Two words for my fellow Americans...

[AkashaCatBat]

so you can under stand this?

2) It actually acknowledges that you can allow what ever -for example Police to search houses- but there are still people that have contrary believes for one reason or another, as you can please everyone, while searching Terrorist activity- for example.

then please translate

 

As I understand it, it means that even though a certain activity is legalized, people can still be against it and speak out against it. As in, even after segregation officially ended (at the state and federal level) that did not stop everyone from being racist.

 

And since you can't go back to edit your post, may I suggest copying and pasting your text into a word processor with spell check? Or at least look at what you've typed before you hit that "Add Reply" button. You don't have to be able to type 100 words a minute in order to be able to do that. Or, if you can't be bothered to speak (or type) proper English yourself, please refrain from picking on other people's English skills.

 

And for the record, I can only type around 70 wpm.

[Jarno Mikkola]

Yes...

so you can under stand this?

2) It actually acknowledges that you can allow what ever -for example Police to search houses- but there are still people that have contrary believes for one reason or another, as you can please everyone, while searching Terrorist activity- for example.

then please translate

Might this help?

It actually acknowledges that you can allow whatever but there are still people that have contrary believes for one reason or another, as you can't please everyone, -for example: Police to search houses, while searching/preventing Terrorist activity.

[Guest S-K]

if jarno would have written that in the first place or corrected it in the second place, we would have not wasted all this time. but you are basically quoting iculus.

because jarno is ESL I said this:

I believe you are ESL so I'll take the time.

meaning even tho I did not need to, I did because (as I have said to many esl's) that I amazed at their English skills.

Truly this was (at the time) the nicest way to say "that sentence was complete gibberish".

For that I apologize. it is not like I laughed at your lack of typing skills.

but instead of bothering to change it, he focused on other topics to deviate from the point. even the topic itself was a deviation, I made a small sub-point about the term phobia in homophobia. did he focus on the main point? no.

phobia is a scientific/medical term. Americans use all sorts of slang but not too often do we add a medical/scientific word to make a slang.

I am sure you can make a case about some obscure angle pointing out the obvious, but I try to leave the obvious out because I give you (apparently too much) credit.

the term phobia is misused I have never feared a homosexual

now are we going to focus on what, I again, tried to clear up or can we get back to the point?

 

I stated that the left is trying to force people that do not agree with homosexuality to accept it.

Icelus said no they are not. then went on to say that

Ending segregation didn't end racism, and allowing gay marriage will not end homophobia.

so with that statement he either is saying that we need to force people to think that it is ok or the point is moot/irrelevant.

if you want to argue this point, that will be fine. if you want to point out typos then...well, that is just lame.

[AkashaCatBat]

Legalizing a certain activity is not the same as forcing a person to accept that activity, though.

 

Just because you can drink legally at 21 does not mean you HAVE to, or that you have to think that drinking alcohol is okay. All it means is that you and everyone else who is 21 has that option.

 

It's the same thing with gay marriage. The left is NOT saying that you have to get a gay marriage, or that you have to think it is okay. All it is saying is that if you want to marry someone of the same sex, you should have that option.

 

You can still think the who fabulous lot of them are going to hell.

[Guest Guest]

was that directed at me?? you'll have to go back a bit more I never said that I had a problem with them getting married if that is what they want. check post 120 the first paragraph.

nor have I ever mentioned hell.

[AkashaCatBat]

was that directed at me?? you'll have to go back a bit more I never said that I had a problem with them getting married if that is what they want. check post 120 the first paragraph.

nor have I ever mentioned hell.

 

All I am pointing out is that no one is asking you to accept gay marriage, or trying to force you to think it is okay. All "the left" wants is the chance for happiness. There is no other agenda at this point.