User Profile: Lawrence7

Member Since: May 04, 2011

CommentsDisplaying Lawrence7's 10 most recent comments.

  • Can the Boy Scouts Ban Openly Gay Members?

    March 13, 2013 at 11:46pm

    BTW this is nothing more that government bullying private organizations into doing something they don’t want to do, all for the purpose of appeasing other privately motivated special interest groups.

    What precedent does this set for the government dictating other private organizations who want to define their own specific identity … and practice specific beliefs? Which special interest groups get government backing and which special interest groups don’t?

  • Can the Boy Scouts Ban Openly Gay Members?

    March 13, 2013 at 11:41pm

    BSA can reject homosexuality and lose corporate sponsors, or they can accept homosexuality and lose a whole bunch of members. Question is, which is the better option, losing sponsors or losing members … is there any point to sponsors if there are no members?

    Keep in mind the BSA primary focus is their members, not their sponsors. I hope BSA makes a wise choice in this matter.

  • Okay, so, a State Rep. answering honestly and bluntly is “angry” because he doesn’t agree with a constituent. And a pastor called to serve a congregation is pursuing her “political activism” in response to his rejection of her ideas.

    Anyone see anything wrong with this picture? Is Fulbright a pastor a political activist? I see a conflict of interest here.

    Is it appropriate to label conservative detractors as “angry” simply because they disagree with a liberal opinion? I think not.

  • The laws regarding marriage as defined by a male and female legal union do not discriminate against gay men marrying a woman, or against a gay woman marrying a man.

    Conservatives for the most part would accept (some grudgingly) laws allowing gays to partner with each other as long as it didn’t require changing the definition of Marriage as between a male and a female.

    Maybe what we need to do is eliminate legal Marriages all together and create a new form of personal partnerships, and thus return the historical institution of marriage back over to the churches.

    Gays would gain a lot of ground if they would stop attacking the ideological institutions which disagree with them (forcing others to change), and instead focus on their own immediate personal concerns.

  • Quote: “In an e-mail response, she explained that the GOP should be celebrating and acknowledging that it is a party of intellectual diversity. This is true not only on the same-sex marriage front, but also on a myriad of other important issues.” …. These is a Liberal / Libertarian point of view, to be sure, but not conservative. S.E.Cupp may be calling herself conservative but this quote reveals she is not.

    Quote: “Cupp doubled-down on the notion that there is no singular conservative view on gay rights:” … uhm, yeah, there is. The conservative point of view is that gay’s do not require special rights that the rest of us currently do not have. This is a matter of definition, or re-definition of the concept of marriage as between a male and a female. This rule has nothing to do with one’s personal choices regarding their sexual orientation.

  • And… in true liberal straw-man/mis-direction… NOBODY EVERY SAID IT WAS … A gun is an “Offensive” weapon that average people can used in a “Defensive” action against bad guys who are tougher than them.

  • A liberal main-stream-media source publishing something in poor taste and offensive to the sensibilities of patriots and conservatives? Say it isn’t so …

  • Attacking stereotyping, by using stereotypes, priceless. Thanks for the chuckles, Margyt.

  • cbrian1978, your not a parent, are you?

  • and you challenging God in anger is foolish.