LGBT extremists shamelessly cause a scene at a Target store.

[Daistallia 2104]

Two people of the same sex marrying serves no purpose.

Ah, we are getting to the roots of your problem here.

Miscegenation, as well as many other marriages, serves no purpose either, you know. But the legal discrimination is still no less discriminatory.

[Tergnitz]

No special treatment was asked for. If the government tells you you can't marry because your name begins with Z, it's not asking for special treatment if you want that disctimination stopped.

Gays have the right to marry the opposite sex, which has been the way for all this time. Gays want everyone to be able to marry the same sex, so that is creating a new "right" for everybody.

The right to marry is not a new right. There's absolutely no difference at all between outlawing ethnic Japanese from marrying, outlawing anyone whose name begins with Z from marrying, and persons of the same gender from marrying.

Two people of the same sex marrying serves no purpose.

How about "I love this person and want him to have the same rights with me as brother has with his wife"?

Then they can enter a civil union which does not tarnish the Christian traditions associated with marriage.

[Blouman Empire]

No special treatment was asked for. If the government tells you you can't marry because your name begins with Z, it's not asking for special treatment if you want that disctimination stopped.

Gays have the right to marry the opposite sex, which has been the way for all this time. Gays want everyone to be able to marry the same sex, so that is creating a new "right" for everybody.

The right to marry is not a new right. There's absolutely no difference at all between outlawing ethnic Japanese from marrying, outlawing anyone whose name begins with Z from marrying, and persons of the same gender from marrying.

Two people of the same sex marrying serves no purpose.

So what exactly is the purpose of marriage?

Tax benefits really. And more handouts from the government

[Haiz]

They call target bigoted, but in the description, the videomaker writes "Call Target CEO Gregg Steinhafel at 612-696-6234 and DEMAND they get the $150,000 back or donate $150,000 to queer youth or transgender services!"
That sounds bigoted to me, them supporting the special treatment of LGBT.

What a crock of shit. "Ahh, these damn Jews are protesting about a million-dollar donation to a Nazi organisation! When will they learn that they don't deserve any special treatment? Those bigoted fuckers."

If people were talking against homosexuals, you would most likely agree they should be arrested. Free speech comes with the tolerance of others.

BULLSHIT. There is no right to not be offended.

There is when it is a private place and the store has the deserve to maintain a general state of duo quorum on their premise. Under that logic I can go into a store that is frequented by gay persons and hand out pamphlets advocating something that is offensive to their way of life, while not expecting to be ejected from the store. If it was a public place, like a park or street corner, then it would be different. But the moment you enter a private place of business you surrender the expectation to be allowed to speak freely.

No, you're totally wrong. ALL that can happen is that you will be asked to leave. As happened here.

Actually you can be arrested for trespassing, being a nuisance, and solicitation by the police; e.g. the threat of being charged with trespassing. In a publicly owned place, you can usually own face one of those charges, e.g. being a public nuisance.

There is no difference. You cannot be arrested if you move on when asked - and the police can request that of you in a public area, too, with the same possible results.

They were still filming when they were requested to stop filming and proceeded to post the video on the internet. They should have blurred out the faces of the employees, but they are driven by hate.

Its obviously by hate that other groups that film dont blur out everything too, right? Its obviously by hate that they persist in damn it keeping to post their videos everywhere.

[Daistallia 2104]

No, no it's not. It's indirectly supporting.

Yes it is.

[The Norwegian Blue]

The biggest thing I have with this is the hypocrisy. If they donated to a Democrat politician with a liberal agenda, there would not of been a peep, but since it is to a Republican candidate with a conservative agenda, they have caused a shitstorm.

I do not really agree that corporations should be able to donate to political campaigns, but this is so such a hypocrisy, that it isn't even funny.

The hell?

It's "hypocrisy" when someone protests things they oppose while not protesting things they don't oppose? I don't think that word means what you think it means...

[Zephie]

No special treatment was asked for. If the government tells you you can't marry because your name begins with Z, it's not asking for special treatment if you want that disctimination stopped.

Gays have the right to marry the opposite sex, which has been the way for all this time. Gays want everyone to be able to marry the same sex, so that is creating a new "right" for everybody.

The right to marry is not a new right. There's absolutely no difference at all between outlawing ethnic Japanese from marrying, outlawing anyone whose name begins with Z from marrying, and persons of the same gender from marrying.

Two people of the same sex marrying serves no purpose.

So what exactly is the purpose of marriage?

Tax benefits really. And more handouts from the government

Yes, which would cause a heavier tax burden on legitimate marriages because the government would need to make up that lost revenue.

[Dododecapod]

No special treatment was asked for. If the government tells you you can't marry because your name begins with Z, it's not asking for special treatment if you want that disctimination stopped.

Gays have the right to marry the opposite sex, which has been the way for all this time. Gays want everyone to be able to marry the same sex, so that is creating a new "right" for everybody.

The right to marry is not a new right. There's absolutely no difference at all between outlawing ethnic Japanese from marrying, outlawing anyone whose name begins with Z from marrying, and persons of the same gender from marrying.

Two people of the same sex marrying serves no purpose.

How about "I love this person and want him to have the same rights with me as brother has with his wife"?

Something should be done so you can see someone if they are in a hospital or something, but gay marriage isn't the answer to that.

Why not? Seriously, I'm not trying to be funny or anything, I just don't understand the problem. Every argument I've heard leads back to religion - which can never be applied to non-believers. IS there another reason?

[Soheran]

They were still filming when they were requested to stop filming and proceeded to post the video on the internet. They should have blurred out the faces of the employees, but they are driven by hate.

Um... people film things all the time and don't blur out the faces of the people in the background.

[The Scandinvans]

No, you're totally wrong. ALL that can happen is that you will be asked to leave. As happened here.

Actually you can be arrested for trespassing, being a nuisance, and solicitation by the police; e.g. the threat of being charged with trespassing. In a publicly owned place, you can usually own face one of those charges, e.g. being a public nuisance.

To be arrested for trespassing in a place that is open for commerce you have to be asked to leave then refuse to do so. Your public nuisance and disorderly conduct charges normally depend on you refusing to cease the behavior when told to do so by the police or property owners. Though these laws differ by state.
Once they were told to leave they left so criminal charges are unlikely to happen and would be tossed out even if they did manage to get before a judge.[/quote]I was operating under the assumption they would refuse to leave when told to do so by the store owners and I, rather sparingly mind you, assumed they would be arrested by the police, I was listing the list of possible charges.

[Haiz]

No special treatment was asked for. If the government tells you you can't marry because your name begins with Z, it's not asking for special treatment if you want that disctimination stopped.

Gays have the right to marry the opposite sex, which has been the way for all this time. Gays want everyone to be able to marry the same sex, so that is creating a new "right" for everybody.

The right to marry is not a new right. There's absolutely no difference at all between outlawing ethnic Japanese from marrying, outlawing anyone whose name begins with Z from marrying, and persons of the same gender from marrying.

Two people of the same sex marrying serves no purpose.

So what exactly is the purpose of marriage?

Tax benefits really. And more handouts from the government

Yes, which would cause a heavier tax burden on legitimate marriages because the government would need to make up that lost revenue.

Whats a legitimate marriage? If you can define it, what makes it legitimate over another?

[Greater Americania]

I applaud the actions of Target for kicking out these indeed shameless left-wing activists back into the street.

[Zephie]

The biggest thing I have with this is the hypocrisy. If they donated to a Democrat politician with a liberal agenda, there would not of been a peep, but since it is to a Republican candidate with a conservative agenda, they have caused a shitstorm.

I do not really agree that corporations should be able to donate to political campaigns, but this is so such a hypocrisy, that it isn't even funny.

The hell?

It's "hypocrisy" when someone protests things they oppose while not protesting things they don't oppose? I don't think that word means what you think it means...

It is a hypocrisy, liberals have been attacking America and its culture for decades.

[Tergnitz]

They were still filming when they were requested to stop filming and proceeded to post the video on the internet. They should have blurred out the faces of the employees, but they are driven by hate.

Um... people film things all the time and don't blur out the faces of the people in the background.

That doesn't make it right...

[Daistallia 2104]

Then they can enter a civil union which does not tarnish the Christian traditions associated with marriage.

What of Christian gay marriages?

[Haiz]

The biggest thing I have with this is the hypocrisy. If they donated to a Democrat politician with a liberal agenda, there would not of been a peep, but since it is to a Republican candidate with a conservative agenda, they have caused a shitstorm.

I do not really agree that corporations should be able to donate to political campaigns, but this is so such a hypocrisy, that it isn't even funny.

The hell?

It's "hypocrisy" when someone protests things they oppose while not protesting things they don't oppose? I don't think that word means what you think it means...

It is a hypocrisy, liberals have been attacking America and its culture for decades.

What? Challenging authority is against American Culture, yeah.

[Island sodor]

Long live the LGBT revolutionaries who fight and take action against the oppressors....we will fight until we get our true freedom you can send us to jail, you can tortcher us but our hearts will foever be united. We will goose step our victory march on the day of our freedom and united vicory!!!!

[Haiz]

Then they can enter a civil union which does not tarnish the Christian traditions associated with marriage.

What of Christian gay marriages?

I guess it depends on the Church?

[Blouman Empire]

Yes, which would cause a heavier tax burden on legitimate marriages because the government would need to make up that lost revenue.

I'm sure they will just take away more benefits from singles.

[Zephie]

Then they can enter a civil union which does not tarnish the Christian traditions associated with marriage.

What of Christian gay marriages?

If you support gay marriage, do you also support polygamy?

[Soheran]

Yes, which would cause a heavier tax burden on legitimate marriages because the government would need to make up that lost revenue.

1. Same-sex marriage is a net revenue gain.

2. We do not determine, and have never determined, marital eligibility by its impact on the government's finances. Nor should we. Marriage is not a social policy initiative, it is a social institution granted civil status to recognize that two spouses are not two strangers, and the law should treat them accordingly.

[Dododecapod]

No special treatment was asked for. If the government tells you you can't marry because your name begins with Z, it's not asking for special treatment if you want that disctimination stopped.

Gays have the right to marry the opposite sex, which has been the way for all this time. Gays want everyone to be able to marry the same sex, so that is creating a new "right" for everybody.

The right to marry is not a new right. There's absolutely no difference at all between outlawing ethnic Japanese from marrying, outlawing anyone whose name begins with Z from marrying, and persons of the same gender from marrying.

Two people of the same sex marrying serves no purpose.

How about "I love this person and want him to have the same rights with me as brother has with his wife"?

Then they can enter a civil union which does not tarnish the Christian traditions associated with marriage.

I'm an atheist. Why should I give a flying fuck about Christian Tradition? Especially when, as a Historian, I know most of those "traditions" are relatively new creations.

[Tergnitz]

Then they can enter a civil union which does not tarnish the Christian traditions associated with marriage.

What of Christian gay marriages?

Homosexuality goes against the Christian teachings demonstrated in the Bible, so there should not be such a thing.

[Haiz]

They were still filming when they were requested to stop filming and proceeded to post the video on the internet. They should have blurred out the faces of the employees, but they are driven by hate.

Um... people film things all the time and don't blur out the faces of the people in the background.

That doesn't make it right...

No, but all groups that do not proceed to blur faces are not all "motivated by hate".

[Zephie]

Yes, which would cause a heavier tax burden on legitimate marriages because the government would need to make up that lost revenue.

I'm sure they will just take away more benefits from singles.

And then all of the single people should protest, because they are being discriminated against because they aren't getting tax breaks for being single!