LogFAQs > #978808491

CyborgSage00x0 posted...

It should also be mentioned that those who think their religious beliefs should be respected and adhered to are the ones least likely to respect the beliefs of others. It's just thinly-veiled elitism.

That and insinuating/claiming that one's own religious status gives them special rights (which against they complain about the LGBTQ+ community supposedly doing so), is dangerously up there with celebrating false idol or professing to be God's equal.

So basically another violation from the people claiming moral high ground.

EPR-radar posted...

Of course not.

And while its true that nearly all of these bigoted GOP moral busybodies are hypocrites, calling out their hypocrisy is just an entertainment, not a real argument.

So their hypocrisy is pure entertainment. Keep those stories coming of the anti-gay megachurch pastors snorting coke off the abs (or asses) of rent boys.

Yeah just I don't know. I was told this is inhumane/uncivil on grounds of demanding a purity test, but I wonder why votes determining LGBTQ+ rights can't morally demand Anti-Voters to prove they abide by their moral code religious or no.

They'd still get to voice objection even if the result is proven that they are immoral/dishonest.

And I feel if one professes to be attempting a ban for the good of God and kids everywhere, one would be willing to deal with an inconvenience to do so. Basically the political/adult equivalent of a kid doing extra chores for money beyond their usual allowance VS just getting what he/she/they want by demanding/begging/asking.

Whereas if a person isn't willing to go for a purity test, it would mean that their views aren't all that important. Thus invalid and by association proving their concern is insincere.