Storm Rider Posted March 6, 2015 Posted March 6, 2015 Uh-huh. They secretly spent $25,000 and did their best to hide it because they wanted to quibble over language in the resolution? Why hide it? Now we have only their word after the fact that that was their objective. They got caught and were pulling PR damage control. Even if you believe them (and I don't) they could be classified as worthless spendthrifts for spending so much money on unimportant legalese in something that is not a law. I certainly would not give them money if this is what they are spending it on. Yeah, still not buying it. There would be no need to hide such a lobbying effort if that is what they were doing. They also had fun trying to spin-doctor the whole thing by arguing that the Ugandan law was only intended for those intentionally spreading HIV which is untrue based on a reading of the Ugandan law. If you want to kill all gays then at least be honest about it. CFR
Storm Rider Posted March 6, 2015 Posted March 6, 2015 I read a lot of allegations about how bad the FRC is, but I have not seen any references to support the allegations. Do you have them or is this your opinion? I am just trying to understand the facts rather than what is false according to the only reference provided, which came from the FRC.
The Nehor Posted March 6, 2015 Posted March 6, 2015 I had you pegged as more of a court jester type.I can multitask. 1
Calm Posted March 6, 2015 Posted March 6, 2015 (edited) I read a lot of allegations about how bad the FRC is, but I have not seen any references to support the allegations. Do you have them or is this your opinion? I am just trying to understand the facts rather than what is false according to the only reference provided, which came from the FRC. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/family-research-council-lobbied-congress-on-resolution-denouncing-ugandan-anti-gay-bill/ (not saying these do or don't support the allegations, this is just info on where it appears that particular allegation came from. I don't see from the lobbying report where the $25,000 is indicated to have been spent solely on that one bill as there are a number of measures listed under it as far as I can tell. Edited March 6, 2015 by calmoriah
sethpayne Posted March 6, 2015 Posted March 6, 2015 Forcing a man out of his job and then lying about the reason is an abuse of power. Scott, Did the DN ever dig-in and find out why the officer quit his job before leveraging his several appeal options and union representation? 1
sethpayne Posted March 6, 2015 Posted March 6, 2015 (edited) And I am assuming that you have completely changed your position on Kate Kelly. I am sure you are now championing her cause to use press releases outlining her "factual" persecution by the church. Because after all, if a person releases a press release, we should all believe their innocence and stop this mob persecution of her. I hadn't thought about that. Somehow the Officer's press release is 100% proof that he was oppressed but Kate Kelly's releases are nothing but lies and distortions. It's almost like Scott may have a bias that is interfering with his ability to be intellectually consistent. ETA: We all have biases -- I most certainly do. They get in my way all the time and so I'm just having some good-natured fun with Scott. Edited March 6, 2015 by sethpayne 1
tonie Posted March 7, 2015 Posted March 7, 2015 The FRC is misguided and betrays their own ignorance by bringing up the individuals from Oregon and Washington. The proposed bill, that the Lord's Church supports, is about housing and employment - two things that the Church has labeled "basic human rights". The proposed bill, is not about providing goods or services.
Recommended Posts