LGBT extremists shamelessly cause a scene at a Target store.

[UNIverseVERSE]

Homophobic? I dont hate homosexuals, nor do i dislike them for being homosexual. I'm merely saying that marriage should be between a man and a woman.

Or equivalently, that you feel homosexuals should be second class citizens because of their sexual orientation.

So you are, in fact, lying.

I didn't know you were a pastafarian.

Nope, Christian. Not all Christians are bigots.

No.

Freedom of religion, fucker.

[Zephie]

And others don't. Religion is attacked in the gay rights debate, and now it's being used to promote it? People need to make up their minds. Some religions allow 5 year olds to be married off and multiple marriages, where would it stop?

And what, exactly, is the difference between a religion that allows people to marry five year olds and one that segregates genders?

One allows the marriage of 5 year olds, the other disallows the marriage of the same-sex.

[Rolling squid]

A declaration of love and commitment, a political tool, a way of strengthening social bonds, a right of passage.

So surely you don't need the government involved to do that.

Yes, we do. There are many a legal benefit conveyed through marriage and marriage alone. All of which are granted under the assumption of privileges of love.

[Dododecapod]

A declaration of love and commitment, a political tool, a way of strengthening social bonds, a right of passage.

So surely you don't need the government involved to do that.

Yep, in our society and culture, you do. That's changing, but right now, you pretty much do.

[Zephie]

A declaration of love and commitment, a political tool, a way of strengthening social bonds, a right of passage.

So surely you don't need the government involved to do that.

Yep, in our society and culture, you do. That's changing, but right now, you pretty much do.

How?

[Rolling squid]

And others don't. Religion is attacked in the gay rights debate, and now it's being used to promote it? People need to make up their minds. Some religions allow 5 year olds to be married off and multiple marriages, where would it stop?

And what, exactly, is the difference between a religion that allows people to marry five year olds and one that segregates genders?

One allows the marriage of 5 year olds, the other disallows the marriage of the same-sex.

What, comparatively, makes them different? Why is one more abhorrent than the other?

[Liuzzo]

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.

Yes, the gay alliance protested a corporation that donated to someone who would deny them certain rights. He's a conservative Republican and they oppose his views. You see if it were a liberal Democrat who supported their view they wouldn't protect him. Why? Because you don't protest your own side that would be fucking stupid. So what were you saying again because now I'm confused? I will agree with you that corporations are not people and should not be able to donate as much as they want to politicians of either party.

[Zephie]

A declaration of love and commitment, a political tool, a way of strengthening social bonds, a right of passage.

So surely you don't need the government involved to do that.

Yes, we do. There are many a legal benefit conveyed through marriage and marriage alone. All of which are granted under the assumption of privileges of love.

Like what?

[The Norwegian Blue]

Animals artificially inseminate in the wild?

Are you trying to bring humans down to the level of animals?

I love you, Iffy. I laughed out loud.

[Buffett and Colbert]

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.

It must have something to do with the conservative agenda being disgusting.

[Ifreann]

It wouldn't. It would go on forever until people are marrying rocks and trying to have babies with trees.

Do you have a problem with that?

I'm just gonna say, poison ivy is not as fun as Batman comics/movies lead you to believe.

[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.

Yes, the gay alliance protested a corporation that donated to someone who would deny them certain rights. He's a conservative Republican and they oppose his views. You see if it were a liberal Democrat who supported their view they wouldn't protect him. Why? Because you don't protest your own side that would be fucking stupid. So what were you saying again because now I'm confused? I will agree with you that corporations are not people and should not be able to donate as much as they want to politicians of either party.

He means not a peep from the other side I think.

[Ifreann]

Animals artificially inseminate in the wild?

Are you trying to bring humans down to the level of animals?

I love you, Iffy. I laughed out loud.

Victory is mine!

[Zephie]

Animals artificially inseminate in the wild?

Are you trying to bring humans down to the level of animals?

I love you, Iffy. I laughed out loud.

This makes me question if you are here to debate or here to bandwagon.

[Ifreann]

Animals artificially inseminate in the wild?

Are you trying to bring humans down to the level of animals?

I love you, Iffy. I laughed out loud.

This makes me question if you are here to debate or here to bandwagon.

That depends, what kind of music is the band playing?

[Liuzzo]

...and uploads it onto youtube.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1inmoke ... re=popular

I want to know if other LGBT people find their actions are justified, or ashamed a group of people that tries to represent them acted so immaturely. They are angry Target apparently donated 150,000 dollars to the campaign of somebody that doesn't support gay marriage, so their argument is you're hate-filled and discriminate if you don't support the special treatment of LGBT. 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.

Sounds to me like good politics. Instead of targeting the political entities (which are either too biased to be swayed or too stupid to notice) they're targeting their opponent's funding. And Target opened themselves up for attack; a nice, big donation like this. As SCOTUS has repeatedly said, political donations are speech; and if you say something in the public arena, as Target has, prepared to be called on it.

Doesn't give people the right to do it in a private area.

Target invites the general public into their building therefor they may not discriminate against the general public who wants to come in. It just so happens this general public was organized. The police were called and I'm sure they investigated thoroughly.

[Dododecapod]

A declaration of love and commitment, a political tool, a way of strengthening social bonds, a right of passage.

So surely you don't need the government involved to do that.

Yep, in our society and culture, you do. That's changing, but right now, you pretty much do.

How?

Because it provides certain rights to and over your partner, gives social cachet to the relationship, and ensures equal treatment by all the state governments under constitutional law.

[Bottle]

A declaration of love and commitment, a political tool, a way of strengthening social bonds, a right of passage.

So surely you don't need the government involved to do that.

Yep, in our society and culture, you do. That's changing, but right now, you pretty much do.

How?

Because it provides certain rights to and over your partner, gives social cachet to the relationship, and ensures equal treatment by all the state governments under constitutional law.

Silly goose, why should those things matter? I mean, if you are hit by a car and your partner of 25 years wants to see you in the hospital, why should you care if they legally can see you or not, right? Such silly, silly, trivial little rights, of no importance whatsoever.

[Dododecapod]

It wouldn't. It would go on forever until people are marrying rocks and trying to have babies with trees.

Do you have a problem with that?

I'm just gonna say, poison ivy is not as fun as Batman comics/movies lead you to believe.

I can see some choices will be more popular than others.

[Rolling squid]

A declaration of love and commitment, a political tool, a way of strengthening social bonds, a right of passage.

So surely you don't need the government involved to do that.

Yes, we do. There are many a legal benefit conveyed through marriage and marriage alone. All of which are granted under the assumption of privileges of love.

Like what?

Essentially, once married, you are considered kin of your spouse. This conveys a whole host of benefits, such as visitation rights and power of attorney, joint adoption, joint tax returns, joint insurance and property rights, to name a few.

[Jusela]

I personally believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. That is my opinion.

Well, your opinion is homophobic, bigoted, irrelevant, and wrong.

Homophobic? I dont hate homosexuals, nor do i dislike them for being homosexual. I'm merely saying that marriage should be between a man and a woman.
Bigoted? If I think marriage should be between a man and a woman, it means I'm bigoted? Heck, in that case i could call you bigoted as well.
Irrelevant? If my views are irrelevant, then so are yours.
Wrong? What makes you think you're right? There is no such thing as right or wrong in this debate, there are only differing opinions.

Because I, and my church, believe marriage is between any two consenting adults.

I didn't know you were a pastafarian.

So get the fuck out of our way and let us marry same sex couples.

No.

You are homophobic.

What? I'm against gay marriage = I'm "homophobic"? Being homophobic means that you DISLIKE and even hate homosexuals just because they are homosexuals. I dont do that. I judge people based on their personality and character (and their looks if they're woman... but that is irrelevant in this discussion), not their sexual orientation. I find it disgusting to see how homosexuals are still being persecuted in some countries.

Being against gay marriage doesn't make one homophobic, so stop using that tactic, it isn't working.

And... death to the church!

Erm... death to you?

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.

It must have something to do with the conservative agenda being disgusting.

Or it might have something to do with the "liberal" agenda being disgusting. Who knows.

[Liuzzo]

Harassing shoppers, handing out soliciting material, causing a disturbance, and filming people against their wishes: Why weren't these people arrested?

Because it was a protest.

On private property.

First, I doubt the target owns the land but more than likely leases the area. Next, unless they were creating a situation where people could not come or go they were not holding the audience captive. Last, for all you know the peoples' whose faces appeared may have signed waivers or the law in the state does not require it. You're all making a lot of assumptions you do not know to be true. You might like them to be true but you do not know.

[Zephie]

A declaration of love and commitment, a political tool, a way of strengthening social bonds, a right of passage.

So surely you don't need the government involved to do that.

Yep, in our society and culture, you do. That's changing, but right now, you pretty much do.

How?

Because it provides certain rights to and over your partner, gives social cachet to the relationship, and ensures equal treatment by all the state governments under constitutional law.

Silly goose, why should those things matter? I mean, if you are hit by a car and your partner of 25 years wants to see you in the hospital, why should you care if they legally can see you or not, right? Such silly, silly, trivial little rights, of no importance whatsoever.

They can simply sign a paper saying they have that right. (or at least that's the way it should be)

[Liuzzo]

The biggest thing I have with this is the hypocrisy. If they donated to a liberal 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.

What hypocrisy? Why on earth would they protest something THEY AGREE WITH? Opposing what you don't like is NOT hypocrisy!

that's what I said.

[Liuzzo]

Well, it seems that the minority has the right to harrass the majority.

Why did you respond to what the other people said first about how your last post made no sense?