House votes to create sexual deviant rights and violates constitutional limitations

[johnwk]

.

See House approves sweeping bill to expand gay rights

5/17/2019

“WASHINGTON — Democrats in the House approved sweeping anti-discrimination legislation Friday that would extend civil rights protections to LGBT people by prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity. The protections would extend to employment, housing, loan applications, education, public accommodations and other areas.”

Well, if you are one who supports and defends our constitutionally limited system of government, and also support our federal constitution’s amendment process to accommodate change for alleged changing times, the Democrat controlled House has confirmed today it is more than willing to usurp powers not granted, and unwilling to be tied to observing our Constitution’s amendment process to gain consent of the governed prior to exercising new legislative powers.

The truth is, the proposed “Equality Act” as it is called, has nothing to do with equality, and everything to do with creating, under law, a privileged sexually deviant class with the government’s muscle behind it. Keep in mind, when the same type of legislation was advanced as a constitutional amendment in the 1980s ___ the Equal Rights Amendment ___ it was rejected by the people of the United States, and for good cause, as it would open a Pandora's Box with countless unintended consequences both disruptive and dangerous. In fact, if adopted, the Equality Act would subvert the people’s right to mutually agree in their contracts and associations which are both inalienable rights of mankind.

And here we are again, but this time the Democrat control House has decided to ignore our Constitution’s required amendment process, and has simply passed legislation usurping a legislative power not granted ____ a legislative power actually rejected when the Equal Rights amendment was defeated in the 1980s.

JWK

"If the Constitution was ratified under the belief, sedulously propagated on all sides that such protection was afforded, [our constitution’s amendment process] would it not now be a fraud upon the whole people to give a different construction to its powers?"___ Justice Story

 

[johnwk]

Taylor Swift urges Sen. Alexander to support Equality Act violating Constitution

See Taylor Swift urges GOP senator to support Equality Act: 'I personally reject the President's stance'

“Pop star Taylor Swift penned an open letter to Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) on Saturday calling on him to defend LGBT rights and support the Equality Act.

Swift released the letter early Saturday — the first day of Pride Month — asking for her home-state senator to “please, please think about the lives you could change for the better if you were to vote for the Equality Act in the Senate and prohibit this harsh and unfair discrimination.”

The singer pointed to a recent study that showed more than 64 percent of Tennesseans support laws for LGBT protections against discrimination.”

“To vote against this bill would be to vote against the wishes of most Tennessean and Americans,” Swift wrote.”

What Taylor Swift needs to understand is, if Senator Lamar Alexander voted in favor of the Equality Act, he would be violating his oath of office to support and defend our Constitution.

Although Tennessee originally approved the Equal Rights Amendment in 1972, which, by Section Two of the amendment would have delegated a power “to enforce, by appropriate legislation” what the Equality Act attempts to do without this authorization in our Constitution, Tennessee later withdrew its support for the Equal Rights Amendment when its citizens became aware of the “Pandora’s box” it would open, and how it would allow Congress to assume more power over private property, and impinge upon a fundamental right of mankind to be left free to mutually agree in contracts and associations.

So, I don’t know if 64% of the people in Tennessee actually support the Equality Act, but it is clear that the good people of Tennessee rejected the Equal Rights Amendment, which the Equality Act attempts to achieve by legislation without the necessary delegation of power being granted to Congress.

JWK

The Democrat Party Leadership has been angry, stupid and obnoxious ever since the Republican Party Leadership freed the democrat’s slaves. ___ Author unknown

 

[kyzr]

Who gives a fuck what the House does?
Without the Senate and Presidential approvals its Nancy's toilet paper.

 

[bodecea]

.

See House approves sweeping bill to expand gay rights

5/17/2019

“WASHINGTON — Democrats in the House approved sweeping anti-discrimination legislation Friday that would extend civil rights protections to LGBT people by prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity. The protections would extend to employment, housing, loan applications, education, public accommodations and other areas.”

Well, if you are one who supports and defends our constitutionally limited system of government, and also support our federal constitution’s amendment process to accommodate change for alleged changing times, the Democrat controlled House has confirmed today it is more than willing to usurp powers not granted, and unwilling to be tied to observing our Constitution’s amendment process to gain consent of the governed prior to exercising new legislative powers.

The truth is, the proposed “Equality Act” as it is called, has nothing to do with equality, and everything to do with creating, under law, a privileged sexually deviant class with the government’s muscle behind it. Keep in mind, when the same type of legislation was advanced as a constitutional amendment in the 1980s ___ the Equal Rights Amendment ___ it was rejected by the people of the United States, and for good cause, as it would open a Pandora's Box with countless unintended consequences both disruptive and dangerous. In fact, if adopted, the Equality Act would subvert the people’s right to mutually agree in their contracts and associations which are both inalienable rights of mankind.

And here we are again, but this time the Democrat control House has decided to ignore our Constitution’s required amendment process, and has simply passed legislation usurping a legislative power not granted ____ a legislative power actually rejected when the Equal Rights amendment was defeated in the 1980s.

JWK

"If the Constitution was ratified under the belief, sedulously propagated on all sides that such protection was afforded, [our constitution’s amendment process] would it not now be a fraud upon the whole people to give a different construction to its powers?"___ Justice Story

Didn't get the results you wanted with Hannity people?

 

[Toronado3800]

.

See House approves sweeping bill to expand gay rights

5/17/2019

“WASHINGTON — Democrats in the House approved sweeping anti-discrimination legislation Friday that would extend civil rights protections to LGBT people by prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity. The protections would extend to employment, housing, loan applications, education, public accommodations and other areas.”

Well, if you are one who supports and defends our constitutionally limited system of government, and also support our federal constitution’s amendment process to accommodate change for alleged changing times, the Democrat controlled House has confirmed today it is more than willing to usurp powers not granted, and unwilling to be tied to observing our Constitution’s amendment process to gain consent of the governed prior to exercising new legislative powers.

The truth is, the proposed “Equality Act” as it is called, has nothing to do with equality, and everything to do with creating, under law, a privileged sexually deviant class with the government’s muscle behind it. Keep in mind, when the same type of legislation was advanced as a constitutional amendment in the 1980s ___ the Equal Rights Amendment ___ it was rejected by the people of the United States, and for good cause, as it would open a Pandora's Box with countless unintended consequences both disruptive and dangerous. In fact, if adopted, the Equality Act would subvert the people’s right to mutually agree in their contracts and associations which are both inalienable rights of mankind.

And here we are again, but this time the Democrat control House has decided to ignore our Constitution’s required amendment process, and has simply passed legislation usurping a legislative power not granted ____ a legislative power actually rejected when the Equal Rights amendment was defeated in the 1980s.

JWK

"If the Constitution was ratified under the belief, sedulously propagated on all sides that such protection was afforded, [our constitution’s amendment process] would it not now be a fraud upon the whole people to give a different construction to its powers?"___ Justice Story

So let me get this straight (ha)

After 175 or so years of folks enslaving others and forcing peeps to ride on the back of the bus or whatever you don't think we need protections from eachother.

Someday someone is going to demand you kneel to Mecca or stand funny during a song about gays or something and you'll be looking for the same protection.

 

[johnwk]

Who gives a fuck what the House does?
Without the Senate and Presidential approvals its Nancy's toilet paper.

Actually, the Equality Act highlights the nitwit thinking of the rainbow crowd which supports it.


The fact is, the Equality Act, in addition to being beyond Congress’ delegated legislative powers, impinges upon a homosexual shop owner’s inalienable right to only hire other homosexuals.

Similarly, the Equality Act impinges upon a lesbian shop owner’s inalienable right to hire who the lesbian chooses to hire, who may want to choose to only hire other lesbians. As such, the Equality Act is therefore a fundamental attack on the lesbian’s right to mutually agree in contracts and associations.

Why is this so difficult for the rainbow crowd to understand and accept? Why are they so eager to surrender an inalienable right to mutually agree in contracts and associations?


JWK

The Democrat Party Leadership has been angry, stupid and obnoxious ever since the Republican Party Leadership freed the democrat’s slaves. ___ Author unknown

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Imagine a man claiming to be a woman sueing a strip club for refusing to hire him because of dumb shit like this.

Fucking leftists

 

[Ambivalent1]

This is simply the first shot being fired, it will not happen because of the Senate. It WILL happen when they get a hold of all three branches though.

 

[johnwk]

Imagine a man claiming to be a woman sueing a strip club for refusing to hire him because of dumb shit like this.

Fucking leftists

And we are told this is not a mental disorder?


JWK

In every communist dictatorial oppressive country, like Cuba, China, and Venezuela, the people are disarmed. Forewarned is forearmed.

 

[johnwk]

So let me get this straight (ha)

After 175 or so years of folks enslaving others and forcing peeps to ride on the back of the bus or whatever you don't think we need protections from eachother.

Someday someone is going to demand you kneel to Mecca or stand funny during a song about gays or something and you'll be looking for the same protection.

The very purpose of establishing our constitutions, federal and state, was to protect the inalienable rights of mankind, one of those fundamental rights is being free to mutually agree in contractions and associations. The Equality Act is intentionally designed to impinge upon that right, not to mention it further erodes rights associated with property ownership.

JWK


The Democrat Party Leadership detests people being left free to mutually agree in their contracts and associations.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

.

See House approves sweeping bill to expand gay rights

5/17/2019

“WASHINGTON — Democrats in the House approved sweeping anti-discrimination legislation Friday that would extend civil rights protections to LGBT people by prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity. The protections would extend to employment, housing, loan applications, education, public accommodations and other areas.”

Well, if you are one who supports and defends our constitutionally limited system of government, and also support our federal constitution’s amendment process to accommodate change for alleged changing times, the Democrat controlled House has confirmed today it is more than willing to usurp powers not granted, and unwilling to be tied to observing our Constitution’s amendment process to gain consent of the governed prior to exercising new legislative powers.

The truth is, the proposed “Equality Act” as it is called, has nothing to do with equality, and everything to do with creating, under law, a privileged sexually deviant class with the government’s muscle behind it. Keep in mind, when the same type of legislation was advanced as a constitutional amendment in the 1980s ___ the Equal Rights Amendment ___ it was rejected by the people of the United States, and for good cause, as it would open a Pandora's Box with countless unintended consequences both disruptive and dangerous. In fact, if adopted, the Equality Act would subvert the people’s right to mutually agree in their contracts and associations which are both inalienable rights of mankind.

And here we are again, but this time the Democrat control House has decided to ignore our Constitution’s required amendment process, and has simply passed legislation usurping a legislative power not granted ____ a legislative power actually rejected when the Equal Rights amendment was defeated in the 1980s.

JWK

"If the Constitution was ratified under the belief, sedulously propagated on all sides that such protection was afforded, [our constitution’s amendment process] would it not now be a fraud upon the whole people to give a different construction to its powers?"___ Justice Story

How is this any different than any other anti-discrimination law...all of which are unconstitutional and ignore the equal protection clause.

 

[johnwk]

How is this any different than any other anti-discrimination law...all of which are unconstitutional and ignore the equal protection clause.

I do not understand your connection between "anti-discrimination law" and its link to the "equal protection clause". I'm not attempting to argue with you, but rather, fully understand what you are saying.

JWK

Let’s not forget Joe Biden is the Democrat Party Leaders shakedown candidate, and does not support individuals being free to negotiate their own employment contracts. He wants every American to pay a union representative a monthly kickback fee in order to work in America.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

How is this any different than any other anti-discrimination law...all of which are unconstitutional and ignore the equal protection clause.

I do not understand your connection between "anti-discrimination law" and its link to the "equal protection clause". I'm not attempting to argue with you, but rather, fully understand what you are saying.

JWK

Let’s not forget Joe Biden is the Democrat Party Leaders shakedown candidate, and does not support individuals being free to negotiate their own employment contracts. He wants every American to pay a union representative a monthly kickback fee in order to work in America.

Anti discrimination laws are built around "protected. classes"...as in if you belong one of these selected classes then you are protected from discrimination. If some classes have more protection than other classes, then the protection is not equal.

 

[johnwk]

Anti discrimination laws are built around "protected. classes"...as in if you belong one of these selected classes then you are protected from discrimination. If some classes have more protection than other classes, then the protection is not equal.

I thought that is what you were indicating. And I agree completely and why I wrote in the OP "The truth is, the proposed “Equality Act” as it is called, has nothing to do with equality, and everything to do with creating, under law, a privileged sexually deviant class with the government’s muscle behind it."

JWK



Civil rights ought not be based upon the personal desires of sexual deviants who now impinge upon the inalienable right of mankind being free to mutually agree in their contracts and associations.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Anti discrimination laws are built around "protected. classes"...as in if you belong one of these selected classes then you are protected from discrimination. If some classes have more protection than other classes, then the protection is not equal.

I thought that is what you were indicating. And I agree completely and why I wrote in the OP "The truth is, the proposed “Equality Act” as it is called, has nothing to do with equality, and everything to do with creating, under law, a privileged sexually deviant class with the government’s muscle behind it."

JWK



Civil rights ought not be based upon the personal desires of sexual deviants who now impinge upon the inalienable right of mankind being free to mutually agree in their contracts and associations.

the one place we seem to disagree is that you think that homosexuals are sexual deviants, I disagree. I think we should all be allowed to do what makes us happy without judgement from others as long as we are not hurting anyone and it involves consenting adults.

 

[johnwk]

the one place we seem to disagree is that you think that homosexuals are sexual deviants, I disagree. I think we should all be allowed to do what makes us happy without judgement from others as long as we are not hurting anyone and it involves consenting adults.

Well, when I use the phrase "sexual deviants" I am only going by this groups' intentional desire to label themselves as an identifiable "community", and having different sexual proclivities [LGBT] than ordinary folk. Am I factually in error?

I'm not sure where our disagreement is.

JWK


The Democrat Party Leadership detests people being left free to mutually agree in their contracts and associations.

 

[bripat9643]

.

See House approves sweeping bill to expand gay rights

5/17/2019

“WASHINGTON — Democrats in the House approved sweeping anti-discrimination legislation Friday that would extend civil rights protections to LGBT people by prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity. The protections would extend to employment, housing, loan applications, education, public accommodations and other areas.”

Well, if you are one who supports and defends our constitutionally limited system of government, and also support our federal constitution’s amendment process to accommodate change for alleged changing times, the Democrat controlled House has confirmed today it is more than willing to usurp powers not granted, and unwilling to be tied to observing our Constitution’s amendment process to gain consent of the governed prior to exercising new legislative powers.

The truth is, the proposed “Equality Act” as it is called, has nothing to do with equality, and everything to do with creating, under law, a privileged sexually deviant class with the government’s muscle behind it. Keep in mind, when the same type of legislation was advanced as a constitutional amendment in the 1980s ___ the Equal Rights Amendment ___ it was rejected by the people of the United States, and for good cause, as it would open a Pandora's Box with countless unintended consequences both disruptive and dangerous. In fact, if adopted, the Equality Act would subvert the people’s right to mutually agree in their contracts and associations which are both inalienable rights of mankind.

And here we are again, but this time the Democrat control House has decided to ignore our Constitution’s required amendment process, and has simply passed legislation usurping a legislative power not granted ____ a legislative power actually rejected when the Equal Rights amendment was defeated in the 1980s.

JWK

"If the Constitution was ratified under the belief, sedulously propagated on all sides that such protection was afforded, [our constitution’s amendment process] would it not now be a fraud upon the whole people to give a different construction to its powers?"___ Justice Story

How is this any different than any other anti-discrimination law...all of which are unconstitutional and ignore the equal protection clause.

That's true, they do.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

the one place we seem to disagree is that you think that homosexuals are sexual deviants, I disagree. I think we should all be allowed to do what makes us happy without judgement from others as long as we are not hurting anyone and it involves consenting adults.

Well, when I use the phrase "sexual deviants" I am only going by this groups' intentional desire to label themselves as an identifiable "community", and having different sexual proclivities [LGBT] than ordinary folk. Am I factually in error?

I'm not sure where our disagreement is.

JWK


The Democrat Party Leadership detests people being left free to mutually agree in their contracts and associations.

Not really sure there any standard proclivities among the "ordinary' folk as you call them. Perhaps you have heard the phrase "different strokes for different folks"?

 

[Nosmo King]

Thank Fox that here in America bigots andmhomophobe still feel that not every citizen is equal under law and can say so.

But those bigots and homophobes do not have the right to impose their arcane attitudes through law.

 

[bripat9643]

Thank Fox that here in America bigots andmhomophobe still feel that not every citizen is equal under law and can say so.

But those bigots and homophobes do not have the right to impose their arcane attitudes through law.

No one has the right to force others to serve them. We are all equal in that regard.