Is MSNBC Ramping Up Racial Tensions To Tag LGBT Agenda Onto New "Civil Rights Fury"?

[Silhouette]

MSNBC has the lowest viewership of all stations. They will do anything to get someone to tune in. They are desperate.

It isn't not having a state recognized legal marriage that humiliates the children of same sex couples. It's having no one recognize the legal marriage of same sex couples. That isn't going to change. It's a shame for the children but that's what these foolish adults chose for those children.

True, I could run around saying I'm from Mars, but if 99.99% of the public disagrees with me in day to day life, I'll not likely get Martian benefits or recognition.

The Supremes are right on this issue, Kennedy apparently is coming to his senses that five people cannot dictate from the bench how the core of society will drastically change, without the participation of the governed/society itself. That's too much power. To be honest, if this question was before me I'd not want to sign off on a federal mandate AT ALL. Can you imagine having the power to shape human destiny from the core up without any voices of opposition being heard, and being silenced forever? WOW! ...and with the welfare of children at stake to boot?

Fanning the flames of black civil unrest so you can coattail somehow "gay rights" onto this tidal wave "to influence via fear an (apparently) unwilling Court" is beyond irresponsible, it's criminal.

I guess even Breyer is balking at being a dictator. So it may even be 6/3 in favor of the Public's participation in the shaping of human destiny. Prop 8 and others like it will have their shroud lifted. I've heard legal discussions about the illegal marriages performed in these couple dozen states since they were forced to not self govern. (By defiant lower appeals courts thwarting the clear message in Windsor 2013 that this was a question for the states, not the fed) People are thinking that those "marriages" will be grandfathered in.

And then petitions for normal election cycles will try to reverse (they're not bans, they're standards) those laws that say marriage is between just one man and one woman consenting adults. But on the other side will be equal effort to preserve the definition of marriage as it has been for thousands of years; to not subject boys to fatherless "marriages" or girls to motherless "marriages" as an institution and recent social experiment (using kids' mental health as lab rats) even those "parents" didn't have to undergo themselves..

 

[Silhouette]

You know, Maryland is so darned close geographically to the US Supreme Court halls in DC. I wonder?.....nah.....

...?

 

[Skylar]

Fanning the flames of black civil unrest so you can coattail somehow "gay rights" onto this tidal wave "to influence via fear an (apparently) unwilling Court" is beyond irresponsible, it's criminal.

Um....you do realize that the only "person" that you're "quoting" is "yourself", right? This entire conspiracy begins and ends in your head. And we don't charge anyone with a crime based on your imagination.

So it may even be 6/3 in favor of the Public's participation in the shaping of human destiny. Prop 8 and others like it will have their shroud lifted.

Nope. In order to have Prop 8 recognized as legally valid, the State of California would have to petition a federal court to have the ruling that overturned it overruled. And California is making no such petition.

So even hypothetically your argument is moot.

But don't let me get in the way of another melodramatic rant. You were saying about 'shaping of human destiny'?

I've heard legal discussions about the illegal marriages performed in these couple dozen states since they were forced to not self govern. (By defiant lower appeals courts thwarting the clear message in Windsor 2013 that this was a question for the states, not the fed) People are thinking that those "marriages" will be grandfathered in.

What 'illegal marriages' are you referring to? Every marriage you've cited is recognized and protected by the States in which the marriages occurred.

And if Windsor was as 'clear' as you claim, why did Scalia contradict you? Scalia found in his dissent that the Court had made its opinion against state gay marriage bans 'beyond mistaking' in the Windsor decision. And that the Court applying the logic of the Windsor decision to overturn state gay marriage bans was 'inevitable'.

And of course, the Windsor decision never even mentions state gay marriage bans. Let alone ruled they were constitutional. Nor did the court find that State marriage laws were beyond federal judicial review. Quite the opposite in fact. In Windsor the actually cited as Loving v. Virginia when citing the constitutional guarantees that the States were subject to. A case in which the federal government overturned State marriage laws.

Exactly opposite of your claims. All of which you know. And really hope we don't.

And then petitions for normal election cycles will try to reverse (they're not bans, they're standards) those laws that say marriage is between just one man and one woman consenting adults. But on the other side will be equal effort to preserve the definition of marriage as it has been for thousands of years; to not subject boys to fatherless "marriages" or girls to motherless "marriages" as an institution and recent social experiment (using kids' mental health as lab rats) even those "parents" didn't have to undergo themselves..

The obvious problem with your logic being that denying marriage to same sex parents doesn't mean that their children have opposite sex parents. It merely guarantees that these children never have married parents.

Which only hurts these children. Even Kennedy recognizes the immediate legal harm that denying same sex marriage causes children.

 

[Skylar]

You know, Maryland is so darned close geographically to the US Supreme Court halls in DC. I wonder?.....nah.....

...?

Laughing.....another batshit conspiracy?

 

[Silhouette]

The facts...

Police in Baltimore are saying the riots that engulfed the city Monday night and in to Tuesday morning may have been the result of some kids who wanted to live out a fantasy from their favorite horror movie...
Students at local Baltimore High Schools began circulating a flier through social media that called for a “purge” to happen at 3 p.m. at the Mondawmin Mall, which would later become the epicenter of the riots...
The purge refers to a 2013 movie set in a dystopian future where crime is legal for a 12-hour period each year. People are free to rob, rape and murder while the police are helpless to respond. Read more at Students Horror Movie Fantasy May Have Sparked Baltimore Riots DailySurge

Here's the flier *someone* purposefully circulated in that school: (the timing is just amazing, isn't it? And so close to the US Supreme Court in DC)

Carrie Wells on Twitter Re the high school purge this is the IG post I ve seen circulating http t.co OzmTggq0YL

"This is absolutely horrible," the lifelong Baltimorean said. "They aren't doing it for [Freddie Gray]. They're taking an opportunity for personal gain. They're tearing up their own neighborhood."....Looters smashed windows and broke through a metal roll-down door in the Save-a-Lot shopping center on McMechen Street in Bolton Hill. Neighbors arrived minutes later to stand in front of the stores, board them up and help sweep up the debris and broken glass... Baltimore rioting kicked off with rumors of purge - Baltimore Sun

I wonder how hard it would be to incite a riot in a bunch of hormone-charged teenagers in a typically simmering neighborhood like the one in Baltimore in a calculated way to cause a riot to erupt at a *certain timing* using social media like a match to a reservoir of otherwise unlit gasoline?

Two things my little Skylar friend:

1. Timing

2. Location (conveniently near DC)

Question to ask therefore, "what is going on in DC at this exact timing that is civil rights related".

And there's your answer..

 

[Skylar]

The facts...

Police in Baltimore are saying the riots that engulfed the city Monday night and in to Tuesday morning may have been the result of some kids who wanted to live out a fantasy from their favorite horror movie...
Students at local Baltimore High Schools began circulating a flier through social media that called for a “purge” to happen at 3 p.m. at the Mondawmin Mall, which would later become the epicenter of the riots...
The purge refers to a 2013 movie set in a dystopian future where crime is legal for a 12-hour period each year. People are free to rob, rape and murder while the police are helpless to respond. Read more at Students Horror Movie Fantasy May Have Sparked Baltimore Riots DailySurge

Here's the flier *someone* purposefully circulated in that school: (the timing is just amazing, isn't it? And so close to the US Supreme Court in DC)

Carrie Wells on Twitter Re the high school purge this is the IG post I ve seen circulating http t.co OzmTggq0YL

Um, there's not the slightest mention of gay marriage anywhere in here tweet.

You....you do realize you're hallucinating this entire conspiracy of yours, right?

 

[Katzndogz]

MSNBC has the lowest viewership of all stations. They will do anything to get someone to tune in. They are desperate.

Yeah, because MSNBC is the *only* channel that covered the riots in Baltimore.

You guys are raising willful ignorance to an art form.

It isn't not having a state recognized legal marriage that humiliates the children of same sex couples. It's having no one recognize the legal marriage of same sex couples.

And by 'no one' do you mean the clear majority of Americans that support same sex marriage?

Remember, most people don't think like you do.

By no one I mean the clear majorities of people that voted it down and the growing movement in high schools to have anti gay days.

You misunderstand the polls in support of SSM. What people support is same sex marriage as long as they are left alone. Since the goal is to leave no one alone there is unquestioned and unaddressed opposition.

 

[Skylar]

MSNBC has the lowest viewership of all stations. They will do anything to get someone to tune in. They are desperate.

Yeah, because MSNBC is the *only* channel that covered the riots in Baltimore.

You guys are raising willful ignorance to an art form.

It isn't not having a state recognized legal marriage that humiliates the children of same sex couples. It's having no one recognize the legal marriage of same sex couples.

And by 'no one' do you mean the clear majority of Americans that support same sex marriage?

Remember, most people don't think like you do.

By no one I mean the clear majorities of people that voted it down and the growing movement in high schools to have anti gay days.

The last three votes on gay marriage have affirmed it. And by 'growing movement', you mean both instances?

You misunderstand the polls in support of SSM. What people support is same sex marriage as long as they are left alone.

More accurately, people support gay marriage being legal.

 

[Silhouette]

More accurately, people support gay marriage being legal.

I have no doubt whatsoever that probably 90% of the people in the blue light district of San Francisco and their friends promoting it in West Hollywood under GLAAD's far-reaching influence in media are in support of gay marriage. So you are technically right, "people" do support gay marriage.

The entire state of California though?...not so much...check the election results for the Prop 8 intiative for details. That 2008 initiative was the second defeat for gay marriage in California.

 

[Skylar]

More accurately, people support gay marriage being legal.

I have no doubt whatsoever that probably 90% of the people in the blue light district of San Francisco and their friends promoting it in West Hollywood under GLAAD's far-reaching influence in media are in support of gay marriage. So you are technically right, "people" do support gay marriage.

I'm just right.

Same-Sex Marriage Support Reaches New High at 55%

Same-Sex Marriage Support Reaches New High at 55

Ignore as you wish. It really doesn't matter if your close your eyes.

The entire state of California though?...not so much...check the election results for the Prop 8 intiative for details. That 2008 initiative was the second defeat for gay marriage in California.

2008 was 7 years ago. Views on gay marriage have shifted radically in California and the rest of the US.

Its not even close.

With Prop 8 overturned by the federal judiciary and the ruling preserved by the USSC, what California's support and what the law says are in sync: gay marriage is legal in California.

Regardless of how the Obergefell ruling falls out, California needs to petition the court to have the lower court ruling that overturned prop 8 set aside.

And California isn't petitioning.

 

[Silhouette]

1.

Same-Sex Marriage Support Reaches New High at 55%

Same-Sex Marriage Support Reaches New High at 55

2.

Regardless of how the Obergefell ruling falls out, California needs to petition the court to have the lower court ruling that overturned prop 8 set aside.

And California isn't petitioning.

1. Then like one of the Justices said this month, you should have no trouble at all with the people of each state weighing in on gay marriage and

2. California doesn't have to "petition" to enforce intiative law. If the Supremes say that states had the say all along, the California Constitution mandates that initiative law is the law. All lower court rulings in conflict would be nullified. And...officials in California don't enjoy the choice of whether or not to enforce intiative law. They have to. And if anyone there wants to overthrow Prop 8, they have to do it with another initiative. That's how the governing system works in that state.

3. I wonder if the investigation into the riots in Baltimore "suddenly"...the same week or thereabouts that "civil rights" are being discussed in DC will turn up a nefarious instigator. See the title of this thread..

 

[Silhouette]

You realize that about California law, right? Wonder what they're uncovering about who struck the match in the reservoir of unlit gasoline in Baltimore's high schools? I was thinking maybe they ought to trace back who produced the movie "Purge" and when? Just for fun.

2013 Presumably, this was the secret project “Vigilandia“ that we reported on back in January. The “speculative thriller” takes place in a world where the government sanctions an annual 12-hour period where everything—including murder—becomes legal... The Purge is produced by Jason Blum of Blumhouse (Paranormal Activity, Insidious, Sinister), Platinum Dunes’ partners Michael Bay, Brad Fuller and Andrew Form (The Amityville Horror, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre), as well as Sébastien Kurt Lemercier (Assault on Precinct 13). THE PURGE Movie Synopsis. THE PURGE Stars Ethan Hawke and Lena Headey Collider

At what point do we start curbing films that incite rioting and unrest in America? I mean, this one nudged so close to our current state of unrest that it almost seems like a directive instead of entertainment?

There is free speech and there is yelling "FIRE!" in an antsy/crowded theater too...

 

[Syriusly]

Don't know why but suddenly I feel like bumping this thread.

Its because thats what you do.....when people stop paying attention to one of your threads you try to flog it back to life.

 

[Syriusly]

You realize that about California law, right? Wonder what they're uncovering about who struck the match in the reservoir of unlit gasoline in Baltimore's high schools? I was thinking maybe they ought to trace back who produced the movie "Purge" and when? Just for fun.

2013 Presumably, this was the secret project “Vigilandia“ that we reported on back in January. The “speculative thriller” takes place in a world where the government sanctions an annual 12-hour period where everything—including murder—becomes legal... The Purge is produced by Jason Blum of Blumhouse (Paranormal Activity, Insidious, Sinister), Platinum Dunes’ partners Michael Bay, Brad Fuller and Andrew Form (The Amityville Horror, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre), as well as Sébastien Kurt Lemercier (Assault on Precinct 13). THE PURGE Movie Synopsis. THE PURGE Stars Ethan Hawke and Lena Headey Collider

At what point do we start curbing films that incite rioting and unrest in America? I mean, this one nudged so close to our current state of unrest that it almost seems like a directive instead of entertainment?

There is free speech and there is yelling "FIRE!" in an antsy/crowded theater too...

You are going down deeper and deeper into the rabbit hole of your batshit conspiracy pit.

 

[Syriusly]

1.

Same-Sex Marriage Support Reaches New High at 55%

Same-Sex Marriage Support Reaches New High at 55

2.

Regardless of how the Obergefell ruling falls out, California needs to petition the court to have the lower court ruling that overturned prop 8 set aside.

And California isn't petitioning.

2. California doesn't have to "petition" to enforce intiative law. If the Supremes say that states had the say all along, the California Constitution mandates that initiative law is the law. All lower court rulings in conflict would be nullified. And...officials in California don't enjoy the choice of whether or not to enforce intiative law. They have to. And if anyone there wants to overthrow Prop 8, they have to do it with another initiative. That's how the governing system works in that state.
..

As usual- you don't understand the law.

Prop 8 was declared unconstitutional- appealed all the way to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court let the decision stand- that case is done. Regardless of how the Supreme Court rules on the cases before it now, it will not affect California- unless:
a) The Supreme Court rules against gay marriage and
b) The State of California challenges the existing ruling.

Anyway- enjoy your delusions.

 

[daws101]

hey why didn't silly wet leave like he said he would ? like all addicts he lies.

 

[Silhouette]

hey why didn't silly wet leave like he said he would ? like all addicts he lies.

Bummer I came back and bumped this thread right about now, I know. I know. I was just watching the news and saw this was instigated on rapid social media at highschools, putting kids in danger at this particular time in "civil rights" history. On behalf of the kids being used, I thought it might be prudent to step up and say something before more of them get hurt.

 

[daws101]

hey why didn't silly wet leave like he said he would ? like all addicts he lies.

Bummer I came back and bumped this thread right about now, I know. I know. I was just watching the news and saw this was instigated on rapid social media at highschools, putting kids in danger at this particular time in "civil rights" history. On behalf of the kids being used, I thought it might be prudent to step up and say something before more of them get hurt.

 

[Silhouette]

evade

[ih-veyd]

• Examples
• Word Origin

verb (used with object), evaded, evading.
1.
to escape from by trickery or cleverness:
to evade one's pursuers.
Synonyms: avoid, dodge.
Antonyms: face, confront.
2.
to get around by trickery:
to evade rules.
3.
to avoid doing or fulfilling:
to evade an obligation.
4.
to avoid answering directly:
to evade a question.

 

[daws101]

Bullshit to lie about one's true nature.