gay marriage bill passed in ny .... wonderful

[antonlavey]

Originally Posted by CWrite78

Originally Posted by hAzEee aNd sN3aKerS

You see I am not the only one who thinks that this is a disgrace that they passed this bill in New York. Bishop Nicholas Dimarzio thinks it is too.Read his article below because he has  very sensible viewpoints on this situation. It's about the younger generation. The younger generation being brainwashed into thinking it's ok to be a homosexual because it is legal. SMH

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[h1]Passage of gay nuptials in New York State is another 'nail in the coffin' of marriage[/h1]

By Most Reverend Nicholas Dimarzio, Ph.D., .D., Bishop Of Brooklyn


Sunday, June 26th 2011, 4:00 AM



The children of our state deserve the best. We put in place public policies to ensure that children have the proper nutrition, the best education available and are safe from harms way.


There is no question that our society genuinely values the young. Yet, despite these efforts, the number of young people suffering from emotional disorders is disconcerting and our teen suicide rate is alarming.


Sociologists and psychologists agree that stable families where a mother and father live together in a loving union are a key predicator of a child's future health, well-being and success.


In other words, this is the best or ideal circumstances for our children for which we should all strive. This arrangement just seems to be built into our DNA.


Tragically, we no longer understand the primary purpose of marriage as the institution by which a man and woman bring new life into the world and teach the child to become a productive citizen.


In striving for that end, the man and woman discover their own mutual consolation. Tragically, we somehow have come to view marriage as legitimizing our individual need for love and affection.


As a consequence we have all witnessed the surge in numbers of divorce, single parenthood and cohabitation outside of marriage. Not even thirty years ago this would have been almost unthinkable and certainly scandalous.


I believe the passage of same sex marriage is another "nail in the coffin" of marriage.


It is destructive because we fail to view marriage in the context of a vocation: a calling to participate in the great enterprise of forming the next generation.


Marriage is reduced to an empty honor.


We who opposes Same-sex Marriage are not callous to the very real human longings for friendship, affection and belonging that proponents of this legislation espouse as the rational "Marriage Equality".


Indeed, we like other New Yorker discuss these issues with our friends, family, co-workers and loved ones who have same-sex attractions. We have in part failed as the proponents of the historical understanding of marriage as that between a man and a woman precisely because we have sought to be sensitive to those who have same-sex attractions. Perhaps we must now speak more forcefully and clearly.


As the chief shepherd of the Catholics in our City's two most populous boroughs, Brooklyn and Queens, the decision of our Catholic Governor and State Legislature to overturn the common understanding of marriage that, despite many developments over thousands of years, has always been understood between a man and woman. That there was virtually no public debate on the issue and that the entire matter was concluded in just over thirty-minutes late on a Friday evening is disgraceful.


As a protest, I have asked my collaborators not to bestow or accept honors, nor to extend a platform of any kind to any state elected official, in all our parishes and churches for the foreseeable future.


Our children in NY State deserve the best and unfortunately there seem to be very few if any "Profiles in Courage."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

& link to article   http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions...e_is_another_nail_in_the_coffin_of_marri.html

shut up. the nail in the coffin is straight couples getting married for the sake of getting married and divorcing within 6 months.

also, try posting an article that isn't one sided. a Reverend?

Dude said "I'm glad I'm not the only one who feels this way" like he got it from a completey unbiased source. See people EVEN a revered thinks homosexuality is a sin and is going to open up the gates of hell.

These people need to stick to what they do best, fondling little boys and covering it up.

 

[antonlavey]

Originally Posted by CWrite78

Originally Posted by hAzEee aNd sN3aKerS

You see I am not the only one who thinks that this is a disgrace that they passed this bill in New York. Bishop Nicholas Dimarzio thinks it is too.Read his article below because he has  very sensible viewpoints on this situation. It's about the younger generation. The younger generation being brainwashed into thinking it's ok to be a homosexual because it is legal. SMH

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[h1]Passage of gay nuptials in New York State is another 'nail in the coffin' of marriage[/h1]

By Most Reverend Nicholas Dimarzio, Ph.D., .D., Bishop Of Brooklyn


Sunday, June 26th 2011, 4:00 AM



The children of our state deserve the best. We put in place public policies to ensure that children have the proper nutrition, the best education available and are safe from harms way.


There is no question that our society genuinely values the young. Yet, despite these efforts, the number of young people suffering from emotional disorders is disconcerting and our teen suicide rate is alarming.


Sociologists and psychologists agree that stable families where a mother and father live together in a loving union are a key predicator of a child's future health, well-being and success.


In other words, this is the best or ideal circumstances for our children for which we should all strive. This arrangement just seems to be built into our DNA.


Tragically, we no longer understand the primary purpose of marriage as the institution by which a man and woman bring new life into the world and teach the child to become a productive citizen.


In striving for that end, the man and woman discover their own mutual consolation. Tragically, we somehow have come to view marriage as legitimizing our individual need for love and affection.


As a consequence we have all witnessed the surge in numbers of divorce, single parenthood and cohabitation outside of marriage. Not even thirty years ago this would have been almost unthinkable and certainly scandalous.


I believe the passage of same sex marriage is another "nail in the coffin" of marriage.


It is destructive because we fail to view marriage in the context of a vocation: a calling to participate in the great enterprise of forming the next generation.


Marriage is reduced to an empty honor.


We who opposes Same-sex Marriage are not callous to the very real human longings for friendship, affection and belonging that proponents of this legislation espouse as the rational "Marriage Equality".


Indeed, we like other New Yorker discuss these issues with our friends, family, co-workers and loved ones who have same-sex attractions. We have in part failed as the proponents of the historical understanding of marriage as that between a man and a woman precisely because we have sought to be sensitive to those who have same-sex attractions. Perhaps we must now speak more forcefully and clearly.


As the chief shepherd of the Catholics in our City's two most populous boroughs, Brooklyn and Queens, the decision of our Catholic Governor and State Legislature to overturn the common understanding of marriage that, despite many developments over thousands of years, has always been understood between a man and woman. That there was virtually no public debate on the issue and that the entire matter was concluded in just over thirty-minutes late on a Friday evening is disgraceful.


As a protest, I have asked my collaborators not to bestow or accept honors, nor to extend a platform of any kind to any state elected official, in all our parishes and churches for the foreseeable future.


Our children in NY State deserve the best and unfortunately there seem to be very few if any "Profiles in Courage."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

& link to article   http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions...e_is_another_nail_in_the_coffin_of_marri.html

shut up. the nail in the coffin is straight couples getting married for the sake of getting married and divorcing within 6 months.

also, try posting an article that isn't one sided. a Reverend?

Dude said "I'm glad I'm not the only one who feels this way" like he got it from a completey unbiased source. See people EVEN a revered thinks homosexuality is a sin and is going to open up the gates of hell.

These people need to stick to what they do best, fondling little boys and covering it up.

 

[cwrite78]

it's sad how clueless these bible thumpers are.

with all the BS religion brings, the last thing i'd want to associate myself with is a church and it's pedophile preachers

 

[cwrite78]

it's sad how clueless these bible thumpers are.

with all the BS religion brings, the last thing i'd want to associate myself with is a church and it's pedophile preachers

 

[anotherprodigy]

Originally Posted by AntonLaVey

Originally Posted by anotherprodigy

Originally Posted by AntonLaVey


Like my man Louie C.K. said "Black people can't mess with time machines". You must be white.

I may or may not be Black based on a joke a white guy told. One joke single-handedly articulates Blacks' perspective. Louis C.K. really is gifted when he can convince you, a black man, that he understands Black life better than the blacks in his audience and outside his demographic. I am thoroughly impressed.

   In case you did not know the 1920s were the home of the Harlem Renaissance and by many accounts an emergence of acceptance of homosexuality. There was self-expression and tolerance everywhere, because the majority race was generally in a good mood, because of the thriving economy surrounding them. No, it wasn't a more tolerant time than today. Yet, in many ways it was one of the foundations of ideological thought that inspires many of the civil rights movements, including the plight experienced by gays, today.

LOL @ you acting like many black people wouldn't feel this way as well....pre-1980 I'm good. Too much uncertainty. Louis CK didn't have to convince me that the past were bad times for black people. Are you #$%$# kidding me?

You think Louie CK is the reason why I think the 1800s and the early 1900s were bad times for black people. Not every black person in the 1920s lived in Harlem, some were in the South getting harassed by Klan members. It's cool that you think that time was great, but don't sit there and try to tell me you don't understand why a MODERN DAY black person would be reluctant. Hell even many white people would be reluctant to live during times in the past. Get over yourself. I bet you thought you were spittin' knowledge too.

Then there's the whole not being able to marry white women thing. Yea I'm not about that life...sue me.

You have an incredible ability to pinpoint a segment of someone's argument in order to distort it and stretch it as the whole.
But, I'll play along. Harlem Renaissance did not mean that you lived in Harlem, wise guy.

I never said, that times were not harsh in the past. I am the type of person who operates better in the heart of struggle and I'd rather be a proponent of change rather than a benefactor. The 1920s was a dynamic time for change and even more progress could not have been progressed. Furthermore, someone else stated that present day is a time of equality, since we're no no longer in 1920. I was debating that we're not living in a time of equality, just as they were not in the 1920s. The 1920s were more tolerant than the 1930s by many accounts (think Great Depression), just as a distant future will be much more accepting than we are today.

Finally, it sucks reading much of what you post, because you are knowledgeable about a variety of topics, but you fail to share/spread much of it, because you'd rather insult others for the sake of masquerading as the winner in an argument and increasing your e-fame.

 

[anotherprodigy]

Originally Posted by AntonLaVey

Originally Posted by anotherprodigy

Originally Posted by AntonLaVey


Like my man Louie C.K. said "Black people can't mess with time machines". You must be white.

I may or may not be Black based on a joke a white guy told. One joke single-handedly articulates Blacks' perspective. Louis C.K. really is gifted when he can convince you, a black man, that he understands Black life better than the blacks in his audience and outside his demographic. I am thoroughly impressed.

   In case you did not know the 1920s were the home of the Harlem Renaissance and by many accounts an emergence of acceptance of homosexuality. There was self-expression and tolerance everywhere, because the majority race was generally in a good mood, because of the thriving economy surrounding them. No, it wasn't a more tolerant time than today. Yet, in many ways it was one of the foundations of ideological thought that inspires many of the civil rights movements, including the plight experienced by gays, today.

LOL @ you acting like many black people wouldn't feel this way as well....pre-1980 I'm good. Too much uncertainty. Louis CK didn't have to convince me that the past were bad times for black people. Are you #$%$# kidding me?

You think Louie CK is the reason why I think the 1800s and the early 1900s were bad times for black people. Not every black person in the 1920s lived in Harlem, some were in the South getting harassed by Klan members. It's cool that you think that time was great, but don't sit there and try to tell me you don't understand why a MODERN DAY black person would be reluctant. Hell even many white people would be reluctant to live during times in the past. Get over yourself. I bet you thought you were spittin' knowledge too.

Then there's the whole not being able to marry white women thing. Yea I'm not about that life...sue me.

You have an incredible ability to pinpoint a segment of someone's argument in order to distort it and stretch it as the whole.
But, I'll play along. Harlem Renaissance did not mean that you lived in Harlem, wise guy.

I never said, that times were not harsh in the past. I am the type of person who operates better in the heart of struggle and I'd rather be a proponent of change rather than a benefactor. The 1920s was a dynamic time for change and even more progress could not have been progressed. Furthermore, someone else stated that present day is a time of equality, since we're no no longer in 1920. I was debating that we're not living in a time of equality, just as they were not in the 1920s. The 1920s were more tolerant than the 1930s by many accounts (think Great Depression), just as a distant future will be much more accepting than we are today.

Finally, it sucks reading much of what you post, because you are knowledgeable about a variety of topics, but you fail to share/spread much of it, because you'd rather insult others for the sake of masquerading as the winner in an argument and increasing your e-fame.

 

[antonlavey]

Originally Posted by anotherprodigy

Originally Posted by AntonLaVey

Originally Posted by anotherprodigy

I may or may not be Black based on a joke a white guy told. One joke single-handedly articulates Blacks' perspective. Louis C.K. really is gifted when he can convince you, a black man, that he understands Black life better than the blacks in his audience and outside his demographic. I am thoroughly impressed.

   In case you did not know the 1920s were the home of the Harlem Renaissance and by many accounts an emergence of acceptance of homosexuality. There was self-expression and tolerance everywhere, because the majority race was generally in a good mood, because of the thriving economy surrounding them. No, it wasn't a more tolerant time than today. Yet, in many ways it was one of the foundations of ideological thought that inspires many of the civil rights movements, including the plight experienced by gays, today.

LOL @ you acting like many black people wouldn't feel this way as well....pre-1980 I'm good. Too much uncertainty. Louis CK didn't have to convince me that the past were bad times for black people. Are you #$%$# kidding me?

You think Louie CK is the reason why I think the 1800s and the early 1900s were bad times for black people. Not every black person in the 1920s lived in Harlem, some were in the South getting harassed by Klan members. It's cool that you think that time was great, but don't sit there and try to tell me you don't understand why a MODERN DAY black person would be reluctant. Hell even many white people would be reluctant to live during times in the past. Get over yourself. I bet you thought you were spittin' knowledge too.

Then there's the whole not being able to marry white women thing. Yea I'm not about that life...sue me.

You have an incredible ability to pinpoint a segment of someone's argument in order to distort it and stretch it as the whole.
But, I'll play along. Harlem Renaissance did not mean that you lived in Harlem, wise guy.

I never said, that times were not harsh in the past. I am the type of person who operates better in the heart of struggle and I'd rather be a proponent of change rather than a benefactor. The 1920s was a dynamic time for change and even more progress could not have been progressed. Furthermore, someone else stated that present day is a time of equality, since we're no no longer in 1920. I was debating that we're not living in a time of equality, just as they were not in the 1920s. The 1920s were more tolerant than the 1930s by many accounts (think Great Depression), just as a distant future will be much more accepting than we are today.

Finally, it sucks reading much of what you post, because you are knowledgeable about a variety of topics, but you fail to share/spread much of it, because you'd rather insult others for the sake of masquerading as the winner in an argument and increasing your e-fame.

Look did I miss anything from your post....you tried to act like a black person being reluctant to live in the 1920s isn't a sentiment shared by many. There are always going to be struggles for equality, as long as greedy men exist on this planet. But let's not downplay the progress that has been made since the 1800s and early 1900s. That is all. And don't act like there ur post didn't have a condescending tone as well. If you love the 1920s more power to you, but don't act like you don't understand why a black man wouldn't be quick to hop in a time machine and travel to the 20s.....wise guy

 

[antonlavey]

Originally Posted by anotherprodigy

Originally Posted by AntonLaVey

Originally Posted by anotherprodigy

I may or may not be Black based on a joke a white guy told. One joke single-handedly articulates Blacks' perspective. Louis C.K. really is gifted when he can convince you, a black man, that he understands Black life better than the blacks in his audience and outside his demographic. I am thoroughly impressed.

   In case you did not know the 1920s were the home of the Harlem Renaissance and by many accounts an emergence of acceptance of homosexuality. There was self-expression and tolerance everywhere, because the majority race was generally in a good mood, because of the thriving economy surrounding them. No, it wasn't a more tolerant time than today. Yet, in many ways it was one of the foundations of ideological thought that inspires many of the civil rights movements, including the plight experienced by gays, today.

LOL @ you acting like many black people wouldn't feel this way as well....pre-1980 I'm good. Too much uncertainty. Louis CK didn't have to convince me that the past were bad times for black people. Are you #$%$# kidding me?

You think Louie CK is the reason why I think the 1800s and the early 1900s were bad times for black people. Not every black person in the 1920s lived in Harlem, some were in the South getting harassed by Klan members. It's cool that you think that time was great, but don't sit there and try to tell me you don't understand why a MODERN DAY black person would be reluctant. Hell even many white people would be reluctant to live during times in the past. Get over yourself. I bet you thought you were spittin' knowledge too.

Then there's the whole not being able to marry white women thing. Yea I'm not about that life...sue me.

You have an incredible ability to pinpoint a segment of someone's argument in order to distort it and stretch it as the whole.
But, I'll play along. Harlem Renaissance did not mean that you lived in Harlem, wise guy.

I never said, that times were not harsh in the past. I am the type of person who operates better in the heart of struggle and I'd rather be a proponent of change rather than a benefactor. The 1920s was a dynamic time for change and even more progress could not have been progressed. Furthermore, someone else stated that present day is a time of equality, since we're no no longer in 1920. I was debating that we're not living in a time of equality, just as they were not in the 1920s. The 1920s were more tolerant than the 1930s by many accounts (think Great Depression), just as a distant future will be much more accepting than we are today.

Finally, it sucks reading much of what you post, because you are knowledgeable about a variety of topics, but you fail to share/spread much of it, because you'd rather insult others for the sake of masquerading as the winner in an argument and increasing your e-fame.

Look did I miss anything from your post....you tried to act like a black person being reluctant to live in the 1920s isn't a sentiment shared by many. There are always going to be struggles for equality, as long as greedy men exist on this planet. But let's not downplay the progress that has been made since the 1800s and early 1900s. That is all. And don't act like there ur post didn't have a condescending tone as well. If you love the 1920s more power to you, but don't act like you don't understand why a black man wouldn't be quick to hop in a time machine and travel to the 20s.....wise guy

 

[staystrong]

**+! it this world is going to hell anyway..

 

[staystrong]

**+! it this world is going to hell anyway..

 

[staystrong]

**+! IT LET THE GAYS MARRY THIS WORLD IS GOING TO HELL ANYWAY

 

[staystrong]

**+! IT LET THE GAYS MARRY THIS WORLD IS GOING TO HELL ANYWAY

 

[antonlavey]

Originally Posted by scshift

Wait who really thinks that being gay is a choice? Like did you just decide one day to flip a coin and heads was straight and tails was gay?

And if that was the case, then why the heck did they pick gay? With all the negative backlash, why didn't they just go with straight, seeing as women are attractive?

There's no argument that being straight is natural while gay isn't. Being gay does not help the species reproduce. So why would you want to take that route?

That's what I'm saying....let's say being gay is a choice, why would anyone WILLINGLY choose it? Are there really that many masochists on this planet. I'm not even saying gay people aren't happy with their lives considering how much $%#$ people put them through, but who the hell would willingly take that route.....especially if they're not really attracted to men cause God didn't create them that way.

 

[cwrite78]

really, that was double post worthy?

and hell is a made up place, just like heaven.

when you die, that's it. straight to the ground as worm food.

or cremated, w/e you want.

 

[cwrite78]

really, that was double post worthy?

and hell is a made up place, just like heaven.

when you die, that's it. straight to the ground as worm food.

or cremated, w/e you want.

 

[antonlavey]

Originally Posted by scshift

Wait who really thinks that being gay is a choice? Like did you just decide one day to flip a coin and heads was straight and tails was gay?

And if that was the case, then why the heck did they pick gay? With all the negative backlash, why didn't they just go with straight, seeing as women are attractive?

There's no argument that being straight is natural while gay isn't. Being gay does not help the species reproduce. So why would you want to take that route?

That's what I'm saying....let's say being gay is a choice, why would anyone WILLINGLY choose it? Are there really that many masochists on this planet. I'm not even saying gay people aren't happy with their lives considering how much $%#$ people put them through, but who the hell would willingly take that route.....especially if they're not really attracted to men cause God didn't create them that way.

 

[scuse7]

who *%%%#%+ cares who get married?

sad that we need a law for this to happen

 

[scuse7]

who *%%%#%+ cares who get married?

sad that we need a law for this to happen

 

[gambit215]

Originally Posted by scshift

Wait who really thinks that being gay is a choice? Like did you just decide one day to flip a coin and heads was straight and tails was gay?

And if that was the case, then why the heck did they pick gay? With all the negative backlash, why didn't they just go with straight, seeing as women are attractive?

There's no argument that being straight is natural while gay isn't. Being gay does not help the species reproduce. So why would you want to take that route?

Being Homosexual is not a "Choice"

Being Gay is.............

 

[gambit215]

Originally Posted by scshift

Wait who really thinks that being gay is a choice? Like did you just decide one day to flip a coin and heads was straight and tails was gay?

And if that was the case, then why the heck did they pick gay? With all the negative backlash, why didn't they just go with straight, seeing as women are attractive?

There's no argument that being straight is natural while gay isn't. Being gay does not help the species reproduce. So why would you want to take that route?

Being Homosexual is not a "Choice"

Being Gay is.............

 

[antonlavey]

Originally Posted by gambit215

Originally Posted by scshift

Wait who really thinks that being gay is a choice? Like did you just decide one day to flip a coin and heads was straight and tails was gay?

And if that was the case, then why the heck did they pick gay? With all the negative backlash, why didn't they just go with straight, seeing as women are attractive?

There's no argument that being straight is natural while gay isn't. Being gay does not help the species reproduce. So why would you want to take that route?

Being Homosexual is not a "Choice"

Being Gay is.............

 

[antonlavey]

Originally Posted by gambit215

Originally Posted by scshift

Wait who really thinks that being gay is a choice? Like did you just decide one day to flip a coin and heads was straight and tails was gay?

And if that was the case, then why the heck did they pick gay? With all the negative backlash, why didn't they just go with straight, seeing as women are attractive?

There's no argument that being straight is natural while gay isn't. Being gay does not help the species reproduce. So why would you want to take that route?

Being Homosexual is not a "Choice"

Being Gay is.............

 

[anotherprodigy]

Originally Posted by AntonLaVey

Originally Posted by anotherprodigy

Originally Posted by AntonLaVey



LOL @ you acting like many black people wouldn't feel this way as well....pre-1980 I'm good. Too much uncertainty. Louis CK didn't have to convince me that the past were bad times for black people. Are you #$%$# kidding me?

You think Louie CK is the reason why I think the 1800s and the early 1900s were bad times for black people. Not every black person in the 1920s lived in Harlem, some were in the South getting harassed by Klan members. It's cool that you think that time was great, but don't sit there and try to tell me you don't understand why a MODERN DAY black person would be reluctant. Hell even many white people would be reluctant to live during times in the past. Get over yourself. I bet you thought you were spittin' knowledge too.

Then there's the whole not being able to marry white women thing. Yea I'm not about that life...sue me.

You have an incredible ability to pinpoint a segment of someone's argument in order to distort it and stretch it as the whole.
But, I'll play along. Harlem Renaissance did not mean that you lived in Harlem, wise guy.

I never said, that times were not harsh in the past. I am the type of person who operates better in the heart of struggle and I'd rather be a proponent of change rather than a benefactor. The 1920s was a dynamic time for change and even more progress could not have been progressed. Furthermore, someone else stated that present day is a time of equality, since we're no no longer in 1920. I was debating that we're not living in a time of equality, just as they were not in the 1920s. The 1920s were more tolerant than the 1930s by many accounts (think Great Depression), just as a distant future will be much more accepting than we are today.

Finally, it sucks reading much of what you post, because you are knowledgeable about a variety of topics, but you fail to share/spread much of it, because you'd rather insult others for the sake of masquerading as the winner in an argument and increasing your e-fame.

Look did I miss anything from your post....you tried to act like a black person being reluctant to live in the 1920s isn't a sentiment shared by many. There are always going to be struggles for equality, as long as greedy men exist on this planet. But let's not downplay the progress that has been made since the 1800s and early 1900s. That is all. And don't act like there ur post didn't have a condescending tone as well. If you love the 1920s more power to you, but don't act like you don't understand why a black man wouldn't be quick to hop in a time machine and travel to the 20s.....wise guy

If you remember, I was responding to the fact that YOU labeled me white for being open to living in the 1920s (which wasn't even what me and dude were discussing). And yes, I’d accept an offer to travel via time machine. I’d go tothe distance past and the future. But, since that is not possible, I willcontinue to rely on books. So sue me, for being open and appreciative of notonly different people, but different times and places.

 

[anotherprodigy]

Originally Posted by AntonLaVey

Originally Posted by anotherprodigy

Originally Posted by AntonLaVey



LOL @ you acting like many black people wouldn't feel this way as well....pre-1980 I'm good. Too much uncertainty. Louis CK didn't have to convince me that the past were bad times for black people. Are you #$%$# kidding me?

You think Louie CK is the reason why I think the 1800s and the early 1900s were bad times for black people. Not every black person in the 1920s lived in Harlem, some were in the South getting harassed by Klan members. It's cool that you think that time was great, but don't sit there and try to tell me you don't understand why a MODERN DAY black person would be reluctant. Hell even many white people would be reluctant to live during times in the past. Get over yourself. I bet you thought you were spittin' knowledge too.

Then there's the whole not being able to marry white women thing. Yea I'm not about that life...sue me.

You have an incredible ability to pinpoint a segment of someone's argument in order to distort it and stretch it as the whole.
But, I'll play along. Harlem Renaissance did not mean that you lived in Harlem, wise guy.

I never said, that times were not harsh in the past. I am the type of person who operates better in the heart of struggle and I'd rather be a proponent of change rather than a benefactor. The 1920s was a dynamic time for change and even more progress could not have been progressed. Furthermore, someone else stated that present day is a time of equality, since we're no no longer in 1920. I was debating that we're not living in a time of equality, just as they were not in the 1920s. The 1920s were more tolerant than the 1930s by many accounts (think Great Depression), just as a distant future will be much more accepting than we are today.

Finally, it sucks reading much of what you post, because you are knowledgeable about a variety of topics, but you fail to share/spread much of it, because you'd rather insult others for the sake of masquerading as the winner in an argument and increasing your e-fame.

Look did I miss anything from your post....you tried to act like a black person being reluctant to live in the 1920s isn't a sentiment shared by many. There are always going to be struggles for equality, as long as greedy men exist on this planet. But let's not downplay the progress that has been made since the 1800s and early 1900s. That is all. And don't act like there ur post didn't have a condescending tone as well. If you love the 1920s more power to you, but don't act like you don't understand why a black man wouldn't be quick to hop in a time machine and travel to the 20s.....wise guy

If you remember, I was responding to the fact that YOU labeled me white for being open to living in the 1920s (which wasn't even what me and dude were discussing). And yes, I’d accept an offer to travel via time machine. I’d go tothe distance past and the future. But, since that is not possible, I willcontinue to rely on books. So sue me, for being open and appreciative of notonly different people, but different times and places.

 

[antonlavey]

Originally Posted by anotherprodigy

Originally Posted by AntonLaVey

Originally Posted by anotherprodigy

You have an incredible ability to pinpoint a segment of someone's argument in order to distort it and stretch it as the whole.
But, I'll play along. Harlem Renaissance did not mean that you lived in Harlem, wise guy.

I never said, that times were not harsh in the past. I am the type of person who operates better in the heart of struggle and I'd rather be a proponent of change rather than a benefactor. The 1920s was a dynamic time for change and even more progress could not have been progressed. Furthermore, someone else stated that present day is a time of equality, since we're no no longer in 1920. I was debating that we're not living in a time of equality, just as they were not in the 1920s. The 1920s were more tolerant than the 1930s by many accounts (think Great Depression), just as a distant future will be much more accepting than we are today.

Finally, it sucks reading much of what you post, because you are knowledgeable about a variety of topics, but you fail to share/spread much of it, because you'd rather insult others for the sake of masquerading as the winner in an argument and increasing your e-fame.

Look did I miss anything from your post....you tried to act like a black person being reluctant to live in the 1920s isn't a sentiment shared by many. There are always going to be struggles for equality, as long as greedy men exist on this planet. But let's not downplay the progress that has been made since the 1800s and early 1900s. That is all. And don't act like there ur post didn't have a condescending tone as well. If you love the 1920s more power to you, but don't act like you don't understand why a black man wouldn't be quick to hop in a time machine and travel to the 20s.....wise guy

If you remember, I was responding to the fact that YOU labeled me white for being open to living in the 1920s (which wasn't even what me and dude were discussing). And yes, I’d accept an offer to travel via time machine. I’d go tothe distance past and the future. But, since that is not possible, I willcontinue to rely on books. So sue me, for being open and appreciative of notonly different people, but different times and places.

As I am....doesn't mean I wanna live in a different time period permanently. Maybe cause I know too much...shrugs.

I'd keep thinking to myself "I think I've seen this before somewhere, it's not going to end well".

Anyhow like I said, many black people/people in general would share the same sentiment, let's not act like I said anything that goes against popular beliefs. I'd like to visit many times during human history but even that is too risky.....too much could go wrong. I'm good.