Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Governments don't give rights, by definition. Rights are inalienable, something you have by way of birth. Governments can only restrict rights. What happened was the SCOTUS took the rights of citizens of the state away to define marriage.Are you saying that this Judge should be able to promote her religious beliefs over the law ?Examples?As long as it's consistent and in line with the Constitution. However, people like you and Jillian are pick and choose.
Do you support social welfare? Obamacare? Abortion? Same sex marriage?
That sorta sounds like Sharia to me.
Are you saying people should be able to refuse to obey the law if they don't like it.
Is someone saying that? You however aren't the arbiter of what laws to follow. The Supreme Court is. And if you understood the issue, you would understand that a state can always give greater rights than the Feds, never fewer.
Yiu might want to read up on that.
If your States laws are unconstitutional it's up to the feds to get you in line. That's your problem. You want to be unconstitutional in your laws.I admit we pick and choose, same way Republicans in Michigan don't like that we voted to legalize pot so Republicans here are using federal law as their reason for fighting the will of the people. Go figure.
According to the writing of the Constitution, they are all state level things. That you support federal level application of them proves what I said about you picking and choosing. Thanks for the proof.
The argumentss you lose are because your state laws are deemed unconstitutional, no?
So you are a hypocrite? Just as I thought.
When we (the feds) tell you what to do its because you want to be unconstitutional. But then you want to cherry pick out of the constitution the part that says States rights? Do you see how you're wrong?
So a state making a law when the STATE is supposed to be the one making the law is being out of line? My problem is when the Constitution indicates a state has the authority to make laws in areas not specifically delegated to the federal government yet the federal government goes against it's own Constitution.
When the Constitution indicates it is a states' right situation and the federal government chooses to do it anyway, that's wrong.
Unless you can show me where the term abortion, marriage, social welfare, etc. are in the Constitution as a federal authority, it's a state authority. When 5 people incorrectly decide it belongs to the federal government, it's because they WANT it to be not because it has the authority to be.
If you dont like the law then you should vote in those who will change it to your satisfaction. There are many laws that are unpopular, the answer is to change the law not sulk like a child.Are you saying that this Judge should be able to promote her religious beliefs over the law ?Examples?What happened to letting States decide?
Bottom line is when law and religion don't agree, law rules
As long as it's consistent and in line with the Constitution. However, people like you and Jillian are pick and choose.
Do you support social welfare? Obamacare? Abortion? Same sex marriage?
That sorta sounds like Sharia to me.
Are you saying people should be able to refuse to obey the law if they don't like it.
Like your right to not let black kids go to your white schools or sit at the front of the bus?Governments don't give rights, by definition. Rights are inalienable, something you have by way of birth. Governments can only restrict rights. What happened was the SCOTUS took the rights of citizens of the state away to define marriage.Are you saying that this Judge should be able to promote her religious beliefs over the law ?Examples?
Do you support social welfare? Obamacare? Abortion? Same sex marriage?
That sorta sounds like Sharia to me.
Are you saying people should be able to refuse to obey the law if they don't like it.
Is someone saying that? You however aren't the arbiter of what laws to follow. The Supreme Court is. And if you understood the issue, you would understand that a state can always give greater rights than the Feds, never fewer.
Yiu might want to read up on that.
The top court in this state could sack this judge who keeps refusing to marry gays
Yup, like its time to get another job you backward bigot.
He is a woman I believe. Its hard to tell these days.The top court in this state could sack this judge who keeps refusing to marry gays
Yup, like its time to get another job you backward bigot.
they're going to have to remove him from the bench. some state yahoo can't override federal law. period.
Who said that? Oh, you did. The state government did not have the authority to treat men differently. In segregation they did, a violation of Constitutionally protected rights.Like your right to not let black kids go to your white schools or sit at the front of the bus?Governments don't give rights, by definition. Rights are inalienable, something you have by way of birth. Governments can only restrict rights. What happened was the SCOTUS took the rights of citizens of the state away to define marriage.Are you saying that this Judge should be able to promote her religious beliefs over the law ?Do you support social welfare? Obamacare? Abortion? Same sex marriage?
That sorta sounds like Sharia to me.
Are you saying people should be able to refuse to obey the law if they don't like it.
Is someone saying that? You however aren't the arbiter of what laws to follow. The Supreme Court is. And if you understood the issue, you would understand that a state can always give greater rights than the Feds, never fewer.
Yiu might want to read up on that.
I can see a whole load of hypocrisy and a whole load of deflection.funny how you are concerned about oppression, when your nation has oppressed others for centuries.This judge is oppressing gays by refusing to marry them.I would also examine the decisions she has made in the past to see if she has actively discriminated against Gay defendants.Gays and Muslims are being oppressed claims the Limey bigot.Its gays and Muslims who are being oppressed at the moment. Thank God that decent people are willing to stand up for them.Funny how the Left stands up for gays and Muslims....yet denigrates Christians and straight white males at every turn. They claim to be open minded but like Cankles, they lie a lot.
Cankles has the terrorist anti-gay Muslim daddy at her rally and the MSM yawns (aside...like Silly Jilly yawns all the time). Imagine the shit storm if Trump did something analogous.
WRONG.
You should have posted Muslims oppress gays, woman, minorities, non-Muslims. We in the West do not.
Everything you know is WRONG.
No doubt you would have little concern about whites or Christians being oppressed.
Do you fail to see the hypocrisy?
Do you support an Olympic heroines right to free speech ?
Funny how the Left stands up for gays and Muslims....yet denigrates Christians and straight white males at every turn. They claim to be open minded but like Cankles, they lie a lot.
Cankles has the terrorist anti-gay Muslim daddy at her rally and the MSM yawns (aside...like Silly Jilly yawns all the time). Imagine the shit storm if Trump did something analogous.What happened to letting States decide?The top court in this state could sack this judge who keeps refusing to marry gays
Yup, like its time to get another job you backward bigot.
they're going to have to remove him from the bench. some state yahoo can't override federal law. period.
You mean like local yahoos creating sanctuary cities despite federal laws related to illegals?
Why don't you just say "can't override federal laws" unless I as a Liberal agree they can.
Fucking liar.
Bottom line is when law and religion don't agree, law rules
This judge is oppressing gays by refusing to marry them.I would also examine the decisions she has made in the past to see if she has actively discriminated against Gay defendants.Gays and Muslims are being oppressed claims the Limey bigot.Its gays and Muslims who are being oppressed at the moment. Thank God that decent people are willing to stand up for them.Funny how the Left stands up for gays and Muslims....yet denigrates Christians and straight white males at every turn. They claim to be open minded but like Cankles, they lie a lot.
Cankles has the terrorist anti-gay Muslim daddy at her rally and the MSM yawns (aside...like Silly Jilly yawns all the time). Imagine the shit storm if Trump did something analogous.
WRONG.
You should have posted Muslims oppress gays, woman, minorities, non-Muslims. We in the West do not.
Everything you know is WRONG.
The thread is about a judge who refuses to obey the Constitution and follow the rule of law.You are absolutely right, but since Muslims have a right to our country, as you pointed out in another thread, then they have the right to Sharia law, and instead of refusing to marry them, maybe we should skip straight to the beheading?
They have a right.... America is their country.... according to you.
This ignorant bigotry has nothing to do with the thread topic.
Read the link below to alleviate your ignorance:
The True Story of Sharia in American Courts
This judge is oppressing gays by refusing to marry them.I would also examine the decisions she has made in the past to see if she has actively discriminated against Gay defendants.Gays and Muslims are being oppressed claims the Limey bigot.Its gays and Muslims who are being oppressed at the moment. Thank God that decent people are willing to stand up for them.Funny how the Left stands up for gays and Muslims....yet denigrates Christians and straight white males at every turn. They claim to be open minded but like Cankles, they lie a lot.
Cankles has the terrorist anti-gay Muslim daddy at her rally and the MSM yawns (aside...like Silly Jilly yawns all the time). Imagine the shit storm if Trump did something analogous.
WRONG.
You should have posted Muslims oppress gays, woman, minorities, non-Muslims. We in the West do not.
Everything you know is WRONG.
1. The Judge should marry them or refuse to marry anyone...
2. Muslims would kill Homosexuals and to claim Muslims are oppressed in America is total bull fucking shit!
When you write about a country you do not reside in make me wonder what the fuck is wrong with you?
I am not going to pretend that America does not have it fucking bigots within her borders and Trump is one of them but for you to sit there and write about how Muslims are oppressed is total nonsense on your part!
Muslims are allowed to worship as they please as long as it does not break any of our Federal, State and local laws and yes this country has laws!
So please stop with the bullshit about how Muslims are oppressed and no they should not be allow to practice or enforce their religious laws if it conflicts with this Country Constitution!
The government shouldn't be involved in any marriage. That's between you, your families, and your church.
Are you saying that this Judge should be able to promote her religious beliefs over the law ?Examples?As long as it's consistent and in line with the Constitution. However, people like you and Jillian are pick and choose.
Do you support social welfare? Obamacare? Abortion? Same sex marriage?
That sorta sounds like Sharia to me.
Are you saying people should be able to refuse to obey the law if they don't like it.
Is someone saying that? You however aren't the arbiter of what laws to follow. The Supreme Court is. And if you understood the issue, you would understand that a state can always give greater rights than the Feds, never fewer.
Yiu might want to read up on that.
If your States laws are unconstitutional it's up to the feds to get you in line. That's your problem. You want to be unconstitutional in your laws.I admit we pick and choose, same way Republicans in Michigan don't like that we voted to legalize pot so Republicans here are using federal law as their reason for fighting the will of the people. Go figure.According to the writing of the Constitution, they are all state level things. That you support federal level application of them proves what I said about you picking and choosing. Thanks for the proof.
The argumentss you lose are because your state laws are deemed unconstitutional, no?
So you are a hypocrite? Just as I thought.
When we (the feds) tell you what to do its because you want to be unconstitutional. But then you want to cherry pick out of the constitution the part that says States rights? Do you see how you're wrong?
So a state making a law when the STATE is supposed to be the one making the law is being out of line? My problem is when the Constitution indicates a state has the authority to make laws in areas not specifically delegated to the federal government yet the federal government goes against it's own Constitution.
When the Constitution indicates it is a states' right situation and the federal government chooses to do it anyway, that's wrong.
Unless you can show me where the term abortion, marriage, social welfare, etc. are in the Constitution as a federal authority, it's a state authority. When 5 people incorrectly decide it belongs to the federal government, it's because they WANT it to be not because it has the authority to be.
You can't descriminate against gays in your laws. See, your laws that are unconstitutional are always telling people they can't do something. Gays can't marry, women can't get abortions, blacks can't get welfare only whites can, blacks can't go to white schools, etc.
You right wingers just don't see why you can't use the constitution to be unconstitutional
The stats tend to disprove your assertion.This judge is oppressing gays by refusing to marry them.I would also examine the decisions she has made in the past to see if she has actively discriminated against Gay defendants.Gays and Muslims are being oppressed claims the Limey bigot.Its gays and Muslims who are being oppressed at the moment. Thank God that decent people are willing to stand up for them.Funny how the Left stands up for gays and Muslims....yet denigrates Christians and straight white males at every turn. They claim to be open minded but like Cankles, they lie a lot.
Cankles has the terrorist anti-gay Muslim daddy at her rally and the MSM yawns (aside...like Silly Jilly yawns all the time). Imagine the shit storm if Trump did something analogous.
WRONG.
You should have posted Muslims oppress gays, woman, minorities, non-Muslims. We in the West do not.
Everything you know is WRONG.
1. The Judge should marry them or refuse to marry anyone...
2. Muslims would kill Homosexuals and to claim Muslims are oppressed in America is total bull fucking shit!
When you write about a country you do not reside in make me wonder what the fuck is wrong with you?
I am not going to pretend that America does not have it fucking bigots within her borders and Trump is one of them but for you to sit there and write about how Muslims are oppressed is total nonsense on your part!
Muslims are allowed to worship as they please as long as it does not break any of our Federal, State and local laws and yes this country has laws!
So please stop with the bullshit about how Muslims are oppressed and no they should not be allow to practice or enforce their religious laws if it conflicts with this Country Constitution!
They are in the bit by assault rifle.If your States laws are unconstitutional it's up to the feds to get you in line. That's your problem. You want to be unconstitutional in your laws.I admit we pick and choose, same way Republicans in Michigan don't like that we voted to legalize pot so Republicans here are using federal law as their reason for fighting the will of the people. Go figure.
The argumentss you lose are because your state laws are deemed unconstitutional, no?
So you are a hypocrite? Just as I thought.
When we (the feds) tell you what to do its because you want to be unconstitutional. But then you want to cherry pick out of the constitution the part that says States rights? Do you see how you're wrong?
So a state making a law when the STATE is supposed to be the one making the law is being out of line? My problem is when the Constitution indicates a state has the authority to make laws in areas not specifically delegated to the federal government yet the federal government goes against it's own Constitution.
When the Constitution indicates it is a states' right situation and the federal government chooses to do it anyway, that's wrong.
Unless you can show me where the term abortion, marriage, social welfare, etc. are in the Constitution as a federal authority, it's a state authority. When 5 people incorrectly decide it belongs to the federal government, it's because they WANT it to be not because it has the authority to be.
You can't descriminate against gays in your laws. See, your laws that are unconstitutional are always telling people they can't do something. Gays can't marry, women can't get abortions, blacks can't get welfare only whites can, blacks can't go to white schools, etc.
You right wingers just don't see why you can't use the constitution to be unconstitutional
Yet you can't show the words abortion, marriage, or social welfare in the Constitution.
If you dont like the law then you should vote in those who will change it to your satisfaction. There are many laws that are unpopular, the answer is to change the law not sulk like a child.Are you saying that this Judge should be able to promote her religious beliefs over the law ?Examples?As long as it's consistent and in line with the Constitution. However, people like you and Jillian are pick and choose.
Do you support social welfare? Obamacare? Abortion? Same sex marriage?
That sorta sounds like Sharia to me.
Are you saying people should be able to refuse to obey the law if they don't like it.
Funny how the Left stands up for gays and Muslims....yet denigrates Christians and straight white males at every turn. They claim to be open minded but like Cankles, they lie a lot.
Cankles has the terrorist anti-gay Muslim daddy at her rally and the MSM yawns (aside...like Silly Jilly yawns all the time). Imagine the shit storm if Trump did something analogous.What happened to letting States decide?The top court in this state could sack this judge who keeps refusing to marry gays
Yup, like its time to get another job you backward bigot.
they're going to have to remove him from the bench. some state yahoo can't override federal law. period.
You mean like local yahoos creating sanctuary cities despite federal laws related to illegals?
Why don't you just say "can't override federal laws" unless I as a Liberal agree they can.
Fucking liar.
Bottom line is when law and religion don't agree, law rules
Bottom law is, federal law should rule. Should they be states deciding? Yep, but that is not the way it goes. The judge is wrong, the judge can either abide by the law and marry all or not marry anyone.
Marijuana, abortion, marriage laws are all state issues and should be handled as such. Illegal aliens is a federal issue and the only time the feds get involved is when states like Arizona try to uphold the federal law. So try to be consistent Meathead.
