Breaking News: Supreme Court Has Chosen Not To Hear Any Of The 7 Marriage Equality Cases.

[Katzndogz]

you have no clue what the "right of association" is, do you? Lemme help you out with that. The right of association has not one single precedent that suggest that it allows for businesses to refuse service based on race, creed, or sexual preference. Quite the opposite, in fact:

NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co., 458 U.S. 886, 907-15 (1982) (concerted activities of group protesting racial bias); Healy v. James, 408 U.S. 169 (1972) (denial of official recognition to student organization by public college without justification abridged right of association). The right does not, however, protect the decision of entities not truly private to exclude minorities.
​

In other words, entities which are public, such as businesses, do not share the same protections from nondiscrimation laws that entities that are private, such as clubs, do. So, you are, in fact, defending a businesses "right" to behave contrary to constitutionally based law. The very definition of a fanatic is to encourage ignoring the law for some rigid set of personal beliefs.

So the second I try to sell something, you somehow get the right to shit on my moral compass?

The only fanatics here are those equating supposed "equality" with the ability to force people to live their lives how YOU want them to.

The only fanatics here are those in favor of government jackboots on the necks of those who disagree with them.

I'm sure you look dashing in a quasi-nazi uniform.

First of all, no one is "shitting" on anything. You are allowed to have any views you want - in your private life. your professional life isn't your private life. If you want to be able to pick, and choose to whom you will sell, it is really simple - don't open a public business. Keep your business private, and only work with referrals from, say, your church. Then you are not subject to the public accommodation laws. However, the minute you make the choice to become open to the public - either through a store, or online - then you know longer get to use your personal beliefs as an excuse to discriminate. That is the law. It is constitutional, and the Supreme Court already ruled on this.

Why does the government get to dictate down to that level one's professional life? What is the government's compelling interest in forcing non essential products and services to be open to PA laws? I know it fits your interest in shitting on anyone who disagrees with you, but by what right to you claim the use of government force to impose your own agenda?

Because discrimination actually does violate people's right to free enterprise.

Also, Citizen's united is also "constitutional" because the "court said so" I wonder what you think about that one....

Oh! It is! I have never suggested otherwise. I disagree with the ruling, but the ruling is what it is. So, now, it is up to Congress to pass an amendment that more clearly defines "speech", if they wish to change that. In the meantime, I fully support Democrats taking full advantage of the ruling.

So all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others? The right of a gay couple to not have to go to one more baker trumps a person's right to perform their livelihood in a way they morally choose to? And finally, all of this is important enough to waste government time and effort to punish those who have the audacity to try to live by their moral compass?

You people keep trying to equate this crap with 'get to the back of the bus, ******" and you fail repeatedly, maybe not among your echo-chamber friends, but to those of us who cherish limited government, the failure resonates.

Likely gays won't know the extent of discrimination. They will know that they can go to a bakery that says "Get your wedding cake here". That's the only bakery they will be able to go to. They won't be able to go to a bakery that says "Sorry, we do not bake wedding cakes" even if they know 10 people who have gotten a wedding cake at that bakery.

 

[rightwinger]

So now we are up to 30 states which will allow homosexual marriage with the remaining 20 facing legal challenges

Will the Republicans still offer their "one man and one woman" response and still push for a Constitutional amendment to ban homosexual marriages?

How much longer till Republicans claim they supported it all along?

 

[bodecea]

Clearly, those who oppose marriage equality are losing this fight.

We have not yet begun to FIGHT. Let's see how many churches, Justices of the Peace, Town Clerks, etc.... are willing to be involved in thus when they start turning up like abortion doctors..... dead.

^Is this the last resort of the homophobe.....just like it was with the Segregationists? Violence because you don't get to legally discriminate anymore?

 

[Czernobog]

The Supreme court just decided it will not hear the Same Sex Marriage cases from IN, OK, UT, VA, or WI. So that means two things.

First, since, in all of those cases, the lower court ruling was to strike down the state ban on Same Sex Marriage, that now means that Marriage Equality is now the "Law of the Land" in those 7 states.

Second, and more importantly, all of those states had a stay on their rulings until the Supreme Court acted. Well, guess what? It just did. So, the stays in all of those states are about to run out.

Bad news for the religious fanatics.

Supreme Court declines to hear gay marriages case in surprise move

Why do you have to be an ass hole about it. Not all religious fanatics hate gays. I'm christian and I applaud gays having the liberty to get married. So stuff that in your hat and eat it.

Okay...why is it so hard for people on the Right to understand there is a difference between Christians, and religious fanatics! Dude! Here's a hint: if you don't want to pass a bunch of laws to force people to behave in accordance with your persona religious views, THEN I WASN'T TALKING ABOUT YOU!!!!!!

No, you just like laws that make people act in accordance to YOUR personal political views.

Really? What exactly does marriage equality make you do, that you didn't do before?

 

[rightwinger]

Clearly, those who oppose marriage equality are losing this fight.

We have not yet begun to FIGHT. Let's see how many churches, Justices of the Peace, Town Clerks, etc.... are willing to be involved in thus when they start turning up like abortion doctors..... dead.

^Is this the last resort of the homophobe.....just like it was with the Segregationists? Violence because you don't get to legally discriminate anymore?

It shows what this country is up against with goons like anathema

 

[NoNukes]

wonderful news for individual rights

The right loves the government controlling them. Liking saying who they can marry. They just love big government.

LOL.

Progressives love making people live they way the progressives want them to live, or else face government sanction or shaming.

Yeah, like we let gays marry because it benefits us.

 

[martybegan]

The Supreme court just decided it will not hear the Same Sex Marriage cases from IN, OK, UT, VA, or WI. So that means two things.

First, since, in all of those cases, the lower court ruling was to strike down the state ban on Same Sex Marriage, that now means that Marriage Equality is now the "Law of the Land" in those 7 states.

Second, and more importantly, all of those states had a stay on their rulings until the Supreme Court acted. Well, guess what? It just did. So, the stays in all of those states are about to run out.

Bad news for the religious fanatics.

Supreme Court declines to hear gay marriages case in surprise move

Why do you have to be an ass hole about it. Not all religious fanatics hate gays. I'm christian and I applaud gays having the liberty to get married. So stuff that in your hat and eat it.

Okay...why is it so hard for people on the Right to understand there is a difference between Christians, and religious fanatics! Dude! Here's a hint: if you don't want to pass a bunch of laws to force people to behave in accordance with your persona religious views, THEN I WASN'T TALKING ABOUT YOU!!!!!!

No, you just like laws that make people act in accordance to YOUR personal political views.

Really? What exactly does marriage equality make you do, that you didn't do before?

The Supreme court just decided it will not hear the Same Sex Marriage cases from IN, OK, UT, VA, or WI. So that means two things.

First, since, in all of those cases, the lower court ruling was to strike down the state ban on Same Sex Marriage, that now means that Marriage Equality is now the "Law of the Land" in those 7 states.

Second, and more importantly, all of those states had a stay on their rulings until the Supreme Court acted. Well, guess what? It just did. So, the stays in all of those states are about to run out.

Bad news for the religious fanatics.

Supreme Court declines to hear gay marriages case in surprise move

Why do you have to be an ass hole about it. Not all religious fanatics hate gays. I'm christian and I applaud gays having the liberty to get married. So stuff that in your hat and eat it.

Okay...why is it so hard for people on the Right to understand there is a difference between Christians, and religious fanatics! Dude! Here's a hint: if you don't want to pass a bunch of laws to force people to behave in accordance with your persona religious views, THEN I WASN'T TALKING ABOUT YOU!!!!!!

No, you just like laws that make people act in accordance to YOUR personal political views.

Really? What exactly does marriage equality make you do, that you didn't do before?

It's not what it makes me do, its what it makes OTHERS do, i.e. bake cakes they don't want to bake.

 

[Stephanie]

marriage equality

liberal/commie speak. run when equality is spoken by them

 

[Czernobog]

you have no clue what the "right of association" is, do you? Lemme help you out with that. The right of association has not one single precedent that suggest that it allows for businesses to refuse service based on race, creed, or sexual preference. Quite the opposite, in fact:

NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co., 458 U.S. 886, 907-15 (1982) (concerted activities of group protesting racial bias); Healy v. James, 408 U.S. 169 (1972) (denial of official recognition to student organization by public college without justification abridged right of association). The right does not, however, protect the decision of entities not truly private to exclude minorities.
​

In other words, entities which are public, such as businesses, do not share the same protections from nondiscrimation laws that entities that are private, such as clubs, do. So, you are, in fact, defending a businesses "right" to behave contrary to constitutionally based law. The very definition of a fanatic is to encourage ignoring the law for some rigid set of personal beliefs.

So the second I try to sell something, you somehow get the right to shit on my moral compass?

The only fanatics here are those equating supposed "equality" with the ability to force people to live their lives how YOU want them to.

The only fanatics here are those in favor of government jackboots on the necks of those who disagree with them.

I'm sure you look dashing in a quasi-nazi uniform.

First of all, no one is "shitting" on anything. You are allowed to have any views you want - in your private life. your professional life isn't your private life. If you want to be able to pick, and choose to whom you will sell, it is really simple - don't open a public business. Keep your business private, and only work with referrals from, say, your church. Then you are not subject to the public accommodation laws. However, the minute you make the choice to become open to the public - either through a store, or online - then you know longer get to use your personal beliefs as an excuse to discriminate. That is the law. It is constitutional, and the Supreme Court already ruled on this.

Why does the government get to dictate down to that level one's professional life? What is the government's compelling interest in forcing non essential products and services to be open to PA laws? I know it fits your interest in shitting on anyone who disagrees with you, but by what right to you claim the use of government force to impose your own agenda?

Because discrimination actually does violate people's right to free enterprise.

Also, Citizen's united is also "constitutional" because the "court said so" I wonder what you think about that one....

Oh! It is! I have never suggested otherwise. I disagree with the ruling, but the ruling is what it is. So, now, it is up to Congress to pass an amendment that more clearly defines "speech", if they wish to change that. In the meantime, I fully support Democrats taking full advantage of the ruling.

So all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others? The right of a gay couple to not have to go to one more baker trumps a person's right to perform their livelihood in a way they morally choose to? And finally, all of this is important enough to waste government time and effort to punish those who have the audacity to try to live by their moral compass?

Yes. Yes it does. You know kinda like how it also trumps a black person's right not to have to go to one more baker, or one more restaurant, or find one more water fountain. Remember? We already decided 40 years ago that this kind of discrimination is simply not acceptable. I'm sorry that you want to be allowed to be a bigot, but we don't really cotton to such things in this country.

You people keep trying to equate this crap with 'get to the back of the bus, ******" and you fail repeatedly, maybe not among your echo-chamber friends, but to those of us who cherish limited government, the failure resonates.

Well, actually we don't. You'll notice that the "us people" keep winning the court battles over this with just that argument. Because discrimination, and bigotry is discrimination and bigotry whether it is based on race, or gender, or sexual preference. And we just don't like discrimination, and bigotry in this country. I know that's a bitter pill to swallow, but there it is.

 

[martybegan]

wonderful news for individual rights

The right loves the government controlling them. Liking saying who they can marry. They just love big government.

LOL.

Progressives love making people live they way the progressives want them to live, or else face government sanction or shaming.

Yeah, like we let gays marry because it benefits us.

No, its because you are insufferable busybodies about other people's lives. You are also usually hypocrites because the second government or people try to go after things you hold dear, you start bitching about freedom, and keeping the government out of people's bedrooms.

 

[Czernobog]

The Supreme court just decided it will not hear the Same Sex Marriage cases from IN, OK, UT, VA, or WI. So that means two things.

First, since, in all of those cases, the lower court ruling was to strike down the state ban on Same Sex Marriage, that now means that Marriage Equality is now the "Law of the Land" in those 7 states.

Second, and more importantly, all of those states had a stay on their rulings until the Supreme Court acted. Well, guess what? It just did. So, the stays in all of those states are about to run out.

Bad news for the religious fanatics.

Supreme Court declines to hear gay marriages case in surprise move

Why do you have to be an ass hole about it. Not all religious fanatics hate gays. I'm christian and I applaud gays having the liberty to get married. So stuff that in your hat and eat it.

Okay...why is it so hard for people on the Right to understand there is a difference between Christians, and religious fanatics! Dude! Here's a hint: if you don't want to pass a bunch of laws to force people to behave in accordance with your persona religious views, THEN I WASN'T TALKING ABOUT YOU!!!!!!

No, you just like laws that make people act in accordance to YOUR personal political views.

Really? What exactly does marriage equality make you do, that you didn't do before?

The Supreme court just decided it will not hear the Same Sex Marriage cases from IN, OK, UT, VA, or WI. So that means two things.

First, since, in all of those cases, the lower court ruling was to strike down the state ban on Same Sex Marriage, that now means that Marriage Equality is now the "Law of the Land" in those 7 states.

Second, and more importantly, all of those states had a stay on their rulings until the Supreme Court acted. Well, guess what? It just did. So, the stays in all of those states are about to run out.

Bad news for the religious fanatics.

Supreme Court declines to hear gay marriages case in surprise move

Why do you have to be an ass hole about it. Not all religious fanatics hate gays. I'm christian and I applaud gays having the liberty to get married. So stuff that in your hat and eat it.

Okay...why is it so hard for people on the Right to understand there is a difference between Christians, and religious fanatics! Dude! Here's a hint: if you don't want to pass a bunch of laws to force people to behave in accordance with your persona religious views, THEN I WASN'T TALKING ABOUT YOU!!!!!!

No, you just like laws that make people act in accordance to YOUR personal political views.

Really? What exactly does marriage equality make you do, that you didn't do before?

It's not what it makes me do, its what it makes OTHERS do, i.e. bake cakes they don't want to bake.

Really? They don't want to bake? Then why did they open a bakery business? That seems really stupid...

 

[Czernobog]

you have no clue what the "right of association" is, do you? Lemme help you out with that. The right of association has not one single precedent that suggest that it allows for businesses to refuse service based on race, creed, or sexual preference. Quite the opposite, in fact:

NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co., 458 U.S. 886, 907-15 (1982) (concerted activities of group protesting racial bias); Healy v. James, 408 U.S. 169 (1972) (denial of official recognition to student organization by public college without justification abridged right of association). The right does not, however, protect the decision of entities not truly private to exclude minorities.
​

In other words, entities which are public, such as businesses, do not share the same protections from nondiscrimation laws that entities that are private, such as clubs, do. So, you are, in fact, defending a businesses "right" to behave contrary to constitutionally based law. The very definition of a fanatic is to encourage ignoring the law for some rigid set of personal beliefs.

So the second I try to sell something, you somehow get the right to shit on my moral compass?

The only fanatics here are those equating supposed "equality" with the ability to force people to live their lives how YOU want them to.

The only fanatics here are those in favor of government jackboots on the necks of those who disagree with them.

I'm sure you look dashing in a quasi-nazi uniform.

First of all, no one is "shitting" on anything. You are allowed to have any views you want - in your private life. your professional life isn't your private life. If you want to be able to pick, and choose to whom you will sell, it is really simple - don't open a public business. Keep your business private, and only work with referrals from, say, your church. Then you are not subject to the public accommodation laws. However, the minute you make the choice to become open to the public - either through a store, or online - then you know longer get to use your personal beliefs as an excuse to discriminate. That is the law. It is constitutional, and the Supreme Court already ruled on this.

Why does the government get to dictate down to that level one's professional life? What is the government's compelling interest in forcing non essential products and services to be open to PA laws? I know it fits your interest in shitting on anyone who disagrees with you, but by what right to you claim the use of government force to impose your own agenda?

Because discrimination actually does violate people's right to free enterprise.

Also, Citizen's united is also "constitutional" because the "court said so" I wonder what you think about that one....

Oh! It is! I have never suggested otherwise. I disagree with the ruling, but the ruling is what it is. So, now, it is up to Congress to pass an amendment that more clearly defines "speech", if they wish to change that. In the meantime, I fully support Democrats taking full advantage of the ruling.

I agree with your point on discrimination..

But I think your nutz to be against the first amendment, as being against the SCOTUS ruling on CU is the same as being against the first amendment.

Oh! I'm not against the first amendment. I just don't think money is speech. Money is property; there's a difference.

 

[NoNukes]

wonderful news for individual rights

The right loves the government controlling them. Liking saying who they can marry. They just love big government.

LOL.

Progressives love making people live they way the progressives want them to live, or else face government sanction or shaming.

Yeah, like we let gays marry because it benefits us.

No, its because you are insufferable busybodies about other people's lives. You are also usually hypocrites because the second government or people try to go after things you hold dear, you start bitching about freedom, and keeping the government out of people's bedrooms.

Bullshit, the right can only see what they believe in, and care about 'their own kind'.

 

[martybegan]

So the second I try to sell something, you somehow get the right to shit on my moral compass?

The only fanatics here are those equating supposed "equality" with the ability to force people to live their lives how YOU want them to.

The only fanatics here are those in favor of government jackboots on the necks of those who disagree with them.

I'm sure you look dashing in a quasi-nazi uniform.

First of all, no one is "shitting" on anything. You are allowed to have any views you want - in your private life. your professional life isn't your private life. If you want to be able to pick, and choose to whom you will sell, it is really simple - don't open a public business. Keep your business private, and only work with referrals from, say, your church. Then you are not subject to the public accommodation laws. However, the minute you make the choice to become open to the public - either through a store, or online - then you know longer get to use your personal beliefs as an excuse to discriminate. That is the law. It is constitutional, and the Supreme Court already ruled on this.

Why does the government get to dictate down to that level one's professional life? What is the government's compelling interest in forcing non essential products and services to be open to PA laws? I know it fits your interest in shitting on anyone who disagrees with you, but by what right to you claim the use of government force to impose your own agenda?

Because discrimination actually does violate people's right to free enterprise.

Also, Citizen's united is also "constitutional" because the "court said so" I wonder what you think about that one....

Oh! It is! I have never suggested otherwise. I disagree with the ruling, but the ruling is what it is. So, now, it is up to Congress to pass an amendment that more clearly defines "speech", if they wish to change that. In the meantime, I fully support Democrats taking full advantage of the ruling.

So all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others? The right of a gay couple to not have to go to one more baker trumps a person's right to perform their livelihood in a way they morally choose to? And finally, all of this is important enough to waste government time and effort to punish those who have the audacity to try to live by their moral compass?

Yes. Yes it does. You know kinda like how it also trumps a black person's right not to have to go to one more baker, or one more restaurant, or find one more water fountain. Remember? We already decided 40 years ago that this kind of discrimination is simply not acceptable. I'm sorry that you want to be allowed to be a bigot, but we don't really cotton to such things in this country.

You people keep trying to equate this crap with 'get to the back of the bus, ******" and you fail repeatedly, maybe not among your echo-chamber friends, but to those of us who cherish limited government, the failure resonates.

Well, actually we don't. You'll notice that the "us people" keep winning the court battles over this with just that argument. Because discrimination, and bigotry is discrimination and bigotry whether it is based on race, or gender, or sexual preference. And we just don't like discrimination, and bigotry in this country. I know that's a bitter pill to swallow, but there it is.

Again, this is not the same as racism, institutional racism that you keep bringing up. Black people were also smart enough to realize that there is no sense in going to a service provider that is hostile to you if you can help not to. This, on the other hand is about acceptance no matter how much people like you say otherwise.

And winning in court does not make your side right. It means our court system is failing us.

 

[martybegan]

wonderful news for individual rights

The right loves the government controlling them. Liking saying who they can marry. They just love big government.

LOL.

Progressives love making people live they way the progressives want them to live, or else face government sanction or shaming.

Yeah, like we let gays marry because it benefits us.

No, its because you are insufferable busybodies about other people's lives. You are also usually hypocrites because the second government or people try to go after things you hold dear, you start bitching about freedom, and keeping the government out of people's bedrooms.

Bullshit, the right can only see what they believe in, and care about 'their own kind'.

The truth hurts, doesn't it?

 

[martybegan]

So the second I try to sell something, you somehow get the right to shit on my moral compass?

The only fanatics here are those equating supposed "equality" with the ability to force people to live their lives how YOU want them to.

The only fanatics here are those in favor of government jackboots on the necks of those who disagree with them.

I'm sure you look dashing in a quasi-nazi uniform.

First of all, no one is "shitting" on anything. You are allowed to have any views you want - in your private life. your professional life isn't your private life. If you want to be able to pick, and choose to whom you will sell, it is really simple - don't open a public business. Keep your business private, and only work with referrals from, say, your church. Then you are not subject to the public accommodation laws. However, the minute you make the choice to become open to the public - either through a store, or online - then you know longer get to use your personal beliefs as an excuse to discriminate. That is the law. It is constitutional, and the Supreme Court already ruled on this.

Why does the government get to dictate down to that level one's professional life? What is the government's compelling interest in forcing non essential products and services to be open to PA laws? I know it fits your interest in shitting on anyone who disagrees with you, but by what right to you claim the use of government force to impose your own agenda?

Because discrimination actually does violate people's right to free enterprise.

Also, Citizen's united is also "constitutional" because the "court said so" I wonder what you think about that one....

Oh! It is! I have never suggested otherwise. I disagree with the ruling, but the ruling is what it is. So, now, it is up to Congress to pass an amendment that more clearly defines "speech", if they wish to change that. In the meantime, I fully support Democrats taking full advantage of the ruling.

I agree with your point on discrimination..

But I think your nutz to be against the first amendment, as being against the SCOTUS ruling on CU is the same as being against the first amendment.

Oh! I'm not against the first amendment. I just don't think money is speech. Money is property; there's a difference.

No, you are against it for people who disagree with you. I'm sure you are just all hunky dory when unions spend money on ads.

 

[Czernobog]

wonderful news for individual rights

The right loves the government controlling them. Liking saying who they can marry. They just love big government.

LOL.

Progressives love making people live they way the progressives want them to live, or else face government sanction or shaming.

Yeah, like we let gays marry because it benefits us.

No, its because you are insufferable busybodies about other people's lives. You are also usually hypocrites because the second government or people try to go after things you hold dear, you start bitching about freedom, and keeping the government out of people's bedrooms.

Says the guy who supports the party that endorsed government mandated trans-vaginal probes, and still endorses government mandated sonograms, and endorses telling people who they can, and cannot marry. Dude! You don't get to support the party that endorses these things, and then talk about others being "busybodies". Wellll...I mean, you do, obviously. You just did. But you don't get to do that, and expect to be taken seriously!!!

 

[NoNukes]

The right loves the government controlling them. Liking saying who they can marry. They just love big government.

LOL.

Progressives love making people live they way the progressives want them to live, or else face government sanction or shaming.

Yeah, like we let gays marry because it benefits us.

No, its because you are insufferable busybodies about other people's lives. You are also usually hypocrites because the second government or people try to go after things you hold dear, you start bitching about freedom, and keeping the government out of people's bedrooms.

Bullshit, the right can only see what they believe in, and care about 'their own kind'.

The truth hurts, doesn't it?

No, it does not hurt at all to speak the truth. You should try it some time.

 

[Nosmo King]

wonderful news for individual rights

The right loves the government controlling them. Liking saying who they can marry. They just love big government.

LOL.

Progressives love making people live they way the progressives want them to live, or else face government sanction or shaming.

What precisely will happen to YOU after marriage equality is recognized in all 50 states? Do you believe that, because of the expansion of liberty, yours will be eroded? What government sanctions have ever been imposed upon YOU as a result of the expansion of liberties?

Are you fearful that openly hating those you fear, despise, loathe and dread will earn YOU special treatment meted out by the state?

Or do you see your contempt for things unknown and barely understood by you becoming unpopular? Well, skippy, it already IS unpopular!

The Supreme court just decided it will not hear the Same Sex Marriage cases from IN, OK, UT, VA, or WI. So that means two things.

First, since, in all of those cases, the lower court ruling was to strike down the state ban on Same Sex Marriage, that now means that Marriage Equality is now the "Law of the Land" in those 7 states.

Second, and more importantly, all of those states had a stay on their rulings until the Supreme Court acted. Well, guess what? It just did. So, the stays in all of those states are about to run out.

Bad news for the religious fanatics.

Supreme Court declines to hear gay marriages case in surprise move

Why do you have to be an ass hole about it. Not all religious fanatics hate gays. I'm christian and I applaud gays having the liberty to get married. So stuff that in your hat and eat it.

Okay...why is it so hard for people on the Right to understand there is a difference between Christians, and religious fanatics! Dude! Here's a hint: if you don't want to pass a bunch of laws to force people to behave in accordance with your persona religious views, THEN I WASN'T TALKING ABOUT YOU!!!!!!

No, you just like laws that make people act in accordance to YOUR personal political views.

Really? What exactly does marriage equality make you do, that you didn't do before?

The Supreme court just decided it will not hear the Same Sex Marriage cases from IN, OK, UT, VA, or WI. So that means two things.

First, since, in all of those cases, the lower court ruling was to strike down the state ban on Same Sex Marriage, that now means that Marriage Equality is now the "Law of the Land" in those 7 states.

Second, and more importantly, all of those states had a stay on their rulings until the Supreme Court acted. Well, guess what? It just did. So, the stays in all of those states are about to run out.

Bad news for the religious fanatics.

Supreme Court declines to hear gay marriages case in surprise move

Why do you have to be an ass hole about it. Not all religious fanatics hate gays. I'm christian and I applaud gays having the liberty to get married. So stuff that in your hat and eat it.

Okay...why is it so hard for people on the Right to understand there is a difference between Christians, and religious fanatics! Dude! Here's a hint: if you don't want to pass a bunch of laws to force people to behave in accordance with your persona religious views, THEN I WASN'T TALKING ABOUT YOU!!!!!!

No, you just like laws that make people act in accordance to YOUR personal political views.

Really? What exactly does marriage equality make you do, that you didn't do before?

It's not what it makes me do, its what it makes OTHERS do, i.e. bake cakes they don't want to bake.

Are those special cakes? Cakes which require different, pe4rhaps exotic and expensive ingredients?

Or are they just cakes. period.

 

[Czernobog]

First of all, no one is "shitting" on anything. You are allowed to have any views you want - in your private life. your professional life isn't your private life. If you want to be able to pick, and choose to whom you will sell, it is really simple - don't open a public business. Keep your business private, and only work with referrals from, say, your church. Then you are not subject to the public accommodation laws. However, the minute you make the choice to become open to the public - either through a store, or online - then you know longer get to use your personal beliefs as an excuse to discriminate. That is the law. It is constitutional, and the Supreme Court already ruled on this.

Why does the government get to dictate down to that level one's professional life? What is the government's compelling interest in forcing non essential products and services to be open to PA laws? I know it fits your interest in shitting on anyone who disagrees with you, but by what right to you claim the use of government force to impose your own agenda?

Because discrimination actually does violate people's right to free enterprise.

Also, Citizen's united is also "constitutional" because the "court said so" I wonder what you think about that one....

Oh! It is! I have never suggested otherwise. I disagree with the ruling, but the ruling is what it is. So, now, it is up to Congress to pass an amendment that more clearly defines "speech", if they wish to change that. In the meantime, I fully support Democrats taking full advantage of the ruling.

I agree with your point on discrimination..

But I think your nutz to be against the first amendment, as being against the SCOTUS ruling on CU is the same as being against the first amendment.

Oh! I'm not against the first amendment. I just don't think money is speech. Money is property; there's a difference.

No, you are against it for people who disagree with you. I'm sure you are just all hunky dory when unions spend money on ads.

I am now. Hell. You guys won. You set the rules for what is acceptable. Why shouldn't we take advantage of the same standards that you guys set, and crow about as being perfectly reasonable? Why was this never a problem when you thought it was just gonna be folks like the Koch brothers doing it? Why, now that the unions are playing by your rules, is this suddenly a problem?