Yes, we could make all those cuts and changes and afford free higher education for all citizens...or we could maybe not build one or two new aircraft carriers and/or maybe mothball a few other pork barrel military welfare projects (by which I mean unwanted aircraft and/or vehicles) and pay for it all with no tax increase.

Sadly, we won't do any of the above because our system is, if not completely broken, at least being effectively sabotaged by many of those running it.

I didn't watch any of his other videos, but based on titles and what bit I actually watched here, if he is a Poe, he's doing a really good job at it. I think he is just a typical conspiracy theorist type... sadly...

EDIT to add: Even if he is a Poe, there are people who honestly believe the type of stuff he's putting out there. Heck somebody I personally know believes that the raise in the popularity of Soccer in the US is because those in power want to make American's like European things so they can bring socialism and communism here and reject Christ. That's apparently why the media is pushing soccer more and more, and I'm sure believes that Obama's (who this person believes to be a Muslim and apparently only eats pork, drinks, and confesses he believes that Jesus is the Christ, just to fool us "brainwashed" people) administration is persecuting FIFA just so we can get a more US friendly FIFA in that will push it on the US even more, though to be fair, I've never heard that part of the claim, just that "they" are pushing soccer so "they" can push European socialism and anti-christ ideals on us.

Not trying to avoid. Being black and being gay are different. One is a choice and a sin, religiously speaking. . The other is just being.

From a mom and pop business point of views:
The gay cake guy decision is based on Religious grounds. That like demanding a Muslim to serve you a pork sandwich and a beer. Denying on these grounds is acceptable. His house his rules.

The black couple can"t change their color ( unless you are a Jackson) . I do not believe there is discrimination / sin for being a different color in the Bible.

To say some are born gay I do not buy. I do agree to a point that some men are born less manly and lean into the gay lifestyle. Same for women.

From a GOD point why would GOD allow this? I do not know. All he does is provide you a choice to accept and follow or reject. WE all get judged.

Can I stand here and say I am better than a gay or a gay couple. No I can not. I sin like everyone else, I just call sin for being sin. I just don't try to change the standard ( the Bible) to suit my lifestyle.


Why should you be forced to serve someone who represents the opposite for which you stand? That would be like hiring an MSNBC who writes pro liberal articles for hire and then asking to hire Chris Hayes , Al Sharpton to write a pro Conservative piece. Then sue when they refuse. That is what is being done to cake makers and such who refuse gays.

Yeah, but once you get to a certain purity it turns blue and you have to start wearing a pork pie hat.

According to Herodotus, the way to catch a crocodile is this. First you bait a hook with pork and float it in the water. Then you get a live pig and beat it with sticks. The pig's squealing will attract the crocodile, which will gulp down the pork as an appetiser. Then you simply haul it onto land, slap mud in its eyes to disable it and it's easily enough dispatched.

The cop's job is to catch people speeding and give them tickets. Seems to be exactly what he did.

The corruptibility of those in public office would be substantially reduced if the general expectation were that they would openly enjoy any extra-organisational perquisites available to them while continuing to perform their office in an objective fashion.

What's more, from a utilitarian perspective the value of the service provided to that cop probably dramatically exceeds the cost to the public purse of a few minutes of his salaried time lost. As an overall result, society has made a profit on the transaction. If anything, therefore, it would have been irresponsible of him to decline the opportunity to, shall we say, mouth-holster his pink pork pistol.

I didn't date someone because when I leaned in to kiss her I could see all of these unsightly random hairs poking up from under her make up. I almost puked.

Sorry, ladies. But unfortunately those random hairs, if not attended to for like, I don't know, months and months at a time, they can start growing. Even as a guy if I see that shit on my face, it's gone. So I just couldn't deal and actually turned out of the kiss.

It was classic. Classic like the disgusting close up shots from Ren & Stimpy. I could even hear the tugboat fog horn blasting 2 tones of gtfo pork chops sandwiches. God, it did not smell good either.

I'm sorry, but the planes we currently have in production are more than capable handling any role we need for conflicts. They even have future capability with tweaking, such as what was done to the super hornet. The F-35 is simply a freaking pork product that allows the current generals to have a nice job later with defense companies, congressmen the chance to give money to their states, etc. Drones are the future.

Yes and no. On one hand, he did preach inclusion and forgiveness, but he also said that the Law still applies. So technically, homosexuality is still against the Christian faith (along with eating shellfish, rabbit, pork, etc and thinking for yourself)

"Do not think that I [Jesus] have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke or a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. (Matthew 5:17-18)"

What possom said. They're delicious, with a texture closer to that of pork than that of other fish.

Enjoy them now...in a few more decades, they'll probably be overfished into extinction.

I don't give a damn if corporations can have religions or not. Their religious rights should entitle them to exactly 4/5 of fuck all.

Tell you what, America. If you let Muslim and Jewish business owners ban their employees from eating pork, then you can have this retarded legislation

I'm not trying to be a hater, but I do want people to get what they deserve...and in this instance I believe those that ignore and deny that AGW is real and in part their fault (and every thing I read and all actual scientists I talk to agree that nearly ALL scientists agree that AGW is real and happening now, contrary to your claim that only 4% agree) deserve to have their offspring eat them alive when the food runs out due to their denial based actions.
Really, you claim you personally spoke to "most climate scientists"?!? So now I know for certain that YOU are just a bold faced liar, because that's an impossibility. ;-)
But I already did my hair and put my party dress on, I'm crashing your party! I'll hide among the other scientists and you'll never notice me until the lampshade hat goes on and I climb onto the bar to dance badly to Bolero.
I am 100% certain that either you or Obama has made a mistake here...4% is an exaggeration of the number of scientists that DON'T theorize that AGW is real, not the other way around. Someone got the wires crossed.
It's a poor argument, when presented with facts that are contrary to your theory, to reply with 'who cares what you think'...but perhaps the best argument against my statements that you have?
I do walk to work, in my own yard. I have a vegi garden and an orchard. I do eat mostly just my own vegis, but not completely, there's also chicken and pork that I don't raise myself (but source locally). My beef intake is miniscule. I drive minimally, well under 5K per year (still adding to the problem, agreed, but far less than average), I don't have children (the best and most useful thing one can do for the massively overpopulated planet IMO) and try at every opportunity to convince others to not have them either, I do have solar panels AND hot water tubes, I do grow >90% of my (and my wife's) food. Most of those things I do because they save me money, because as I said, I have no personal incentive to "save the planet" for more than 40+- years, and I also don't think it's possible at this point. I can try to not add to the problem as much as possible, but at the same time I don't let my methods rule or ruin my life. It's my opinion that the time to minimize AGW was in the 80's, when it was completely ignored, and that now it's far too late to minimize things, the system reacts slowly and the last century of CO2 (and others) will continue to effect the system long after we stop adding more...and I think we're already to the point where that unavoidable rise in temp will melt methalhydrates, giving us boiling oceans on fire and at least another 5 deg of near instant temperature rise (likely far more). The tipping point was back when we could avoid that, and I have been convinced by data that that time came and went long ago and now we're hosed.
I will concede that the ONN is a GREAT place for 'news'.

I am guessing that I was one of the first pastors, if not the first, in my community not in opposition to gay marriage. I don't say this with any sense of accomplishment of having wrestled through some sort of epic moral struggle, because I never have opposed gay marriage as sanctioned by the State. I don't believe there is any Constitutional basis for opposing it. . I also see no issue with a business serving the gay community. By default, our family business has happily done so for decades. One of my favorite mottoes is, 'live and let live.' I am confident that people around me, including those gays that call me 'friend' know this about me already. Although I am a part of the Christian community where I live, not one of my gay friends has exited our relationship due to that, nor have I ever been considered a homophobe. My views on marriage are exactly that: conclusions I have come to with the resources at my command. And whether or not I disagree with you, I believe that I have no right whatsoever to impose my view of marriage on anyone. In the same breath, after considering my own failings, I have no right to judge how someone else chooses to live their life. I have concluded that whatever path they choose was never between me and them, but between them and God anyway.

The solutions to this common struggle today (the question of religious conscience living side by side with gender liberty) cannot be solved by enacting more law. Americans are, as always, legislating the soupe du jour. The trouble is, in a society where that kind of 'might makes right,' the pendulum can and does swing the other way to deleterious effect. I think that our common issue can be solved by a simple but powerful idea: a stronger community. Like it or not, we are in this together and only together can overcome the vitriol on either side.

I remember an incident many years ago when my Muslim ex-Uncle showed up at my grandparent's house for dinner. On the menu: pork. In one of the most despicable acts of imposition that I can remember happening in our family, my Grandfather decided that serving pork that day would give him some kind of twisted self satisfaction; a victory, of sorts. He decided that he would attempt to get our Uncle to violate his religious conscience and, if that not be possible, at the very least, offend my Uncle as much as possible within his power. I don't think anyone would argue that it wasn't within my Grandfather's rights to serve whatever meal he wanted in his own home. But was it morally right? If he had loved my Uncle, he would have put aside his own rights and made a way to foster community. That is what living together is about.

In the same vein, I don't believe any one of my gay friends would ever ask me to perform their wedding. Even given that right legally, they wouldn't ask because they love me and they would not attempt to get me to violate both my conscience and my own understanding of marriage. While we agree to disagree, we remain friends out of love. Love is what binds. The law divides. The law is a foreigner to community, the enemy of community, when it says, 'we can live together only when you do as I want you to do in order to satisfy me or my sense of offense for another." While laws are necessary in society, they are superfluous when love will do. But we don't want to work that hard. So we make rules. We call people names. We stereotype. We divide, condescend, and foment bitterness toward our neighbors, gay and straight alike.

I had a friend confess to me once, "My whole family is racist. I was racist. But I'm not racist any more." That didn't happen because of legislation. It happened because he got to know some black people and found out that he had some love in his heart for them. Wouldn't you have liked to have been there when he shook a black man's hand for the first time in his life? Yeah, me too.

Just once, I'd like to see someone brew some iced tea, walk across the street to that gay neighbor or that Christian neighbor and sit down and find some commonality. I read above (can't remember who wrote it) that the Bible's morality is trumped by today's morality. I say that the epitome of morality exists in the words of Jesus when he says, "Love your enemies." That, to me, is the fulfillment of what it means to be human.

In related thoughts, I think the Church needs to tell the State, 'Goodbye. We are not going to act as your agent any longer in arena of legal marriage. We will not sign your documents. You have the legal authority over marriage in our society but the Church has the spiritual authority as the Church sees fit." That leaves room for some congregations to perform gay weddings and others to not as they see fit. It leaves room for live and let live. It leaves room for love.

@chingalera
@SDGundamX
you guys should just make out and get it over with.

im with gundam on this.
its the definition of hypocrisy.

in fact i will even take it a step further.
did you guys know its a federal offense to take snapshots or video the giant corporate owned slaughter farms?

now companies like IBP like to site reasons such as "privacy" and "ownership" but the real reason isnt too hard to put together.if the american public ever saw how their cheeseburger came into existence the sales of beef and pork would plummet.

so while it may be disturbing to watch flipper getting corralled and mass executed,lets be at least honest with ourselves.

we view dolphins much like we view or cats and dogs.they are considered a "pet" class and not a "dinner" class.

the japanese do not.to them the dolphin is meat for dinner.

we would react the same to country fried lassie steaks and garfield goulosh.

now if we were talking how asia destroys the shark population JUST for their fins,then i think there would be a valid argument to be had.

but this is about dinner and our perspectives on certain animals.

what do you guys think?

*promote the discussion.

Long pig. Tastes like pork