks,
    Rep. Louie Gohmert,
    Rep. Tim Huelskamp,
    Sen. Rand Paul,
    Mike Huckabee,
    David Barton,
    James Dobson,
    Mat Staver,
    Phyllis Schlafly,
    Scott Lively,
    Alveda King,
    Brian Camenker,
    Frank Pavone,
    Robert Knight,
    John Stemberger, and, of course,
    Janet Porter herself, who can been seen walking around in the woods with a lantern, warning that gay activists are seeking to turn Christians into criminals
  • coolarmydude

    Posts: 9190

    Feb 08, 2015 12:40 PM GMT
    It's amazing how they make gay civil rights about them and their religion. Christianity is not about sexuality. They are the "darkness over the land" with this perverted notion of religion as politics.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 08, 2015 1:39 PM GMT
    coolarmydude saidIt's amazing how they make gay civil rights about them and their religion. Christianity is not about sexuality. They are the "darkness over the land" with this perverted notion of religion as politics.

    +1

    US Republicans are evil, as are those who endorse, support & vote for them. This is the evidence.

    "Janet Porter herself, who can been seen walking around in the woods with a lantern, warning that gay activists are seeking to turn Christians into criminals"

    You vote for one Republican, you vote for them all, and their extremist anti-gay leadership. Because they vote as a gang, as they're directed, not individually.

    Congressional Republicans have been the "Party Of No" for the last 6 years, trying to destroy the first Black President in their "White" House, as they publicly stated when Obama took office. And the Republicans in the separate States have been even worse.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 08, 2015 2:42 PM GMT
    1. Democrat former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reed stopped 100's of bills from being voted on, even bills that other democrats wanted.

    2. Obama isn't black, he mixed race:





    Obama has already declared that being gay is a "Lifestyle Choice":


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 08, 2015 4:40 PM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    coolarmydude saidIt's amazing how they make gay civil rights about them and their religion. Christianity is not about sexuality. They are the "darkness over the land" with this perverted notion of religion as politics.

    +1

    US Republicans are evil, as are those who endorse, support & vote for them. This is the evidence.

    "Janet Porter herself, who can been seen walking around in the woods with a lantern, warning that gay activists are seeking to turn Christians into criminals"

    You vote for one Republican, you vote for them all, and their extremist anti-gay leadership. Because they vote as a gang, as they're directed, not individually.

    Congressional Republicans have been the "Party Of No" for the last 6 years, trying to destroy the first Black President in their "White" House, as they publicly stated when Obama took office. And the Republicans in the separate States have been even worse.


    More certifiable nonsense from Bloody Maryland. Your "vote for one, vote for all" theory puts the whole idea of primaries into doubt, no? I keep abreast of politics, especially GOP ones, and I don't recognize half the names on this list; many of the others are has-beens. Phyllis Schafly? Please. Who's next, Pat Robertson?

    And thank God the GOP has been the party of no; consider where we'd be if the Emperor With No Clothes in the WH had his way on everything. And speaking of gangs, as others have noted, Harry Reid ran interference for Obama in the Senate to prevent votes on many GOP-led initiatives; thankfully, that's starting to change.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 08, 2015 5:00 PM GMT
    MGINSD said
    Harry Reid ran interference for Obama in the Senate to prevent votes on many GOP-led initiatives; thankfully, that's starting to change.

    True. Blocking many Republican anti-gay initiatives, as well as repeal of Social Security & Medicare, and many other social safety nets.

    Republican efforts which we must suppose you approve? Please declare yourself on these issues.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 08, 2015 5:27 PM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    MGINSD said
    Harry Reid ran interference for Obama in the Senate to prevent votes on many GOP-led initiatives; thankfully, that's starting to change.

    True. Blocking many Republican anti-gay initiatives, as well as repeal of Social Security & Medicare, and many other social safety nets.

    Republican efforts which we must suppose you approve? Please declare yourself on these issues.


    LOL! No GOP Senator has proposed repealing SS & Medicare under Reid's dictat..., er, I mean, tenure. As for "many other social safety nets," many are in fact hammocks. You can "suppose" all you want, but you'll usually continue to be wrong in your assumptions, as you are once again with these. This isn't a bridge game, but I support both SS & Medicare, and not only because I'll be eligible for it in a few years; I'd like to recoup at least some of the thousands I've paid into each over my working life. As for the others, Clinton had the right idea: ending welfare as we know it. Unfortunately, Obama's reinstated it as we'd never intended it, and then some. And, for those "many Republican anti-gay initiatives," just which two or more GOP senate bills are you imagin..., I mean, referring to?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 08, 2015 5:50 PM GMT
    MGINSD said
    ...I support both SS & Medicare, and not only because I'll be eligible for it in a few years; I'd like to recoup at least some of the thousands I've paid into each over my working life.

    Well I'm glad you do. Most Republicans in Congress you support do not. Keep voting for them and you'll never see your Social Security, for all the thousands you paid into it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 08, 2015 5:54 PM GMT
    The Repub party has become some weird cult that's obsessed with trying to take control of the government so they can force their beliefs on the rest of us.

    Fortunately, there's a silent majority of Americans who won't vote to put a Bush-style anti-gay tax-cuts-for-the-rich Repub back in the White House.

    The Repubs want to gut Social Security and Medicare in order to pay for big tax cuts for the rich - but the truth is that the Repubs can never win the White House advocating that scheme.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 08, 2015 6:10 PM GMT
    The_Polaris saidThe Repub party has become some weird cult that's obsessed with trying to take control of the government so they can force their beliefs on the rest of us.

    Fortunately, there's a silent majority of Americans who won't vote to put a Bush-style anti-gay tax-cuts-for-the-rich Repub back in the White House.

    The Repubs want to gut Social Security and Medicare in order to pay for big tax cuts for the rich - but the truth is that the Repubs can never win the White House advocating that scheme.


    I sure would like to see some evidence of ANY GOPer's wanting to end or gut SS or Medicare, from you, Art or anyone else. Or, proof that "most Republicans [I] support in Congress do;" how do you know whom I support, by the way? Is that still another supposition, or are you chanelling Lois Lerner? So far, all you've got are wild, unsupported, speculative and hyperbolic claims. It's tough to accord those much credibility. And, even if either went under, I'd be covered by my own private insurance. It's called planning ahead and saving, for those unfamiliar with the concept or how it works.
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14350

    Feb 08, 2015 6:27 PM GMT
    MGINSD said
    Art_Deco said
    coolarmydude saidIt's amazing how they make gay civil rights about them and their religion. Christianity is not about sexuality. They are the "darkness over the land" with this perverted notion of religion as politics.
    Art is being his usual stubborn, naive self claiming that all republicans are virulently anti gay which is nonsense. Not all republicans agree with or support the narrow minded bible thumping screwballs like James Dobson and mike fuckabee oops I mean huckabee. If that is the case, than all democrats are corrupt, incompetent, pander both to crooked organized labor and the unmotivated urban poor. In addition, the democrats longtime monolithic rule has ruined most older northern cities. You want to really know why cities like St. Louis, Chicago, Rochester, Baltimore and others are in horrendous shape, thank the democrats.
    +1

    US Republicans are evil, as are those who endorse, support & vote for them. This is the evidence.

    "Janet Porter herself, who can been seen walking around in the woods with a lantern, warning that gay activists are seeking to turn Christians into criminals"

    You vote for one Republican, you vote for them all, and their extremist anti-gay leadership. Because they vote as a gang, as they're directed, not individually.

    Congressional Republicans have been the "Party Of No" for the last 6 years, trying to destroy the first Black President in their "White" House, as they publicly stated when Obama took office. And the Republicans in the separate States have been even worse.


    More certifiable nonsense from Bloody Maryland. Your "vote for one, vote for all" theory puts the whole idea of primaries into doubt, no? I keep abreast of politics, especially GOP ones, and I don't recognize half the names on this list; many of the others are has-beens. Phyllis Schafly? Please. Who's next, Pat Robertson?

    And thank God the GOP has been the party of no; consider where we'd be if the Emperor With No Clothes in the WH had his way on everything. And speaking of gangs, as others have noted, Harry Reid ran interference for Obama in the Senate to prevent votes on many GOP-led initiatives; thankfully, that's starting to change.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 08, 2015 6:34 PM GMT
    MGINSD said
    The_Polaris saidThe Repub party has become some weird cult that's obsessed with trying to take control of the government so they can force their beliefs on the rest of us.

    Fortunately, there's a silent majority of Americans who won't vote to put a Bush-style anti-gay tax-cuts-for-the-rich Repub back in the White House.

    The Repubs want to gut Social Security and Medicare in order to pay for big tax cuts for the rich - but the truth is that the Repubs can never win the White House advocating that scheme.


    I sure would like to see some evidence of ANY GOPer's wanting to end or gut SS or Medicare, from you, Art or anyone else. Or, proof that "most Republicans [I] support in Congress do;" how do you know whom I support, by the way? Is that still another supposition, or are you chanelling Lois Lerner? So far, all you've got are wild, unsupported, speculative and hyperbolic claims. It's tough to accord those much credibility. And, even if either went under, I'd be covered by my own private insurance. It's called planning ahead and saving, for those unfamiliar with the concept or how it works.



    You're awfully uninformed about the policies advocated by the Repub party - especially considering the fact that you obsessively and slavishly spend your time here pushing and defending the Repubs.

    Here's what the Repub's preferred economic policy - the Ryan budget plan - would do to Medicare:
    http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3731

    The Repub Ryan plan would result in deep cuts to coverage that would force seniors to pay thousands more out of their pockets for their health care costs.

    This budget plan has been voted on in Congress more than once and each time all except a handful of Repubs voted FOR it - so in fact the proof is there that a majority of Repubs in Congress support gutting Medicare with deep cuts to coverage for seniors who depend on it.

    The Ryan budget plan also includes generous tax cuts for the rich.
    So, the plan TAKES from the middle class Americans who depend on Medicare - in order to pay for tax cuts for the rich.
    Which sums up the Repub party's priorities perfectly.

    You should educate yourself about what the Repubs actually want to do before unquestioningly devoting yourself to supporting them in kneejerk fashion.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 08, 2015 7:36 PM GMT
    The_Polaris said
    MGINSD said
    The_Polaris saidThe Repub party has become some weird cult that's obsessed with trying to take control of the government so they can force their beliefs on the rest of us.

    Fortunately, there's a silent majority of Americans who won't vote to put a Bush-style anti-gay tax-cuts-for-the-rich Repub back in the White House.

    The Repubs want to gut Social Security and Medicare in order to pay for big tax cuts for the rich - but the truth is that the Repubs can never win the White House advocating that scheme.


    I sure would like to see some evidence of ANY GOPer's wanting to end or gut SS or Medicare, from you, Art or anyone else. Or, proof that "most Republicans [I] support in Congress do;" how do you know whom I support, by the way? Is that still another supposition, or are you chanelling Lois Lerner? So far, all you've got are wild, unsupported, speculative and hyperbolic claims. It's tough to accord those much credibility. And, even if either went under, I'd be covered by my own private insurance. It's called planning ahead and saving, for those unfamiliar with the concept or how it works.



    You're awfully uninformed about the policies advocated by the Repub party - especially considering the fact that you obsessively and slavishly spend your time here pushing and defending the Repubs.

    Here's what the Repub's preferred economic policy - the Ryan budget plan - would do to Medicare:
    http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3731

    The Repub Ryan plan would result in deep cuts to coverage that would force seniors to pay thousands more out of their pockets for their health care costs.

    This budget plan has been voted on in Congress more than once and each time all except a handful of Repubs voted FOR it - so in fact the proof is there that a majority of Repubs in Congress support gutting Medicare with deep cuts to coverage for seniors who depend on it.

    The Ryan budget plan also includes generous tax cuts for the rich.
    So, the plan TAKES from the middle class Americans who depend on Medicare - in order to pay for tax cuts for the rich.
    Which sums up the Repub party's priorities perfectly.

    You should educate yourself about what the Repubs actually want to do before unquestioningly devoting yourself to supporting them in kneejerk fashion.


    I appreciate your supplying some proof of what's been claimed, even if it's from the avowedly liberal CBPP

    http://theincidentaleconomist.com/wordpress/wheres-the-conservative-counterpart-to-the-center-on-budget-and-policy-priorities/

    but revising Medicare is not the same as repealing or gutting it, as has been asserted. I trust we can agree that Medicare, like any other social program, could stand some improvement. And, where's any mention of SS in the CBPP's analysis? As for my "unquestioning" devotion to the GOP, you need to consider all of my posts, not just those that serve your ad hominem claims. See, e.g., my posts re: Aaron Schock and his shady Rezko-like real estate dealings.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 08, 2015 7:44 PM GMT
    Religion is one big argument about lifestyle choice. Go to various pastors, priests, etc or go to a religious conference and ask "How does one get to heaven?" You will find there is just as much division on the lifestyle required to achieve "life ever after" as there are churches. People pick and choose what fits them. That's why there are over 50 versions of the bible and thousands of churches, most of which are still highly segregated by race. From race to alcohol to clothing and sex... it's one big cluster. We are one of the few things left to debate. Religion is fracturing

    Spirituality, is different. I believe in God. I am definitely more of a "spirit of the law" versus a letter of the law type of guy though. The letter is pretty confusing, is written in contextual metaphors and has so many iterations and interpretations. God is love, mercy, grace, forgiveness and peace. Therefore I should be those things. I'm fine with that interpretation... forever and ever. Amen.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 08, 2015 8:20 PM GMT
    MGINSD said
    The_Polaris said
    MGINSD said
    The_Polaris saidThe Repub party has become some weird cult that's obsessed with trying to take control of the government so they can force their beliefs on the rest of us.

    Fortunately, there's a silent majority of Americans who won't vote to put a Bush-style anti-gay tax-cuts-for-the-rich Repub back in the White House.

    The Repubs want to gut Social Security and Medicare in order to pay for big tax cuts for the rich - but the truth is that the Repubs can never win the White House advocating that scheme.


    I sure would like to see some evidence of ANY GOPer's wanting to end or gut SS or Medicare, from you, Art or anyone else. Or, proof that "most Republicans [I] support in Congress do;" how do you know whom I support, by the way? Is that still another supposition, or are you chanelling Lois Lerner? So far, all you've got are wild, unsupported, speculative and hyperbolic claims. It's tough to accord those much credibility. And, even if either went under, I'd be covered by my own private insurance. It's called planning ahead and saving, for those unfamiliar with the concept or how it works.



    You're awfully uninformed about the policies advocated by the Repub party - especially considering the fact that you obsessively and slavishly spend your time here pushing and defending the Repubs.

    Here's what the Repub's preferred economic policy - the Ryan budget plan - would do to Medicare:
    http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3731

    The Repub Ryan plan would result in deep cuts to coverage that would force seniors to pay thousands more out of their pockets for their health care costs.

    This budget plan has been voted on in Congress more than once and each time all except a handful of Repubs voted FOR it - so in fact the proof is there that a majority of Repubs in Congress support gutting Medicare with deep cuts to coverage for seniors who depend on it.

    The Ryan budget plan also includes generous tax cuts for the rich.
    So, the plan TAKES from the middle class Americans who depend on Medicare - in order to pay for tax cuts for the rich.
    Which sums up the Repub party's priorities perfectly.

    You should educate yourself about what the Repubs actually want to do before unquestioningly devoting yourself to supporting them in kneejerk fashion.


    I appreciate your supplying some proof of what's been claimed, even if it's from the avowedly liberal CBPP

    http://theincidentaleconomist.com/wordpress/wheres-the-conservative-counterpart-to-the-center-on-budget-and-policy-priorities/

    but revising Medicare is not the same as repealing or gutting it, as has been asserted. I trust we can agree that Medicare, like any other social program, could stand some improvement. And, where's any mention of SS in the CBPP's analysis? As for my "unquestioning" devotion to the GOP, you need to consider all of my posts, not just those that serve your ad hominem claims. See, e.g., my posts re: Aaron Schock and his shady Rezko-like real estate dealings.




    The Ryan budget plan would result in deep cuts in health care benefits and would force seniors to pay thousands more in their health care costs.
    That's a simple fact - and it certainly does qualify as gutting Medicare.

    For Repubs to claim that they want to cut the cost of Medicare - but that there wouldn't be any cuts to benefits or pain to seniors is disgraceful and total BS.
    OF COURSE, the Repub's proposed cuts to the Medicare program would result in fewer benefits and more out-of-pocket cost and pain for seniors.

    The Repub goal is to cut the cost of the Medicare program - and that would OBVIOUSLY cut benefits to seniors.
    It's IMPOSSIBLE to make the kind of significant cuts to the cost of Medicare that the Repubs want to make without that resulting in cuts to benefits for seniors.
    It's intellectually dishonest to spin some BS about how cutting the program wouldn't cuts benefits or severely hurt the wallets and pocketbooks of older Americans.

    For you to try to describe the Repub Ryan plan as "revising" or "improving" Medicare is deeply dishonest.
    It's just another attempt on your part to try to protect and defend the Repubs - no matter how you have to spin and distort the facts.

    If you support the Ryan plan to make deep cuts to the Medicare benefits seniors receive - while still giving big tax cuts to the rich - then just say so.
    You're free to support any party or policy that you choose.
    But for you to try to spin some BS load of garbage about how the Ryan plan wouldn't result in Medicare benefit cuts to seniors is just dishonest pro-Repub spin.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 08, 2015 8:31 PM GMT
    The_Polaris said
    MGINSD said
    The_Polaris said
    MGINSD said
    The_Polaris saidThe Repub party has become some weird cult that's obsessed with trying to take control of the government so they can force their beliefs on the rest of us.

    Fortunately, there's a silent majority of Americans who won't vote to put a Bush-style anti-gay tax-cuts-for-the-rich Repub back in the White House.

    The Repubs want to gut Social Security and Medicare in order to pay for big tax cuts for the rich - but the truth is that the Repubs can never win the White House advocating that scheme.


    I sure would like to see some evidence of ANY GOPer's wanting to end or gut SS or Medicare, from you, Art or anyone else. Or, proof that "most Republicans [I] support in Congress do;" how do you know whom I support, by the way? Is that still another supposition, or are you chanelling Lois Lerner? So far, all you've got are wild, unsupported, speculative and hyperbolic claims. It's tough to accord those much credibility. And, even if either went under, I'd be covered by my own private insurance. It's called planning ahead and saving, for those unfamiliar with the concept or how it works.



    You're awfully uninformed about the policies advocated by the Repub party - especially considering the fact that you obsessively and slavishly spend your time here pushing and defending the Repubs.

    Here's what the Repub's preferred economic policy - the Ryan budget plan - would do to Medicare:
    http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3731

    The Repub Ryan plan would result in deep cuts to coverage that would force seniors to pay thousands more out of their pockets for their health care costs.

    This budget plan has been voted on in Congress more than once and each time all except a handful of Repubs voted FOR it - so in fact the proof is there that a majority of Repubs in Congress support gutting Medicare with deep cuts to coverage for seniors who depend on it.

    The Ryan budget plan also includes generous tax cuts for the rich.
    So, the plan TAKES from the middle class Americans who depend on Medicare - in order to pay for tax cuts for the rich.
    Which sums up the Repub party's priorities perfectly.

    You should educate yourself about what the Repubs actually want to do before unquestioningly devoting yourself to supporting them in kneejerk fashion.


    I appreciate your supplying some proof of what's been claimed, even if it's from the avowedly liberal CBPP

    http://theincidentaleconomist.com/wordpress/wheres-the-conservative-counterpart-to-the-center-on-budget-and-policy-priorities/

    but revising Medicare is not the same as repealing or gutting it, as has been asserted. I trust we can agree that Medicare, like any other social program, could stand some improvement. And, where's any mention of SS in the CBPP's analysis? As for my "unquestioning" devotion to the GOP, you need to consider all of my posts, not just those that serve your ad hominem claims. See, e.g., my posts re: Aaron Schock and his shady Rezko-like real estate dealings.




    The Ryan budget plan would result in deep cuts in health care benefits and would force seniors to pay thousands more in their health care costs.
    That's a simple fact - and it certainly does qualify as gutting Medicare.

    For Repubs to claim that they want to cut the cost of Medicare - but that there wouldn't be any cuts to benefits or pain to seniors is disgraceful and total BS.
    OF COURSE, the Repub's proposed cuts to the Medicare program would result in fewer benefits and more out-of-pocket cost and pain for seniors.

    The Repub goal is to cut the cost of the Medicare program - and that would OBVIOUSLY cut benefits to seniors.
    It's IMPOSSIBLE to make the kind of significant cuts to the cost of Medicare that the Repubs want to make without that resulting in cuts to benefits for seniors.
    It's intellectually dishonest to spin some BS about how cutting the program wouldn't cuts benefits or severely hurt the wallets and pocketbooks of older Americans.

    For you to try to describe the Repub Ryan plan as "revising" or "improving" Medicare is deeply dishonest.
    It's just another attempt on your part to try to protect and defend the Repubs - no matter how you have to spin and distort the facts.

    If you support the Ryan plan to make deep cuts to the Medicare benefits seniors receive - while still giving big tax cuts to the rich - then just say so.
    You're free to support any party or policy that you choose.
    But for you to try to spin some BS load of garbage about how the Ryan plan wouldn't result in Medicare benefit cuts to seniors is just dishonest pro-Repub spin.


    I don't see the need to revise anything I wrote on this subject, other than to sate that, having looked at the facts, we simply disagree on their characterization or impact.
  • Svnw688

    Posts: 3350

    Feb 08, 2015 9:15 PM GMT
    Let's maintain focus.

    This evidence and source material is about GOP politicians taking a demonstrably wrong stand (measured morally, "trend-wise," logically, or under common sense) on LGBT rights and the purported connection to Christian oppression.

    This is a prime example of the GOP being deaf and out of touch with the general public, and is inexcusable. Not only that, but "mainstream" Republicans should denounce this in the strongest of terms. I hear silence.

    No amount of dirt kicking and red herrings can change this fact: they're all GOP politicians, and no GOP "mainstream" politician has denounced this. Pathetic. Those involved, and those who support this eccentric party.

    Even Judge Posner, a renowned conservative Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals judge stated that he USED to be Republican until in 2008 the party WENT CRAZY. Truer words were never spoken. This is not the GOP of Reagan, or even the now seemingly moderate Bush. The GOP today is nuts. See the ad above. Tortured logic. It smacks of a college film project.
  • Svnw688

    Posts: 3350

    Feb 08, 2015 9:19 PM GMT
    @MGINSD

    Huckabee is not some washed up, has been. He's a front-runner for the GOP primaries.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 08, 2015 10:54 PM GMT
    Svnw688 said@MGINSD

    Huckabee is not some washed up, has been. He's a front-runner for the GOP primaries.


    Not in my book, which isn't to discount his popularity with other GOPers. But, if gay friendliness is to be the only criterion for supporting a candidate - which I do NOT believe it should be, there being many more important and pressing issues - then Jeb Bush would get my vote, per this WaPo piece:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/has-jeb-bush-shown-republicans-a-new-way-to-talk-about-same-sex-marriage/2015/01/07/5d03a4c2-95e4-11e4-927a-4fa2638cd1b0_story.html

    I understand your points about the overall image of the GOP, but a large part of that comes from the MSM - again - in focusing on the headline-grabbing retards of the Xtian fundamentalist extreme right, to the exclusion of those who do support gay rights, 20 of whom are shown here and who've not been afraid to urge their party colleagues to do so:

    http://www.logcabin.org/issues/allies/

    But, as any google search will confirm, you have to look long and hard to find any of this in the MSM.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 10, 2015 7:06 PM GMT
    metta8 saidGOP presidential hopefuls, members of Congress appear in anti-gay documentary




    http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2015/02/gop-presidential-hopefuls-members-of-congress-appear-in-anti-gay-documentary/


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFIctFKnZKQ



    Exposed: Their "Christian video presentation" has pagan written in it, as in the Hermit & Moon, Tarot icon_rolleyes.gif

    hermit.jpg

    The Hermit is an extremely spiritual card, and often has to do with institutions and large organizations - everything from a bank to the entire Christian Church. This card indicates spirituality even if you are an atheist. It's in whatever sense the word "spirit" makes sense to you, even if for you "spirit" equates to "emotion." You may be trying hard to figure out what the "truth" is about someone (or some matter), don't feel that you have to do it all on your own, ask for help if you need it to gain different perspectives, more information, etc.

    moon.jpg

    In this case, the moon represents their emotion and or the deception of it, they gave themselves away in this video, they are great at spin, just horrible people in general. Will the real evil please stand up


    Interesting analogy between "sheeps and goats", most people wont get it (Aries-Uranus) vs (Capricorn-Pluto) squared, finale #7



    I cant post them all, so many truths and their lies icon_rolleyes.gif


    http://www.illuminati-news.com/religious-wars.htm

    If you were to tell a stranger that you belong to a religious movement whose adherents believed in demons, the raising of the dead, or the invoking of entities to alter worldly events in accordance with their own will, they might logically suspect that you were a member of a Satanic cult.
    - by Boyd Rice, Oct 21, 2004 -

    The Jesuit Order is a fascist operation that hides behind the cover of 'Christianity' while actually being an elite secret society within the Illuminati web. There are two hierarchies in all Illuminati organizations - the one the public sees and the one in the shadows with the real power.
    - by David Icke, Feb 17, 2008 -

    Modern-day Christianity has often belittled our ancient ancestors who are not here to defend themselves.
    They falsely accuse that they were nothing more than ignorant worshippers of the sun. Therefore we can, with assurance, summarily dismiss thousands of years of human spirituality as ignominious myth, believed by well-meaning, but gullible primitives. Too much of this kind of spiritual arrogance and religious pride has continued without challenge. The time has come to set matters straight. -
    - by Jordan Maxwell -

    Religion is designed to focus the people's attention and energy on a single, unchanging, uncompromising and invisible supreme being who allegedly created an inferior human race just for some extra companionship and love for himself and then supposedly foisted a set of oppressive and in some cases arbitrary rules on them, which if broken would be met with unimaginable punishment. -
    - by Andrew Werner -

    The general idea behind a religion, is for the founder to say what will subdue everyone to himself, then claim it comes from a power higher than himself so it will be more readily believed by the unsuspecting, often with promises of paradise and threats of agony. -
    - by Frater RAH, Oct 26, 2005 -

    The assertion that Jesus Christ is a myth can be proved not only through the works of dissenters and "pagans" who knew the truth - and who were viciously refuted or murdered for their battle against the Christian priests and "Church Fathers" fooling the masses with their fictions - but also through the very statements of the Christians themselves, who continuously disclose that they knew Jesus Christ was a myth founded upon more ancient deities located throughout the known ancient world. -
    - by Archaya S. -

    Why have the facts on the revisionist activities of the American Baptists been suppressed? Perhaps because the current well-known King James-Only defenders are all Baptists? And why have the Rothschild, Rhodes and Rockefeller connections to Bible revision been omitted from the standard histories, as well as the occult affiliations of the famous Bible revisers? -
    - by Mr. X, Mar 19, 2007 -

    Pious fraud was a common technique employed by early Christian writers to make a point. Their intention was to convert anyone and everyone by any means available. One of the more persuasive methods was to write a text and falsely tell others that it was written in first person. -
    - mksmith.org -

    Although many profess to be believers, relatively few people actually read the Bible and are thus ignorant of the blood and gore in the "Good Book," which contains endless accounts of genocide, including against the Canaanites, Hittites, Moabites and others. -
    - Gnostic Liberation Front -

    The Baptists were sure they were the only one’s who had religion and God right, everyone else was wrong. The Lutherans, Methodists, Catholics, Pentecostals, Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Messianic temples and everyone else were and are the same. With over 27,000 different sects and branches of religion today, exactly which one has it all right? None of them. -
    - by Sherry Shriner -

    Christians never think it strange that the birth date of Jesus is also the birth date of many of the incarnated gods of antiquity. They never think it curious that it was for ancient astronomers the last day of the year—when the year was re-born and a new sun began to climb again in the heavens. That Pagans venerated the birthday of Christ as the birthday of their gods is beyond coincidence . -
    - smithbrad.nventure.com -

    Televangelist Paul Crouch, founder of the world's largest Christian broadcasting network, has waged a fierce legal battle to prevent a former employee from publicizing allegations that he and Crouch had a sexual encounter eight years ago. -
    - ConspiracyWorld.com -

    On the evening of November 29th, Emmy-winning investigative reporter Richard Ray, of Fox Television Dallas (KDFW-TV) presented a searing expose on Brother Paul Crouch and his buddies at TBN. It's yet another chapter in a tawdry tale of gay sex, hush money and a cover-up that was first broken nationally by reporter Bill Lobdell at The Los Angeles Times. This is a story that may well rock the Trinity Broadcasting empire to it's core. -
    - Wittenburgdoor.com -

    Why won't Pat Robertson be treated as a terrorist? Believe me, if you said what he said about any of America's current leaders, you would be arrested quickly under the Patriot Act and locked away. -
    - by John Chuckman, Aug 24, 2005 -

    Christianity began as a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. When it went to Athens, it became a philosophy. When it went to Rome, it became an organization. When it went to Europe, it became a culture. When it came to America, it became a business." -
    - InPlainSite.com -

    If Christian fundamentalists are to be believed, America's invasion of Iraq and the consequent brutal slaughter of thousands of innocent civilians in that country are all part of a grand divine plan that will finally culminate in the 'second coming' of Jesus Christ. -
    - by Yoginder Sikand, Countercurrents.org, Nov 17, 2005 -






  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 10, 2015 7:24 PM GMT
    LOL There's ol' Alveda! Bless her charcoal heart, she's still trying!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 10, 2015 7:47 PM GMT
    the last 2-3 years, every couple of weeks gays can talk about new advances in their agenda. We have had incredible success. LGBT peeps & their civil rights would all still be in the closet with the previous cast of republican hopefuls:

    Mitt Romney
    OR
    John McCain
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 11, 2015 11:34 PM GMT
    Separation of Church and State.

    And freedom FROM religion.