Flags

[Josh]

As has been well documented, we are all forced now to “accept” homosexual “marriage”, despite it being an obvious sham. Two men cannot be married, full stop, ever.

But we can’t speak this reality without being labelled bigots or hateful, just as a man cannot become a woman, but it’s also labelled hateful and bigotry to say this out loud.

This is about perverted people with degenerate, wicked desires forcing their perversions on the rest of us and demanding that we participate by going along with pretending they are “married” or pretending that a man is a woman.

[Ken]

As has been well documented, we are all forced now to “accept” homosexual “marriage”, despite it being an obvious sham. Two men cannot be married, full stop, ever.

But we can’t speak this reality without being labelled bigots or hateful, just as a man cannot become a woman, but it’s also labelled hateful and bigotry to say this out loud.

This is about perverted people with degenerate, wicked desires forcing their perversions on the rest of us and demanding that we participate by going along with pretending they are “married” or pretending that a man is a woman.

No one is forcing you to accept anything. You are free to hold any opinions that you want. And you have a first amendment right to express them just like you are doing right here at this very moment. No one is knocking at your door to arrest you because you are speaking out against gay marriage here on Mennonet. And if you oppose gay marriage, don't get gay married.

But those rights go both ways. People are also free to think whatever they want of YOU. And also free to label you as a hateful bigot. As is THEIR first amendment right. Which is absolutely no different in any way from you labeling other people "degenerate and wicked" as you just did in the paragraph above. And are wont to do here on Mennonet all the time.

See how that works?

[Josh]

You know that’s not how it actually works, and things like pizza parlours and cake decorators get sued now.

[Ken]

You know that’s not how it actually works, and things like pizza parlours and cake decorators get sued now.

It is EXACTLY how it works. Exactly as I described. You absolutely have a constitutional right to think and say whatever you want.

These people have been doing it for 35 years non-stop and in 2010 the Supreme Court upheld their right to do so by an 8-1 vote in the case of Snyder v. Phelps. They have been sued various times and won every time.

[temporal1]

i apologize.
on page 3, i added a RELATED note that is a different topic, it could be a new thread:

i wrote:
related: Justice Alito foresaw the pitfalls

This topic, “Flags,” is best staying narrowly focused on removal of extraneous flags+logos from gov property,
including but not limited to rainbows, and now rainbows+++ variations.

Various states are responding to this now. A good thing.

“A stitch in time saves 9” is true. The stitch was not made, so, now it’s .. 50? One for each state?

[Ken]

i apologize.
on page 3, i added a RELATED note that is a different topic, it could be a new thread:

i wrote:
related: Justice Alito foresaw the pitfalls

This topic, “Flags,” is best staying narrowly focused on removal of extraneous flags+logos from gov property,
including but not limited to rainbows, and now rainbows+++ variations.

Various states are responding to this now. A good thing.

“A stitch in time saves 9” is true. The stitch was not made, so, now it’s .. 50? One for each state?

No, it's just performative grandstanding by bigoted legislators in red states who would rather obsess about a bit of fabric while they underfund their public schools and purposefully let crazy people with military grade weaponry run around schools unchecked.

I note that in TN the legislature quickly shot down an amendment to include the confederate flag in their school flag legislation which is the tell that they aren't serious people.

[temporal1]

Step in the right direction!

Symbolic... does 0 to address any real problems.
If I were a Floridian, I'd be disappointed that my reps in the legislature are being paid to time waste like this...

Symbolism matters.
i will venture to guess numbers of forum members would prefer not to have U.S. flags in school rooms, not to pledge allegiance, etc. Plain dress is symbolic. Christian crosses are symbolic.

For elected reps, i think of this matter as basic housekeeping. Necessary work, not glamorous. No need to be a big debate.
Remove your stuff from gov property. Don’t spend gov dollars putting it in place.

Bunny trail:
To your general point about wasted time on the taxpayer dime, i agree 1000%.
It’s important to remember, Congress earns their low approval rating: https://news.gallup.com/poll/1600/congress-public.aspx

It would be fair to presume they’re brain-dead.
What gives them away as worse than brain-dead is how they have no problem working quickly+efficiently when they have decisions to make on their own pay, benefits, privileges, legal protections, etc. Suddenly, they become cooperative geniuses.

[JimFoxvog]

Which flag should I take down?
...
...

All of them. I think they are all flags representing pride.

[temporal1]

Which flag should I take down?
...
...

All of them. I think they are all flags representing pride.

^^This is my expected response on this particular forum.

Personally, i make an exception for countries to have their national, state, military flags, because, like borders, this is the way of earth, and i don’t see scriptures removing the concept of nations on earth. i’m glad the U.S. tolerates those who do not wish to have flags, take oaths, etc., i’m uncomfortable with oaths, too.

To me, these extra flags (not just rainbows, which symbolize carnal sin) equate to pirate’s flags, or others, they do not symbolize nations, borders, etc.

The practice should not have been allowed. Of course, removing popular indulgences is harder than not allowing from the start.
Every argument imaginable will be tossed out in protest. Memorized talking points, like chants.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Removing extraneous symbols does not change marriage laws.
Christian flags are not flown (anywhere, really) that doesn’t mean Christians do not worship, marry, attend church, etc.

If you “can’t live” without a flag or logo, it’s become idol worship, it’s false. Get control of yourself!

Of course every state will choose the legal language they want for their state.
From what i read in the OP link, Florida did a nice job of describing “extraneous” without naming any certain group.
To me, this is important. Laws should pertain to all.

The Pride folks believe it’s always about them, they’re well educated and pushy about their interests - - in every setting.
Give credit where credit is due. They intend to prevail, everywhere all the time, the expectation is they will.

Legal language should be careful not to become ensnared in that one vocal group’s interest.

imho

[Josh]

Which flag should I take down?
...
...

All of them. I think they are all flags representing pride.

Indeed. The flag I deal with the most are the national flags.

(I make an exception for eg a small Brazilian flag for a family from Brazil. They are just celebrating their ethnic heritage.)