JTF.ORG Forum
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: Dan Ben Noah on October 26, 2013, 02:42:57 PM
-
Shalom
-
They were just being stupid. What does his sexual orientation have to do with the work he did for them? If they were fine with serving him they need to pay him for the services he rendered. They basically stole from him by not tipping which makes them the immoral ones.
-
I don't see what the big deal is here. Any normal person would have just thrown the paper away instead of whining about it.
-
I have to agree with Rubystars here. Instead of making a principled stand on homosexuality, they just came across as being jerks, and this deed will be used to demonstrate "pervasive homophobia" in society.
-
They accepted his services and even admitted it was excellent work, but then they spitefully refused to pay him for the work. It's like hiring a bunch of illegal immigrants to mow your lawn and then saying that it's against your moral principles to help them make their way in this country and they can go to the police if they don't like it. Would that also be awesome or just cruel? The tip is part of the bill if you're a decent person. Unless the server did horrible work, mixed up their orders, was rude to them, etc. they should have tipped him.
-
They should have just the left the guy alone. He did his job. They just wanted to make trouble.
-
If they had a strong principled stance against paying gay people they would not have chosen to eat at the restaurant once they realized their server was gay. They would have left.
Instead they chose to accept service from him. Then they not only refused to tip but called him a name which in most of society is now considered to be a nasty slur. This comes off as hateful and spiteful. This is likely to make the person not want to have anything to do with religious people rather than having any kind of positive effect on his life.
-
I've got another problem with this.
How did they know he was gay? I've met people before with certain mannerisms but then found out they had girlfriends or wives. One person I thought was gay at first impression even turned out to be a strong conservative.
So then what if the person is homosexual by orientation, and what if the person has stereotypical mannerisms associated with that, which might set off someone's "gaydar?" Does that mean they've committed a sin yet? I thought the sin was actually acting on the deviant desires. Unless he grabbed another man and started having sex in the dining room how did they know that he engaged in homosexual behavior?
There was a lot of assumption going on there on their part.
-
We will never win the war by making insults and taunts at random. This couple has harmed the fight against sodomy, not furthered it (assuming the guy really is gay).
-
I would also have supported that action, but that's not near as funny.
That would've been the right way to take a stand though, if that's what they were going to do.
Gays accept everything this country has to offer and then demand that everyone accept their lifestyle so the couple's action was appropriate payback. Also there is no such thing as a "slur" against gays, that's like saying you can "slur" thieves. "Fag" and "queer" are taunts which need to be mainstreamed to fight the communist infiltration of America, which seeks to marginalize all those who support the family unit by creating forbidden so-called "slurs" against those who undermine the family unit. Also the person probably wouldn't want to have anything to do with religious people no matter how nice they were to him so at least this way they can make a statement.
Maybe it's because I am coming from a Christian mindset but my philosophy is that to win someone over to your way of looking at things the best way is to set a good example and to show kindness when possible.
Look at these two scenarios:
1. "Thank you for your excellent service tonight. I've enclosed a tip. I may be wrong but I got the impression that you might be part of the homosexual lifestyle. While I can not tell another adult what to do with their life, my personal beliefs based on the Bible are that such a lifestyle can lead to serious spiritual consequences. I wish the best for people and would not want these consquences to affect you. If you would like to learn more about this then here are some resources where you can learn more *list of resources*
2. You did a great job on serving us tonight but I'm still not going to tip you because you're a dirty fag. You are going to hell and I hate you. By the way did I mention you're a fag?
Which one would be more likely to give a positive result? Not that the first one is all that likely to produce an immediate positive result either, but it at least respects the server as a person.
-
We will never win the war by making insults and taunts at random. This couple has harmed the fight against sodomy, not furthered it (assuming the guy really is gay).
Exactly, they made the mistake of falling into the "hateful religious people" stereotype, which is how the left would like to paint all of us.
-
That's what people always say to those who speak out forcefully. Unfortunately as a result we have a country of weak-stomached conservatives whose idea of protesting is holding signs that say "support our troops" and then cleaning up after themselves instead of burning Obama in effigy. This is why we are losing the war, not because of name calling.
What they did was childish. Not one person will stand up and oppose sodomy because of these deeds. Instead, average people go away with the thought that homosexuals provide excellent customer service and right-wing heterosexuals are immature cheapskate jerks and these jerks will likely get fired when their identity becomes widely known. This played exactly into the NWO's hands. There are so many other ways they could have taken a principled stand (besides simply refusing to do business at that restaurant). They could have given the guy the tip along with an admonition to repent of his sexual sins.
-
It seems the fag gets reincarnated as a dog.
-
I can understand why someone wouldn't want to be served by an overtly extroverting gayness waiter, but I don't know think this was the case. The waiter's private life are his own and the clients shouldn't concern themselves with that.
Anyway I suspect this is a publicity stunt. It could be a cry for attention from this waiter, or a scheme by some leftist radicals, or by the westboro church.
-
If they didn't mind him serving them, they shouldn't have a problem tipping him. If this was from good intentions, they probably thought it was a good way to tell the fag what they thought. I can't stand the voice thing, it's like three girls scratching a chalkborads which something with claws scratches at the back of my brain, so I do my best to avoid having them serve me. Taking the bus sometimes when two of them are talking about the most irrelevant and/or immoral things for an hour definitely gets me retribution for a lot of bad things. I'd much rather ten of the most nervous wives nagging about problems at once for a decade.
-
What if the homosexual in question had un-wanted gay thoughts and seemed gay to people but didn't carry out on his thoughts because he knew they were wrong? If people claim that someone is born gay and don't act on it, then that could mean there are people that act in a "gay" manner but don't participate in homosexual immorality.
-
What if the homosexual in question had un-wanted gay thoughts and seemed gay to people but didn't carry out on his thoughts because he knew they were wrong? If people claim that someone is born gay and don't act on it, then that could mean there are people that act in a "gay" manner but don't participate in homosexual immorality.
There are some men that sound very femenine. Some of them also sound very childish and even annoying, and some of them copy mannerisms that women have. These people do not have the spiritual quality of a honey badger trying to escape with my skull with its claws. They may not sound manly, but when someone has the voice, even when they try to hide it, I can tell instantly. When someone is psychotically nervous and worried, I can feel it the second they step into the room, or when a girl is really... lonely and looking... same. These are spirits I think that you either have to fight or join, and while some can have a time and a place, there is never one for this thing.
So finally, if someone has any sort of tendency that have lead others to homosexuality and they do not follow it, I have the utmost respect for them for beating this trial so far, and pray that Hashem gives them the discipline to continue being righteous men.
-
That's what people always say to those who speak out forcefully. Unfortunately as a result we have a country of weak-stomached conservatives whose idea of protesting is holding signs that say "support our troops" and then cleaning up after themselves instead of burning Obama in effigy. This is why we are losing the war, not because of name calling.
Have mercy :::D Are people's lives so empty that they have to go out to dinner and analyze the possible sexual activities of the help? Was the guy winking at the male patron or rubbing up against him in some unnecessary way? Or did he take a bolder approach and just serve up an unwanted proposition along with the dinner... People like this that go around leaving notes like this tend to have deeper issues than the people they are leaving the note for... In many cases closet jobs of the worst order... On par with reformed smokers so to speak... :'( People like that tend to be annoying in general and I pity the poor people that must come into contact with them like this waiter did... Sounds like the waiter was doing his job and nothing more... The patrons were just cheap chisellers looking to beat the guy out of he tip which is actually figured in by the employer as good part of his pay for the day... People like this should be more concerned about the 20 or 30 million illegals that flock to jobs like this spreading diseases such as hepatitis and TB... What sort of note do they leave for them?
-
Unless homosexuals reprent and change their ways, they will NOT inherit the kingdom of God.
-
Homosexuals do have human rights, we just oppose them having special rights like the evil agenda to redefine marriage or to put children into those kinds of deviant environments.
A violation of human rights would be the kind of thing that was done to Alan Turing. A denial of special rights would be to stand firm and say that marriage is defined as being between a man and a woman and should not be legally recognized for homosexuals.
Most conservatives will agree with you Dan that special rights for homosexuals shouldn't be given. However that doesn't mean we want to violate anybody's basic human rights. The left has been mixing these two concepts up and deliberately confusing them together as if they were the same thing.
-
Ya know, I cant stand the whole LGBT junk, but he worked and they stiffed him.
They are wrong.
End of story.
-
Ya know, I cant stand the whole LGBT junk, but he worked and they stiffed him.
They are wrong.
End of story.
That's what a normal person would see. The left sees this as an example that all conservatives are hateful people.
-
Tip is not any liability until and unless specified clearly by some law which really abides. BTW traditions are only the traditions to follow and are not the laws by themselves
.
-
Tip is not any liability until and unless specified clearly by some law which really abides. BTW traditions are only the traditions to follow and are not the laws by themselves
.
Tips are how Waitstaff are paid in America comprising almost their whole salary so they are highly expected. I however would be annoyed to if my waiter was flamboyant...I wonder how they knew he was gay.
-
it would be funny had they been black. ( I didn't read it nor know who was it but I am confident that the couple weren't black).
-
Okay I just saw the video, honestly who cares? This is a very good way to make money, heck someone should make sh^t like this up, then they can get a lot of dummies to go on and tip them a lot.
-
No ones human rights were violated, not Alan Turing's, and certainly not the guy's in this story. You don't have a human right to a tip. The left has certainly succeeded in making people believe things like this though.
You don't think forcing someone to choose between jail and chemical castration because they want to engage in something between consenting adults, and driving them to suicide over it, is a violation of human rights?
When I had found out what happened to Turing I was in total shock.
-
The real violation of human rights though has been the fact that the mainstream psychiatric and psychological institutions no longer regard homosexuality as a mental disorder. This cuts off people who have unwanted gay thoughts from professional help and resources, leaving their only option to getting help the amateur and often ineffective religious reparative therapy. Now the leftists want to cut off even that resource to them, as flawed as it may be. That's really sad and unfair. Unless the psychological community is going to offer a professional alternative they shouldn't be cutting off the only help people have access to.
-
Not really. I suppose there could have been therapies offered besides chemical ones but if I was in charge one of the choices would have been death so I don't see these choices as inhumane (he actually chose death in the end anyway though). They sometimes do "chemical castration" for pedophiles today and no one sees a problem with that. The time of Turing was a more sane era when the homosexual lifestyle was still considered unacceptable and they actually had laws against it. Another thing the left has succeeded in doing is convincing people that what "consenting adults" do can never be wrong. Well adultery is also between consenting adults but it tears apart the family unit and the fabric of society, just like homosexuality. So the only reason this shocks the modern mind is because liberals have corrupted the culture to that extent.
I think death is an extreme choice. A major problem with homosexuality is that if you say its a choice people will think you're insane for suggesting such a thing and will cast you as a "homophobe" because you think logically.
-
Acting on the homosexual desires is a choice and should not be done because it is sinful and because it hurts both people involved physically and spiritually. It makes them prone to diseases like HIV and some acts can cause unnecessary physical damage in other ways. Even if it wasn't prohibited in the Bible it would still be wrong/icky/against what people should do. The condemnation in the Bible of homosexual behavior is a good thing. I think the response however should be in how to help these people to become celibate, or if bisexual to only act on the heterosexual half of their desires.
Adultery is also wrong and evil. It hurts the people involved, and breaks apart families. In many ways its worse than a homosexual who never tries to get "married" or raise kids because the adulterer is breaking trust, exposing his wife or her husband to diseases without her or his full knowledge/consent, . and exposing the married couple's children to danger and/or a broken home.
Dan, I don't see how you can compare pedophilia to anything else. Pedophiles who act on their deviant desires are always criminals both legally and morally. A child can not give consent. Any sex with a child is automatically rape. I would agree to the immediate death penalty for a convicted pedophile because those types of desires are never going to go away from the perpetrator and they will always be a danger if allowed to be around children at all.
I don't believe that any pedophile who acted on their desires should ever be released back into society. They're a whole level of sick that's above anything else.
-
It's crazy how they say homosexuals have a right to choose to be gay but then they say they were born that way and criticize for offering the choice not to be gay. They say "it's their choice" or "their democratic choice" but then act like they can't help it.
-
Pedophiles are no more dangerous to society than homosexuals. So when is the cut-off for when someone can give consent? I've heard that the brain is not fully formed until age 25. This is another cultural determination. Culture, not science, determines what is sick, criminal, unacceptable, etc. The reason the American Psychological Association does not treat homosexuality is because it does not interfere with secular culture. And of course the left is actually trying to normalize people now who have "attraction to minors" and incest since their lies worked about homosexuality. And since gradually society tends to fall hook line and sinker for the flawed liberal arguments and tends to reject the legitimate conservative arguments, in the future you will have many self-hating Jews and Christians arguing for the so-called human rights of pedophiles.
You think homosexuals having sex with eachother is equal to pedophiles who kidnap rape and sometimes kill children?
-
You think homosexuals having sex with eachother is equal to pedophiles who kidnap rape and sometimes kill children?
No that's like 3 crimes. More like Arab pedophiles, it's equal.
-
You think homosexuals having sex with eachother is equal to pedophiles who kidnap rape and sometimes kill children?
Good question.
-
Pedophiles are no more dangerous to society than homosexuals.
I really don't see how you can say that when pedophiles destroy children's lives, physically and mentally traumatize them, and sometimes even kill the children. Living next door to a homosexual who is only interested in other adults is much safer than living next to a pedophile for a family with children.
So when is the cut-off for when someone can give consent? I've heard that the brain is not fully formed until age 25. This is another cultural determination. Culture, not science, determines what is sick, criminal, unacceptable, etc.
Both homosexuality and pedophilia are sick and unacceptable. One primarily affects adults who make a conscious choice to engage in the evil behavior, while the other targets innocent children who have no choice but to be victims. A homosexual encounter (let's say two of them meet each other at a bar and decide to go have anal sex together that night), is an abomination, sick, and against God's will. It can also bring judgment down upon the nation that allows that behavior to continue unchecked. However, nobody in that scenario is a victim. It involves two people who chose to engage in degenerate/evil behavior with one another. When a pedophile acts on their deviant desires it automatically creates an unwilling victim.
That's why consent is important in these discussions. Both homosexuality and pedophilia are evil, but pedophilia automatically creates a victim.
The reason the American Psychological Association does not treat homosexuality is because it does not interfere with secular culture. And of course the left is actually trying to normalize people now who have "attraction to minors" and incest since their lies worked about homosexuality.
That's true. I've been trying to bring up this point many times on my own facebook wall and other places. People don't want to believe me when I try to warn that normalizing pedophiles is the next step of the communist/liberal agenda but I'm glad that you at least recognize that. The keywords are going to be "minor attracted" and "consenting partners" (notice the difference, it's not consenting adults, but consenting without the adult part tacked on). Pedophiles have for years argued that children are capable of "enjoying" being victimized. This can be traced at least as far back as the evil abomination/pervert Kinsey.
And since gradually society tends to fall hook line and sinker for the flawed liberal arguments and tends to reject the legitimate conservative arguments, in the future you will have many self-hating Jews and Christians arguing for the so-called human rights of pedophiles.
If someone has an orientation that directs them to be sexually attracted to children then it is up to them to get help before they act on those desires. Or, if someone else knows about it, to get help for the person whether they want it or not. If someone like that steps forward and admits this problem before they act on it, then now at least they have access to some help to try to keep themselves out of trouble and children safe from their urges.
They retain their human rights not to be tortured/killed as long as they don't act on it and are doing everything in their power to seek help and keep children safe.
If someone chooses to act on it then they have forfeited their right to be in society at all and should immediately be put to death.
As for homosexuals in today's society, there should be some kind of solutions available. Mandatory professional treatment should be the first step, to help them not to act on their deviant desires. There's a lot of evidence that an orientation is very difficult to actually change, but with professional treatment they could become celibate and find meaning in their lives in other ways besides sex.
They should never be allowed to raise children.
Being caught committing homosexual acts again should have further punishment, but I don't think giving a man hormones until he starts to have feminine characteristics and driving him to suicide is a very good idea. The constitution is against cruel or unusual punishments like that.
-
Personally I feel that the couple only alienated the gay waiter..... in other words "we are too good for you, we will ALLOW you to serve us but leave no tip"...
Treating someone with respect does not equate to condoning their lifestyle. I don't think the waiter's lifestyle should even be an issue in this situation. If the waiter invited them to participate in gay activities :fright: (or similar) they could respectfully decline and voice their opinion on homosexuality, otherwise they come across as "holier than thou".
-
Personally I feel that the couple only alienated the gay waiter..... in other words "we are too good for you, we will ALLOW you to serve us but leave no tip"...
Treating someone with respect does not equate to condoning their lifestyle. I don't think the waiter's lifestyle should even be an issue in this situation. If the waiter invited them to participate in gay activities :fright: (or similar) they could respectfully decline and voice their opinion on homosexuality, otherwise they come across as "holier than thou".
I don't think so. They're just hypocrites. If they didn't want to support his disgusting behavior, they shouldn't have eaten at the restaurant. If they didn't like the twisted voice they have, they should have canceled their order and left. My option would be one of the previous two. If they stay there until the end, they show they have no problem with them, and they were just using this tipping thing as a way to get the guy to read their note, because they were too afraid to tell him upfront.
-
I don't think so. They're just hypocrites. If they didn't want to support his disgusting behavior, they shouldn't have eaten at the restaurant. If they didn't like the twisted voice they have, they should have canceled their order and left. My option would be one of the previous two. If they stay there until the end, they show they have no problem with them, and they were just using this tipping thing as a way to get the guy to read their note, because they were too afraid to tell him upfront.
I totally agree....
-
Treating someone with respect does not equate to condoning their lifestyle.
Right.
-
All sexual deviancy is sickness... I am of the belief that bestiality will be legal before pedophilia because animals are not capable of saying no, thus they implicitly are granting consent. Animals do not have civil rights at this time and thus they have no recourse through the law. They are also unable to make complaints to the authorities.
I believe the common thread which runs through all three (homosexual, bestial, and pedophile) perversions has to do with domination of the other, sadistic pleasure at being able to penetrate and violate the other. Because of this I find myself agreeing with Dan on most of this topic.
-
People should not eat out if they have all these problems.
-
Dan--maybe there is no right to a tip, but there is an expectation that human beings that profess to be Christians don't act like d-bags. The behavior of the couple accomplished nothing, certainly not getting the allegedly gay waiter to change his mind.
Rubystars--I don't agree with how Turing was treated but I do think that unrepentant homosexuals should receive involuntary psychological assistance. Homosexuality is a mental illness.
-
Dan--maybe there is no right to a tip, but there is an expectation that human beings that profess to be Christians don't act like d-bags. The behavior of the couple accomplished nothing, certainly not getting the allegedly gay waiter to change his mind.
Rubystars--I don't agree with how Turing was treated but I do think that unrepentant homosexuals should receive involuntary psychological assistance. Homosexuality is a mental illness.
I really don't have a problem with how he was treated. These twisted people were once executed, so I'm not crying that he didn't get a tip. The fact that they wanted to behave harshly wasn't unjustified, there was someone doing a terrible sin that would destroy his life here and after physical death. It's completely understandable. If you're going to do something, though, do it, make a stand, don't sit quietly and leave a note on how you're completely opposed to the person you just took benefit from. If you really had a problem, you wouldn't take his service for money, or money for free. I am literally boycotting half the coffee shops where I live for this reason.
If someone lies to you in a sales presentation, are you going to purchase the product, and then write a note that you will not give him a referral because you disagree with liars, or even if he didn't lie but is a known liar? When's the last time the baptists here sat around and sang Amen to a pastor who wants Arabs to rule America, and then drops a piece of paper with "I disagree" on it in the collection plate? You spit on the floor if they say, "stay", and you leave.
-
Dan,
The problem is that this person was doing his job at the time. He was not engaging in any homosexual activity. The Torah does not prohibit the appearance of being homosexual, it clearly only forbids the actual sex act itself. Besides that, in order to have the death penalty, at least two witnesses of the act are required and they must have warned the transgressor before the crime that it is prohibited. This is the required sequence of events according to the Torah (as I understand it) in order to prosecute a homosexual.
None of those events took place. On what basis was this person (waiter) determined to be a homosexual? Obviously he did not engage in the prohibited action while working in the restaurant. So I question whether it was really a pure act on the part of the customers who left the note.
Again, if we are to push for enforcing the prohibition against sexual immorality we must also be aware that the Torah expressly commands the death penalty for Jews who do not observe the Sabbath. If we were really standing up for the Torah we would be just as mad at all the Jews who desecrate the Sabbath and call for the death penalty for them, just as much as for the homosexual...
The Torah actually has a narrative about a man who transgressed Shabbat, and how he was put to death. There is no such narrative concerning the death of a homosexual...
-
Dan--maybe there is no right to a tip, but there is an expectation that human beings that profess to be Christians don't act like d-bags. The behavior of the couple accomplished nothing, certainly not getting the allegedly gay waiter to change his mind.
Rubystars--I don't agree with how Turing was treated but I do think that unrepentant homosexuals should receive involuntary psychological assistance. Homosexuality is a mental illness.
As long as they don't attempt to bring their homosexuality into the public domain by pushing for redefining marriage or trying to adopt children to two "parents" of the same sex, then I don't really think it's any of our business if someone is homosexual or not as long as the person keeps it private. What they choose to do if they are having sexual acts with people of the same sex will bring God's judgment upon them if they don't repent for and change their behavior. I don't want the government intruding into someone's bedroom activities like that just because what they are doing might be a sin. Sins bring their own judgments, both in this world and the next.
When they are open homosexuals and promote homosexuality and special rights for homosexuals then it becomes in the public interest to do something about the problem. God will judge a nation that allows that kind of thing. Public homosexuality is a nation destroyer.
Then I think they should be subject to involuntary treatment (not necessarily to change the orientation, but at least to help them be celibate). I do think an orientation can be fluid to some degree and change over the course of a person's life but just as heterosexuals generally couldn't imagine enjoying sex with someone of the same sex, true homosexuals (who are not bisexual) wouldn't enjoy sex with someone of the opposite sex and therapy generally isn't going to change that unless the person is still very young and impressionable. I don't think anybody should try to enforce that they actually form an opposite sex relationship which they could never be fully emotionally invested in. Celibacy should be the goal for true homosexuals and bisexuals should be encouraged to either be celibate or stick to opposite sex relationships.
There is one thing that Dan said that I agree with and that's that just because something is between consenting adults doesn't make it right. I think Kinsey is partly at fault for promoting the idea that it is. Obviously something like homosexuality hurts the people involved spiritually and sometimes physically as well.
I recently saw a video of someone talking about how they had M/M sex with someone they trusted and found out they were HIV positive after the fact. Now that person has to live with the spectre of AIDS hanging over them the rest of their lives. If they ever lose access to the medications they take, or the medicines stop working, that person will probably develop and die of AIDS. That's something that never would have happened to them if they had followed what the Bible taught. This was a judgment they brought upon themselves by their evil choice in behavior. There are serious consequences for sinful behavior that will happen to the people involved whether or not anybody gives them an official punishment.
-
All sexual deviancy is sickness... I am of the belief that bestiality will be legal before pedophilia because animals are not capable of saying no, thus they implicitly are granting consent. Animals do not have civil rights at this time and thus they have no recourse through the law. They are also unable to make complaints to the authorities.
I believe the common thread which runs through all three (homosexual, bestial, and pedophile) perversions has to do with domination of the other, sadistic pleasure at being able to penetrate and violate the other. Because of this I find myself agreeing with Dan on most of this topic.
Bestiality is already legal in some areas of the USA. I think the liberals are going to normalize pedophilia first to the general public though so they can begin to make that legal too at least in some areas.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoophilia_and_the_law_in_the_United_States
Dan and I both agree that homosexuality is a sin and an abomination. I just don't think homosexuals should be subject to bizarre punishments like being made to grow breasts from hormone treatments like Turing was.
-
While I agree that homosexual behavior is completely wrong, and I have the highest respect for Dan Ben Noah, I can't see how this helps anything at all... except to make people in Kansas side with the homosexual waiter from sympathy (which is what happened). So really, it just made it worse. The Torah tells us that the end result matters.
What kind of person leaves a hate filled mega-self-righteous sounding note telling the guy he had great customer service, that he's going to hell, making sure to throw in there that the person writing the note is going to heaven, telling him "we hope you will see the tip your fag choices made you lose out on" (I mean, really? What like $3?), and then says " It is never too late for GOD’S love"? So they think this guy is going to be straight now and run out and buy a Bible because he didn't get a tip and got called names in an arrogant sounding note that tells him God hates him? What normal person does this?
Does Westboro Baptist Church do any good at all with their signs at funerals saying "God Hates Fags"? Absolutely not. They are all idiots, and we do not wish to imitate them in any shape or form.
I wouldn't be surprised if this was a stunt done by gays to gain sympathy. I wish this thread would quietly drift off of the main page.
-
While I agree that homosexual behavior is completely wrong, and I have the highest respect for Dan Ben Noah, I can't see how this helps anything at all... except to make people in Kansas side with the homosexual waiter from sympathy (which is what happened). So really, it just made it worse. The Torah tells us that the end result matters.
What kind of person leaves a hate filled mega-self-righteous sounding note telling the guy he had great customer service, that he's going to hell, making sure to throw in there that the person writing the note is going to heaven, telling him "we hope you will see the tip your fag choices made you lose out on" (I mean, really? What like $3?), and then says " It is never too late for GOD’S love"? So they think this guy is going to be straight now and run out and buy a Bible because he didn't get a tip and got called names in an arrogant sounding note that tells him God hates him? What normal person does this?
Does Westboro Baptist Church do any good at all with their signs at funerals saying "God Hates Fags"? Absolutely not. They are all idiots, and we do not wish to imitate them in any shape or form.
I wouldn't be surprised if this was a stunt done by gays to gain sympathy. I wish this thread would quietly drift off of the main page.
I think you're right.
-
I wouldn't be surprised if this was a stunt done by gays to gain sympathy.
My thoughts exactly, but I kinda maxed out on conspiracies for the week with my dentistry...
-
That's what a normal person would see. The left sees this as an example that all conservatives are hateful people.
These people that stiffed him didnt show an example of any type of kindness at all. Homosexuals are sick people. Bigtime.
He is WORKING.
If they didnt want him to serve them, they simply could have requested another table in another section.
-
Although, I must also say this:
The more these sodomites thrust their love for anus hunting into holy matrimony, the more you will see this type of thing.
-
These people that stiffed him didnt show an example of any type of kindness at all. Homosexuals are sick people. Bigtime.
He is WORKING.
If they didnt want him to serve them, they simply could have requested another table in another section.
If it was a legitimate story, sure. My point is to say the left grabs on to any detail they can to proove all conservatives are one way, when in reality, most of what they do proves a thousand times more that they're anti everyone, especially good people.
-
That's really messed up. If someone has strong religious feelings against homosexuality, this is not the way you try to help them.
If anything, this note makes the waiter mre pro gay and more anti religion and anti Gd and anti things that are good for you.
I do not suggest jtfers to do something like this couple AFTER they have been given service. I even bet that couple was not free of sin.
-
As suspected, the story is a giant fraud from the get-go, the couple left 18 dollars and everyone speaks lashon hara on them for this faggot YS"V to get financial support for his bravery to be a lying degenerate piece of worthless garbage. So not only does he get reincarnated as a dog, but a retarded one, not that I believe this animal will actually get a chance to come back here.
http://liberallogic101.com/?p=4160
-
http://liberallogic101.com/?p=4251
The faggot is a pathological liar.
-
It was a waitress. Not waiter.
-
It was a waitress. Not waiter.
Didn't it say waiter before? Maybe she doesn't like that women are called a separate name for the same job. Do feminists want to get rid of feminine nouns in English?
-
Didn't it say waiter before? Maybe she doesn't like that women are called a separate name for the same job. Do feminists want to get rid of feminine nouns in English?
I don't know. My point was that it was a woman not a man. Originally, I thought the story was about a male waiter.
-
Maybe that's how she wants to be identified.
-
Maybe that's how she wants to be identified.
What?
If we payed less attention to stories like this, they might go away. I really don't care what the sexuality of a waiter or waitress is. Unless, they make it an issue for me. Then I should take it up with management. If it was a hoax...then I am glad that this couple spoke out.
-
What?
If we payed less attention to stories like this, they might go away. I really don't care what the sexuality of a waiter or waitress is. Unless, they make it an issue for me. Then I should take it up with management. If it was a hoax...then I am glad that this couple spoke out.
Maybe she wanted to be called a man.
Point against your case: http://www.massresistance.org/docs/marriage/effects_of_ssm_2012/SSM_Mass_2012.pdf
-
Rump Rangers choose to be that way & are not born like that I have absolutely no sympathy for them.
>:(
-
These are 2 separate stories. The original post is not the same case as the female who was recently exposed faking her story.
Thanks for the clarification, Dan Ben Noah. I didn't know that it was two separate instances.
-
Maybe she wanted to be called a man.
Point against your case: http://www.massresistance.org/docs/marriage/effects_of_ssm_2012/SSM_Mass_2012.pdf
What case? I wasn't making a case.
-
These are 2 separate stories. The original post is not the same case as the female who was recently exposed faking her story.
Had a feeling
What case? I wasn't making a case.
"If we payed less attention to stories like this, they might go away. "