What are your thoughts on this?

[ozso]

Yep LGBT has infiltrated Disneyland the same as children's libraries. But they're not really coming for your children.

 

[ozso]

Child “Mommy why is that man wearing a dress.?” Parent “ That’s not a man that’s a woman “ Child “Why does that woman have a beard?”

"There's so such thing as a woman".

 

[BPPLEE]

Yep LGBT has infiltrated Disneyland the same as children's libraries. But they're not really coming for your children.

I’m sorry but a man in a dress who wants to be around children should be a red flag to any parent

 

[Bradskii]

Free speech means.that things will be said that others don’t agree with. There is no such thing as a right not to be offended.
My concern is that with a law like this someone could be prosecuted for quoting scripture .

No-one has the right to say to a gay woman 'You deserve death' and then claim an exception because hey, it's in the bible. I think you'd agree with me on that. But if you want to say that God considers homosexuality to be a sin, then I'd agree with you in saying that that is acceptable.

 

[BPPLEE]

No-one has the right to say to a gay woman 'You deserve death' and then claim an exception because hey, it's in the bible. I think you'd agree with me on that. But if you want to say that God considers homosexuality to be a sin, then I'd agree with you in saying that that is acceptable.

I don’t think anyone should make a statement saying someone deserves to die. But it’s not illegal. If they said “You deserve to die and I’m going to kill you” That’s already illegal. No special law needed

 

[Bradskii]

I don’t think anyone should make a statement saying someone deserves to die. But it’s not illegal. If they said “You deserve to die and I’m going to kill you” That’s already illegal. No special law needed

I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this point. If you say 'You deserve to die...' then the threat is implicit. And as we've seen, someone could be convinced that they're the one who is going to do God's will.

 

[ozso]

I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this point. If you say 'You deserve to die...' then the threat is implicit.

The point is there are already laws against that.

And as we've seen, someone could be convinced that they're the one who is going to do God's will.

There's hardly anything remotely new about that. There's also been a lot of the devil made me do it. David Burkowitz killed a bunch of people because he said his neighbor's dog told him to do it.

 

[rjs330]

Comon' it's satire. Lol

 

[rjs330]

Child “Mommy why is that man wearing a dress.?” Parent “ That’s not a man that’s a woman “ Child “Why does that woman have a beard?”

Hahahahahahaha!

 

[rjs330]

Free speech means.that things will be said that others don’t agree with. There is no such thing as a right not to be offended.
My concern is that with a law like this someone could be prosecuted for quoting scripture .

Some countries don't have free speech so they can do that. If you are offended they can lock the person up. It's what the left wants and supports. Policing speech.

 

[rjs330]

I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this point. If you say 'You deserve to die...' then the threat is implicit. And as we've seen, someone could be convinced that they're the one who is going to do God's will.

Why is it implicit? If the person is not present or the person has no weapons is no obvious threat there is no jeopardy and not ability to kill them why is it implicit. It's only words.

 

[BPPLEE]

I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this point. If you say 'You deserve to die...' then the threat is implicit. And as we've seen, someone could be convinced that they're the one who is going to do God's will.

You’ve got a point. Anyway no one should say that someone deserves to die unless they’re talking about someone who is a murderer and deserves lethal injection

 

[BPPLEE]

Some countries don't have free speech so they can do that. If you are offended they can lock the person up. It's what the left wants and supports. Policing speech.

That’s what some people want in the US. That’s true. But we shouldn’t let it happen

 

[ozso]

Disneyland attendance has been low this summer. Go woke, go broke.

 

[Bradskii]

The point is there are already laws against that.

Then nominating any race, gender or sexual preference is simply clarifying what is and what is not allowed.

 

[Bradskii]

Why is it implicit? If the person is not present or the person has no weapons is no obvious threat there is no jeopardy and not ability to kill them why is it implicit. It's only words.

I can't help you if you don't understand the difference between implicit and explicit.

 

[ozso]

Then nominating any race, gender or sexual preference is simply clarifying what is and what is not allowed.

Sounds more like preferential laws.

 

[Bradskii]

You’ve got a point. Anyway no one should say that someone deserves to die unless they’re talking about someone who is a murderer and deserves lethal injection

So we can restrict any language that says such things. 'It is written' doesn't give one a free pass. The point being that we CAN restrict religious language if it's deemed unacceptable.

 

[BPPLEE]

So we can restrict any language that says such things. 'It is written' doesn't give one a free pass. The point being that we CAN restrict religious language if it's deemed unacceptable.

Once you go down that road you leave the door open for the government to usurp that power and restrict any speech they deem unacceptable

 

[Bradskii]

Sounds more like preferential laws.

Good grief, no. It doesn't preference anyone. It protects people.