Amazing, Six Members of the Clown Car did WHAT?

[mdk]

What part of the report is untrue? That these candidates signed a pledge?

All of it. It was made up, fabricated.

Six GOP Hopefuls Vow To Enshrine Anti-Gay Discrimination Into Law

Your turn

A blog? Fail. Provide some proof that isnt from a biased source.

Here's your link: Google

Wrong. Next.

Baby demands links from others but you point them to your signature when they ask the same of you. Too funny.

 

[mdk]

This could already occur in rural areas of states that don't have protections for gay people; however, it isn't. The backlash from the public would be enormous.

To assuage the fears of people, certain services would be deemed essential and they would have to accommodate people regardless.

Why only certain services?

Services that are essential to live. Police, fire, hospitals, taxis, grocery stores, gas stations, buses, etc.

So you want to officially make gays second class citizens

This would apply for everyone not just gays.

So it applies to blacks and jews if you don't want their kind hanging out in your store

You are familiar with the word everyone, no?

 

[Wry Catcher]

"Six of the Republican candidates vying for the presidency have signed a pledge promising to support legislation during their first 100 days in the White House that would use the guise of “religious liberty” to give individuals and businesses the right to openly discriminate against LGBT people.

"Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Ben Carson, Carly Fiorina, Rick Santorum, and Mike Huckabee vowed to push for the passage of the First Amendment Defense Act (FADA), legislation that would prohibit the federal government from stopping discrimination by people or businesses that believe “marriage is or should be recognized as the union of one man and one woman” or that “sexual relations are properly reserved to such a marriage.”

This is because for all the crying these phuckheads do about privacy and individualism, they constantly vote and endorse MORE government intrusion into our lives, not less.

They want to know who is gay and who isn't. Who is having sex and who isn't. Who wants to start a family and who doesn't. And yet the uni-browed rightwingers just can't connect the dots.

So, in your world, fining a person for not making a cake is not government intrusion but allowing a person to have religious beliefs, however contrary to yours, is government intrusion? Me thinks you have something backwards.

So you've been protesting this "government intrusion" since 1965 when Public Accommodation laws were passed at the Federal level, right? You've been asking your congressman to repeal Title II of the Civil Rights Act, right?

No, you fuckers want to have your cake and eat it too...pun intended. You like those PA laws that says I can't refuse to serve a Christian...you just don't like the ones that say the Christian has to serve me.

Nope, what it is, is you want to dictate your beliefs and force them onto everyone else, as if your beliefs are the only true beliefs.

There is a vast, VAST difference between being born black and gay marriage. I would think it an insult to black people to even make the connection.

I don't think you think, and I'd bet I'm not alone. Explain to me / us why you believe you can pick and choose those who have unalienable Rights among which are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness?

If you're proud of being a bigot or racist put up a sign and let those who you don't know but choose to hate and discriminate against telling them that they're not welcome.

If they still want the service you offer serve them, you don't need to be civil but you need to obey the law. And if you refuse to serve them on principle tell them you will not serve them and suffer the consequence, a fine, a jail sentence or a busted nose.

 

[peach174]

"Six of the Republican candidates vying for the presidency have signed a pledge promising to support legislation during their first 100 days in the White House that would use the guise of “religious liberty” to give individuals and businesses the right to openly discriminate against LGBT people.

"Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Ben Carson, Carly Fiorina, Rick Santorum, and Mike Huckabee vowed to push for the passage of the First Amendment Defense Act (FADA), legislation that would prohibit the federal government from stopping discrimination by people or businesses that believe “marriage is or should be recognized as the union of one man and one woman” or that “sexual relations are properly reserved to such a marriage.”

Guise?
It is in our 1st amendment. That is no guise.
Well they would not have had to so such a thing in the first place if the Dem's had not passed policies that discriminate against religious beliefs and morals.

 

[The Rabbi]

Its untrue. What it reports never happened.

What part of the report is untrue? That these candidates signed a pledge?

All of it. It was made up, fabricated.

Six GOP Hopefuls Vow To Enshrine Anti-Gay Discrimination Into Law

Your turn

A blog? Fail. Provide some proof that isnt from a biased source.

Your turn

Why don't you embarass me and show where any of the six have spoken out against the First Amendment Defense Act (FADA)?

You made the assertion. You back it up, Bozo.

 

[Wry Catcher]

"Six of the Republican candidates vying for the presidency have signed a pledge promising to support legislation during their first 100 days in the White House that would use the guise of “religious liberty” to give individuals and businesses the right to openly discriminate against LGBT people.

"Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Ben Carson, Carly Fiorina, Rick Santorum, and Mike Huckabee vowed to push for the passage of the First Amendment Defense Act (FADA), legislation that would prohibit the federal government from stopping discrimination by people or businesses that believe “marriage is or should be recognized as the union of one man and one woman” or that “sexual relations are properly reserved to such a marriage.”

Guise?
It is in our 1st amendment. That is no guise.
Well they would not have had to so such a thing in the first place if the Dem's had not passed policies that discriminate against religious beliefs and morals.

Religious beliefs and morals are not the same thing. Do you find human or animal sacrifices moral? How about female circumcision?

 

[The Rabbi]

All of it. It was made up, fabricated.

Six GOP Hopefuls Vow To Enshrine Anti-Gay Discrimination Into Law

Your turn

A blog? Fail. Provide some proof that isnt from a biased source.

Here's your link: Google

Wrong. Next.

Baby demands links from others but you point them to your signature when they ask the same of you. Too funny.

So you cannot substantiate anything. WHy is that not shocking?

"Six of the Republican candidates vying for the presidency have signed a pledge promising to support legislation during their first 100 days in the White House that would use the guise of “religious liberty” to give individuals and businesses the right to openly discriminate against LGBT people.

"Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Ben Carson, Carly Fiorina, Rick Santorum, and Mike Huckabee vowed to push for the passage of the First Amendment Defense Act (FADA), legislation that would prohibit the federal government from stopping discrimination by people or businesses that believe “marriage is or should be recognized as the union of one man and one woman” or that “sexual relations are properly reserved to such a marriage.”

Guise?
It is in our 1st amendment. That is no guise.
Well they would not have had to so such a thing in the first place if the Dem's had not passed policies that discriminate against religious beliefs and morals.

Religious beliefs and morals are not the same thing. Do you find human or animal sacrifices moral? How about female circumcision?

Fails as reductio ad absurdum fallacy.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Six GOP Hopefuls Vow To Enshrine Anti-Gay Discrimination Into Law

Your turn

A blog? Fail. Provide some proof that isnt from a biased source.

Here's your link: Google

Wrong. Next.

Baby demands links from others but you point them to your signature when they ask the same of you. Too funny.

So you cannot substantiate anything. WHy is that not shocking?

"Six of the Republican candidates vying for the presidency have signed a pledge promising to support legislation during their first 100 days in the White House that would use the guise of “religious liberty” to give individuals and businesses the right to openly discriminate against LGBT people.

"Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Ben Carson, Carly Fiorina, Rick Santorum, and Mike Huckabee vowed to push for the passage of the First Amendment Defense Act (FADA), legislation that would prohibit the federal government from stopping discrimination by people or businesses that believe “marriage is or should be recognized as the union of one man and one woman” or that “sexual relations are properly reserved to such a marriage.”

Guise?
It is in our 1st amendment. That is no guise.
Well they would not have had to so such a thing in the first place if the Dem's had not passed policies that discriminate against religious beliefs and morals.

Religious beliefs and morals are not the same thing. Do you find human or animal sacrifices moral? How about female circumcision?

Fails as reductio ad absurdum fallacy.

Rabbi should never attempt to use words, phrases or definitions he can't understand. He may think, err, the may believe it makes him appear educated but it does the exact opposite:

Reductio ad Absurdum | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

 

[peach174]

"Six of the Republican candidates vying for the presidency have signed a pledge promising to support legislation during their first 100 days in the White House that would use the guise of “religious liberty” to give individuals and businesses the right to openly discriminate against LGBT people.

"Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Ben Carson, Carly Fiorina, Rick Santorum, and Mike Huckabee vowed to push for the passage of the First Amendment Defense Act (FADA), legislation that would prohibit the federal government from stopping discrimination by people or businesses that believe “marriage is or should be recognized as the union of one man and one woman” or that “sexual relations are properly reserved to such a marriage.”

Guise?
It is in our 1st amendment. That is no guise.
Well they would not have had to so such a thing in the first place if the Dem's had not passed policies that discriminate against religious beliefs and morals.

Religious beliefs and morals are not the same thing. Do you find human or animal sacrifices moral? How about female circumcision?

Yes they are.
Those two things does harm.
One business who refuses to bake a wedding cake does not harm anyone. They have the right to go to any bakers they want to go to, that do not have strong morals or religious beliefs.
Forcing them to bake a cake is just as much bigotry towards their beliefs.

 

[Iceweasel]

"Six of the Republican candidates vying for the presidency have signed a pledge promising to support legislation during their first 100 days in the White House that would use the guise of “religious liberty” to give individuals and businesses the right to openly discriminate against LGBT people.

Thank God. It's a shame we need that but the liberals have bastardized the laws in many areas. If it were a Constitutional matter there would be no need for PA laws forcing business owners to serve people they find perverted. The founders would roll over in their graves if they knew the tyrannical left was passing laws that treated homosexuality like a race, gender or religion.

 

[mdk]

So you cannot substantiate anything. WHy is that not shocking?

Just giving baby a taste of his own medicine. All the best.


6 Presidential Candidates Pledge to Support Bill to Protect Gay Marriage Opponents

Six Presidential Candidates Pledge to Support First Amendment Defense Act (FADA) Within First 100 Days | American Principles Project

Six Presidential Candidates Pledge to Sign the First Amendment Defense Act (FADA) | American Principles Project

 

[The Rabbi]

A blog? Fail. Provide some proof that isnt from a biased source.

Here's your link: Google

Wrong. Next.

Baby demands links from others but you point them to your signature when they ask the same of you. Too funny.

So you cannot substantiate anything. WHy is that not shocking?

"Six of the Republican candidates vying for the presidency have signed a pledge promising to support legislation during their first 100 days in the White House that would use the guise of “religious liberty” to give individuals and businesses the right to openly discriminate against LGBT people.

"Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Ben Carson, Carly Fiorina, Rick Santorum, and Mike Huckabee vowed to push for the passage of the First Amendment Defense Act (FADA), legislation that would prohibit the federal government from stopping discrimination by people or businesses that believe “marriage is or should be recognized as the union of one man and one woman” or that “sexual relations are properly reserved to such a marriage.”

Guise?
It is in our 1st amendment. That is no guise.
Well they would not have had to so such a thing in the first place if the Dem's had not passed policies that discriminate against religious beliefs and morals.

Religious beliefs and morals are not the same thing. Do you find human or animal sacrifices moral? How about female circumcision?

Fails as reductio ad absurdum fallacy.

Rabbi should never attempt to use words, phrases or definitions he can't understand. He may think, err, the may believe it makes him appear educated but it does the exact opposite:

Reductio ad Absurdum | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy

Fails as an ad hominem attack.
Stick to cock sucking. At least you have experience there.

 

[The Rabbi]

So you cannot substantiate anything. WHy is that not shocking?

Just giving baby a taste of his own medicine. All the best.


6 Presidential Candidates Pledge to Support Bill to Protect Gay Marriage Opponents

Six Presidential Candidates Pledge to Support First Amendment Defense Act (FADA) Within First 100 Days | American Principles Project

Six Presidential Candidates Pledge to Sign the First Amendment Defense Act (FADA) | American Principles Project

Thats a fail. Those arent unbiased sources.

Wow, pretending to be a lib is so much fun.

 

[Wry Catcher]

"Six of the Republican candidates vying for the presidency have signed a pledge promising to support legislation during their first 100 days in the White House that would use the guise of “religious liberty” to give individuals and businesses the right to openly discriminate against LGBT people.

"Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Ben Carson, Carly Fiorina, Rick Santorum, and Mike Huckabee vowed to push for the passage of the First Amendment Defense Act (FADA), legislation that would prohibit the federal government from stopping discrimination by people or businesses that believe “marriage is or should be recognized as the union of one man and one woman” or that “sexual relations are properly reserved to such a marriage.”

Guise?
It is in our 1st amendment. That is no guise.
Well they would not have had to so such a thing in the first place if the Dem's had not passed policies that discriminate against religious beliefs and morals.

Religious beliefs and morals are not the same thing. Do you find human or animal sacrifices moral? How about female circumcision?

Yes they are.
Those two things does harm.
One business who refuses to bake a wedding cake does not harm anyone. They have the right to go to any bakers they want to go to. that do not have strong morals or religious beliefs.
Forcing them to bake a cake is just as much bigotry towards their beliefs.

Here's a little food for thought:

The Force of Law — Frederick Schauer | Harvard University Press

It's a short read and one which provides perspective on civil order, which most human beings seek and why governments exist. If the force of law was not applied in the singular example, the baker, how would that extrapolate?

Now, consider the differences in religion and moral relativism. What maybe a moral imperative to a Muslim may be anathema to a Christian.

 

[The Rabbi]

"Six of the Republican candidates vying for the presidency have signed a pledge promising to support legislation during their first 100 days in the White House that would use the guise of “religious liberty” to give individuals and businesses the right to openly discriminate against LGBT people.

"Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Ben Carson, Carly Fiorina, Rick Santorum, and Mike Huckabee vowed to push for the passage of the First Amendment Defense Act (FADA), legislation that would prohibit the federal government from stopping discrimination by people or businesses that believe “marriage is or should be recognized as the union of one man and one woman” or that “sexual relations are properly reserved to such a marriage.”

Guise?
It is in our 1st amendment. That is no guise.
Well they would not have had to so such a thing in the first place if the Dem's had not passed policies that discriminate against religious beliefs and morals.

Religious beliefs and morals are not the same thing. Do you find human or animal sacrifices moral? How about female circumcision?

Yes they are.
Those two things does harm.
One business who refuses to bake a wedding cake does not harm anyone. They have the right to go to any bakers they want to go to. that do not have strong morals or religious beliefs.
Forcing them to bake a cake is just as much bigotry towards their beliefs.

Here's a little food for thought:

The Force of Law — Frederick Schauer | Harvard University Press

It's a short read and one which provides perspective on civil order, which most human beings seek and why governments exist. If the force of law was not applied in the singular example, the baker, how would that extrapolate.

Now, consider the differences in religion and moral relativism. What maybe a moral imperative to a Muslim may be anathema to a Christian.

You mean people actually running their businesses as they see fit? Wow, what a concept!

 

[rightwinger]

Why only certain services?

Services that are essential to live. Police, fire, hospitals, taxis, grocery stores, gas stations, buses, etc.

So you want to officially make gays second class citizens

This would apply for everyone not just gays.

So it applies to blacks and jews if you don't want their kind hanging out in your store

You are familiar with the word everyone, no?

Your point is that nonessential services should have the right to deny service to anyone. We saw that with lunch counters, hotels, movie theaters 50 years ago...it was unfair then, it is unfair now

 

[rightwinger]

What part of the report is untrue? That these candidates signed a pledge?

All of it. It was made up, fabricated.

Six GOP Hopefuls Vow To Enshrine Anti-Gay Discrimination Into Law

Your turn

A blog? Fail. Provide some proof that isnt from a biased source.

Your turn

Why don't you embarass me and show where any of the six have spoken out against the First Amendment Defense Act (FADA)?

You made the assertion. You back it up, Bozo.

Ball is firmly in your court Rabbi

You have been provided sources and now it is your turn to back up your claim that the OP is made up. This is the point where you usually

1. Run away
2. Claim a bogus victory
3. Double down on your bogus claims

 

[mdk]

So you cannot substantiate anything. WHy is that not shocking?

Just giving baby a taste of his own medicine. All the best.


6 Presidential Candidates Pledge to Support Bill to Protect Gay Marriage Opponents

Six Presidential Candidates Pledge to Support First Amendment Defense Act (FADA) Within First 100 Days | American Principles Project

Six Presidential Candidates Pledge to Sign the First Amendment Defense Act (FADA) | American Principles Project

Thats a fail. Those arent unbiased sources.

Wow, pretending to be a lib is so much fun.

You're not even good at that game. Poor dear.

 

[peach174]

"Six of the Republican candidates vying for the presidency have signed a pledge promising to support legislation during their first 100 days in the White House that would use the guise of “religious liberty” to give individuals and businesses the right to openly discriminate against LGBT people.

"Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Ben Carson, Carly Fiorina, Rick Santorum, and Mike Huckabee vowed to push for the passage of the First Amendment Defense Act (FADA), legislation that would prohibit the federal government from stopping discrimination by people or businesses that believe “marriage is or should be recognized as the union of one man and one woman” or that “sexual relations are properly reserved to such a marriage.”

Guise?
It is in our 1st amendment. That is no guise.
Well they would not have had to so such a thing in the first place if the Dem's had not passed policies that discriminate against religious beliefs and morals.

Religious beliefs and morals are not the same thing. Do you find human or animal sacrifices moral? How about female circumcision?

Yes they are.
Those two things does harm.
One business who refuses to bake a wedding cake does not harm anyone. They have the right to go to any bakers they want to go to. that do not have strong morals or religious beliefs.
Forcing them to bake a cake is just as much bigotry towards their beliefs.

Here's a little food for thought:

The Force of Law — Frederick Schauer | Harvard University Press

It's a short read and one which provides perspective on civil order, which most human beings seek and why governments exist. If the force of law was not applied in the singular example, the baker, how would that extrapolate?

Now, consider the differences in religion and moral relativism. What maybe a moral imperative to a Muslim may be anathema to a Christian.

Our Federal Government should not be in the management of our Society.
Doing so is counter to freedom.

 

[rightwinger]

So you cannot substantiate anything. WHy is that not shocking?

Just giving baby a taste of his own medicine. All the best.


6 Presidential Candidates Pledge to Support Bill to Protect Gay Marriage Opponents

Six Presidential Candidates Pledge to Support First Amendment Defense Act (FADA) Within First 100 Days | American Principles Project

Six Presidential Candidates Pledge to Sign the First Amendment Defense Act (FADA) | American Principles Project

Thats a fail. Those arent unbiased sources.

Wow, pretending to be a lib is so much fun.

You're not even good at that game. Poor dear.

This is where the Rabbi plays his "I am the Rabbi" game
He demands sources and then dismisses all sources given as "bogus" or "invalid"
All while scoffing at the idea that he is responsible for sourcing his own wild claims