SNL and God's Not Gay

[One Bad Pig]

It's the law.

I'm well aware of that, thanks.

[Apologiaphoenix]

Apparently the new definition of freedom is "Doing whatever we can get the government to force you to do."

Having you be forced to use your goods and services to do what the master of government wants.....

Isn't that slavery to the government?

[Adrift]

-1 Peter 2:13-17

What exactly was the point of posting this passage? Were you expecting all of the Christians in the thread to suddenly say, "Uh oh, he knows 1 Peter. Pack in it guys, he's got our number"? Maybe I missed it, but has any Christian here actually advocated breaking the law?

[Secular Liberation]

What exactly was the point of posting this passage? Were you expecting all of the Christians in the thread to suddenly say, "Uh oh, he knows 1 Peter. Pack in it guys, he's got our number"? Maybe I missed it, but has any Christian here actually advocated breaking the law?

Apologiaphoenix has argued that refusing service to people based on their race, sexual orientation, or height is justified, which is a violation of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. He is promoting breaking the law.

[Apologiaphoenix]

Apologiaphoenix has argued that refusing service to people based on their race, sexual orientation, or height is justified, which is a violation of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. He is promoting breaking the law.

Let's see. Let's look at the document.

Interesting. I don't see sexual orientation anywhere in there. Also, many of the black community in fact oppose the idea since what is being talked about is a behavior and not a race, but let's look at what was done. Before, you had mandatory discrimination. I oppose that. I also oppose mandatory forcing of selling goods or services. That means everyone else has a right to your property. They don't. What I own is what I own. Now let's suppose I had a business and I wanted to sell to people but I wanted to exclude Chinese people for instance. What's to be done? Well in a more socialist society, you get big daddy government to come and say I need to play nice with others and force me to sell. How about another way? If you don't like the way I run my business, you do something like spread word of mouth and say "This person does not serve to Chinese people" and let my reputation kill my own business. This is even easier today with services like Yelp and where you can post on someone's Facebook page.

Now let's suppose for the sake of argument that you have a business then that is run by someone who is a racist. The business owner sees people coming in of the race that he detests. What's he to do? Well he can act on his own decisions if he wants to and say "I refuse to sell" but then he has to put up with the consequences of word of mouth going out. What he could say instead is "I really don't like these people, but I want to keep my business going and not have a bad reputation." He will then serve them anyway. (Note here also a difference with the homosexual situation. It's not saying we don't like the people. We don't like the activity and we see no reason why we should endorse it) In fact, if a Christians wants to not celebrate a homosexual ceremony, let them, and let the market determine how it works out.

In an anti-capitalist society, what you do is you have the ones who are in charge enforce what they want and put fines and jail time on dissenters. It looks like in this kind of society, the only way you will do the right thing is if daddy government tells you what to do. I contend the real measure of the people of a society is how closely they follow the Natural Law. I don't need government to tell me racism is wrong. I should know that (And do know that) by virtue of being a human being.

If you want government to be your master, have at it, but it's a master that quickly becomes a tyrant.

[Gary]

Apparently the new definition of freedom is "Doing whatever we can get the government to force you to do."

Having you be forced to use your goods and services to do what the master of government wants.....

Isn't that slavery to the government?

You guys can howl all you want about anti-discrimination laws but the facts are these:

---the South lost the war
---the North, Midwest, and West are in favor of current anti-discrimination laws
---secession is no longer an option

Therefore, you will just have to learn to accept the will of the rest of the country. The majority of your "herd" has made the decision that limiting property rights in these circumstances serves the greater good.

And prepare yourselves: It's about to get a lot "worse" from your perspective. Donald Trump's big win in New York last night strongly favors that he will win the Republican nomination. If he does, Hillary will slaughter him in the general election. Trump is anathema to blacks, Hispanics, women, and moderate/liberal whites such as myself. The liberal and moderate turn out for Hillary will be HUGE, possibly giving her long coattails to flip the Senate and the House. If this happens, expect a long list of laws on the Liberal/Progressive Wish List to be passed. Expect a liberal Supreme Court. The days of white, conservative domination of this country are in their final days.

[Apologiaphoenix]

Ah yes. So now everyone else has to be enslaved to what other people want. Got it. Don't you love freedom? Let's look at some facts.

The Civil War was not primarily about slavery. Slavery was going on before it got started. It was about the right to secede the union. That's why in the South it is often called "The War of Northern Aggression." Was the South wrong on slavery? Absolutely. (And the North were hardly saints with their child labor laws and such.) Were they right on the right to secede the union? Definitely.

All you have is an argument ad populum, but then you've also said there is no objective morality so ultimately, you just have might makes right. Whoever holds the bigger stick is in the right so why not give that stick to the government?

You're just supporting slavery to government and government as savior. Just look at Russia if you want to see how that works out.

[Gary]

Ah yes. So now everyone else has to be enslaved to what other people want. Got it. Don't you love freedom? Let's look at some facts.

The Civil War was not primarily about slavery. Slavery was going on before it got started. It was about the right to secede the union. That's why in the South it is often called "The War of Northern Aggression." Was the South wrong on slavery? Absolutely. (And the North were hardly saints with their child labor laws and such.) Were they right on the right to secede the union? Definitely.

All you have is an argument ad populum, but then you've also said there is no objective morality so ultimately, you just have might makes right. Whoever holds the bigger stick is in the right so why not give that stick to the government?

You're just supporting slavery to government and government as savior. Just look at Russia if you want to see how that works out.

Call it whatever you like, Nick, but it's the future, whether Southern white males like it or not.

[Apologiaphoenix]

Everyone bow down to Gary using the big stick of government to force everyone to do what he wants.

Those of us who love freedom will disagree, but who cares about freedom?

[Gary]

I was born in a border state. My grandmother's family had fought for the South. My family was pro-South, so I know all the justifications for "the Cause".

"Our slaves were happy. They were better off with us than after the Yankees forced them off the farm. They didn't want to leave."

"Most slaves were better off under slavery than afterwards."

"The War wasn't about slavery. It was about States Rights."

Baloney. It was ALL about slavery. The Southern economy depended on slave labor. For years the North and South had fought over whether slavery should be allowed into each new territory. The South left the Union because Lincoln was against slavery and although he had not campaigned to outlaw it outright, he had campaigned to prevent its expansion into the territories. That was the reason for the War: the South wanted no limitations on the expansion of slavery into the territories.

Southerners (and those of us who are descendants of Southerners) should be ashamed of our slave past, not proud of it.

[Apologiaphoenix]

I was born in a border state. My grandmother's family had fought for the South. My family was pro-South, so I know all the justifications for "the Cause".

"Our slaves were happy. They were better off with us than after the Yankees forced them off the farm. They didn't want to leave."

"Most slaves were better off under slavery than afterwards."

"The War wasn't about slavery. It was about States Rights."

The latter is the only one I'm defending. I don't think the South was right with slavery. I think they were right with the right to secede.

Baloney. It was ALL about slavery. The Southern economy depended on slave labor. For years the North and South had fought over whether slavery should be allowed into each new territory. The South left the Union because Lincoln was against slavery and although he had not campaigned to outlaw it outright, he had campaigned to prevent its expansion into the territories. That was the reason for the War: the South wanted no limitations on the expansion of slavery into the territories.

And yet, all of this was going on before the Civil War started. It started when the South seceded the union. That was the breaking point.

Southerners (and those of us who are descendants of Southerners) should be ashamed of our slave past, not proud of it.

No one here is defending slavery, save those here defending being slaves of the government.

[Gary]

Everyone bow down to Gary using the big stick of government to force everyone to do what he wants.

Those of us who love freedom will disagree, but who cares about freedom?

The rest of the nation doesn't like your definition of freedom: Let white, Christian (preferably Protestant), heterosexual men do as they please.

[Gary]

The latter is the only one I'm defending. I don't think the South was right with slavery. I think they were right with the right to secede.



And yet, all of this was going on before the Civil War started. It started when the South seceded the union. That was the breaking point.



No one here is defending slavery, save those here defending being slaves of the government.

Jefferson Davis told them: 10 Lincoln denied that right.

Source: http://www.abrahamlincolnsclassroom....and-secession/

Gary: Our definition of democracy is called "Republicanism/the rule of the majority". Your definition of democracy is: "We demand that the majority accept our way or we will raise holy hell and destroy the country."

Your view of democracy was defeated.

[Apologiaphoenix]

The rest of the nation doesn't like your definition of freedom: Let white, Christian (preferably Protestant), heterosexual men do as they please.

Oh. I didn't realize freedom means I can only do what I want as long as everyone else likes it.

Sorry Gary, but you don't believe in freedom. You believe in getting what you want and using daddy government to get it.

[Gary]

Oh. I didn't realize freedom means I can only do what I want as long as everyone else likes it.

Sorry Gary, but you don't believe in freedom. You believe in getting what you want and using daddy government to get it.

Whatever.

Trump is the last gasp of the angry, conservative/libertarian, southern white male. Cherish every day, guys, until next January when Hillary steps into the White House.