Houston becomes the largest city to elect openly gay mayor?

[Gertch]

Slowly but surely, the intolerant are losing their hold on this country. Well, I'd like to think that's the case...

Yes, the polls have been increasingly showing that the liberals are indeed losing their hold.

I don't see the big deal that a mayor, like any other position, can be held by a homosexual. In fact there has been no 'advancement' (according to liberals) if it is such a big deal. But then liberals thought putting the poor into virtual slavery by way of welfare was the right thing to do also.

Someday the world will come to it's senses and decide to really help people afflicted with this birth defect. Until then we can only hope their lives aren't made worse by those would would rather hold them up as political fodder or worse by those that prey on them like the disgusting safe schools czar Kevin Jennings.

But much success to the new mayor. May the media blitz die down so she may perform the duties she was elected to do.

 

[Crusher Disciple]

What party? Perry is still going to win unfortunately.

The one we'll be having in 10 years. It's gonna be so awesome that it'll take at least that long to plan.

 

[Thespeckledkiwi]

What party? Perry is still going to win unfortunately.

The one we'll be having in 10 years. It's gonna be so awesome that it'll take at least that long to plan.

We'll, you mean you'll be having. I'm not part of this party. Federal law prohibits me from any recreational fun.

 

[The Castellan]

Someday the world will come to it's senses and decide to really help people afflicted with this birth defect.

What birth defect is that, if I might ask?

 

[sidious618]

Someday the world will come to it's senses and decide to really help people afflicted with this birth defect.

Birth defect? Really? Even if you believe that how could you possibly think that's an appropriate thing to say on a board where there are many homosexual posters?

 

[Hoser]

Someday the world will come to it's senses and decide to really help people afflicted with this birth defect.

What birth defect is that, if I might ask?

Maybe it's poverty. :/

 

[Locutus of Bored]

Someday the world will come to it's senses and decide to really help people afflicted with this birth defect.

Feel free to make bigoted remarks in your own home or on other boards that allow that kind of thing, but you know better than to do it here since I and others have personally talked to you on multiple occasions.

You have received an infraction for Trolling. Comments to PM.

 

[The Castellan]

Someday the world will come to it's senses and decide to really help people afflicted with this birth defect.

What birth defect is that, if I might ask?

Maybe it's poverty. :/

Oh, he's been listening to Sean Hannity again, eh?

 

[RJDiogenes]

I wouldn't give that sort of remark much attention. It wasn't so long ago, in historical terms, that Blacks, Jews, et cetera were also still considered genetically inferior by many. As the subject of this Thread proves, much progress can be made in a short amount of time, and the rate of change continues to accelerate. America will always win in the end.

 

[John Picard]

I wouldn't give that sort of remark much attention. It wasn't so long ago, in historical terms, that Blacks, Jews, et cetera were also still considered genetically inferior by many. As the subject of this Thread proves, much progress can be made in a short amount of time, and the rate of change continues to accelerate. America will always win in the end.

I take issue with your earlier statement toward the State of Texas, in general. First, I am not a native Texan, nor do I live there; however, those of you out east, who think you live in such a "tolerant" area need to be reminded that your States/towns still have segregated neighborhoods (blacks, Jews, Russians, Jamaicans, etc), plus, there are still incidents in your local news reporting of racial strife as well as the occasional gays bashing incident.

You'd be surprised at how open-minded and accepting of others the so-called uncivilized area west of the Appalachians (aka Flyover Country") really is.

 

[Squiggy]

Yes, the polls have been increasingly showing that the liberals are indeed losing their hold.

 

[Kelso]

^ Put Gertch's words in my mouth again and you're going to wish you'd fallen outta that airplane.

 

[Squiggy]

HA! Edited.

 

[RJDiogenes]

I wouldn't give that sort of remark much attention. It wasn't so long ago, in historical terms, that Blacks, Jews, et cetera were also still considered genetically inferior by many. As the subject of this Thread proves, much progress can be made in a short amount of time, and the rate of change continues to accelerate. America will always win in the end.

I take issue with your earlier statement toward the State of Texas, in general. First, I am not a native Texan, nor do I live there; however, those of you out east, who think you live in such a "tolerant" area need to be reminded that your States/towns still have segregated neighborhoods (blacks, Jews, Russians, Jamaicans, etc), plus, there are still incidents in your local news reporting of racial strife as well as the occasional gays bashing incident.

You'd be surprised at how open-minded and accepting of others the so-called uncivilized area west of the Appalachians (aka Flyover Country") really is.

I'm well aware of anti-American attitudes in my own area, and I'm also well aware that there are good and civilized people all over the country. Nevertheless, there are various dominant sub-cultures in different States-- that's why they color them red and blue on the political maps-- and it's a very good sign to see something like this happening in a place like Texas.

 

[I'm Kirk]

There is strong evidence that King David was bi at the very least.

Yet he was especially loved by God and chosen specifically by God to be King. It's all in the bible.


So it seems like God doesn't have any real problem with man/man relationships or with a homosexual being a politician.

Of course something being in the bible means nothing to me, but I imagine it would mean something to you TLS.

I must interject here and say the only evidence that King David was bi would be from the immoral people who try to discredit the most reliable manuscripts and made up their own. There is no way he could be bi because scripture says that King David was a man after God's own heart and God finds homosexuality disgusting. If a person doesn't want to believe or read what the old testament says about that lifestyle of choice (yes it is a choice) then the first chapter of Romans addresses it to (New Testament)..of course that is for those who care about what scripture says. For those who don't, it's ok..it's there whether you want to believe it or not.

 

[Kira's Mom]

There is strong evidence that King David was bi at the very least.

Yet he was especially loved by God and chosen specifically by God to be King. It's all in the bible.


So it seems like God doesn't have any real problem with man/man relationships or with a homosexual being a politician.

Of course something being in the bible means nothing to me, but I imagine it would mean something to you TLS.

I must interject here and say the only evidence that King David was bi would be from the immoral people who try to discredit the most reliable manuscripts and made up their own. There is no way he could be bi because scripture says that King David was a man after God's own heart and God finds homosexuality disgusting. If a person doesn't want to believe or read what the old testament says about that lifestyle of choice (yes it is a choice) then the first chapter of Romans addresses it to (New Testament)..of course that is for those who care about what scripture says. For those who don't, it's ok..it's there whether you want to believe it or not.

It is not a choice. And God does not find homosexuals disgusting.

 

[TheLonelySquire]

There is strong evidence that King David was bi at the very least.

Yet he was especially loved by God and chosen specifically by God to be King. It's all in the bible.


So it seems like God doesn't have any real problem with man/man relationships or with a homosexual being a politician.

Of course something being in the bible means nothing to me, but I imagine it would mean something to you TLS.

I must interject here and say the only evidence that King David was bi would be from the immoral people who try to discredit the most reliable manuscripts and made up their own. There is no way he could be bi because scripture says that King David was a man after God's own heart and God finds homosexuality disgusting. If a person doesn't want to believe or read what the old testament says about that lifestyle of choice (yes it is a choice) then the first chapter of Romans addresses it to (New Testament)..of course that is for those who care about what scripture says. For those who don't, it's ok..it's there whether you want to believe it or not.

It is not a choice. And God does not find homosexuals disgusting.

Well, it's pretty clear what the Bible has to say on the subject and it's not favorable. But while it may have been looked down on God certainly loves homosexuals as much as heterosexuals. We are ALL sinners and imperfect.

 

[Kelso]

There is no way he could be bi because scripture says that King David was a man after God's own heart and God finds homosexuality disgusting.

This is the same dude that knocked-up a married chick and then had her husband killed so he could add her to his harem.

Of course, God's reaction was to kill the baby... so maybe this was a man after God's own heart, after all.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

I must interject here and say the only evidence that King David was bi would be from the immoral people who try to discredit the most reliable manuscripts and made up their own. There is no way he could be bi because scripture says that King David was a man after God's own heart and God finds homosexuality disgusting. If a person doesn't want to believe or read what the old testament says about that lifestyle of choice (yes it is a choice) then the first chapter of Romans addresses it to (New Testament)..of course that is for those who care about what scripture says. For those who don't, it's ok..it's there whether you want to believe it or not.

Homosexuality is disgusting, but to use the story of Lot as an example, offering up one's daughters to angry townspeople for gang-rape, practicing incest with those daughters, turning a God-fearing man's wife into a pillar of salt for having the nerve to look behind her, blinding all the men of a town, and nuking entire cities for sinning is perfectly okay, is that it?

You can't take some parts literally and then skip over the inconvenient stuff when it doesn't suit you.

 

[Misfit Toy]

Well, it's pretty clear what the Bible has to say on the subject

Not really. That's why there is still much disagreement among biblical scholars. It's only "pretty clear" to those who already have their minds made up.