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.
Social morals for free from a God is all it may require not the Expense of Government.Those that believe the Supreme Court is going to rehear Obergefell v. Hodges are fooling themselves as they lack any standing. Those bringing the challenge are going to have to show how the married poofs down the street have harmed them measurably. You're going to need bring more than your hurt feelings, pearl-clutching, and, prognostications of doom if you wish to have the courts even consider the case.
That's certainly a good point. But if you look back at the case of the city of Sodom, where even normative folks like Lot lost his home when Almighty God was pissed at the Gay Community and even lost his wife who was turned into a pillar of sodium chloride.
No. Not selling their usual products to other customers based on their Religious preference may be.You want separation based on sexual orientation when it comes to treatment under the law. That's segregation. Surely you knew what the word meant, right?Do try to stay on topic, segregationist.We are talking legal marriage....do try to stay on topic....if you can.
Responding to the bolded part, dippy.
Again, responding to a statement.
And what segregation?
You are a nanny state fascist twat.
I want common sense to dictate that someone's free exercise overrides the need to a specific contracted cake.
Is a Jewish Butcher not selling pork segregation?
No. Not selling their usual products to other customers based on their Religious preference may be.You want separation based on sexual orientation when it comes to treatment under the law. That's segregation. Surely you knew what the word meant, right?Do try to stay on topic, segregationist.Responding to the bolded part, dippy.
Again, responding to a statement.
And what segregation?
You are a nanny state fascist twat.
I want common sense to dictate that someone's free exercise overrides the need to a specific contracted cake.
Is a Jewish Butcher not selling pork segregation?
Public accommodation.No. Not selling their usual products to other customers based on their Religious preference may be.You want separation based on sexual orientation when it comes to treatment under the law. That's segregation. Surely you knew what the word meant, right?Do try to stay on topic, segregationist.
Again, responding to a statement.
And what segregation?
You are a nanny state fascist twat.
I want common sense to dictate that someone's free exercise overrides the need to a specific contracted cake.
Is a Jewish Butcher not selling pork segregation?
Who made that rule up?
Public accommodation.No. Not selling their usual products to other customers based on their Religious preference may be.You want separation based on sexual orientation when it comes to treatment under the law. That's segregation. Surely you knew what the word meant, right?Again, responding to a statement.
And what segregation?
You are a nanny state fascist twat.
I want common sense to dictate that someone's free exercise overrides the need to a specific contracted cake.
Is a Jewish Butcher not selling pork segregation?
Who made that rule up?
seeeee"Evangelical Christian" is a dog whistle for Democrat bigots
No. Evangelicals are an out-of-control, arrogant, authoritarian cult that does not have much to do with anything Jesus taught. They think that they are entitled to rule the U.S., other Christians and non-Christians alike. They are intent on destroying the Christian faith from within.
Doesn’t matterConstitution uses the words......personsYou are welcome to follow your religious beliefs and hate anyone you wishIt is pure bigotry just like under Jim Crow
Has nothing to do with religion and everything to do with appeasing a customer base that sets gays
Your view is bigotry as well, bigotry against those who follow their religious beliefs.
Your business is not
Why not? Where in the Constitution does it say you lose your rights when you try to sell something?
Businesses are not persons
Persons run businesses. These are not corporations, but small businesses run by small groups of people, or even single persons.
Again, why does a person lose their rights when they try to sell something?
It has had its day in courtWhere is the ominous part of the letter ? Clickbait garbage to inspire the lefts constant artificially induced outrage.I think this man is doing this because there are two new judges on the court. He thinks that those two judges will throw out marriage equality.
Why do people believe they have the right to force everyone to live their way of life and don't have the freedom to choose within outlaws? I mean you people are free to live your life the way you want. Why do you feel you have the right to force everyone to live their lives your way?
No one is hurt by gay couples getting married. Just leave those people alone to live their lives with the same freedoms you enjoy.
Christian Fundamentalist Attorney Sends Ominous Letter to TN Clerks - Out & About Nashville - LGBT news, events and gay guide
Maybe the part where he threatens them for violating the Tennessee Constitution?
What I think you are failing to understand is that Gay Marriage is a very controversial issue that's going to end up being brought to court. County clerks who collaborate with this abomination will be caught on the wrong side of history.
It has had its day in courtWhere is the ominous part of the letter ? Clickbait garbage to inspire the lefts constant artificially induced outrage.I think this man is doing this because there are two new judges on the court. He thinks that those two judges will throw out marriage equality.
Why do people believe they have the right to force everyone to live their way of life and don't have the freedom to choose within outlaws? I mean you people are free to live your life the way you want. Why do you feel you have the right to force everyone to live their lives your way?
No one is hurt by gay couples getting married. Just leave those people alone to live their lives with the same freedoms you enjoy.
Christian Fundamentalist Attorney Sends Ominous Letter to TN Clerks - Out & About Nashville - LGBT news, events and gay guide
Maybe the part where he threatens them for violating the Tennessee Constitution?
What I think you are failing to understand is that Gay Marriage is a very controversial issue that's going to end up being brought to court. County clerks who collaborate with this abomination will be caught on the wrong side of history.
Gays are allowed to marry and we ain’t going back
Conservatives, who lost in court, are trying a new tactic
The Gubmint may allow you to marry....but good luck finding a reception hall, caterer, wedding invitations, flowers, limos, hotels or a wedding cake
Doesn’t matterConstitution uses the words......personsYou are welcome to follow your religious beliefs and hate anyone you wishYour view is bigotry as well, bigotry against those who follow their religious beliefs.
Your business is not
Why not? Where in the Constitution does it say you lose your rights when you try to sell something?
Businesses are not persons
Persons run businesses. These are not corporations, but small businesses run by small groups of people, or even single persons.
Again, why does a person lose their rights when they try to sell something?
Hey negro, go find somewhere else to eat because we don’t serve negroes here
Is no longer allowed
It has had its day in courtWhere is the ominous part of the letter ? Clickbait garbage to inspire the lefts constant artificially induced outrage.I think this man is doing this because there are two new judges on the court. He thinks that those two judges will throw out marriage equality.
Why do people believe they have the right to force everyone to live their way of life and don't have the freedom to choose within outlaws? I mean you people are free to live your life the way you want. Why do you feel you have the right to force everyone to live their lives your way?
No one is hurt by gay couples getting married. Just leave those people alone to live their lives with the same freedoms you enjoy.
Christian Fundamentalist Attorney Sends Ominous Letter to TN Clerks - Out & About Nashville - LGBT news, events and gay guide
Maybe the part where he threatens them for violating the Tennessee Constitution?
What I think you are failing to understand is that Gay Marriage is a very controversial issue that's going to end up being brought to court. County clerks who collaborate with this abomination will be caught on the wrong side of history.
Gays are allowed to marry and we ain’t going back
Conservatives, who lost in court, are trying a new tactic
The Gubmint may allow you to marry....but good luck finding a reception hall, caterer, wedding invitations, flowers, limos, hotels or a wedding cake
Doesn’t matterConstitution uses the words......personsYou are welcome to follow your religious beliefs and hate anyone you wishYour view is bigotry as well, bigotry against those who follow their religious beliefs.
Your business is not
Why not? Where in the Constitution does it say you lose your rights when you try to sell something?
Businesses are not persons
Persons run businesses. These are not corporations, but small businesses run by small groups of people, or even single persons.
Again, why does a person lose their rights when they try to sell something?
Hey negro, go find somewhere else to eat because we don’t serve negroes here
Is no longer allowed
You’re using the anecdotal to upset an entire process and to justify something undeserving. That’s a typical dishonest left wing strategy.Then what is the point in getting married?Not procreating is a very courageous and wise decision for a growing number of traditionally married couples. I commend them for thinking it through.
It doesn't matter. Years ago when I worked as a hostess in a popular downtown DC steakhouse, I had the pleasure of meeting a couple in their 80s, who had just gotten married a few days before. No, they were not going to have eight children, but yes, they were very happy to have found each other again after being high-school sweethearts decades earlier. Of course, there are legal reasons for getting married, as well as to make public their commitment to each other. But in the end, it's nobody else's damned business.
No process is being upset. The couple who I know who got married did it the same as so many other couples do; the license, the courthouse ceremony, signing the legal documents. There is nothing "undeserving" about it. And there is nothing "dishonest" involved.You’re using the anecdotal to upset an entire process and to justify something undeserving. That’s a typical dishonest left wing strategy.Then what is the point in getting married?Not procreating is a very courageous and wise decision for a growing number of traditionally married couples. I commend them for thinking it through.
It doesn't matter. Years ago when I worked as a hostess in a popular downtown DC steakhouse, I had the pleasure of meeting a couple in their 80s, who had just gotten married a few days before. No, they were not going to have eight children, but yes, they were very happy to have found each other again after being high-school sweethearts decades earlier. Of course, there are legal reasons for getting married, as well as to make public their commitment to each other. But in the end, it's nobody else's damned business.
You didn’t respond to my post. You only doubled-down on your wag-the-dog rationalization.No process is being upset. The couple who I know who got married did it the same as so many other couples do; the license, the courthouse ceremony, signing the legal documents. There is nothing "undeserving" about it. And there is nothing "dishonest" involved.You’re using the anecdotal to upset an entire process and to justify something undeserving. That’s a typical dishonest left wing strategy.Then what is the point in getting married?Not procreating is a very courageous and wise decision for a growing number of traditionally married couples. I commend them for thinking it through.
It doesn't matter. Years ago when I worked as a hostess in a popular downtown DC steakhouse, I had the pleasure of meeting a couple in their 80s, who had just gotten married a few days before. No, they were not going to have eight children, but yes, they were very happy to have found each other again after being high-school sweethearts decades earlier. Of course, there are legal reasons for getting married, as well as to make public their commitment to each other. But in the end, it's nobody else's damned business.
You are the one contending that the ability and intention to reproduce is a necessary prerequisite for marriage. I don't. I thought that this couple were delightful, particularly when the wife said to me, "my dear, I don't feel a day over 50!" and her new husband said "no, my dear, you don't."
I hope that they enjoyed many good years together. This is what I hope for everybody.
You didn’t respond to my post. You only doubled-down on your wag-the-dog rationalization.No process is being upset. The couple who I know who got married did it the same as so many other couples do; the license, the courthouse ceremony, signing the legal documents. There is nothing "undeserving" about it. And there is nothing "dishonest" involved.You’re using the anecdotal to upset an entire process and to justify something undeserving. That’s a typical dishonest left wing strategy.Then what is the point in getting married?Not procreating is a very courageous and wise decision for a growing number of traditionally married couples. I commend them for thinking it through.
It doesn't matter. Years ago when I worked as a hostess in a popular downtown DC steakhouse, I had the pleasure of meeting a couple in their 80s, who had just gotten married a few days before. No, they were not going to have eight children, but yes, they were very happy to have found each other again after being high-school sweethearts decades earlier. Of course, there are legal reasons for getting married, as well as to make public their commitment to each other. But in the end, it's nobody else's damned business.
You are the one contending that the ability and intention to reproduce is a necessary prerequisite for marriage. I don't. I thought that this couple were delightful, particularly when the wife said to me, "my dear, I don't feel a day over 50!" and her new husband said "no, my dear, you don't."
I hope that they enjoyed many good years together. This is what I hope for everybody.
But your response was a dodge.You didn’t respond to my post. You only doubled-down on your wag-the-dog rationalization.No process is being upset. The couple who I know who got married did it the same as so many other couples do; the license, the courthouse ceremony, signing the legal documents. There is nothing "undeserving" about it. And there is nothing "dishonest" involved.You’re using the anecdotal to upset an entire process and to justify something undeserving. That’s a typical dishonest left wing strategy.Then what is the point in getting married?
It doesn't matter. Years ago when I worked as a hostess in a popular downtown DC steakhouse, I had the pleasure of meeting a couple in their 80s, who had just gotten married a few days before. No, they were not going to have eight children, but yes, they were very happy to have found each other again after being high-school sweethearts decades earlier. Of course, there are legal reasons for getting married, as well as to make public their commitment to each other. But in the end, it's nobody else's damned business.
You are the one contending that the ability and intention to reproduce is a necessary prerequisite for marriage. I don't. I thought that this couple were delightful, particularly when the wife said to me, "my dear, I don't feel a day over 50!" and her new husband said "no, my dear, you don't."
I hope that they enjoyed many good years together. This is what I hope for everybody.
I responded to your post, as per your personal e-mail to me. It is evident that you are obsessed with this subject, but your theories are getting boring. Give it up, Jack.
