Gaystapo out on the prowl again

[Darth Executor]

Huh? If gays use OkCupid, someone is going to shoot them? Or are you saying that if they use that service, someone is going to shoot you? Or me?

This isn't about gays using OkCupid, it's about the Gaystaop (including OKCupid) trying to get Eich fired for daring to oppose gay "marriage". You incurable imbecile.

Can you explain?

How about you actually read the OP before commenting instead? This way I don't actually have to explain anything.

As for shooting "them" (I'm not sure why you say "them" and not "us" since the entire progressive coalition will get the Berlin Cocktail), I am saying that the endless progressive abuses that have turned the West into a neo-Weimar Republic will result in a fascist uprising and you will all end up on the wrong end of a bullet.

[phank]

This isn't about gays using OkCupid, it's about the Gaystaop (including OKCupid) trying to get Eich fired for daring to oppose gay "marriage". You incurable imbecile.

And you have never felt that anyone deserves to be fired because YOU disagree with them? Like your President, maybe?

How about you actually read the OP before commenting instead? This way I don't actually have to explain anything.

Don't worry, you never really need to explain anything. I can usually visualize the worst possible ways to achieve the worst possible goals, without you ratifying my ideas.

As for shooting "them" (I'm not sure why you say "them" and not "us" since the entire progressive coalition will get the Berlin Cocktail), I am saying that the endless progressive abuses that have turned the West into a neo-Weimar Republic will result in a fascist uprising and you will all end up on the wrong end of a bullet.

Really? Golly, who knew? And when will the sky be falling over this little tantrum of yours? You be sure to keep people advised, ok?

[Darth Executor]

And you have never felt that anyone deserves to be fired because YOU disagree with them? Like your President, maybe?

Canada doesn't have a president. Unless someone's working for an ideological organization where his beliefs are actually relevant I don't think someone should be fired over them.

Don't worry, you never really need to explain anything. I can usually visualize the worst possible ways to achieve the worst possible goals, without you ratifying my ideas.

I'm sure you can, seeing how you adhere to the most evil and murderous political ideology in history.

Really? Golly, who knew? And when will the sky be falling over this little tantrum of yours? You be sure to keep people advised, ok?

The sky won't be falling at all. The Fuhrer's light of righteousness shall burn the heathens, the degenerates and the fiends of Progress to a crisp and all will be right with the world.

[Epoetker]

By "people" you seem to mean Eich, who seems to be a first-class bigot. If you wish to enlist in that camp, be my guest. Gays will soon get equal rights whether you do or not.

"Some are more equal than others" would have been more respectful of better past authors, but I suppose this is the sort of statement that passes for originality among leftists after a victory, magnanimity and generosity being foreign concepts to them.

The man has come leftist full circle, so let us close the books, tighten the nooses, and, like Denmark did with its Communists, turn them over to the Nazis to face what justice they deem sufficient. Have at him, Herr Darth.

[Bill the Cat]

Ah, that's a neat trick. I'm asked to give one example, I give it, and you hand-wave it away. But once again, you fail. PixieOfError can marry the person she loves, and the government doesn't allow gays to do the same.

She can not marry the person she loves if either of them is already married to someone else at the same time, if that other person is of the same sex as her, or if the person she loves is closer related than first cousins. That's the same as any other person, straight or homosexual. So, YOU fail, bucky.

Is it legal to marry someone you are not in love with?

[Bill the Cat]

On the contrary, you were simply too dishonest to address the issue. If changing the subject is the best you can do, this is an outright admission of defeat, and I accept it as such.

Why won't you answer the question Phank? You know why, don't you? Because you know it will destroy your nonsense argument.

Human male A (25, unmarried US Citizen) is standing in a room with 10 other people. 5 are female and 5 are male

Human female B is 21, unmarried US Citizen, and not related to Human male A
Human female C is 14, unmarried US Citizen, and not related to Human male A
Human female D is 25, married US Citizen, and not related to Human male A
Human female E is 19, unmarried US Citizen, and is Human male A's sister
Human female F is 30, unmarried British Citizen, and is not related to human male A
Human male B is 21, unmarried US Citizen, and not related to Human male A
Human male C is 14, unmarried US Citizen, and not related to Human male A
Human male D is 25, married US Citizen, and not related to Human male A
Human male E is 19, unmarried US Citizen, and is Human male A's brother
Human male F is 30, unmarried British Citizen, and is not related to human male A


Who could human male A marry under the law (before the recent changes in the law)

[Spartacus]

You don't marry the person you love. You promise to love the person whom you marry. Romantic love is not a prerequisite or condition for marriage.

[Spartacus]

Why won't you answer the question Phank? You know why, don't you? Because you know it will destroy your nonsense argument.

Human male A (25, unmarried US Citizen) is standing in a room with 10 other people. 5 are female and 5 are male

Human female B is 21, unmarried US Citizen, and not related to Human male A
Human female C is 14, unmarried US Citizen, and not related to Human male A
Human female D is 25, married US Citizen, and not related to Human male A
Human female E is 19, unmarried US Citizen, and is Human male A's sister
Human female F is 30, unmarried British Citizen, and is not related to human male A
Human male B is 21, unmarried US Citizen, and not related to Human male A
Human male C is 14, unmarried US Citizen, and not related to Human male A
Human male D is 25, married US Citizen, and not related to Human male A
Human male E is 19, unmarried US Citizen, and is Human male A's brother
Human male F is 30, unmarried British Citizen, and is not related to human male A


Who could human male A marry under the law (before the recent changes in the law)

My impression is that he objects to having to do your research for you.

[Sparko]

Phank. Eich was against gay marriage. He never said he was against gays, and he even made sure they were treated equally at work and as to benefits. Eich never USED OKCupid. He was CEO of a company that made an internet browser. A browser that has nothing in it to stop anyone from using it if they are gay. A browser that just as many gay people as straight people use and enjoy.

OKCupid decided to attack someone that did nothing to them, other than disagree about something they didn't like them to disagree with. It was a completely fascist move. Of course OKcupid is a private company so they can do what they want, but it is still fascist of them. How would you like it if google said something like "Microsoft supports gay marriage and we don't, so we will not allow anyone using IE or even Windows to use our search engine?" You would be all riled up about it, calling them bigots and hatemongers.


If you don't understand all that, then maybe the internet is too complicated for you. I am amazed you have even figured out how to use a keyboard.

[seasanctuary]

Is this the thread where conservative Christians pretend they've never boycotted?

[Zymologist]

Is this the thread where conservative Christians pretend they've never boycotted?

I don't think I've seen anyone do that. Could you point to a specific post?

[Teallaura]

Two words: Google Chrome.

Two more words: Christian Mingle

And for our non-Christian Friends: eHarmony.

[JonathanL]

Two words: Google Chrome.

Two more words: Christian Mingle

And for our non-Christian Friends: eHarmony.

Or you could just avoid dating sites like he plague.

[seasanctuary]

I don't think I've seen anyone do that. Could you point to a specific post?

Well, Sparko called OKCupid's call for a boycott "fascist" just above my post. It's too bad historical fascism wasn't just about voluntary boycotts to express disapproval. =P

[Darth Executor]

Is this the thread where conservative Christians pretend they've never boycotted?

Depends. Boycott for what?