Comments by "Aaron Rosenberg" (@aaronrosenberg6633) on "The Wall Street Journal" channel.

  1. "....provide a set of protections to religious liberty." Protections? From what? "Violating religious liberty" means what, exactly? You get to discriminate against anybody you want as long as you can justify that your god hates them as much as you do. And since evidence for god is not forthcoming, your claims are all unfalsifiable. You have nothing. Not wanting to deal with the reality that those different from you are your equals under the law, you behave like toddlers, using superstition to justify your ignorant remarks.
    2
  2. Jack Breed Yes. Scare you?
    1
  3. I see. Sorry to jump down your throat.  Where I'm from, they are equal, can marry, and cannot be discriminated against, and worldwide it seems like a two steps forward one step back scenario, so it does seem things are improving, despite the idiocy that sometimes seems to prevail. But I'm also admittedly asserting the situation as a moral imperative, even where it is not acknowledged: In a just system, LGBT people are entitled to the same privileges as non-LGBT people. We are not inferior in any way to non-LGBT people. We are productive, tax-paying citizens of every town in every country on the planet. 
    1
  4. Well, here's wishing you success transcending  your political environment, and maybe even bringing some others along with you.  Multiple-partner marriages need to be examined on their own terms. I'm not sure what research reveals on them, but they're a different beast. 
    1
  5. I appreciate your feedback. I can be pretty condescending, but I only start as somewhat acerbic.   Also, I frequently begin with an attempt to reason, something like this person did with the jazz analogy. Responses are rarely, "oh, I get it!" and more often "you can't compare the two because [x, y, z], followed buy reminding me how disgusting they find gay people, and how we're all going to hell.  This is typical. 
    1