Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Bronco wrote:Weird that when I read the story on a CBS site they had no description of the attackers

In the remarks the posters from NY were saying they were black

I guess that with 3% not identifying with the donkey party that it could be conservative blacks doing the beating

Cap'n Cat wrote:http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/Ga ... 11201.html



Two gay men who were holding hands as they left a movie theater in Chelsea were attacked by a group of men who hurled anti-gay slurs, and one was hurt so badly he needed seven stitches on his face.

Peter Nortman and his boyfriend, Michael Felenchak, had left the Chelsea Cinemas just after midnight early Wednesday when they were confronted by two men on West 24th Street, according to police.

One said "what are you looking at, you f------." The attackers then started punching the victims while hurling anti-gay slurs. Police say four more men approached, who were believed to be friends of the suspects, and joined in the assault.

Nortman and Felenchak tried to fight back, but were ultimately overpowered.

"We did what we could," Nortman told NBC 4 New York. "It was six of them and two of us."


Z, Baldy, Col. Hogan: restrain your asshole friends, will ya? Pussies, six v two.......





Col. Hogan and family:

Grizalltheway wrote:

Bronco wrote:Weird that when I read the story on a CBS site they had no description of the attackers

In the remarks the posters from NY were saying they were black

I guess that with 3% not identifying with the donkey party that it could be conservative blacks doing the beating

Nice anecdotal evidence. Come back when you have a legit source, Bongo.

Chizzang wrote:If you were to read all four gospels thoroughly in search of Jesus’ teachings on homosexuality
It would be a futile endeavor...
Not only would you come to the end of the gospels without finding anything attributed to Jesus on the subject you wouldn’t even find a single reference to the issue in any context...

But we all know:
a) Approximately 90% of Christians have NEVER read the bible
b) Atheists score higher on Biblical tests than Christians
c) It's all about fear and hatred / Not family Values

The End...

Ivytalk wrote:Dback would've whipped all 6.

Chizzang wrote:If you were to read all four gospels thoroughly in search of Jesus’ teachings on homosexuality
It would be a futile endeavor...
Not only would you come to the end of the gospels without finding anything attributed to Jesus on the subject you wouldn’t even find a single reference to the issue in any context...

But we all know:
a) Approximately 90% of Christians have NEVER read the bible
b) Atheists score higher on Biblical tests than Christians
c) It's all about fear and hatred / Not family Values

The End...

Chizzang wrote:If you were to read all four gospels thoroughly in search of Jesus’ teachings on homosexuality
It would be a futile endeavor...
Not only would you come to the end of the gospels without finding anything attributed to Jesus on the subject you wouldn’t even find a single reference to the issue in any context...

But we all know:
a) Approximately 90% of Christians have NEVER read the bible
b) Atheists score higher on Biblical tests than Christians
c) It's all about fear and hatred / Not family Values

The End...

For most gay Americans in the 20th century, the church was a place of pain. It cast them out and called them evil. It cleaved them from their families. It condemned their love and denied their souls. In 2004, a president was elected when religious voters surged from their pews to vote against the legal recognition of gay relationships. When it came to gay rights, religion was the enemy.

A decade later, the story is very different. Congregations across the country increasingly accept, nurture, and even marry their gay brethren. Polls show majorities of major Christian denominations -- including American Catholics, despite their church's staunch opposition -- support legal gay marriage. Leaders of some of the most conservative sects, like the Southern Baptists, have moved away from the vitriolic rhetoric of yesteryear and toward a more compassionate tone. Mormons march in gay-pride parades. A sitting Republican senator, a Methodist from the heartland state of Ohio, says the question was settled for him by "the Bible's overarching themes of love and compassion and my belief that we are all children of God." A new pope says, "If someone is gay and he searches for the Lord and has good will, who am I to judge?"

The votes, too, are going differently these days. Ballot measures, state legislatures, and Supreme Court decisions testify to a new public consensus on gay marriage, the political issue that currently serves as the chief proxy for attitudes toward gay rights and acceptance.

Gradually, and largely below the radar, religious Americans have powered this momentous shift. In 2004, just 36 percent of Catholics, the Christian sect most supportive of gay marriage, favored it, along with 34 percent of mainline Protestants; today, it's 57 percent of Catholics and 55 percent of mainline Protestants. Even among white evangelical Protestants, the most hostile group to gay marriage, support has more than doubled, from 11 percent in 2004 to 24 percent in 2013. "This debate has gone from a debate between nonreligious and religious Americans to a debate dividing religious Americans," said Robert Jones, CEO of the Public Religion Research Institute, who has closely tracked the evolution in public opinion.

TheDancinMonarch wrote:http://gaycitynews.com/gay-couple-victi ... n-chelsea/

Baldy wrote: Oh yeah, the only two black Conks who live in Chelsea.

Skjellyfetti wrote:

Baldy wrote: Oh yeah, the only two black Conks who live in Chelsea.

Whoa whoa whoa.

Zimmerman's "white hispanic" label was bullshit to you. But "black latino" = "black."



These guys probably weren't Conks... but, this disconnect really intrigues me.

Baldy wrote:

Skjellyfetti wrote:
Whoa whoa whoa.

Zimmerman's "white hispanic" label was bullshit to you. But "black latino" = "black."



These guys probably weren't Conks... but, this disconnect really intrigues me.

Eating boogers intrigues you, lubejob.

If you need it to be explained, you're worse off than I thought and I honestly feel sorry for you.

Cap'n Cat wrote:Baldy. Wants his Conk and eat it, too.

Baldy wrote:

Cap'n Cat wrote:Baldy. Wants his Conk and eat it, too.

It's OK Cappy, you're used to the thread fail by now.
But just as expected, the attackers were Obama loving hood rats.

Cap'n Cat wrote:

Baldy wrote:

It's OK Cappy, you're used to the thread fail by now.
But just as expected, the attackers were Obama loving hood rats.

Every single one of Cap'n Cat's threads skies over anything your lame Conk mind could ever sweat out. I am God and I think I need to come down there and remind you, son.

Baldy wrote:

Cap'n Cat wrote:
Every single one of Cap'n Cat's threads skies over anything your lame Conk mind could ever sweat out. I am God and I think I need to come down there and remind you, son.

Bring it on you made up pagan deity.

Cap'n Cat wrote:

Baldy wrote: Bring it on you made up pagan deity.

Just look around, Cletus. Observe and learn!

Skjellyfetti wrote:Whoa whoa whoa.

Zimmerman's "white hispanic" label was bullshit to you. But "black latino" = "black."