Gay Dallas Judge Won't Perform Straight Marriages

[Article 15]

Bodey, I think you are misunderstanding Peach's position.

Nope, she misunderstood mine. Look at the post of mine about the Supreme Court laughing that she replied to with a totally irrelevant link.

I took this post from her....

They have equal protection before the law. They are entitled to marry with the same constraints and benefits as everyone else.

Negged for disingenuous bullshit

They have equal protection before the law. They are entitled to marry with the same constraints and benefits as everyone else.
**********************************************
Not in Florida. Until a Supreme Court case of just a few years ago, gay citizens could not even ADOPT children They could be guardians, and foster parents but not NO ADOPTION. And the law stood through Democratic AND Republican governors.

....as her piggybacking on my post at Avatard. She brought up Florida to show the guy that gays aren't treated equally under the law.

At least that's how I read it.

 

[Peach]

Um....hate to break this to you, but your link and that court case has NOTHING to do with the argument that gays are treated equally as straights.

I'm beginning to feel sorry for you Peach. You are in SO over your head.

I did not assert that Bodecea, read closely. I noted than in Florida those that are gay do NOT have equal rights. Gay citizens may NOT marry, and have only been able to adopt for less than 2 years. My response was to the EQUAL RIGHTS post. Note also, I do not think the Judge should be removed from office if the electors in her county/circuit/district do not so choose.

Look at the post of MINE you were replying to with your link, Peach. Your link has NOTHING to do with what I was saying the Supreme Court was laughing over.

Again, you are in over your head. Sorry.

I wasn't responding to your post on Loving. The opinion was quite serious, no laughing matter.

 

[Immanuel]

Here's the post Bodecea:

If a judge wanted to refuse to perform interracial marriages or any other kind of marriage and just refused to do it there is no problem. In this case the judge chose to expose her bias by saying that the reason is she doesn't agree with the laws of her state.

That's the difference.

What other laws does she not agree with and therefore would avoid rulings?

Boo Hoo.


BTW....I'm noticing a definite lack in you and others condemning ChessWarsNow for his horrific comments about this judge.

I don't read CWN posts but saw your comments about it. I won't comment about his post because I believe he is deliberately attempting to make an ass out of himself and a joke out of the issues he participates in.

He's trying to be funny. I don't find him funny. I don't comment on his posts.

Sorry, that is all I have to say about his comment.

Immie

 

[bodecea]

Here's the post Bodecea:

Boo Hoo.


BTW....I'm noticing a definite lack in you and others condemning ChessWarsNow for his horrific comments about this judge.

I don't read CWN posts but saw your comments about it. I won't comment about his post because I believe he is deliberately attempting to make an ass out of himself and a joke out of the issues he participates in.

He's trying to be funny. I don't find him funny. I don't comment on his posts.

Sorry, that is all I have to say about his comment.

Immie

I think we're talking two different conversation strands.

 

[Unknown_Soldier]

Let's hope # 9 happens to you and yours!

Let's see who condemns him for his posts....no one seemed to do so about his first horrific post....except to say he was "just kidding".

Now you are lying. I didn't say he was "just kidding", I said he tried to make an ass of himself. I could also have added that he is very successful at it.

Immie

Actually SHE is lying when she says no one said anything about his initial post to. I clearly did. Guess I don't count.

 

[Immanuel]

Here's the post Bodecea:

I don't read CWN posts but saw your comments about it. I won't comment about his post because I believe he is deliberately attempting to make an ass out of himself and a joke out of the issues he participates in.

He's trying to be funny. I don't find him funny. I don't comment on his posts.

Sorry, that is all I have to say about his comment.

Immie

I think we're talking two different conversation strands.

I think maybe you mis-understood where my emphasis was in that post and I probably should not have said you were lying.

I apologize.

Immie

 

[Unknown_Soldier]

Boo Hoo.


BTW....I'm noticing a definite lack in you and others condemning ChessWarsNow for his horrific comments about this judge.

And I'm noticing that you have ran like a coward when you didn't want to address my question.

Run like a coward? I'm right here. Right now.

And still refusing to answer a simple question, which at this point has became rhetorical because your non answer is an answer all on its own.

 

[Big Black Dog]

I think the judge should be fired.

 

[Si modo]

If a judge wanted to refuse to perform interracial marriages or any other kind of marriage and just refused to do it there is no problem. In this case the judge chose to expose her bias by saying that the reason is she doesn't agree with the laws of her state.

That's the difference.

What other laws does she not agree with and therefore would avoid rulings?

Boo Hoo.


BTW....I'm noticing a definite lack in you and others condemning ChessWarsNow for his horrific comments about this judge.

I don't read CWN posts but saw your comments about it. I won't comment about his post because I believe he is deliberately attempting to make an ass out of himself and a joke out of the issues he participates in.

He's trying to be funny. I don't find him funny. I don't comment on his posts.

Sorry, that is all I have to say about his comment.

Immie

Bingo. Except, now and then I will neg him and call him a homosexual. He has a meltdown with me, so that can be interesting.

 

[Immanuel]

Boo Hoo.


BTW....I'm noticing a definite lack in you and others condemning ChessWarsNow for his horrific comments about this judge.

I don't read CWN posts but saw your comments about it. I won't comment about his post because I believe he is deliberately attempting to make an ass out of himself and a joke out of the issues he participates in.

He's trying to be funny. I don't find him funny. I don't comment on his posts.

Sorry, that is all I have to say about his comment.

Immie

Bingo. Except, now and then I will neg him and call him a homosexual. He has a meltdown with me, so that can be interesting.

I really, really have to be pushed to neg someone.

Immie

 

[Texanmike]

I think the judge should be fired.

I think that what the judge did, by all accounts, is legal. She should be fired legally, which would entail an election.

Mike

 

[Si modo]

I don't read CWN posts but saw your comments about it. I won't comment about his post because I believe he is deliberately attempting to make an ass out of himself and a joke out of the issues he participates in.

He's trying to be funny. I don't find him funny. I don't comment on his posts.

Sorry, that is all I have to say about his comment.

Immie

Bingo. Except, now and then I will neg him and call him a homosexual. He has a meltdown with me, so that can be interesting.

I really, really have to be pushed to neg someone.

Immie

Normally for someone that consistently offensive about homosexuals, or any topic, and especially upon seeing that he has an impressive negative rep balance, it's normally a waste of rep, neg or otherwise. But, as he adds the payoff, it's worth it to me.

Otherwise, I feel the same way about that poster and I see little reason to go into it with him - same with the Stormfronters - except occasionally. Almost everyone here discounts what they say.

 

[Immanuel]

Bingo. Except, now and then I will neg him and call him a homosexual. He has a meltdown with me, so that can be interesting.

I really, really have to be pushed to neg someone.

Immie

Normally for someone that consistently offensive about homosexuals, or any topic, and especially upon seeing that he has an impressive negative rep balance, it's normally a waste of rep, neg or otherwise. But, as he adds the payoff, it's worth it to me.

Otherwise, I feel the same way about that poster and I see little reason to go into it with him - same with the Stormfronters - except occasionally. Almost everyone here discounts what they say.

Stormfronters?

Immie

 

[Si modo]

I really, really have to be pushed to neg someone.

Immie

Normally for someone that consistently offensive about homosexuals, or any topic, and especially upon seeing that he has an impressive negative rep balance, it's normally a waste of rep, neg or otherwise. But, as he adds the payoff, it's worth it to me.

Otherwise, I feel the same way about that poster and I see little reason to go into it with him - same with the Stormfronters - except occasionally. Almost everyone here discounts what they say.

Stormfronters?

Immie

The racist and anti-semite posters who regularly start threads here.

 

[g5000]

I really, really have to be pushed to neg someone.

Immie

Normally for someone that consistently offensive about homosexuals, or any topic, and especially upon seeing that he has an impressive negative rep balance, it's normally a waste of rep, neg or otherwise. But, as he adds the payoff, it's worth it to me.

Otherwise, I feel the same way about that poster and I see little reason to go into it with him - same with the Stormfronters - except occasionally. Almost everyone here discounts what they say.

Stormfronters?

Immie

Stormfront is a website for White Nationalists.

 

[Immanuel]

Normally for someone that consistently offensive about homosexuals, or any topic, and especially upon seeing that he has an impressive negative rep balance, it's normally a waste of rep, neg or otherwise. But, as he adds the payoff, it's worth it to me.

Otherwise, I feel the same way about that poster and I see little reason to go into it with him - same with the Stormfronters - except occasionally. Almost everyone here discounts what they say.

Stormfronters?

Immie

Stormfront is a website for White Nationalists.

Thank you, both... I don't think I will be visiting the website.

Immie

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Oh, so now you libtards are touting ancient tradition? Oh hypocrisy, thy name is liberal.

1) I'm not a liberal.

2) Even if I were, the fact would still remain that the "it's been defined this way for thousands of years we can't change it now" argument is BS.

soggy is a liar...its all it does.

And backed up as usual with absolutely nada. You're such a dumbfuck and a docuhenozzle...

 

[g5000]

Stormfront is a website for White Nationalists.

Thank you, both... I don't think I will be visiting the website.

Immie

You have to shed about 70 IQ points if you do. Just to give them a fighting chance against you.

 

[del]

They have equal protection before the law. They are entitled to marry with the same constraints and benefits as everyone else.

And likewise if the law is changed you will be able to marry a man you don't love.

Were you under the erroneous impression that women don't ALREADY marry men they don't love? For the life of me, I can't imagine where you dimwits got the idea that marriage laws have ****-all to do with "love", or ever have had.

save it for your shrink, sugartits

good to see that got up bright and early to make sure this thread didn't run low on *stupid*

 

[Si modo]

Stormfront is a website for White Nationalists.

Thank you, both... I don't think I will be visiting the website.

Immie

You have to shed about 70 IQ points if you do. Just to give them a fighting chance against you.

And, develop a cast iron coated stomach. And, learn to bite your tongue just hard enough not to go postal on them, but not hard enough to lose your own tongue.

These are skills I don't have.