Cruz introduces Anti-Gay marriage bill

[TakeAStepBack]

So, tell me Luddly, should businesses be forced to service homosexuals? Would that fall under, as you put it, .. "Left it to the individuals involved." ? Or does that go against your hypocritical philosophy?

 

[Katzndogz]

If you believe that activity between consenting adults cannot be controlled by law, leaving aside consensual cannibalism, then you should by all that's constitutional believe that someone who does not want to participate in a same sex wedding should not be forced to do so.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

JoeB is vehemently against the 2nd amendment.

Lie.

Biden Confirms Support for Second Amendment, Says He Owns Two Shotguns - ABC News

Biden: "There Is A Second Amendment. The President And I Support The Second Amendment" | RealClearPolitics

If you want to find people who are against the Constitution, read rw's on the subject of religion, abortion and marriage equality.

JoeB on this this board you blithering idiot. and I don't believe for a second when a democratic politican says they support the 2nd amendment. considering the laws they propose only screw over law abiding gun owners, they deserve nothing but scorn.

Don't blame me because you're not clear.

This is a huge part of the reason I don't spend more time here. Reading crap from rw's like you kills brain cells.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

So, tell me Luddly, should businesses be forced to service homosexuals? Would that fall under, as you put it, .. "Left it to the individuals involved." ? Or does that go against your hypocritical philosophy?

If you had read my comments in that thread, you would know that I wrote that businesses should be able to refuse service.

OTOH, used to be, racists assholes could refuse to sell homes to blacks/Hispanics/other minorities, employers could refuse a job based on religion or age. These days, govt is still in our private lives and its jerks like you who are in favor of that.

Stop cherry picking. The constitution is not a cafeteria where you can be against equal rights for some while demanding it for others.

I defend the right of jerks like you to spew your vomit. Same with the KKK, Westboro, etc. You have to do the same or stop pretending to be an American.

You wanna see more of your rw hypocrisy?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/current-events/340337-va-strikes-down-gay-marriage-ban.html

 

[TakeAStepBack]

So, tell me Luddly, should businesses be forced to service homosexuals? Would that fall under, as you put it, .. "Left it to the individuals involved." ? Or does that go against your hypocritical philosophy?

If you had read my comments in that thread, you would know that I wrote that businesses should be able to refuse service.

OTOH, used to be, racists assholes could refuse to sell homes to blacks/Hispanics/other minorities, employers could refuse a job based on religion or age. These days, govt is still in our private lives and its jerks like you who are in favor of that.

Stop cherry picking. The constitution is not a cafeteria where you can be against equal rights for some while demanding it for others.

I defend the right of jerks like you to spew your vomit. Same with the KKK, Westboro, etc. You have to do the same or stop pretending to be an American.

You wanna see more of your rw hypocrisy?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/current-events/340337-va-strikes-down-gay-marriage-ban.html

So, it's ok for a business to refuse to service homosexuals, but you find it OK for the government to tell a business or property owner that they must sell, loan or service someone with which they do not want to consent mutually with in such an agreement?



You're still trying to equate me to something that entirely misrepresents my positions. You will not find me in favor of laws against (or for, to be clear) gay marriage, abortion, discrimination or any other host of normal mutual consent relaated issue between individuals. You on the otherhand, continue to show you're a full blown hypocrite on the matter. in some instances government needs to force others to service others in which they may not want to, and in other instances they should be left alone as individuals. It's hard to keep all that hypocrisy straight and in which cases you like intervention by govt. and in which ones you dont.

Your hypocrisy knows no boundaries.

 

[peach174]

Lie.

Biden Confirms Support for Second Amendment, Says He Owns Two Shotguns - ABC News

Biden: "There Is A Second Amendment. The President And I Support The Second Amendment" | RealClearPolitics

If you want to find people who are against the Constitution, read rw's on the subject of religion, abortion and marriage equality.

JoeB on this this board you blithering idiot. and I don't believe for a second when a democratic politican says they support the 2nd amendment. considering the laws they propose only screw over law abiding gun owners, they deserve nothing but scorn.

Don't blame me because you're not clear.

This is a huge part of the reason I don't spend more time here. Reading crap from rw's like you kills brain cells.

Thinking only one way is what kills brain cells, not to mention that one way ideology is what Communists and Dictators do.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

So, tell me Luddly, should businesses be forced to service homosexuals? Would that fall under, as you put it, .. "Left it to the individuals involved." ? Or does that go against your hypocritical philosophy?

If you had read my comments in that thread, you would know that I wrote that businesses should be able to refuse service.

OTOH, used to be, racists assholes could refuse to sell homes to blacks/Hispanics/other minorities, employers could refuse a job based on religion or age. These days, govt is still in our private lives and its jerks like you who are in favor of that.

Stop cherry picking. The constitution is not a cafeteria where you can be against equal rights for some while demanding it for others.

I defend the right of jerks like you to spew your vomit. Same with the KKK, Westboro, etc. You have to do the same or stop pretending to be an American.

You wanna see more of your rw hypocrisy?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/current-events/340337-va-strikes-down-gay-marriage-ban.html

So, it's ok for a business to refuse to service homosexuals, but you find it OK for the government to tell a business or property owner that they must sell, loan or service someone with which they do not want to consent mutually with in such an agreement?



You're still trying to equate me to something that entirely misrepresents my positions. You will not find me in favor of laws against (or for, to be clear) gay marriage, abortion, discrimination or any other host of normal mutual consent relaated issue between individuals. You on the otherhand, continue to show you're a full blown hypocrite on the matter. in some instances government needs to force others to service others in which they may not want to, and in other instances they should be left alone as individuals. It's hard to keep all that hypocrisy straight and in which cases you like intervention by govt. and in which ones you dont.

Your hypocrisy knows no boundaries.

As I said before, if I am wrong, I take it back.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

JoeB on this this board you blithering idiot. and I don't believe for a second when a democratic politican says they support the 2nd amendment. considering the laws they propose only screw over law abiding gun owners, they deserve nothing but scorn.

Don't blame me because you're not clear.

This is a huge part of the reason I don't spend more time here. Reading crap from rw's like you kills brain cells.

Thinking only one way is what kills brain cells, not to mention that one way ideology is what Communists and Dictators do.

And only rw's can read minds.

Right?

 

[peach174]

Good for Ted Cruz!! ....

Your hypocrisy knows no bounds:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/pets/...e-to-attend-a-dog-cock-fight.html#post8622172

hey, [MENTION=11674]Sunni Man[/MENTION] ... You can't have it both ways.

The activity between consenting should not be controlled by the law.

Cruelty for fun and profit and done to animals (or children) who cannot consent, should be.

But you think that abortion is?
Don't you think that it is also cruel to rip off the head, legs and arms of little babies who can't consent? I do. I think that it is just as cruel as dog and cock fighting.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

If you had read my comments in that thread, you would know that I wrote that businesses should be able to refuse service.

OTOH, used to be, racists assholes could refuse to sell homes to blacks/Hispanics/other minorities, employers could refuse a job based on religion or age. These days, govt is still in our private lives and its jerks like you who are in favor of that.

Stop cherry picking. The constitution is not a cafeteria where you can be against equal rights for some while demanding it for others.

I defend the right of jerks like you to spew your vomit. Same with the KKK, Westboro, etc. You have to do the same or stop pretending to be an American.

You wanna see more of your rw hypocrisy?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/current-events/340337-va-strikes-down-gay-marriage-ban.html

So, it's ok for a business to refuse to service homosexuals, but you find it OK for the government to tell a business or property owner that they must sell, loan or service someone with which they do not want to consent mutually with in such an agreement?



You're still trying to equate me to something that entirely misrepresents my positions. You will not find me in favor of laws against (or for, to be clear) gay marriage, abortion, discrimination or any other host of normal mutual consent relaated issue between individuals. You on the otherhand, continue to show you're a full blown hypocrite on the matter. in some instances government needs to force others to service others in which they may not want to, and in other instances they should be left alone as individuals. It's hard to keep all that hypocrisy straight and in which cases you like intervention by govt. and in which ones you dont.

Your hypocrisy knows no boundaries.

As I said before, if I am wrong, I take it back.

You take it back and then re-insert the bullshit again later.

So, one final question here and then we'll move on.

If a business owner should be granted the right to mutual consent about servicing gay people without govt. interference, shoud the same business be allowed to discriminate for any reason they see fit for the purposes of employment, loaning or selling without govt. interference as well? Where is the arbitrary line drawn here?

 

[peach174]

Don't blame me because you're not clear.

This is a huge part of the reason I don't spend more time here. Reading crap from rw's like you kills brain cells.

Thinking only one way is what kills brain cells, not to mention that one way ideology is what Communists and Dictators do.

And only rw's can read minds.

Right?

No one can read minds.
We are talking about sharing and discussing ideologies. The left hate that.

 

[SayMyName]

That should be a real winner. Goodness, I won't even ask where the GOP is going. I don't think they are even a coherent body of politic any longer. And before Democrats start giving "likes" for this one, I think the same of that corral of mad donkies.

 

[OnePercenter]

I don't understand why the rightyloons feel the need to discriminate against heterosexuals. Gay people should not get special treatment because they choose to poke butts. They should have to deal with the same shit as the rest of us.

Open the closet door and step out!

Since when is getting married 'special treatment?'

 

[OnePercenter]

Oh, cool! Yeah, that'll help jobs ... how, exactly?

The jobs ship has sailed...

-Geaux

That's why my plan is great. It creates jobs.

-Raise minimum wage to $23.50/hr. Based on where minimum wage should be using 1970-2013 rise in food, shelter, and transportation.

-Eliminate all business subsidies (deductions/write-off’s/write-downs) except for employee expenses which are deducted dollar-for-dollar on all city, state, and Federal taxes and fees.

-Adjust Social Security and private/public retirement and pension payments using 1970-2013 price structure.

-Back down ALL costs, prices, fees, to January 1, 2009 levels and hold them for 10 years.

-Recall ALL off-shore investments tax free, and disallow any further off-shore investments.

 

[OnePercenter]

Marriage equality is a states' rights issue as long as the state does not violate the 14th Amendment.

What if a gay married couple move to a state where their marriage isn't valid?

 

[OnePercenter]

But I've been told the Tea Party isn't about social conservatism.

It isn't. It's about taxes. You are conflating the tea party with those individuals who are in the tea party. Just like you claim that ALL liberals aren't trying to destroy the country.

It's about pushing the Koch agenda.

 

[Qball]

There's something a little silly about people continuing to say "it should be decided by the states" that's more than a little tone deaf. Supporters don't think it should be left up to the states unless the states decide they want to legalize it. It's like libertarians enjoy playing checkers while liberals play chess. At this point there should be a constitutional amendment stating that one man and one woman is the only marriage a state must recognize. Any other innovations are subject to the state.

 

[OnePercenter]

There's something a little silly about people continuing to say "it should be decided by the states" that's more than a little tone deaf. Supporters don't think it should be left up to the states unless the states decide they want to legalize it. It's like libertarians enjoy playing checkers while liberals play chess. At this point there should be a constitutional amendment stating that one man and one woman is the only marriage a state must recognize. Any other innovations are subject to the state.

But there are more Americans than just you, and some are gay.

 

[Interpol]

Why is gay on a Republican's mind so much?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Why is gay on a Republican's mind so much?

Because most conservatives and republicans fear diversity, dissent, and expressions of individual liberty.