-16 votes

This post was banned Per request by a fellow DPer

We must NOT discuss things that may not be popular with some here on the Daily Paul, it might hurt feelings or it might confuse us because of our indoctrination via our modern lifestyle.


Note: This was not removed by any moderator or the site owner.

It's the Daily Paul for goodness sake, the last bastion of real freedom on the web.


Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Because you have yet some indoctrination of your own to shed

We are ALL Created equal. Your post was one of inequality towards gays. What is that inequality based off of? Something some book says? Or have you lived and experienced for yourself some sort of personal persecution by the gay community that you feel you need to lash out against?

Is your belief based on your LIVED experience,
Or someone else's words that indoctrinated you?

Until you identify with all human beings as HUMAN BEINGS living TOGETHER on a watery round rock spiralling around a giant ball of fire as it circles the galactic centre, your point of view is seen as narrow compared to the majority of the people on this site.

Is there really nothing more important to discuss than who marries who in what building? And NO that is not the point you wanted to make because then your post would have simply read, "I'm ok with gays getting married in whatever institution, even my own." But no, instead you chose to claim you don't really care but then say something condescending like "open your own rainbow church if you want get married".

The year is 2013. Get over it. Go meet some gay people. I have gay friends and you may not believe this but they're just like you and me. And if you're going to make this a Christian issue, then Jesus says NOTHING about persecuting ANYONE. He speaks nothing but Unconditional Love and what you are doing is completely un-Christian because you are accepting of gay marriage under the CONDITION they start a "Rainbow Church".

I, however, forgive you for I know you know not what you do. You have some false beliefs of OTHERS in your mind that you need to shed and I lovingly encourage you to do so before you preach "acceptance".

"We are not human beings having a spiritual experience; we are spiritual beings having a human experience"—Pierre Teilhard de Chardin

Which Post Was That?

? The one where you are the superior judge of gays? People responded with their opinions and rather than leave those comments and LEARN from them you decide to wimp out and DELETE the thread? That only adds to the idea that you are not capable of debate to me. Closed minded and closed thread. Whatever!


I stand in awe.......

Joe....what vision and strategy
Look at the traffic on your post now. Quality move and I mean it.

In many ways you have proven your point, faith and government dont mix well. I got your point, been there myself.......I leave this post with these words, I find them somewhat appropriate.

"He who is void of virtuous attachments in private life is, or very soon will be, void of all regard for his country. There is seldom an instance of a man guilty of betraying his country, who had not before lost the feeling of moral obligations in his private connections." - Samuel Adams

So, It's Good To Back Down

and not debate over ideas now? Just say, "oh no one agrees with me, I better be a get along guy and delete my thoughts"? Paaaaalllleeeezzze!


I consider it an honor to be downvoted.

Those few threads of mine that have were controversial, admittedly, and thought-provoking, certainly.

But I never apologized for a single one of them.

Won't you reinstate the original title of your post, stand tall, and let others judge you on the merits of your argument rather than on the ill-wordedness of your title?

Pandacentricism will be our downfall.

Not sure why...

...you obliterated your own post. Isn't it Dr. Paul's and many other Liberty-minded folks' position that government should be completely out of the marriage business? Maybe I'm missing some nuance in your wording that was the crux of the matter in your getting down-voted.

When you think about it, why should the government be involved in slapping the 'marriage' label on anything? Some people say, well, the government has to be involved to make sure things like polygamy aren't allowed. But wait a second... if a guy has multiple partners and even kids by them, without calling it marriage, that's something you can live with as legal; but if you put the label 'marriage' on it, somehow the behavior has become horror of horrors? People will do what people will do; and as long as no one is harming anyone else physically, what business does the government have in any of it? (Age of consent laws still applying.)

So, yes, leave it up to individuals to seek out houses of faith or none at all to add their particular meaning to 'marriage' that they desire; but leave the government out of it. I view my wedding ceremony before God and family and friends as meaningful -- not some piece of paper from the State.

Well Said

I can learn from you and hope others will too!



...this was one of the issues I wrestled with for a time, similar to the drug issue, as a mainline social conservative; but after getting woken out of my trance in 2008 by Dr. Paul in the debates, it really started clicking with me: you don't have to endorse what everyone does with their Liberty in order to support them having that Liberty.


"you don't have to endorse what everyone does with their Liberty in order to support them having that Liberty."

And our defense of everyone's liberty means we are free to hold to and express our own viewpoints as well.

There is a difference between

There is a difference between Banned and Downvoted.
There is a difference between Marriage (M&W) and civil unions and others..

Words have a meaning otherwise we cannot communicate.

You may want to look up the definition of "Banned"

It sounds like you, "per another DPer's request", banned your OWN post.


You have the freedom to say what you want to say. Don't bitch when people exercise their freedom in expressing a difference of opinion.

You have to be more honest.

You have to be more honest. Downvoted does not mean banned. My posts have also been downvoted. Geez - Dr. Paul has been booooed and blacked out miriads of times. Appreciate your opinions. Just recognize truth and move on.

His post was probably about

His post was probably about mixing alkaline and nickel cadmium batteries which is extremely taboo and shunned here on the Dailypaul.
For shame.

Southern Agrarian



Michael Nystrom's picture

"Banned per request by a fellow DPer?"

WTF are you talking about? How can it be "banned by request?"

Something is banned by force. I have the power to do that, as do the mods. None of us did it (as your post correctly notes). YOU DID IT I looked at the revision history. No one edited this post but you.

We must NOT discuss things that may not be popular with some here on the Daily Paul, it might hurt feelings or it might confuse us because of our indoctrination via our modern lifestyle.


You caved probably because you were getting downvoted into oblivion. So what. Be a man and stand by your words. Don't blame it on "being banned by a fellow DPer." That is weak.

What was the word Ann Coulter used to describe libertarians? It is appropriate here.

If this is the last bastion of freedom on the web, then stand by it. Who is going to protect your words, if not you?


The only way to make sense out of change is to plunge into it, move with it, and join the dance. - Alan Watts



No Michael

I never said anybody on the DP banned me, said it was a request of a poster who thought it should be. So I took it down and replaced the wording myself.

I don't give a darn about getting down voted, ha I'm no freaking Libertarian. I'm a Constitutionalist. But the point is, that this is the Daily Paul and for someone to ask that a post be banned by the moderators because of a diifference of ideas is outrageous.

So I took it down for affect.

muzzled myself - participation is my choice, true freedom.

But I do admire your site, it's powerful


deacon's picture


as you can see.this poster has lied
and has drug the DP into this
i asked for this post to be removed
it has not been,but the title has been changed
please do not lose sleep over this
nor mind it
this wasn't removed as you have stated,so it is a falsity
as is this post

If we deny truth before your very eyes,then the rest of what we have to say,is of little consequence

Michael Nystrom's picture

Thank you deacon

It is okay.

Everything is an opportunity for learning and growth, for everyone, including me.

I appreciate your honesty, and your kind words. We're all human. We're all friends here. And we're all learning.

So it is all good. I promise I won't lose sleep over this. And I request that you (and you, and you, and you) (you, too!) don't lose sleep over it either.

Thank you. I'm going to go saw some logs now.



The only way to make sense out of change is to plunge into it, move with it, and join the dance. - Alan Watts

Is this really true? I

Is this really true? I support the DP via money contributions and spread the word so other people may join. Can you explain what happened? Please let me know clearly who made the censorship, was it Michael - don't think so - was it because you do not agree with gay mentality.. Please let me know the mechanism and see how we can apply pressure.

I am against censorship on traditional marriage defense: i.e. Laura Schlessinger has been banned, liberal colleges pushing an agenda, 1 million people march in France against gay marriage banned by the media.

Michael Nystrom's picture

It wasn't me

See the note in the OP:

Note: This was not removed by any moderator or the site owner.

The only way to make sense out of change is to plunge into it, move with it, and join the dance. - Alan Watts

Joe has a point......

Currently we have a situation where some people are defaulted government benefits based on their collective group, traditional marriage, and others are denied. THis is similar to Jim Crow laws in that it is government created chaos.
At the end of the day the only way the traditional marriages can argue this topic is to advocate elimination of the default benefits provided to them. If not the government will be forced to include all groups in the club of marriage.

On the other hand, if probate and inheritance are not defaulted then a couple without a State sanctioned contract will default their property to the State as opposed to the heirs or spouse.

deacon's picture

this post should be taken down

and i think after all this time
i finally found one to put on my ban list
arguing back and forth just for the sake of arguing
wishy washy division here

If we deny truth before your very eyes,then the rest of what we have to say,is of little consequence

Sounds like the Government to me

Ban free speech, ban guns

Liberty baby

deacon's picture

you talking about your beliefs?

when you get past your quirks,you shall grow
when others can live life the way they see fit
there is freedom
you don't offer freedom,you offer bondage,bondage
veiled if false beliefs and dogma

If we deny truth before your very eyes,then the rest of what we have to say,is of little consequence

Take it down......

I can appreciate your opinion the post be removed......dont get your assertion this topic or discussion should be banned.
Probate, contract law, inheritance, separation of Church and State.......these subjects should be banned.......

Whats your real problem, here, Deacon ?

deacon's picture

my problem

is the fact he can't even make up his mind
on his own topic
he has changed his mind and words on 2 separate posts
concerning this very post
once to me,and another here,if he can't stay on topic with his own
post,then why should it even be up to read?
you cannot say gay marriage doesn't bother me/affect me,then tell me
it bothers and takes his freedom away
it is not the subjects that bother me,it is the matter of
not saying the same thing to different people.
i believe in people living the life they want,as long as no one gets hurt by it,i pointed this out
it is not about any one church or religion,it boils down to people
people who have one life free from other's influences and doctrines
what he has told me,is this my thoughts do not line up with his
freedom is for everyone,not just here in america where i am at,but for everyone,it is not based in religions nor falsehoods,nor others beliefs
it is ones owns beliefs that need to be cherished and upheld
i asked questions just to find out about this post,and where it was going,what i got back was religious beliefs,which is not freedoms
but is in fact the opposite
if everyone on this planet cannot live the way they want,then they do not have freedom,but have a wasted life
people for thousands and thousands of years have gotten together without the church involvement,it does not need it now,nor has it needed it.
marriages are between 2 people and a creator,the priests,pastors
ect ect have had no involvement in that whatsoever
this poster claims so far that the only ones who claim a union
is the catholic church (so far as i could tell,as my questions are so far unanswered) and this thought is wrong
no where does a marriage between anything bother another,or so it shouldn't if in fact we all all want to be free
what you asked me in return has been the most inspiring so far
as to asking why i think the way i do
i ask questions to get a response,an answer if you will to a post
if this post was about what you asked me,then i could have been more productive
if i ask you does this bother you....? and you say NO,then another asks the same thing and you say yes,what is gleaned from it?
if it wasn't about his religion,then it should have been left out
he made it all wrap around it,and has formed his opinions based upon it
life to me,is about letting people be who they want to be,free from persecution from the states/feds roles,and it does include religion

If we deny truth before your very eyes,then the rest of what we have to say,is of little consequence


The viewing audience benefits from all views......

This is an important issue, thanks for the contribution.

deacon's picture

and thank you as well

if the crux of this post is you have stated
then i have wasted hours asking questions
questions that have so far gone unanswered
not by you,but the poster
what a shame
you see,i took this as a vendetta,one against all who aren't
of a certain persuasion,hence my pointed question,questions
to point myself in the direction of the point of this op
i don't color my questions,i don't ask things just to hinder
it is for my benefit (maybe others)
but i ask them,for my own point of reference
questions to know where another is coming from,and to where it is going
but if questions are asked,and go answered or talked around,what is one to glean or grasp from it all?
again,thank you for asking me where i stand (no one else has so far)
as far as this post getting removed per my request,it is still here
but the words have changed what does say to you personally about the posters frame of mind? seeing it has not been removed,and I don't have that power?

If we deny truth before your very eyes,then the rest of what we have to say,is of little consequence