| Topic: |
Science > Abortion |
| User: |
"Craig Chilton -- Get us the hell OUT of Iraq -- NOW!!!" |
| Date: |
12 May 2006 08:16:33 PM |
| Object: |
Re: Exxon says no special rights for sodomites |
On Fri, 12 May 2006 02:08:35 GMT,
"User" Parroted:
http://biz.yahoo.com/hftn/060511/050906_pluggedin_fortune.html?.v=2
Does ExxonMobil have a problem with gay people?
Thursday May 11, 4:54 pm ET
By Marc Gunther, FORTUNE senior writer
While much of corporate America has embraced gay rights - by promising
not to discriminate against gay workers and offering domestic partner
benefits - the world's largest oil company has steadfastly resisted
pressures to become more gay-friendly.
This is the kind of thing that makes me proud to be among their
shareholders.
Ah. So you're a mindless bigot, huh?
Thanks for the info. I'll be one LESS consumer of their products
from here on.
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
A Canadian Tells It Like It **IS**!!
A homophobic bigot calling himself, " A. Krieghund," wrote:
There is a good chance that Massachusetts will repeal
its homosexual marriage law in the next state wide election.
There is a also a push to remove the State Supreme Court
Chief Justice who railroaded the law through the state legis-
lature.
He was countered by a sensible and egalitarian Canadian,
going by "Johannes v Ebersdorf:"
All any of this proves is that the USA is a social backwater
that is unfit to lead the free world in anything.
(Yep. A not-surprising ultimate outcome for a nation unfortunate
enough to have been poisoned from its inception by Puritans.)
We've had same-sex marriage in the Province of Ontario
for some time, and the sky hasn't fallen, nor has it fallen in numer-
ous other progressive jurisdictions where human rights are not
subject to the votes of others.
The USA is unique in that one set of voters, usually the most
ignorant among the ignorant, can strip another set of their basic
human rights.
(Fortunately, though, the tide is finally turning *against* the
RRR-Cult-tainted Republican Party. We may soon return
to sanity!)
-- 10/20/05
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
.
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Exxon says no special rights for sodomites |
12 May 2006 09:25:43 PM |
|
|
Craig Chilton -- Get us the hell OUT of Iraq -- NOW!!! wrote:
"User" Parroted:
http://biz.yahoo.com/hftn/060511/050906_pluggedin_fortune.html?.v=2
Does ExxonMobil have a problem with gay people?
Thursday May 11, 4:54 pm ET
By Marc Gunther, FORTUNE senior writer
While much of corporate America has embraced gay rights - by promising
not to discriminate against gay workers and offering domestic partner
benefits - the world's largest oil company has steadfastly resisted
pressures to become more gay-friendly.
This is the kind of thing that makes me proud to be among their
shareholders.
Ah. So you're a mindless bigot, huh?
Thanks for the info. I'll be one LESS consumer of their products
from here on.
Buy your gas at Citgo. It's a Venezuela-owned petroleum company, and
you can use this:
http://www.citgo.com/CITGOLocator.jsp
to locate a Citgo station near you. Do it for the kittens.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton -- Get us the hell OUT of Iraq -- NOW!!!" |
|
| Title: Re: Exxon says no special rights for sodomites |
13 May 2006 01:48:04 AM |
|
|
On 12 May 2006 19:25:43 -0700,
"Spartakus" <spartakus@my-deja.com> wrote:
Craig Chilton wrote:
"User" Parroted:
http://biz.yahoo.com/hftn/060511/050906_pluggedin_fortune.html?.v=2
Does ExxonMobil have a problem with gay people?
Thursday May 11, 4:54 pm ET
By Marc Gunther, FORTUNE senior writer
While much of corporate America has embraced gay rights - by promising
not to discriminate against gay workers and offering domestic partner
benefits - the world's largest oil company has steadfastly resisted
pressures to become more gay-friendly.
This is the kind of thing that makes me proud to be among their
shareholders.
Ah. So you're a mindless bigot, huh?
Thanks for the info. I'll be one LESS consumer of their products
from here on.
Buy your gas at Citgo. It's a Venezuela-owned petroleum company...
I was aware of this. I live just 6 blocks from one, and it gets ALL
of my local business!
... and you can use this:
http://www.citgo.com/CITGOLocator.jsp
...to locate a Citgo station near you. Do it for the kittens.
This is a good thing to post OFTEN. On LOTS of newsgroups!!
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
.
|
|
|
| User: "dcc" |
|
| Title: Re: Exxon says no special rights for sodomites |
13 May 2006 03:52:04 AM |
|
|
mine as well viva world socialism
forever!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bitchin Bonney" |
|
| Title: Re: Exxon says no special rights for sodomites |
12 May 2006 10:31:56 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 13 May 2006 01:16:33 GMT, Craig Chilton -- Get us the hell OUT
of Iraq -- NOW!!! <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
On Fri, 12 May 2006 02:08:35 GMT,
"User" Parroted:
http://biz.yahoo.com/hftn/060511/050906_pluggedin_fortune.html?.v=2
Does ExxonMobil have a problem with gay people?
Thursday May 11, 4:54 pm ET
By Marc Gunther, FORTUNE senior writer
While much of corporate America has embraced gay rights - by promising
not to discriminate against gay workers and offering domestic partner
benefits - the world's largest oil company has steadfastly resisted
pressures to become more gay-friendly.
This is the kind of thing that makes me proud to be among their
shareholders.
Ah. So you're a mindless bigot, huh?
And you're a *****-witted bigot.
Thanks for the info. I'll be one LESS consumer of their products
from here on.
With gasoline at more than three dollars a gallon Exxon must be is
frantic about loosing a queer customer <SNIGGER> They save more than
you would spend in your lifetime by not kowtowing to a bunch of
queers.
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
A Canadian Tells It Like It **IS**!!
A homophobic bigot calling himself, " A. Krieghund," wrote:
There is a good chance that Massachusetts will repeal
its homosexual marriage law in the next state wide election.
There is a also a push to remove the State Supreme Court
Chief Justice who railroaded the law through the state legis-
lature.
He was countered by a sensible and egalitarian Canadian,
going by "Johannes v Ebersdorf:"
All any of this proves is that the USA is a social backwater
that is unfit to lead the free world in anything.
(Yep. A not-surprising ultimate outcome for a nation unfortunate
enough to have been poisoned from its inception by Puritans.)
We've had same-sex marriage in the Province of Ontario
for some time, and the sky hasn't fallen, nor has it fallen in numer-
ous other progressive jurisdictions where human rights are not
subject to the votes of others.
The USA is unique in that one set of voters, usually the most
ignorant among the ignorant, can strip another set of their basic
human rights.
(Fortunately, though, the tide is finally turning *against* the
RRR-Cult-tainted Republican Party. We may soon return
to sanity!)
-- 10/20/05
Homosexuality Trumps Free Speech And Religion In Canada
A Vanderbilt University Law Journal surveys the growing trend in
Canada of judges suppressing free speech and religion in order to
support homosexuality.
August 9, 2005 - Hans C. Clausen, Editor-in-Chief of the Vanderbilt
Journal of Transnational Law, has written a lengthy article on the
suppression of free speech and religious belief in Canada over
conflicts with homosexual activists in that nation.
The 66-page article, "The 'privilege of speech' in a 'pleasantly
authoritarian country': how Canada's judiciary allowed laws
proscribing discourse critical of homosexuality to trump free speech
and religious liberty," was published in the March, 2005 edition of
the law journal. The article is currently only available through
fee-based database services.
Clausen's main premise is this: "The goal of these laws [proscribing
criticism of homosexuality] is much grander than preventing
discrimination against homosexuals; rather, the objective is seemingly
to promote the social acceptance of gay and lesbian lifestyles ...
achieving the social equality of homosexuals-conceived in sweeping
terms-has, in many Western countries, outstripped legal protections
for speech and religious freedoms."
Clausen introduces the case of Dr. Chris Kempling, a Christian high
school counselor who has been persecuted for publishing his views on
homosexuality in local newspapers. Kempling, a NARTH member, has
chronicled his legal problems in "Against the Current: The Cost Of
Speaking Out For Orientation Change In Canada" on NARTH's web site.
After describing Kempling's suspension from his teaching position for
publicly expressing his views on homosexuality, Clausen then mentions
several other countries that have criminalized critical remarks
against homosexuality: New Zealand, South Africa, Netherlands,
Denmark, and others.
However, according to Clausen, Canada has taken the strongest stand
against public comments against homosexuality. Activists have used
"hate speech" laws to ban negative comments about homosexual behavior
from the television and radio as well as from mail delivery.
In 2004, the Canadian Parliament passed C-250, sponsored by gay
legislator Svend Robinson. The legislation added "sexual orientation"
to the list of protected minority categories in Canadian law.
Because of this new law, religious leaders are fearful of speaking out
against homosexuality and, notes Clausen, "Academicians also seem to
be feeling the effect: some university professors are scared that the
law will threaten free inquiry in the classroom and in their own
publications."
According to Clausen, moral criticisms of homosexuality will not be
protected under C-250, which means that pastors can be prosecuted for
speaking out against homosexuality or quoting from the Bible.
In one legal case, a Canadian court justified its suppression of free
speech because it claimed that criticism of gays impacted an
individual's sense of "self-worth and acceptance." The court also
listed "self-fulfillment," "self-autonomy," and "self-development," as
reasons to suppress free speech in favor of gays.
Clausen points out that this argument is seriously flawed because it
favors the speech rights of one group over another group. The court
also claimed that criticism of homosexuality damaged the "dignity" of
gays.
Clausen counters: "... the argument that homosexuals are entitled to
such a sweeping claim of 'dignity' is questionable. That argument
relies on the notion that sexual orientation is 'an innate or
unchangeable characteristic,' and inherent to one's identity. This
claim has never been conclusively demonstrated, and studies that have
attempted to prove the connection have consistently failed."
The author cites two researchers from Harvard and Stanford who have
commented that "recent studies seeking a genetic basis for
homosexuality suggest that ... we may be in for a new molecular
phrenology, rather than true scientific progress and insight into
behavior. ... [T]he data in fact provide strong evidence for the
influence of the environment."
Clausen notes that not only is there growing evidence against a
genetic basis for homosexuality, but there is also increased
acceptance of the success of reparative or conversion therapy.
He ends his discussion by observing that hate speech laws that
suppress criticism of homosexuality, if taken to their logical
conclusion, would "require the abolition of democracy itself" and "It
reflects a deep lack of faith in citizens' ability to distinguish
truth from error, faults the 'marketplace of ideas' as inadequate and
even dangerous, and claims that the coercive force of government-in
the form of hate speech laws-is the solution."
.
|
|
|
| User: "Andrealphus" |
|
| Title: Re: Exxon says no special rights for sodomites |
12 May 2006 10:29:21 PM |
|
|
In News 7dka629tfpacpfd54v0kn69uudq8uij17s@4ax.com,, Bitchin' Bonney at
bibon@râlant.org, typed this:
On Sat, 13 May 2006 01:16:33 GMT, Craig Chilton -- Get us the hell OUT
of Iraq -- NOW!!! <xanadu222@mchsi.com> wrote:
On Fri, 12 May 2006 02:08:35 GMT,
"User" Parroted:
http://biz.yahoo.com/hftn/060511/050906_pluggedin_fortune.html?.v=2
Does ExxonMobil have a problem with gay people?
Thursday May 11, 4:54 pm ET
By Marc Gunther, FORTUNE senior writer
While much of corporate America has embraced gay rights - by
promising not to discriminate against gay workers and offering
domestic partner benefits - the world's largest oil company has
steadfastly resisted pressures to become more gay-friendly.
This is the kind of thing that makes me proud to be among their
shareholders.
Ah. So you're a mindless bigot, huh?
And you're a *****-witted bigot.
Thanks for the info. I'll be one LESS consumer of their products
from here on.
With gasoline at more than three dollars a gallon Exxon must be is
frantic about loosing a queer customer <SNIGGER>
There probably more frantic about the upcoming investigations into their
less than reputable business practices.
--
Question with boldness even the existence of god; because if there be
one, he must more approve the homage of reason than that of blindfolded
fear. - Thomas Jefferson
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Craig Chilton -- Get us the hell OUT of Iraq -- NOW!!!" |
|
| Title: Re: Exxon says no special rights for sodomites |
13 May 2006 01:44:24 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 12 May 2006 23:31:56 -0400,
Mindless Bigot, Bill Taylor wrote:
Craig Chilton wrote:
"User" Parroted:
http://biz.yahoo.com/hftn/060511/050906_pluggedin_fortune.html?.v=2
Does ExxonMobil have a problem with gay people?
Thursday May 11, 4:54 pm ET
By Marc Gunther, FORTUNE senior writer
While much of corporate America has embraced gay rights - by promising
not to discriminate against gay workers and offering domestic partner
benefits - the world's largest oil company has steadfastly resisted
pressures to become more gay-friendly.
This is the kind of thing that makes me proud to be among their
shareholders.
Ah. So you're a mindless bigot, huh?
And you're a *****-witted bigot.
LOL!!!! Sorry, dim-witted LOSER... but bigots moronically seek
to *repress* personal liberties, and egalitarians like me DEFEND
them.
But thanks for playing, Taylor.
It's ALWAYS fun to see you making such a total fool of yourself.
Thanks for the info. I'll be one LESS consumer of their products
from here on.
With gasoline at more than three dollars a gallon Exxon must be is
frantic about loosing a queer customer <SNIGGER>...
"Loosing?" As in, UNLEASHING?
Although not true 100% of the time, people in here who are too
bone-dumb to know how to spell "lose" usually ARE losers. That
certainly fits you!
BTW, moron, you're probably about the ONLY person in here
who doesn't know that this father of 3 and grandfather of 5 (me)
is a *straight* ALLY of the gay community in its quest for full access
to EQUAL rights.
[[[ DAMN, but Taylor is dumber than a sack of hammers! LOL!! ]]]
-- Craig Chilton <xanadu222_@mchsi.com>
& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & &
The 145,000,000 Americans who make
DOG MEAT of the Homophobes' Agenda!
= = = = = = = = = = = = =
TO: All who are sufficiently socially-retarded, hateful,
and bone-ignorant enough to seek to DENY across-
the-board **equal** rights to ANY person based on
a matter so utterly TRIVIAL as how they choose to
have sex in *private* -- society is RAPIDLY growing
up, and in that maturation process, it is OUTGROWING
and REJECTING such mindless and loathsome agendas
as yours. As the article below PROVES, beyond a
shadow of a doubt.
Homophobia is for LOSERS.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
On Jan. 28, 2004,
James Riske <james_riske@mail15_dot_com> wrote:
Do prove that "straight allies almost certainly are in
greater numbers than the gays".
(To which I responded as follows) ---
ROTFL!!!!! That's one of the **easiest** things in the world
to do!
The *highest* percentage of gays that anyone claims, in the
population, is 10%. So just for fun (and to YOUR advantage, in this
case), let's assume that figure is true. HOWEVER... recent polls
have shown that the percentage of people in America who would
be supportive of same-sex civil unions (but not "marriage,'
semantically-speaking... and really, that's the ONLY difference) is
now very close to 50%. Any straight person who would not object
to same-sex civil unions are ALLIES of the gays. And if we used
only 40% (and there are more allies than that, as I just said), then
we'd have the following:
Gays 10% -- 29,000,000 Americans
Straight Allies 30% -- 87,000,000 Americans
___ __________________
TOTAL Gays & Allies 40% -- 116,000,000 Americans
Ratio: 3-1. Three times more straight allies than gays.
AT LEAST!
Using more realistic numbers; 5% of population is gay, and 45%
of population favors the granting of the right of gays to have
same-sex civil unions, we have the following figures, which probably
approximate today's reality very closely:
Gays 5% -- 14,500,000 Americans
Straight Allies 45% -- 130,500,000 Americans
___ __________________
TOTAL Gays & Allies 50% -- 145,000,000 Americans
Ratio: 9-1. NINE times more straight allies than gays.
Using either set of figures, bigots who think that straight
allies of the GLTB Community are few in number, LOSE, big-time.
Three-to-one is the BEST they can do with such a claim, but that's
unrealistically low. Straight ALLIES of the gays vastly **outnumber**
the gays, themselves. By approximately NINE to one.
From:
http://www.abcnews.go.com/sections/us/Relationships/same_sex_marriage_poll_040121.html
________________________________________________
Views of Same-Sex Marriage and Civil Unions:
"Marriage" -- Make legal: 41% Keep Illegal: 55%
"Civil Unions" -- Make legal: 46% Keep Illegal: 51%
________________________________________________
This reliable ABC News Poll PROVES the idiocy of homophobic
bigots when they claim that gays have relatively few straight allies.
~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~
AND -- per CNN's exit polls at the Wisconsin Primary, fully
*** 61% *** of the people in that HEARTLAND (not "liberal" coastal)
state who took the time and effort to actually get out and VOTE --
said that they SUPPORT same sex civil unions/marriage. And that
was an **open** primary, in which people from ALL parties, including
Republicans, were allowed to vote. The Wisconsin Primary was held
more than a week AFTER the same-sex marriages had started in San
Francisco, so people were WELL aware of what they were supporting.
Your loathsomely-hateful and infinitely-ignorant homophobic
agenda is ACCELERATING into the Drain of Extinction, where it
soon will very properly join the moldering bones of the agenda of
the segregationists, and be forgotten. ANOTHER form of bigotry
**rejected** forever -- and **good riddance** to it!
& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & &
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
