Skip to main content

Conservatives react to Brewer's veto via Twitter

After Arizona Governor Jan Brewer (Republican) vetoed SB 1062, which would have made it legal for professionals in the state to refuse service or employment to homosexuals on religious grounds, she's been on the receiving end of some lovely tweets from fellow conservatives, such as the following:

"CNN led full court media press to take away rights of Christians. Just the beginning. Using tolerance as weapon against us. Wake up." - John Nolte

Using tolerance as a weapon against Christians? Whom supposedly believe in and worship Jesus, who, rumor has it, was extremely tolerant, and preached love? Who should wake up again? ::points toward Nolte::


"Not sure what the GOP stands for when it stands against religious freedom out of pure fear of political correctness." - Ben Shapiro

For at least one day of the year, the GOP stands for tolerance, so, congratulations! Oh, wait... That's not a good thing? Well, like I said - it was one day... Mr. Shapiro and his ilk are attempting to make certain the event was just a blip on the radar. Onward with the bigotry! ::rolls eyes::


"Brewer vote shows that poorly informed hysteria works." - Rich Lowry

Poorly informed hysteria? Right... So, if the bill was signed into law and we had this following experience (courtesy of Seinfeld), it wouldn't be a big deal?

Gay man: "I would like some of the..."

Soup Nazi: "Wait a minute! Are you one of them?!? Are you a gay?!?"

Gay man: "Well, yes, yes I am..."

Soup Nazi: "No soup for you!"

So, Rich, if Christians had been on the gay man end of that equation, would that not have been cause for "poorly informed hysteria" as well? ::gives the yank-yank motion::


"Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer makes Christians in her state second class citizens." - Todd Starnes

Right... Just like when blacks were considered to be more than 3/5 of a person, the government was treating whites as second-class citizens, and when women were finally given the right to vote, men were being treated like second-class citizens. In this case, Christians can't refuse service to gays, so it's the Christians whom are being treated like second-class citizens. Yet, if the bill had passed and some Christians did refuse service to the LGBT community, Mr. Starnes would firmly believe that Christians' rights were simply being upheld and gays' rights would be right where they should be - equal to that of second-class citizens... Idiot... ::shakes head::


"Tony Perkins on Fox: AZ veto was due to misinformation spread by the hired left. Who's going to protect the rights of Christians?" - Jeremy W. Peters

What? Protect their rights to go to church? Worship? Read the Bible? Go to Sunday school? Go to Bible study? Pray? Believe in Jesus? Get baptized? Partake in communion? Donate money to the church? Can't Christians already do all that? Oh, he means to practice bigotry against homosexuals... Well, when tempted with such words and behavior, perhaps they should ask themselves this question - "What would Jesus do?" ::points to 1 John 4:8::

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/02/27/conservative-pundits-arizona-bill_n_4865482.html

http://www.openbible.info/topics/god_loves_everyone

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun...

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i...