The Left Loses Ground...

The contract is intended only for couples who are capable of reproducing.
No, it isn't, which is why no one asks if you can have children, and so many can't or no longer can. That argument also died in the courts so, give it up.
Of course it is. That's the way it was for 250 years in this country, and thousands of years in Europe. Are you actually going to claim that Washington and Jefferson believed in gay marriage?
Don't need to. Among other things they were raping (no consent could be granted) their property, AKA human beings known as ******* (slaves). I don't need to ask them about my iPhone either.

We aren't talking about your iphone. We're talking about laws that have been around for hundreds of years. You claim these laws were intended to include gay couples. I just proved you're full of shit.
I didn't claim anything of the kind my little infant. Equality is an American value, and in the Constitution. Since marriage here is a license from the state, and all are supposed to be equal that way unless a compelling reason can be found for them not to be, that fucks you right up the ass...

So if the license is from the state, what federal government has to do with it? It's states business to issue the license, or to deny it. Federal government is mingling in the State's rights for way to long. The reason why we have 10th Amendment is to define the balance of power between the federal government and the states. Just to remind, the amendment says that the federal government has only those powers specifically granted by the Constitution. The marriage is not one of them.
 
So you're saying she can afford to by her own birth control. Then she must've been the one lying because she said she couldn't and needed the government to buy them for her.

Free birth control = Don't have sex.

Certainly you can quote her saying as much? No? Well, don't let the truth stand in the way of a good lie. The right wing never does.



"Well, don't let the truth stand in the way of a good lie. The right wing never does."

"Lie of the Year: 'If you like your health care plan, you can keep it'"
Lie of the Year If you like your health care plan you can keep it PolitiFact

You make this sooooo easy....

...easy...like Fluke.

Translation: You can't quote her saying that.

All too easy; like you crushing your bed springs.



The Left likes nothing better than sluts as they represent zero personal responsibility and values.....and therefore, needs big government to take care of then.
And that is why your avi/icon is a heroine to Leftists.

You still won't put up you pic, huh, Ug?

Waiting for Halloween?

And still no quotes of Ms. Fluke asking for free contraceptives....
You're ugly enough without the lying.


Yeah shes a friken genius, tools don't have to be bright to spew talking points...


 
Lower what standard?

I am quoting just this part...

Left is lowering EVERY freaking standard possible!

Can't pass the test in school, lower the testing standard.
Can't pass police exam, lower the standard.
Can't pass military requirement, lower the requirement.
Can't get in college, lower the requirement or AA.
Can't date a hot chick, date a guy.
Won't work, give a welfare, disability and food stamps.
Affordable housing, ghettos.
Common core.
Bottom line, we didn't build that.
 
Lower what standard?

I am quoting just this part...

Left is lowering EVERY freaking standard possible!

Can't pass the test in school, lower the testing standard.
Can't pass police exam, lower the standard.
Can't pass military requirement, lower the requirement.
Can't get in college, lower the requirement or AA.
Can't date a hot chick, date a guy.
Won't work, give a welfare, disability and food stamps.
Affordable housing, ghettos.
Common core.
Bottom line, we didn't build that.

Wow. That statement was stripped of every ounce of context, wasn't it.

The issue being discussed was procreation as a requirement of marriage. One you won't touch with a 10 foot pole.
 
No one is forcing anyone to tolerate gay marriage or perform or attend gay marriages.

A post of sheer and colossal ignorance. I can name at least two instances where your claim is immediately disproven.

Had Memories Pizza been a catering service and catered weddings... they would have been forced to cater to a gay wedding. Against their religious conscience.

Sweet Cakes by Melissa was shut down because they refused to cater a gay wedding.

The common theme here? "Cater gay marriages, or else."

The bakery broke the law.

The Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries ruled that although Oregon law provides an exemption for religious institutions, it "does not allow private businesses to discriminate based on sexual orientation, just as they cannot legally deny service based on race, sex, age, disability or religion."

He added, "The bakery is not a religious institution under the law."

Of course they did, but now they have standing to sue the State of Oregon using citing the Hobby Lobby decision as precedent. That has become the benchmark case for businesses and religious freedom.

There comes a critical juncture where the law goes too far in dictating the beliefs of the man. That instance was a perfect example. Normally, I would say, "hey, serve them anyway." But I also as a religious individual understand the need to stick by the teachings of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. I'm all for equal rights, so long as they apply to both parties, not just one.

All right, let's expand on your premise that people should be able to adhere to their religious beliefs and refuse to service to gays.

Would it be OK for an EMT who shows up at a car accident to refuse to treat a gravely injured person because they are gay? Or a doctor or nurse in an emergency room? How about a fireman, can he refuse to use the jaws of life? Would it be OK for a policeman to refuse to apprehend someone who was attacking a gay person?
 
No one is forcing anyone to tolerate gay marriage or perform or attend gay marriages.

A post of sheer and colossal ignorance. I can name at least two instances where your claim is immediately disproven.

Had Memories Pizza been a catering service and catered weddings... they would have been forced to cater to a gay wedding. Against their religious conscience.

Sweet Cakes by Melissa was shut down because they refused to cater a gay wedding.

The common theme here? "Cater gay marriages, or else."

The bakery broke the law.

The Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries ruled that although Oregon law provides an exemption for religious institutions, it "does not allow private businesses to discriminate based on sexual orientation, just as they cannot legally deny service based on race, sex, age, disability or religion."

He added, "The bakery is not a religious institution under the law."

Of course they did, but now they have standing to sue the State of Oregon using citing the Hobby Lobby decision as precedent. That has become the benchmark case for businesses and religious freedom.

There comes a critical juncture where the law goes too far in dictating the beliefs of the man. That instance was a perfect example. Normally, I would say, "hey, serve them anyway." But I also as a religious individual understand the need to stick by the teachings of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. I'm all for equal rights, so long as they apply to both parties, not just one.

All right, let's expand on your premise that people should be able to adhere to their religious beliefs and refuse to service to gays.

Would it be OK for an EMT who shows up at a car accident to refuse to treat a gravely injured person because they are gay? Or a doctor or nurse in an emergency room? How about a fireman, can he refuse to use the jaws of life? Would it be OK for a policeman to refuse to apprehend someone who was attacking a gay person?
Yes. Why wouldn't it be?

What's more all professed homosexuals should be required to have an identifying mark, so that first responders can defend themselves against contact with HIV tainted blood. So that they can have a better opportunity to refuse service.
 
Lower what standard?

I am quoting just this part...

Left is lowering EVERY freaking standard possible!

Can't pass the test in school, lower the testing standard.
Can't pass police exam, lower the standard.
Can't pass military requirement, lower the requirement.
Can't get in college, lower the requirement or AA.
Can't date a hot chick, date a guy.
Won't work, give a welfare, disability and food stamps.
Affordable housing, ghettos.
Common core.
Bottom line, we didn't build that.

Wow. That statement was stripped of every ounce of context, wasn't it.

The issue being discussed was procreation as a requirement of marriage. One you won't touch with a 10 foot pole.
Which of those would you like to deny skylar?

I'm reposting them for your edification:

Left is lowering EVERY freaking standard possible!

Can't pass the test in school, lower the testing standard.
Can't pass police exam, lower the standard.
Can't pass military requirement, lower the requirement.
Can't get in college, lower the requirement or AA.
Can't date a hot chick, date a guy.
Won't work, give a welfare, disability and food stamps.
Affordable housing, ghettos.
Common core.
 
No, it isn't, which is why no one asks if you can have children, and so many can't or no longer can. That argument also died in the courts so, give it up.
Of course it is. That's the way it was for 250 years in this country, and thousands of years in Europe. Are you actually going to claim that Washington and Jefferson believed in gay marriage?
Don't need to. Among other things they were raping (no consent could be granted) their property, AKA human beings known as ******* (slaves). I don't need to ask them about my iPhone either.

We aren't talking about your iphone. We're talking about laws that have been around for hundreds of years. You claim these laws were intended to include gay couples. I just proved you're full of shit.
I didn't claim anything of the kind my little infant. Equality is an American value, and in the Constitution. Since marriage here is a license from the state, and all are supposed to be equal that way unless a compelling reason can be found for them not to be, that fucks you right up the ass...

So if the license is from the state, what federal government has to do with it? It's states business to issue the license, or to deny it. Federal government is mingling in the State's rights for way to long. The reason why we have 10th Amendment is to define the balance of power between the federal government and the states. Just to remind, the amendment says that the federal government has only those powers specifically granted by the Constitution. The marriage is not one of them.
Full faith and credit, dumbass, and federal supremacy. The Feds win when the states fuck up.

The no Jews or ******* state doesn't actually exist even though we call it Alabama.
 
Last edited:
Of course it is. That's the way it was for 250 years in this country, and thousands of years in Europe. Are you actually going to claim that Washington and Jefferson believed in gay marriage?
Don't need to. Among other things they were raping (no consent could be granted) their property, AKA human beings known as ******* (slaves). I don't need to ask them about my iPhone either.

We aren't talking about your iphone. We're talking about laws that have been around for hundreds of years. You claim these laws were intended to include gay couples. I just proved you're full of shit.
I didn't claim anything of the kind my little infant. Equality is an American value, and in the Constitution. Since marriage here is a license from the state, and all are supposed to be equal that way unless a compelling reason can be found for them not to be, that fucks you right up the ass...

So if the license is from the state, what federal government has to do with it? It's states business to issue the license, or to deny it. Federal government is mingling in the State's rights for way to long. The reason why we have 10th Amendment is to define the balance of power between the federal government and the states. Just to remind, the amendment says that the federal government has only those powers specifically granted by the Constitution. The marriage is not one of them.
Full faith and credit, dumbass, and federal supremacy. The Feds win when the states fuck up.

Ahh... Yes.

It shouldn't be long now.
 
And still no quotes of Ms. Fluke asking for free contraceptives....
You're ugly enough without the lying.

Without insurance coverage contraception, as you know, can cost a women over $3000 during law school. For a lot of students, who are like me on a public interest scholarships, that's practically an entire summer salary.

2 minute mark

 
No, it isn't, which is why no one asks if you can have children, and so many can't or no longer can. That argument also died in the courts so, give it up.
Of course it is. That's the way it was for 250 years in this country, and thousands of years in Europe. Are you actually going to claim that Washington and Jefferson believed in gay marriage?
Don't need to. Among other things they were raping (no consent could be granted) their property, AKA human beings known as ******* (slaves). I don't need to ask them about my iPhone either.

We aren't talking about your iphone. We're talking about laws that have been around for hundreds of years. You claim these laws were intended to include gay couples. I just proved you're full of shit.
I didn't claim anything of the kind my little infant. Equality is an American value, and in the Constitution. Since marriage here is a license from the state, and all are supposed to be equal that way unless a compelling reason can be found for them not to be, that fucks you right up the ass...

So if the license is from the state, what federal government has to do with it? It's states business to issue the license, or to deny it. Federal government is mingling in the State's rights for way to long. The reason why we have 10th Amendment is to define the balance of power between the federal government and the states. Just to remind, the amendment says that the federal government has only those powers specifically granted by the Constitution. The marriage is not one of them.
The States play, the Fed rules. Sucks for you, but it works. It's Constitutional...
 
Don't need to. Among other things they were raping (no consent could be granted) their property, AKA human beings known as ******* (slaves). I don't need to ask them about my iPhone either.

We aren't talking about your iphone. We're talking about laws that have been around for hundreds of years. You claim these laws were intended to include gay couples. I just proved you're full of shit.
I didn't claim anything of the kind my little infant. Equality is an American value, and in the Constitution. Since marriage here is a license from the state, and all are supposed to be equal that way unless a compelling reason can be found for them not to be, that fucks you right up the ass...

So if the license is from the state, what federal government has to do with it? It's states business to issue the license, or to deny it. Federal government is mingling in the State's rights for way to long. The reason why we have 10th Amendment is to define the balance of power between the federal government and the states. Just to remind, the amendment says that the federal government has only those powers specifically granted by the Constitution. The marriage is not one of them.
Full faith and credit, dumbass, and federal supremacy. The Feds win when the states fuck up.

Ahh... Yes.

It shouldn't be long now.
Four weeks, thank Roberts.
 
The contract is intended only for couples who are capable of reproducing.
No, it isn't, which is why no one asks if you can have children, and so many can't or no longer can. That argument also died in the courts so, give it up.

Yes it is, Nazi. The courts aren't the arbiters of absolute truth. Until about 20 years ago, when the queers started whining, no one even questioned the proposition that marriage existed for the purpose of reproduction. People would have looked at you as if you were mad if you suggested that gays should get married.
 
Of course it is. That's the way it was for 250 years in this country, and thousands of years in Europe. Are you actually going to claim that Washington and Jefferson believed in gay marriage?
Don't need to. Among other things they were raping (no consent could be granted) their property, AKA human beings known as ******* (slaves). I don't need to ask them about my iPhone either.

We aren't talking about your iphone. We're talking about laws that have been around for hundreds of years. You claim these laws were intended to include gay couples. I just proved you're full of shit.
I didn't claim anything of the kind my little infant. Equality is an American value, and in the Constitution. Since marriage here is a license from the state, and all are supposed to be equal that way unless a compelling reason can be found for them not to be, that fucks you right up the ass...

So if the license is from the state, what federal government has to do with it? It's states business to issue the license, or to deny it. Federal government is mingling in the State's rights for way to long. The reason why we have 10th Amendment is to define the balance of power between the federal government and the states. Just to remind, the amendment says that the federal government has only those powers specifically granted by the Constitution. The marriage is not one of them.
The States play, the Fed rules. Sucks for you, but it works. It's Constitutional...

Hmmm . . no, that's how the courts have destroyed the Constitution.
 
Don't need to. Among other things they were raping (no consent could be granted) their property, AKA human beings known as ******* (slaves). I don't need to ask them about my iPhone either.

We aren't talking about your iphone. We're talking about laws that have been around for hundreds of years. You claim these laws were intended to include gay couples. I just proved you're full of shit.
I didn't claim anything of the kind my little infant. Equality is an American value, and in the Constitution. Since marriage here is a license from the state, and all are supposed to be equal that way unless a compelling reason can be found for them not to be, that fucks you right up the ass...

So if the license is from the state, what federal government has to do with it? It's states business to issue the license, or to deny it. Federal government is mingling in the State's rights for way to long. The reason why we have 10th Amendment is to define the balance of power between the federal government and the states. Just to remind, the amendment says that the federal government has only those powers specifically granted by the Constitution. The marriage is not one of them.
The States play, the Fed rules. Sucks for you, but it works. It's Constitutional...

Hmmm . . no, that's how the courts have destroyed the Constitution.
Not at all, they are making it come true. All men are becoming equal...
 
The contract is intended only for couples who are capable of reproducing.
No, it isn't, which is why no one asks if you can have children, and so many can't or no longer can. That argument also died in the courts so, give it up.

Yes it is, Nazi. The courts aren't the arbiters of absolute truth. Until about 20 years ago, when the queers started whining, no one even questioned the proposition that marriage existed for the purpose of reproduction. People would have looked at you as if you were mad if you suggested that gays should get married.
We don't need, or can even find, absolute truth, which doesn't exist. What we need is equality before the law. That is enough, and the courts can work that out, eventually.
 
We aren't talking about your iphone. We're talking about laws that have been around for hundreds of years. You claim these laws were intended to include gay couples. I just proved you're full of shit.
I didn't claim anything of the kind my little infant. Equality is an American value, and in the Constitution. Since marriage here is a license from the state, and all are supposed to be equal that way unless a compelling reason can be found for them not to be, that fucks you right up the ass...

So if the license is from the state, what federal government has to do with it? It's states business to issue the license, or to deny it. Federal government is mingling in the State's rights for way to long. The reason why we have 10th Amendment is to define the balance of power between the federal government and the states. Just to remind, the amendment says that the federal government has only those powers specifically granted by the Constitution. The marriage is not one of them.
The States play, the Fed rules. Sucks for you, but it works. It's Constitutional...

Hmmm . . no, that's how the courts have destroyed the Constitution.
Not at all, they are making it come true. All men are becoming equal...

The idea that the courts, an arm of the government, could serve as an impartial arbiter of any dispute between the government and the people is too absurd for words. The function of the courts for the last 250 years has been to advance government power and justify government control at the expense of the rights of the people.
 
The contract is intended only for couples who are capable of reproducing.
No, it isn't, which is why no one asks if you can have children, and so many can't or no longer can. That argument also died in the courts so, give it up.

Yes it is, Nazi. The courts aren't the arbiters of absolute truth. Until about 20 years ago, when the queers started whining, no one even questioned the proposition that marriage existed for the purpose of reproduction. People would have looked at you as if you were mad if you suggested that gays should get married.
We don't need, or can even find, absolute truth, which doesn't exist. What we need is equality before the law. That is enough, and the courts can work that out, eventually.

In other words, there is no truth. That includes what you just posted, moron.

The absurdity of the nihilist argument was exposed 2000 years ago.

Since no one knows the truth, why should anyone accept your belief that equality is the ultimate moral value?
 
Last edited:
The contract is intended only for couples who are capable of reproducing.
No, it isn't, which is why no one asks if you can have children, and so many can't or no longer can. That argument also died in the courts so, give it up.

Yes it is, Nazi. The courts aren't the arbiters of absolute truth. Until about 20 years ago, when the queers started whining, no one even questioned the proposition that marriage existed for the purpose of reproduction. People would have looked at you as if you were mad if you suggested that gays should get married.
We don't need, or can even find, absolute truth, which doesn't exist. What we need is equality before the law. That is enough, and the courts can work that out, eventually.

In other words, there is no truth. That includes what you just posted, moron.

The absurdity of the nihilist argument was exposed 2000 years ago.
There are truths, not truth, and profound truths tend to have an opposite which is another profound truth. Not to worry my little infant, you will never understand, so, don't try.
 

Forum List

Back
Top