Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Dude, if you want to talk about hateful bigots then you had best distance yourself from guno. Lately he's descended into the use of NAZI terminology such as "subhumans" when describing those he dislikes. He traveled even further down the NAZI road when he openly wondered what should be "done with them" in future times.
He's a fucking loon.
He's just Statist's type then.
Stat has never advocated for the forced imprisonment and murder of christians as guno has.
But he encourages those who do. He's just nominally more socially adept than guano. He still has the same desire.
YOU are the one on this thread who has called for people to die, not I.
Your own words betray you.
So very christian of you, too.
Omigosh, I didn't mean to make you cry! Your friend guano is nearby to comfort you, thank goodness.
He's just Statist's type then.
Stat has never advocated for the forced imprisonment and murder of christians as guno has.
But he encourages those who do. He's just nominally more socially adept than guano. He still has the same desire.
YOU are the one on this thread who has called for people to die, not I.
Your own words betray you.
So very christian of you, too.
Omigosh, I didn't mean to make you cry! Your friend guano is nearby to comfort you, thank goodness.
NO, you did not make me cry, for I am neither gay nor am I a Nazi.
But it is interesting to see you openly show such weakness. Only weak people reach so quickly into the Godwin barrel in a vain attempt to find some munition.
Ahhhh, but the Christians get skewered there. Paul counseled Christians to have little dealings with those not of the faith. In fact, he pretty much preached a doctrine of socialism within Christian communities. The Amish Mennonites et al. all have some commercial dealings, but unlike the bakers, their goods are not tied to any specific "religious rite."
That's one reason I have difficulty summoning sympathy for the bakers. I knew a Christian family years ago that employed every adult (and some kids) in a commercial printing business. Can't the Christians find an avocation that does not require them to discriminate in order to not offend their oh-so-precious beliefs of who others can marry?
Or simply act like an adult and a professional
Amazing that Christians of this hateful, bigoted sort have completely forgotten the history of the masons..... and why they were formed.... and how they functioned.
Just amazing.
For we they to know the history, they would know that Christians have been doing business with "unbelievers" of practically all stripes for a good 1800 years now. But all of a sudden, gay people are suddenly too icky for those upstanding Christians to even touch.
Funny that.
The Christians on this thread, well many of them, are almost as stupid and worthless as the fake Rabbi, who is no Rabbi, much less a Jew.
Dude, if you want to talk about hateful bigots then you had best distance yourself from guno. Lately he's descended into the use of NAZI terminology such as "subhumans" when describing those he dislikes. He traveled even further down the NAZI road when he openly wondered what should be "done with them" in future times.
He's a fucking loon.
I concur with you on that point. No one is a "subhuman".
Hillary Clinton is.
I take it this is your way of cowering away with your tail tucked firmly betwixt your hind legs?Yeah? How much you wanna bet?Can you believe that?... "Harm" is not the proper criteria for deciding whether actions should be legal.
I swear to dawg, the dumbing down of America has reached it's zenith.
You and paperview only demonstrated how profoundly stupid you are.
I'll bet you can't explain why it's "dumb" or "unbelievable." Go ahead, we're all waiting to be enlightened.
You failed. You used a logical fallacy - more than one, actually.
Stat has never advocated for the forced imprisonment and murder of christians as guno has.
But he encourages those who do. He's just nominally more socially adept than guano. He still has the same desire.
YOU are the one on this thread who has called for people to die, not I.
Your own words betray you.
So very christian of you, too.
Omigosh, I didn't mean to make you cry! Your friend guano is nearby to comfort you, thank goodness.
NO, you did not make me cry, for I am neither gay nor am I a Nazi.
But it is interesting to see you openly show such weakness. Only weak people reach so quickly into the Godwin barrel in a vain attempt to find some munition.
That's just something that Nazis say so we won't notice that they're Nazis. Give it up, lol. Nobody buys it anymore.
But he encourages those who do. He's just nominally more socially adept than guano. He still has the same desire.
YOU are the one on this thread who has called for people to die, not I.
Your own words betray you.
So very christian of you, too.
Omigosh, I didn't mean to make you cry! Your friend guano is nearby to comfort you, thank goodness.
NO, you did not make me cry, for I am neither gay nor am I a Nazi.
But it is interesting to see you openly show such weakness. Only weak people reach so quickly into the Godwin barrel in a vain attempt to find some munition.
That's just something that Nazis say so we won't notice that they're Nazis. Give it up, lol. Nobody buys it anymore.
You really don't possess the ability to debate anything, now do you....
Well, it was fun batting you around.
Maybe one day soon when I am bored out of my head, I will do it again, Kosherthingy.
I don't understand the outrage
At $135 a cake, the baker only needs to bake 100,000 cakes to break even
They make a $135 wedding cake?
Here, are you in the market? They're doing greatHome - Sweet Cakes
If you had balls you'd be a man. Regrettably for you, neither is the case.You're a fucking imbecile. Where did I suggest people ignore your post?? I want people to read it. I want people to see just how fucking retarded you are.And the retarded offers their tripe... Moron .... this isn't about where you shop -- it's about where you're banned from shopping due to illegal discrimination.If I quit shopping at Winn Dixie and switch to Publix, I have "harmed" Winn Dixie. "Harm" is not the proper criteria for deciding whether actions should be legal.
That you think being "harmed" is not legally actionable speaks volumes towards your G-d given mental handicap.
In other words, "I don't have a good argument against your analogy, so I'm just going to tell everyone to ignore it." As my example shows, "harm" is not a good indicator of whether the law should prevent a given action, especially when nobody has been harmed, or when no property has been damaged or even changed hands.
My example shows harm in exactly the sense liberal retards mean it, and yet everyone agrees that it should remain legal.
Regardless, your example doesn't show harm in the same sense as anything Liberals are saying because your example doesn't make any sense in the context of Sweet Cakes. For your example to make sense in that regard, the lesbians would have had to harm Sweet Cakes by shopping elsewhere. You really are stupid enough to confuse a person preferring one establishment over another; with an establishment violating the law to not do business with a prospective customer because they don't approve with whom they have sex.
If government made the former illegal then it would be against the law, moron. The point of this discussion is determining the basis for making certain kinds of economic decisions illegal. You begged the question by assumming the decision has already been made.
Still, yours is a morons' example since it is a failed comparison. There is no comparison between you preferring where you shop (not illegal) with a person being denied service due to their sexual orientation (illegal).
That you're incapable of comprehending that only serves to demonstrate just how retarded you are.
Which is why I want people to read your posts; to remove any doubt.
Or simply act like an adult and a professional
Amazing that Christians of this hateful, bigoted sort have completely forgotten the history of the masons..... and why they were formed.... and how they functioned.
Just amazing.
For we they to know the history, they would know that Christians have been doing business with "unbelievers" of practically all stripes for a good 1800 years now. But all of a sudden, gay people are suddenly too icky for those upstanding Christians to even touch.
Funny that.
The Christians on this thread, well many of them, are almost as stupid and worthless as the fake Rabbi, who is no Rabbi, much less a Jew.
Dude, if you want to talk about hateful bigots then you had best distance yourself from guno. Lately he's descended into the use of NAZI terminology such as "subhumans" when describing those he dislikes. He traveled even further down the NAZI road when he openly wondered what should be "done with them" in future times.
He's a fucking loon.
I concur with you on that point. No one is a "subhuman".
Hillary Clinton is.
No, she's not. But I enjoy watching Righties completely lose it and shed their half-way civilized veneer to show their true selves.
Please, rant away more.
I take it this is your way of cowering away with your tail tucked firmly betwixt your hind legs?Yeah? How much you wanna bet?Can you believe that?I swear to dawg, the dumbing down of America has reached it's zenith.
You and paperview only demonstrated how profoundly stupid you are.
I'll bet you can't explain why it's "dumb" or "unbelievable." Go ahead, we're all waiting to be enlightened.
You failed. You used a logical fallacy - more than one, actually.
Amazing that Christians of this hateful, bigoted sort have completely forgotten the history of the masons..... and why they were formed.... and how they functioned.
Just amazing.
For we they to know the history, they would know that Christians have been doing business with "unbelievers" of practically all stripes for a good 1800 years now. But all of a sudden, gay people are suddenly too icky for those upstanding Christians to even touch.
Funny that.
The Christians on this thread, well many of them, are almost as stupid and worthless as the fake Rabbi, who is no Rabbi, much less a Jew.
Dude, if you want to talk about hateful bigots then you had best distance yourself from guno. Lately he's descended into the use of NAZI terminology such as "subhumans" when describing those he dislikes. He traveled even further down the NAZI road when he openly wondered what should be "done with them" in future times.
He's a fucking loon.
I concur with you on that point. No one is a "subhuman".
Hillary Clinton is.
No, she's not. But I enjoy watching Righties completely lose it and shed their half-way civilized veneer to show their true selves.
Please, rant away more.
When being questioned about the murder of 4 State Department employees who reported to her she said "what difference does it make?"
That's a subhuman if I've ever encountered one.
I think they're bigots and boors, but there are plenty of those amongst the gay folk too. I just think civil law should .... take a pass on this. The gays will win out within 20 years, and nobody in Oregon is going without cake.The Christian baker broke the law, no argument. But, I gotta say, I'm pretty much in favor of decriminalizing drug use, and I have lots less sympathy for druggies getting raped in prison that I have for the Christian baker.Well, the gay couple had plenty of access to cakes even if the Christian baker wouldn't sell one to the gay couple. And as a result the gay baker goes out of biz and owes 135K. I submit, the penalty far exceeded any offense, and the gay couple's motivation was not achieving equal access to cakes, but rather punish the baker for choosing to base his business decision on a belief that their marriage was not a good as a hetro marriage. So, I'm pretty sure both parties are boors, but I'm a little hard pressed to find the gay baker is the bigger jerk than the gays.
Point is, if you deny them access, you are discriminating against them and breaking the law. I agree that the amount awarded is pretty high, but that is probably because of the blatant disregard for the law exhibited by this couple.
I know, some of you will continue to see these bakers as some kind of victims or martyrs. I don't see it like that.
On a slightly different tack .... I think the whole issue of religion and public life is interesting. In the bigger picture this is sort of like the Elizabethan Compromise and the concept of via media. All citizens had to swear to the primacy of the Anglican Church, and to Elizabeth and all future rulers being Anglican, and to a prescribed rite of worship. But, the rite was vague enough to allow both Anglican and Roman Catholic services. What you chose to worship was not of interest to the state. But to deny Elizabeth, or Anglicanism as the state religion, at the least you'd lose your head, and there was also the possibility of having your balls roasted while you were trussed up by your hands and feet over a fire.
The Founders had good reason to eschew a state religion. I think in terms of PA and gay rights, we've elevated secularism to a state religion, and the state is picking the winner in a fight between boors. And the Founders rather believed that with free speech and debate, people would find the correct path without state compulsion, on way or the other.
Well we no longer have free speech.
Dude, if you want to talk about hateful bigots then you had best distance yourself from guno. Lately he's descended into the use of NAZI terminology such as "subhumans" when describing those he dislikes. He traveled even further down the NAZI road when he openly wondered what should be "done with them" in future times.
He's a fucking loon.
I concur with you on that point. No one is a "subhuman".
Hillary Clinton is.
No, she's not. But I enjoy watching Righties completely lose it and shed their half-way civilized veneer to show their true selves.
Please, rant away more.
When being questioned about the murder of 4 State Department employees who reported to her she said "what difference does it make?"
That's a subhuman if I've ever encountered one.
This, totally without context, bothers you?
Yepp, too much red koolaide for you, I see.
Carry on. Rant away. Let the moderates out there see who incredibly batshit crazy this line of thinking is.
I concur with you on that point. No one is a "subhuman".
Hillary Clinton is.
No, she's not. But I enjoy watching Righties completely lose it and shed their half-way civilized veneer to show their true selves.
Please, rant away more.
When being questioned about the murder of 4 State Department employees who reported to her she said "what difference does it make?"
That's a subhuman if I've ever encountered one.
This, totally without context, bothers you?
Yepp, too much red koolaide for you, I see.
Carry on. Rant away. Let the moderates out there see who incredibly batshit crazy this line of thinking is.
What "context" alters the fact that Hillary doesn't give a shit about people in her charge getting killed?
Hillary Clinton is.
No, she's not. But I enjoy watching Righties completely lose it and shed their half-way civilized veneer to show their true selves.
Please, rant away more.
When being questioned about the murder of 4 State Department employees who reported to her she said "what difference does it make?"
That's a subhuman if I've ever encountered one.
This, totally without context, bothers you?
Yepp, too much red koolaide for you, I see.
Carry on. Rant away. Let the moderates out there see who incredibly batshit crazy this line of thinking is.
What "context" alters the fact that Hillary doesn't give a shit about people in her charge getting killed?
First off, you left some key words out of the quote, dumbfuck.
Secondly, there is the context of body English and the reason for the statement to begin with.
This is why Liberals almost always triumph quite easily over Conservative bullshit - we are not sheeples like you are.
Carry on. Moan. Groan. Get your jollies off of Fox. Have fun.
But when you say stupid shit like that, no thinking person is going to take you seriously.
And if you cannot understand the word "context", then you are either in the 1st grade or completely retarded. I vote for both in your case.
So if the law is always right, it was right when you took it up the butt when sodomy was illegal...right, statist? That makes you a criminal.Not true. You can't just break the law and cite some made up religious belief as a defense. I recall a church in Miami trying that idiocy as a defense for smoking weed. That turned out even worse for them than it did for Sweet Cakes.For a piece of shit like you? I will do neither. Still, nothing in the Bible indicates baking a cake for a wedding is sacreligious. If you think for a second you get to trump U.S. law by making up religious beliefs that do not exist in the Bible, like Sweet Cakes, you're sadly mistaken.
As I said, you don't dictate what is sacrilegious to anyone. And neither does the state. And bad law is trumped all the time. As is good law. In fact, that's sort of what happened here. Fuck the law, when the law is illegal.
The law itself is in violation of the law.
And watch us. Believe me, we can and will break the law. Just like you and your homo friends did every time you took it up the butt before sodomy became the (fake) law of the land.
Outstanding case of butthurt without borders!!!
Brava, Kosherthingy, brava!!!
Unlike you, my butt retains the borders it was designed with.Not true. You can't just break the law and cite some made up religious belief as a defense. I recall a church in Miami trying that idiocy as a defense for smoking weed. That turned out even worse for them than it did for Sweet Cakes.For a piece of shit like you? I will do neither. Still, nothing in the Bible indicates baking a cake for a wedding is sacreligious. If you think for a second you get to trump U.S. law by making up religious beliefs that do not exist in the Bible, like Sweet Cakes, you're sadly mistaken.
As I said, you don't dictate what is sacrilegious to anyone. And neither does the state. And bad law is trumped all the time. As is good law. In fact, that's sort of what happened here. Fuck the law, when the law is illegal.
The law itself is in violation of the law.
And watch us. Believe me, we can and will break the law. Just like you and your homo friends did every time you took it up the butt before sodomy became the (fake) law of the land.
Outstanding case of butthurt without borders!!!
Brava, Kosherthingy, brava!!!
In other words, you're wrong again. That is not what I said. You're clearly not capable of understanding what I said. And I repeat pointing out you're a moron because you scream that in almost every post you submit. Stop saying retarded shit and I'll stop saying you're retarded. Deal? Personally, I don't think you can.If you had balls you'd be a man. Regrettably for you, neither is the case.You're a fucking imbecile. Where did I suggest people ignore your post?? I want people to read it. I want people to see just how fucking retarded you are.And the retarded offers their tripe... Moron .... this isn't about where you shop -- it's about where you're banned from shopping due to illegal discrimination.
That you think being "harmed" is not legally actionable speaks volumes towards your G-d given mental handicap.
In other words, "I don't have a good argument against your analogy, so I'm just going to tell everyone to ignore it." As my example shows, "harm" is not a good indicator of whether the law should prevent a given action, especially when nobody has been harmed, or when no property has been damaged or even changed hands.
My example shows harm in exactly the sense liberal retards mean it, and yet everyone agrees that it should remain legal.
Regardless, your example doesn't show harm in the same sense as anything Liberals are saying because your example doesn't make any sense in the context of Sweet Cakes. For your example to make sense in that regard, the lesbians would have had to harm Sweet Cakes by shopping elsewhere. You really are stupid enough to confuse a person preferring one establishment over another; with an establishment violating the law to not do business with a prospective customer because they don't approve with whom they have sex.
If government made the former illegal then it would be against the law, moron. The point of this discussion is determining the basis for making certain kinds of economic decisions illegal. You begged the question by assumming the decision has already been made.
Still, yours is a morons' example since it is a failed comparison. There is no comparison between you preferring where you shop (not illegal) with a person being denied service due to their sexual orientation (illegal).
That you're incapable of comprehending that only serves to demonstrate just how retarded you are.
Which is why I want people to read your posts; to remove any doubt.
In other words, the government should make discrimination by service providers illegal because it's illegal.
That's the moron substitute for "logic" that you have posted.
The way you keep calling me a moron is amusing. it's like you think repeating it enough will make it come true.
So you say ... meanwhile, YOU offered up a bet. You then ran away from your own bet the instant you learned I was interested.I take it this is your way of cowering away with your tail tucked firmly betwixt your hind legs?Yeah? How much you wanna bet?Can you believe that?
You and paperview only demonstrated how profoundly stupid you are.
I'll bet you can't explain why it's "dumb" or "unbelievable." Go ahead, we're all waiting to be enlightened.
You failed. You used a logical fallacy - more than one, actually.
Hmmm, no. That's a polite way of saying "you're an idiot."
