Loading

MakerBot Print is our newest print-prepration software, which supports native CAD files and STL assemblies,
allows you to interact with all your printers via the Cloud, and many other exciting new features.

Download Now

rebeltaz

Straight Pride Pendant

by rebeltaz Jul 25, 2019
Download All Files

Thing Apps Enabled

Please Login to Comment

Dude I don't give a crap what your beliefs are, but in the end this is not the platform to be making political arguments.

So save the arguments for your facebook and just put creations on here.

Unless you are posting this same arrogant bullshit on every gay pride model posted here, too.... As soon as you post even a single creation here, I might listen to what you have to say. Until then... shove it up you ass and move along.

Don’t get me wrong I more than agree with you that I strait white man has the right the best proud of who he is and owes that to himself, but one should have pride in themselves only for themselves and not to smite others.

... "one should have pride in themselves only for themselves and not to smite others."

Do you not see how ironic that statement is given the proliferation of gay pride parades? That is not "pride in themselves only for themselves." That is shoving it down the throats of the public and yelling from the rooftops "look at me... you will approve of me."

I mean the thing you posting the 3D file of the pendent itself I can respect, but your way about describing it on the page was not the most tasteful and seemed less like you created it for your own self pride and more like it was created with the intent of mocking and degrading others.

I went and re-read the description I posted because I wanted to be sure of what I am saying. I'm not sure where you see mocking and degradation in those words. I even said that "... I encourage everyone to be proud of who you are - no matter who that person happens to be. "

Listen... I have no issue with any people as a group, regardless of sex, race, gender, nationality, or religion. I judge people individually based on their character. Period. What I do have issue with is the fact that in today's world, you are praised to high heaven if you take pride in your orientation/sex/religion/race... unless you happen to be a straight, white, male Christian. We are instead told to be ashamed of who we are. You don't believe that?

Hell, professors in liberal indoctrination center - aka colleges - teach courses on how to hate yourself if you're the "wrong" sex/race/orientation.

If my being proud to be a straight, white (actual Italian, but in today's world, I'm called white), Christian, male somehow takes away from the pride that others show in their own self... well, I'm sorry, but that is their issue - not mine.

Lastly, typing what you want to prove I to search engine and then posting the link to the results is not evidence for an argument.

Nor is posting the equivalent of blog post from a random “news” site.

I will say that everyone in society gets attacked by someone else for their way of life.

So I know you posted your thing looking for a fight (considering you tagged your thing with gay pride tags), but I was really just making a critique on the delivery of your message and not the idea overall.

I was completely agreeing with that part of your message.

And yes, in modern society it’s so wrong that if your seen as the “oppressive majority” or whatever they claim that you are supposed to feel guilty about yourself. It’s toxic and dose no good for either party.

I agree with your message just not the delivery

You do you! Whether you're gay, straight, trans, or whatever you identify as, be proud of yourself!

Fox News would have you believe that the straight, white Christian Conservative is the most oppressed group. Despite the fact that minorities receive more severe sentences for the same crimes, you can be fired for being homosexual (no federal protections) and that we have a President that seeks to punish all those who criticize him. Can you make one Fox's annual "War the on Christmas"?

Fox News would have you believe that the straight, white Christian Conservative is the most oppressed group. Despite the fact that minorities receive more severe sentences for the same crimes, you can be fired for being homosexual (no federal protections) and that we have a President that seeks to punish all those who criticize him. Can you make one Fox's annual "War the on Christmas"?

Damn... I thought you'd done forgot about lil' ol' me. I was startin' to get my feelin's hurt!

OK, so...

"...you can be fired for being homosexual (no federal protections)..."

I can go on and on with these... Contrary to what you allude, there is no federal protection for white folks, for Christians or for straight folks - however, there most assuredly is federal protection for the alphabet community. Now, please show me the articles where anyone has been fired for being homosexual.

"...minorities receive more severe sentences for the same crimes..."

Notice how those studies never take into account prior arrests or criminal convictions? Convenient, don't you think?

"...we have a President that seeks to punish all those who criticize him..."

Really? Show me one quote were Trump has said that those who criticize him should be punished. However, Democrat Rep. Frederica Wilson did say that people who make fun of members of Congress should be prosecuted:

Those people who are online making fun of members of Congress are a disgrace and there is no need for anyone to think that is unacceptable,” Wilson said during a press conference. “We are going to shut them down and work with whoever it is to shut them down, and they should be prosecuted.

Boy, you had better start getting your facts straight and quit spouting off uninformed if you want anyone to take you seriously.

"Now, please show me the articles where anyone has been fired for being homosexual."

Doesn't get really reported in Conservative media. They would have you believe that gays already have equal rights.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/10/us/gay-teachers-wife-texas.html

Also what is with the obscure, lack of credibility websites you posted as sources? Also one of the articles mentions someone was fired for discriminating against gays but yet you're treating the person who did the discriminating as the victim.

"there is no federal protection for white folks, for Christians or for straight folk"

That is a lie. "Title VII prohibits discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin."

"Notice how those studies never take into account prior arrests or criminal convictions? Convenient, don't you think?"

I think you're choosing believe what you want despite contradictory evidence. I don't think you want to admit that our justice system often treats the impoverished and non-white differently.

"Show me one quote were Trump has said that those who criticize him should be punished."

It would take days for me to compile all the times he has sought to punish his critics. It is something he does frequently. Your lack of awareness of this fact is likely a result of insulating yourself from legitimize journalistic sources.

"Boy, you had better start getting your facts straight and quit spouting off uninformed if you want anyone to take you seriously."

Your level of projection and unawareness of your own ignorance is comical.

"Now, please show me the articles where anyone has been fired for being homosexual."
Doesn't get really reported in Conservative media. They would have you believe that gays already have equal rights.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/10/us/gay-teachers-wife-texas.html

Seeing how Fox is the only really "Conservative media", while all the rest are liberal - MSNBC, CNN, CBS, NBC, as well as all of the other lesser known sources, I would think you would have no trouble finding plenty of examples. The one you did choose to show was not a teacher fired for being gay. She was fired for teaching homosexuality as a norm against school policy. There is a difference.

Also what is with the obscure, lack of credibility websites you posted as sources? Also one of the articles mentions someone was fired for discriminating against gays but yet you're treating the person who did the discriminating as the victim.

Well, as I pointed out, the only media outlet that is Conservative is Fox. To get any real news these days, you pretty much have to go to "obscure" web sites. Being obscure does not equal lack of credibility, anymore than being well known equals credibility. Just ask CNN. Furthermore, just because a story is only reported on an "obscure" site doesn't mean that the story is not "credible." It only means that the mainstream media is ignoring it because it doesn't fit their narrative.

"there is no federal protection for white folks, for Christians or for straight folk"
That is a lie. "Title VII prohibits discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin."

You have me there, so let me rephrase my claim. The federal protections provided for race, color, religion sex or national origin are not upheld for those who are white, Christian or straight. Allow me to provide proof:

And this has been going on for decades. I was writing articles for my local paper denouncing this racist practice back when I was a teenager in the eighties. You'll notice one of those link is the Washington Post. That should be credible enough for you.

"Notice how those studies never take into account prior arrests or criminal convictions? Convenient, don't you think?"
I think you're choosing believe what you want despite contradictory evidence. I don't think you want to admit that our justice system often treats the impoverished and non-white differently.

You are correct in that the justice system treats certain classes differently. Jussie Smollet, for example... the Clintons, for example... Women who, in a divorce, get half of everything that their husbands have worked for when she decided that, for no good reason - or even worse because she has found someone else - that she wants out of the marriage, having never earned a single dime of that money... The girl accused of licking ice cream in Walmart. The media was reporting that she faced up to twenty years in jail. That is until it was discovered that she was a "person of color." All of a sudden, they decided that they wouldn't be taking any actions at all, or at the most a slap on the wrist... So yes... people are often treated differently by the "justice" system. Women are often favored over men. The rich are often favored over the poor. If you think that blacks are the only ones who are "impoverished," then you are the racist. There are just as many poor white folks who get screwed over by the "justice" system as there are black folks. You just don't hear their stories broadcast day and night by the biased mainstream media. You want to fix the "justice" system? Then fix the entire system.

"Show me one quote were Trump has said that those who criticize him should be punished."
It would take days for me to compile all the times he has sought to punish his critics. It is something he does frequently. Your lack of awareness of this fact is likely a result of insulating yourself from legitimize journalistic sources.

I only asked for one so if there are that many, it shouldn't have been that hard to pick just a single quote.

"Boy, you had better start getting your facts straight and quit spouting off uninformed if you want anyone to take you seriously."
Your level of projection and unawareness of your own ignorance is comical.

Ditto.

Also you realize the Washington Times has no connection to the Washington Post, right? Do you even research any of the sources you read?

You're in too deep and I will not been able to convince you of that.

In order to buy into your belief system you had to have all outside sources discredited. They have isolated you into a bubble that they don't intend to ever let you out of. You will echo the same criticisms back at me, my sources have been journalistic institutions for generations and continue to receive Pulitzer's for their investigative reporting. Trump and his allies rely on his supporters being misinformed. And there has yet to be a Trump supporter prove that claim wrong to me.

You say that, I hear "I can't win the argument and I give up."

Democrats make me laugh. Go run back to scoop up Bill's sloppy seconds won't you?

You will hear whatever you want to. I can't have a productive argument with someone who only trusts unreputable sources.

Aren't they fun :)

Trump and his allies rely on his supporters being misinformed. And there has yet to be a Trump supporter prove that claim wrong to me.

I'm just curious... how would one go about proving that statement false? That doesn't even make sense.

Defend his policies without using misinformation.

"Defend his policies without using misinformation."

See, there is the problem. Who are you to decide what is or is not misinformation? If something is reported, and the story as it is presented is factual, then regardless of the reporting agency, that story is not "misinformation." Just because you do not like/trust the source or the material does not make it "misinformation." It is, therefore, up to you to prove the information I, and apparently others, have provided as "misinformation." Prove that the stories we have offered you are false.

"Also you realize the Washington Times has no connection to the Washington Post, right? Do you even research any of the sources you read?"

Oh.. you caught me. I made a typo. May God have mercy on my soul for such a egregious offense.

The more important point is do you even research any of these sources that you blindly trust? Also do you understand the concept of credibility? If a source has not built credibility it does warrant being trusted. Otherwise you wide up trusting obscure websites run by fringe conspiracy theorists. Let's break down your sources.

The College Fix - Run by John J. Miller from the National Review, a Conservative editorial site. Appears to be Fox News material aimed at college kids. Has no Pulitzer's and is not a respected journalistic institution.

The Daily Caller - Co-founded by Tucker Carlson in 2010. Has already been able to establish a reputation of spreading discredited stores. Tucker Carlson himself has never really worked as a journalist and a has a long history of spreading dishonest claims. Has no Pulitzer's and is not a respected journalistic institution.

The Federalist - Launched in 2013. Has posted a number of false stories. Co-founder Ben Domenech has a history of seedy journalistic behavior. Has no Pulitzer's and is not a respected journalistic institution.

The Washington Times - Founded in 1982, very sketchy funding sources. Has spread many conspiracy theories. Has no Pulitzer's and is not a respected journalistic institution.

So long story short, no... you cannot prove the stories false, so instead you attack the messengers.

I have news for you (no pun intended)... you're "respected journalists" are not the Gospel truth angels, you seem to think:

So, I guess that means that we can't trust your "reputable" sources, either.

I can prove the stories false but I don't need to because they have no credibility. So Jayson Blair was forced to resign from the New York Times? If he was forced to resign that would imply that the New York Times respects the truth and cares about their credibility. Meanwhile Hannity lies every night and gets away with because that's what he supposed to do.

You seem to be unable to tell the difference between a smudge on a mirror and it being caked in soot. To you, the mirror is still dirty. The reality is the mirror with only a smudge still shows you the truth.

"You seem to be unable to tell the difference between a smudge on a mirror and it being caked in soot. To you, the mirror is still dirty. The reality is the mirror with only a smudge still shows you the truth.

You say that, while claiming you don't need to prove the stories are false, because they have no credibility. Yet you don't see the irony in your mirror analogy.

Show the the lies of Hannity. I don't really listen to him, so I can't say you're wrong or you're right, but you can't make blanket statements without evidence and expect to be taken seriously. If he lies as often as you say he does (and hell, he might.. I don't know), you should have no trouble finding suitable proof of such a claim.

Hannity isn't a journalist, he reinterprets and almost always misrepresents the news. This kind of role is common for the majority of figureheads in Conservative media. Hannity tells disgusting lies on almost a nightly basis, the worst such example was when he promoted the Seth Reth conspiracy theory.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/07/09/dont-blame-seth-rich-conspiracy-russians-blame-americans/?utm_term=.2e85a9951280

Why do you trust the daily caller and the Washington Times? Are those your primary sources of news?

"Why do you trust the daily caller and the Washington Times? Are those your primary sources of news?"

No. I don't have "primary sources of news." I read and watch news from all sides and all sources, deciding on my own which to trust given the facts at that particular moment. I don't care whether a source is "reputable" or not. Even Lucifer tells the truth when it suits him.

Well it's not working great for you. You absorb from fringe sources and block out respected journalistic institutions.

Seems to me that you two are pissing out of the same cock.

You know... I could take offense at that... ahh... who the hell am I kidding? I ain't no snowflake...

In a world of misinformation and flagrant propaganda, whose info is fake? How do we tell? As for me, it's head back in the sand time.

I came across a nurse a while back, really.... brilliant woman, who began drinking nothing but 'alkaline water' and wanted to feed her kids, her young growing children, a raw vegan diet... This is the same woman that would have easily given all her money up to a pyramid scheme because her old friend hit her up on Facebook telling her it was a great idea. Two seconds on Google and I had to tell her it's a pyramid scheme and they're getting sued, F- on BBB and blah blah blah so on so forth. But but but, the other mothers on Facebook!!! "they aren't doctors and neither are you!!"

That's a bit of a tangent but you understand what I'm saying I suppose.

I prefer to keep my head above water - and sand. Yeah, everyone is biased, that's why you get news from all sources and decide for yourself what's true and what's not. That includes not trusting "reputable sources" just because they're "reputable."

All sources are not equal, neither is bias. This method of yours has failed. From our discussions you consistently demonstrated being misinformed on key facts.

"All sources are not equal, neither is bias. This method of yours has failed. From our discussions you consistently demonstrated being misinformed on key facts."

So says you... yet you have failed to prove one single statement I've made false, other than to declare it so, just because you say so...

You implied no one gets fired for being gay. You also claimed there are no protections for religious or racial discrimination. All these claims were proven to be false.

Although I didn't prove, essentially all your claims were false. Your method of finding the truth isn't working.

You are getting close to truth. The nurse didn't just buy into a conspiracy theory, she bought in a support system where the instituitions were not to be trusted. When you don't trust institutions you can more easily be manipulated because there is no one to prove them wrong. It becomes "everyone else is lying to you, only I am telling you the truth". Once you get sucked in, it's hard to get out.

It's not even loading the picture for me. This site is taking its last dump I think.

It took me four tries to even get that thing to upload. When the remix page did initially come up, it kept filling the [Description] field in with some text from some printer upgrade part. This site is a sinking ship...

Here's a screenshot of the model for anyone who can't see the thingiverse preview:
www.RobotsAndComputers.com/temp/Screenshot%20from%202019-07-24%2022-55-07.png

Funny, I said that to Jay earlier. I downloaded it and there wasn't even a picture included with the bundle. The readme came across fine though.

Oh, the images haven't been downloading with the archives in months and the readme was empty except for the word [Creator:] - without the creator's name - up until they "fixed" the archive issue with the numbers for naming scheme. I mean, I guess they are trying (since that was fixed) but I swear it's as if some kid still in elementary school is the one rewriting the code!

I don't know much about site coding but I'd love, LOVE to take a look at the plate of spaghetti that is the source.

I take that back, the readme just says 'Creator: Derek Tombrello'.