Author Topic: Starbuck's Marriage View  (Read 2149 times)

hjmoosejaw

  • Guest
Starbuck's Marriage View
« on: April 01, 2013, 12:44:59 AM »

Offline RS762

  • Committed prepper
  • *****
  • Posts: 989
  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Starbuck's Marriage View
« Reply #1 on: April 01, 2013, 12:57:30 AM »
those faggots.

Offline thatGuy

  • Kind Lover
  • Community Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3454
  • Karma: +12/-0
    • thatGuy's youtube
Re: Starbuck's Marriage View
« Reply #2 on: April 01, 2013, 01:00:35 AM »
The CEO of StraightPrep Inc believes that there was a separation of Church and State for a reason. He believes that having to buy a licence to take part in a religious ceremony is a intrusion on ones inalienable rights to freely practice.

With that in mind Mr.thatGuy believes that if the gay want to get married they need to build a gay church and go on a gay crusade to prove they are worthy of God's affection.

For the record Mr.thatGuy was only kidding about the crusade unless it's against Muslims... he would be cool with that

 [url=http://www.freesmileys.or

Oh I almost forgot, fuck Starbucks.

That is all.
« Last Edit: April 01, 2013, 11:56:02 AM by thatGuy »

CrystalHunter1989

  • Guest
Re: Starbuck's Marriage View
« Reply #3 on: April 01, 2013, 07:32:08 AM »
I find it strange that the CEO of a company which took such a staunch position in favor open carry is now against the very same conservative block of customers they already defended...

hjmoosejaw

  • Guest
Re: Starbuck's Marriage View
« Reply #4 on: April 01, 2013, 08:35:01 AM »
The CEO of StraightPrep Inc believes that there was a separation of Church and State for a reason. He believes that having to buy a licence to take part in a religious ceremony is a intrusion on ones inalienable rights to freely practice.

With that in mind Mr.thatGuy believes that if the gay want to get married they need to build a gay church and go on a gay crusade to prove they are worth of God's affection.

For the record Mr.thatGuy was only kidding about the crusade unless it's against Muslims... he would be cool with that

 

Oh I almost forgot, fuck Starbucks.

That is all.

I like how you did that!

Quote
find it strange that the CEO of a company which took such a staunch position in favor open carry is now against the very same conservative block of customers they already defended...

Yeah, that pisses me off. I open carry a lot. People will bitch and say, "Well, it was ok when they were backing open carry. Now that they want gay marriage, it's not." The difference being, is one is a constitutional right. All they were doing was upholding the law.     

I'm already tired of them "equql" signs I'm seeing everywhere. The symbol for people that are for gay marriage. 

Where I stand is, I'm not for it. I do think that anybody should be allowed to have anybody they choose in a hospital room. What about a homeless guy that doesn't have family, but maybe the only friend is a beat cop that he knows, or something like that. I believe that anybody should give benefits to whoever they want. If they are owed those benefits and have worked for them. No freebees. Pensions and such, not social security. IRAs and things like that. Not something the gov. pays out to someone to carry on without you. I don't like the titles, like marriage and unions. Marriage was defined long time ago.

Offline JohnyMac

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 15159
  • Karma: +23/-0
Re: Starbuck's Marriage View
« Reply #5 on: April 01, 2013, 09:18:25 AM »
Merriam-Webster Definition:
Quote
(1) : the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2) : the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage <same-sex marriage>
American Heritage Definition:
   
Quote
a)The legal union of a man and woman as husband and wife.
    b)The state of being married; wedlock.
    c) A common-law marriage.
    d) A union between two persons having the customary but usually not the legal force of marriage: a
        same-sex marriage.

Political Correctness is already here. My Merriam-Webster dictionary from 1970 does not list # 2. I wonder in what year it was changed.

On one side I have no problem if gay couples wanting and then getting married. On the other hand it is just a PC push to normalize a life style that has been looked down upon for 3,000 years. It is being done by the Progressives to further divide the country into many camps. Pro gay vs. anti gay. Rich vs. poor. Second Amendment proponents vs. anti gun.

Divide et impera Machiavelli    

Keep abreast of J6 arrestees at https://americangulag.org/ Donate if you can for their defense.

hjmoosejaw

  • Guest
Re: Starbuck's Marriage View
« Reply #6 on: April 01, 2013, 09:26:51 AM »
Merriam-Webster Definition:
Quote
(1) : the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2) : the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage <same-sex marriage>
American Heritage Definition:
   
Quote
a)The legal union of a man and woman as husband and wife.
    b)The state of being married; wedlock.
    c) A common-law marriage.
    d) A union between two persons having the customary but usually not the legal force of marriage: a
        same-sex marriage.

Political Correctness is already here. My Merriam-Webster dictionary from 1970 does not list # 2. I wonder in what year it was changed.

On one side I have no problem if gay couples wanting and then getting married. On the other hand it is just a PC push to normalize a life style that has been looked down upon for 3,000 years. It is being done by the Progressives to further divide the country into many camps. Pro gay vs. anti gay. Rich vs. poor. Second Amendment proponents vs. anti gun.

Divide et impera Machiavelli    

That's the thing. Gays have been around forever. This movement just seems as another "in your face" type thing. (no pun intended) Just another way for the left to upset the apple cart.

Offline WhiteWolfReloaded

  • Senior Prepper
  • ****
  • Posts: 437
  • Karma: +1/-0
Re: Starbuck's Marriage View
« Reply #7 on: April 01, 2013, 10:21:45 AM »
Seriously? Where am I going to get my half whip, double shot, rasberry, mocha, soy, venti latte?  [img]http://www.arrse.co.uk/at
If I drank that shit I'd hand in my man card. The older I get the more I hate going in to any big corporation's store front and this is a prime example of why. Fuck Starbucks. It's just sad their employees will suffer because of his stance.

hjmoosejaw

  • Guest
Re: Starbuck's Marriage View
« Reply #8 on: April 01, 2013, 10:30:34 AM »
Seriously? Where am I going to get my half whip, double shot, rasberry, mocha, soy, venti latte?
If I drank that shit I'd hand in my man card. The older I get the more I hate going in to any big corporation's store front and this is a prime example of why. Fuck Starbucks. It's just sad their employees will suffer because of his stance.

Yep.

Offline JohnyMac

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 15159
  • Karma: +23/-0
Re: Starbuck's Marriage View
« Reply #9 on: April 01, 2013, 10:31:30 AM »
hj,
I have some gay acquaintances (Males & Females) and all of them love to agitate the "right" by using their "gayness" as a call for civil rights.

Now concerning marriage; none of the gay guys really give a hoot. On the gay female end they are militant in wanting the marriage option. I laugh because it's not unlike the guys and gals in the straight world.

It's kind of like the Overton Window:

Quote
Overton assigned a spectrum of ?more free? and ?less free?, with regard to government intervention, oriented vertically on an axis. When the window moves or expands along this axis, an idea at a given location may become more or less politically acceptable as the window moves relative to it. The degrees of acceptance[4] of public ideas can be described roughly as:

    Unthinkable
    Radical
    Acceptable
    Sensible
    Popular
    Policy

The Overton window is a means of visualizing which ideas define that range of acceptance by where they fall in it. Proponents of policies outside the window seek to persuade or educate the public so that the window either ?moves? or expands to encompass them. Opponents of current policies, or similar ones currently within the window, likewise seek to convince people that these should be considered unacceptable.

Other formulations of the process created after Overton's death add the concept of moving the window, such as deliberately promoting ideas even less acceptable than the previous "outer fringe" ideas, with the intention of making the current fringe ideas acceptable by comparison.[5] The "door-in-the-face" technique of persuasion is a similar concept.


I am sure a version of the Overton Window theory was the down-fall of Rome. Remember that the Roman Senate became impotent post Caesar's assassination, monetary problems, decadence, crop failures, and to a degree the rise of Christianity.

We are living history man!  [img]http://www.arrse.co.uk/at
     
« Last Edit: April 01, 2013, 11:52:22 AM by JohnyMac »
Keep abreast of J6 arrestees at https://americangulag.org/ Donate if you can for their defense.

hjmoosejaw

  • Guest
Re: Starbuck's Marriage View
« Reply #10 on: April 01, 2013, 11:08:42 AM »
hj,
I have some gay acquaintances (Males & Females) and all of them love to agitate the "right" by using their "gayness" as a call for civil rights.

Now concerning marriage none of the gay guys really give a hoot. On the gay female end they are militant in wanting the marriage option. I laugh because it's not unlike the guys and gals in the straight world.

It's kind of like the Overton Window:

Quote
Overton assigned a spectrum of ?more free? and ?less free?, with regard to government intervention, oriented vertically on an axis. When the window moves or expands along this axis, an idea at a given location may become more or less politically acceptable as the window moves relative to it. The degrees of acceptance[4] of public ideas can be described roughly as:

    Unthinkable
    Radical
    Acceptable
    Sensible
    Popular
    Policy

The Overton window is a means of visualizing which ideas define that range of acceptance by where they fall in it. Proponents of policies outside the window seek to persuade or educate the public so that the window either ?moves? or expands to encompass them. Opponents of current policies, or similar ones currently within the window, likewise seek to convince people that these should be considered unacceptable.

Other formulations of the process created after Overton's death add the concept of moving the window, such as deliberately promoting ideas even less acceptable than the previous "outer fringe" ideas, with the intention of making the current fringe ideas acceptable by comparison.[5] The "door-in-the-face" technique of persuasion is a similar concept.

I am sure a version of the Overton Window theory was the down-fall of Rome. Remember that the Roman Senate became impotent post Caesar's assassination, monetary problems, decadence, crop failures, and to a degree the rise of Christianity.

We are living history man!
   

Yep.

1000meterstare

  • Guest
Re: Starbuck's Marriage View
« Reply #11 on: April 01, 2013, 12:04:20 PM »
If I went around telling people "I'mstraight, I'm straight!  Look how straight I am", they would lock me up.  I open carry in Starbucks just to make those metrosexuals feel uncomfortable. [URL=http://www.smileyvault.co

Offline Reaver

  • Hardcore Prepper
  • ******
  • Posts: 3256
  • Karma: +3/-0
  • I just want it to start already
    • ASTINvlogs
Re: Starbuck's Marriage View
« Reply #12 on: April 01, 2013, 03:28:04 PM »
Who the fuck cares.

Does he support gun rights?

Some things are more important than some gay ass religious zealot bullshit. If the fags wanna have a stupid ceremony to show their love then so fucking be it. Just leave me and my tax dollars out of it.
Any station this is net, any station this is net. Monster One Alpha Radio check over.

CrystalHunter1989

  • Guest
Re: Starbuck's Marriage View
« Reply #13 on: April 01, 2013, 03:33:05 PM »

That's the thing. Gays have been around forever. This movement just seems as another "in your face" type thing. (no pun intended) Just another way for the left to upset the apple cart.
[/quote]

We're not up to ancient Rome levels of gayness....yet. Back then, you had married men (especially in the upper classes) taking male lovers, some as young as fourteen (granted, there was no age stigma in the law of that land).

Slippery slope? History is ALWAYS a slippery slope.

I have to wonder how many of them actually support so-called "human rights" and how many just want to punish conservatives for X, Y, and Z reasons.

Offline Reaver

  • Hardcore Prepper
  • ******
  • Posts: 3256
  • Karma: +3/-0
  • I just want it to start already
    • ASTINvlogs
Re: Starbuck's Marriage View
« Reply #14 on: April 01, 2013, 04:15:14 PM »
Me personally.
I'm married, been married for 7 years now. I would be just as happy and in love with the same exact person not being married. Marriage nowadays is just a form of making paying the bills easier. People marry and get divorced on a wimb, drunken stuper, legitimate reasons or just for the hell of it. 

This whole, the bible says so shit needs to stop primarily because its hypocritical as fuck. It also says its not your position to judge. Leave that to the all mighty, and mind your own dam business.
Any station this is net, any station this is net. Monster One Alpha Radio check over.

CrystalHunter1989

  • Guest
Re: Starbuck's Marriage View
« Reply #15 on: April 01, 2013, 04:25:24 PM »
Me personally.
I'm married, been married for 7 years now. I would be just as happy and in love with the same exact person not being married. Marriage nowadays is just a form of making paying the bills easier. People marry and get divorced on a wimb, drunken stuper, legitimate reasons or just for the hell of it. 

This whole, the bible says so shit needs to stop primarily because its hypocritical as fuck. It also says its not your position to judge. Leave that to the all mighty, and mind your own dam business.

It's only hypocritical if the law is not followed by those who profess to live by it. Bottom line: we're no where near resolving this, or any other issue, as a nation any time soon no matter what the courts say.

Offline crudos

  • Community Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2565
  • Karma: +7/-2
  • Expect Resistance
Re: Starbuck's Marriage View
« Reply #16 on: April 01, 2013, 05:32:27 PM »
Hetro couples have been messing up marriage for centuries, no harm in letting gay couple have the same rights. My wife, the minister, doesn't see any reason why gay folks can't have the same rights as the rest of us. And she is the smartest non-christian, who will school you three-ways from Sunday service on the bible and it's interpretations.

Offline WhiteWolfReloaded

  • Senior Prepper
  • ****
  • Posts: 437
  • Karma: +1/-0
Re: Starbuck's Marriage View
« Reply #17 on: April 01, 2013, 05:58:42 PM »
Hetro couples have been messing up marriage for centuries, no harm in letting gay couple have the same rights. My wife, the minister, doesn't see any reason why gay folks can't have the same rights as the rest of us. And she is the smartest non-christian, who will school you three-ways from Sunday service on the bible and it's interpretations.

Marriage isn't a right. Marriage is a covenant between a man and a woman. BIG difference. Kind of like the Second Amendment isn't for hunting. Ya dig? Socialist assholes can call it whatever they want with pretty words, but it doesn't make it true. The only thing homosexuals deserve is to not be heckled, bothered, or murdered. In other words, they can go about their lives. End of story.

Offline Reaver

  • Hardcore Prepper
  • ******
  • Posts: 3256
  • Karma: +3/-0
  • I just want it to start already
    • ASTINvlogs
Re: Starbuck's Marriage View
« Reply #18 on: April 01, 2013, 06:16:24 PM »
Bottom line.

We all should have the right to pursue our own happiness.
Religion based ideas ruin that. If your a constitutionalist you should be pro fag. Just because of they want to be happy with a cock in their mouth they should. Who am I or you to tell them no. Your not.

Look, I'm not a fag, and me personally I think it's fucking gross. But it's not my place to tell them they can't be happy. Do y'all thing. Just leave me out of it.


Any station this is net, any station this is net. Monster One Alpha Radio check over.

Offline sledge

  • Community Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2328
  • Karma: +5/-0
Re: Starbuck's Marriage View
« Reply #19 on: April 01, 2013, 06:26:37 PM »
I'd really love to join in this discussion.  But I can't do it without letting my bias take control.  The "Judge not lest you be judged thing".  I will say that I tend to agree with Whitewolf.


So I'll just mind my own business and let God sort them out.




In the pursuit of liberty, many will fall. In the pursuit of fascism, many will be against the wall..........   Courtesy of Xydaco

Offline sledge

  • Community Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2328
  • Karma: +5/-0
Re: Starbuck's Marriage View
« Reply #20 on: April 01, 2013, 06:36:14 PM »
Reaver, were I you I would give the Bible a little more respect in an effort to avoid hell for eternity.  I hear hell is infested with demon creatures possessing cotton ball tails, longs ears, and sharp teeth.

Just saying.  : )



In the pursuit of liberty, many will fall. In the pursuit of fascism, many will be against the wall..........   Courtesy of Xydaco

Offline thatGirl

  • Senior Prepper
  • ****
  • Posts: 434
  • Karma: +4/-0
  • Extinction is the rule. Survival is the exception.
Re: Starbuck's Marriage View
« Reply #21 on: April 01, 2013, 07:16:40 PM »
Reaver, were I you I would give the Bible a little more respect in an effort to avoid hell for eternity.  I hear hell is infested with demon creatures possessing cotton ball tails, longs ears, and sharp teeth.

Just saying.  : )


Not a bad suggestion, Sledge.  If nothing else, it's a heavy enough book to turn demon bunnies into dust bunnies if you swing it hard enough.  Some call it the "good" book, but I think it's great!

I Kick Ass for the Lord


Personally I believe in equal rights for all, but I don't actually understand why marriage is even dictated or recognized by the state, the feds, etc... That's a personal, spiritual choice like what brand of tampon you use, only marriage won't stop the bleeding from a bullet wound...
All the great things are simple, and many can be expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honor, duty, mercy, hope.
Winston Churchill

You have freedom when you're easy in your harness.
Robert Frost

Tomorrow hopes we have learned something from yesterday.
John Wayne

Offline sledge

  • Community Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2328
  • Karma: +5/-0
Re: Starbuck's Marriage View
« Reply #22 on: April 01, 2013, 08:51:06 PM »
Walker I pretty much understand exactly what it means.  The Bible doesn't say not to judge in a righteous manner.  And plenty of people do, feeling they are righteous, whether they are in fact or not.  It also says Judge not lest you be judged.  Which means, if you choose to judge others expect to be judged yourself.  It's a personal choice to cast the first stone.  I make my choices as do everyone else.  We will all answer for them accordingly.  We can hope to hear words of praise from our creator at the final judgement.  But I suspect many will not hear what they were banking on.

Whether someone else turns permissive is none of my business. That is between them and their God or conscience.  The fact that someone else develops permissiveness has no effect on my morals or anyone else's unless we choose to let it.  It is a personal choice, that free will thing.

If their thoughts or permissiveness has no effect on me then I choose not to take God's place in judging them.  I may have opinions and a strong personal disagreement with their actions.  But it's not my place to be their final judge.  Nor to change their view.  If what they do presents a danger to me or mine, then I will no doubt be their final judge.  That is a personal choice I would make and no doubt answer for when my time to be judged arrives.

We each decide what the important issues are for ourselves, and each can be different.  I do not expect for issues important to me to be the same for you, nor should you for me.  We are each individuals, not clones.



In the pursuit of liberty, many will fall. In the pursuit of fascism, many will be against the wall..........   Courtesy of Xydaco

Offline crudos

  • Community Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2565
  • Karma: +7/-2
  • Expect Resistance
Re: Starbuck's Marriage View
« Reply #23 on: April 01, 2013, 09:25:38 PM »
Hetro couples have been messing up marriage for centuries, no harm in letting gay couple have the same rights. My wife, the minister, doesn't see any reason why gay folks can't have the same rights as the rest of us. And she is the smartest non-christian, who will school you three-ways from Sunday service on the bible and it's interpretations.

Marriage isn't a right. Marriage is a covenant between a man and a woman. BIG difference. Kind of like the Second Amendment isn't for hunting. Ya dig? Socialist assholes can call it whatever they want with pretty words, but it doesn't make it true. The only thing homosexuals deserve is to not be heckled, bothered, or murdered. In other words, they can go about their lives. End of story.
Bit late in the game to bring up covenants when the sanctity of marriage has pretty much been ignored by the so-called faithful for centuries. The biblical meaning of marriage has about as much relevance as stoning. Unless your all for old testament punishments. Islam is all over that train, like wise men to a future messiah. I dig, more than you can imagine.

Offline thatGuy

  • Kind Lover
  • Community Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 3454
  • Karma: +12/-0
    • thatGuy's youtube
Re: Starbuck's Marriage View
« Reply #24 on: April 01, 2013, 09:29:33 PM »
The married gays I know aren't infringing on anyone's liberties nor are they destroying healthy homes or the sacred institution of family. I just don't see it happening.

Personally I think we have more important things to discuss.

 C:-) Move along, nothing to see here.