I am so tired of all the gay shit

[Kondor3]

Social Justice Warriors are slimy individuals.

Yeah, I hate those people.

What a ***** eh, wanting to sit in the front of the bus. Damn *******, and their uppity call for equal rights.

Ah, yes, the Ever Popular Bullshit Analogy between the righteous Civil Rights movement of the 20th Century and this judicial-activism -style legitimizing of sexual perversity.

Bigotry remains constant

As does perversity, and support for such degeneracy.

Again...you can believe all you want....you just cannot act legally upon it.

Until it once again becomes legal.

 

[rightwinger]

Federal, state and local government gets to regulate commerce

You think you get to make up your own rules because you own a business?

Nope. The federal government has authority only to regulate transactions that cross state boundaries. That means only sales. Not primary production, such as farming, hunting, fishing, or mining. It does not include services, securities, or communication. Nor does it include manufacturing, transport, retail sales, possession, use, or disposal of anything. It does not include anything that might have a "substantial effect" on commerce, or the operations of parties not directly related to the actual transfers of ownership and possession.

Notice I said federal, state and local?

The federal government also gets to enforce equal protection laws at the state and local level

Cool isn't it?

Apparently what I posted didn't penetrate your thick skull. The Constitution doesn't authorize the federal government to regulate private business, period. That includes so-called "equal protection laws" that regulate private business.

Good god....of course it does

Labor laws, environmental....all impact comerce

Of course it doesn't. That's what the authors of the Constitution intended, not this fascist police state.

The founders intended for future generations to determine the size and scope of government that they would need

 

[rightwinger]

Social Justice Warriors are slimy individuals.

Yeah, I hate those people.

What a ***** eh, wanting to sit in the front of the bus. Damn *******, and their uppity call for equal rights.

Ah, yes, the Ever Popular Bullshit Analogy between the righteous Civil Rights movement of the 20th Century and this judicial-activism -style legitimizing of sexual perversity.

Bigotry remains constant

As does perversity, and support for such degeneracy.

They used to claim mixed marriages were degenerate

 

[Kondor3]

Social Justice Warriors are slimy individuals.

Yeah, I hate those people.

What a ***** eh, wanting to sit in the front of the bus. Damn *******, and their uppity call for equal rights.

Ah, yes, the Ever Popular Bullshit Analogy between the righteous Civil Rights movement of the 20th Century and this judicial-activism -style legitimizing of sexual perversity.

Bigotry remains constant

As does perversity, and support for such degeneracy.

They used to claim mixed marriages were degenerate

Those who claimed that mixed marriages were degenerate, were wrong.

Those who claim that homosexuality is degenerate are correct.

One has nothing whatsoever to do with the other.

 

[bodecea]

Yeah, I hate those people.

What a ***** eh, wanting to sit in the front of the bus. Damn *******, and their uppity call for equal rights.

Ah, yes, the Ever Popular Bullshit Analogy between the righteous Civil Rights movement of the 20th Century and this judicial-activism -style legitimizing of sexual perversity.

Bigotry remains constant

As does perversity, and support for such degeneracy.

Again...you can believe all you want....you just cannot act legally upon it.

Until it once again becomes legal.

Yeah...so, insight into YOUR version of America is a place where it is legal to discriminate against your fellow citizens because they are gay.

 

[bripat9643]

The law violates the Constitution. You have never had a right to compel anyone to serve you, no matter what the law said.

The law does not compel anyone to serve you. It compels people who desire to sell certain products to the public like food, to not discriminate who they serve to based on race, religion, ...

It compels people to serve you. No amount of verbal gymnastics is going to fool any intelligent person.

No you are not compelled to serve food to the public.

Yeah? So what? Why should serving food to 'A' obligate me to serve food to 'B?'

Same reason you can't rape your neighbor. We as a people have decided that your rape of your neighbor does more harm to your neighbor than the harm you get by being told you can't rape her anytime you feel like it. even if said rapes are a part of your religious practice. Thus even though we are restricting your right to have sex with your neighbor whenever the hell you feel like it, we as a people believe you are a vile POS for what you want to do to your neighbor.

No, it isn't the reason you can't rape your neighbor. Rape violates a person's rights. It involves using force against an innocent person to force them to do what you want. It has been against the law since the first laws were written.

Not serving 'B' doesn't require using force against 'B.' It doesn't require any interaction with 'B' whatsoever. Choosing who you want to business with has never been against the law until the public accommodations act was passed. That's the way businesses have been operated for thousands of years as well. No one ever considered it a violation of anyone's rights. And objectively speaking it isn't.

It doesn't matter what the majority decides. Popular opinion doesn't determine justice or rights. If it did then lynching would be perfectly OK.

 

[bodecea]

Yeah, I hate those people.

What a ***** eh, wanting to sit in the front of the bus. Damn *******, and their uppity call for equal rights.

Ah, yes, the Ever Popular Bullshit Analogy between the righteous Civil Rights movement of the 20th Century and this judicial-activism -style legitimizing of sexual perversity.

Bigotry remains constant

As does perversity, and support for such degeneracy.

They used to claim mixed marriages were degenerate

Those who claimed that mixed marriages were degenerate, were wrong.

Those who claim that homosexuality is degenerate are correct.

One has nothing whatsoever to do with the other.

And you base that on.....................?

 

[bripat9643]

Nope. The federal government has authority only to regulate transactions that cross state boundaries. That means only sales. Not primary production, such as farming, hunting, fishing, or mining. It does not include services, securities, or communication. Nor does it include manufacturing, transport, retail sales, possession, use, or disposal of anything. It does not include anything that might have a "substantial effect" on commerce, or the operations of parties not directly related to the actual transfers of ownership and possession.

Notice I said federal, state and local?

The federal government also gets to enforce equal protection laws at the state and local level

Cool isn't it?

Apparently what I posted didn't penetrate your thick skull. The Constitution doesn't authorize the federal government to regulate private business, period. That includes so-called "equal protection laws" that regulate private business.

Good god....of course it does

Labor laws, environmental....all impact comerce

Of course it doesn't. That's what the authors of the Constitution intended, not this fascist police state.

The founders intended for future generations to determine the size and scope of government that they would need

No, not really. They intended the federal government to remain small and powerless. They certainly never intended it to regulate every detail of our lives as it does now.

"The best government is that which governs least."

- Thomas Jefferson -​

 

[rightwinger]

Yeah, I hate those people.

What a ***** eh, wanting to sit in the front of the bus. Damn *******, and their uppity call for equal rights.

Ah, yes, the Ever Popular Bullshit Analogy between the righteous Civil Rights movement of the 20th Century and this judicial-activism -style legitimizing of sexual perversity.

Bigotry remains constant

As does perversity, and support for such degeneracy.

They used to claim mixed marriages were degenerate

Those who claimed that mixed marriages were degenerate, were wrong.

Those who claim that homosexuality is degenerate are correct.

One has nothing whatsoever to do with the other.

History is already proving you wrong

 

[rightwinger]

Notice I said federal, state and local?

The federal government also gets to enforce equal protection laws at the state and local level

Cool isn't it?

Apparently what I posted didn't penetrate your thick skull. The Constitution doesn't authorize the federal government to regulate private business, period. That includes so-called "equal protection laws" that regulate private business.

Good god....of course it does

Labor laws, environmental....all impact comerce

Of course it doesn't. That's what the authors of the Constitution intended, not this fascist police state.

The founders intended for future generations to determine the size and scope of government that they would need

No, not really. They intended the federal government to remain small and powerless. They certainly never intended it to regulate every detail of our lives as it does now.

"The best government is that which governs least."

- Thomas Jefferson -​

They never discuss the size of the government and no.......they didn't expect them to be powerless

Do I really need to slap you around again and show you that Jefferson never said that?

Where do you guys make up this shit?

 

[Kondor3]

Ah, yes, the Ever Popular Bullshit Analogy between the righteous Civil Rights movement of the 20th Century and this judicial-activism -style legitimizing of sexual perversity.

Bigotry remains constant

As does perversity, and support for such degeneracy.

They used to claim mixed marriages were degenerate

Those who claimed that mixed marriages were degenerate, were wrong.

Those who claim that homosexuality is degenerate are correct.

One has nothing whatsoever to do with the other.

History is already proving you wrong

A fine sentiment...

It has very little basis in Reality, but...

A fine sentiment...

 

[RKMBrown]

The law does not compel anyone to serve you. It compels people who desire to sell certain products to the public like food, to not discriminate who they serve to based on race, religion, ...

It compels people to serve you. No amount of verbal gymnastics is going to fool any intelligent person.

No you are not compelled to serve food to the public.

Yeah? So what? Why should serving food to 'A' obligate me to serve food to 'B?'

Same reason you can't rape your neighbor. We as a people have decided that your rape of your neighbor does more harm to your neighbor than the harm you get by being told you can't rape her anytime you feel like it. even if said rapes are a part of your religious practice. Thus even though we are restricting your right to have sex with your neighbor whenever the hell you feel like it, we as a people believe you are a vile POS for what you want to do to your neighbor.

No, it isn't the reason you can't rape your neighbor. Rape violates a person's rights. It involves using force against an innocent person to force them to do what you want. It has been against the law since the first laws were written.

Not serving 'B' doesn't require using force against 'B.' It doesn't require any interaction with 'B' whatsoever. Choosing who you want to business with has never been against the law until the public accommodations act was passed. That's the way businesses have been operated for thousands of years as well. No one ever considered it a violation of anyone's rights. And objectively speaking it isn't.

It doesn't matter what the majority decides. Popular opinion doesn't determine justice or rights. If it did then lynching would be perfectly OK.

Incorrect. For example, slander. libel, yelling fire in a crowded theater. More examples? Speeding, parking violations, driving without a licence. More examples? Transporting illegally across state lines. Selling food that is not approved for public sale. Want more examples? How many are enough for you?

Locking people out of the public market is illegal. For good reason. The good reason is that there are millions of people just like YOU. People like you think it's no harm to tell someone that they are not welcome in your town, that they can't eat your town, or buy a house in your town...

Think about it... then tell me what you would do if your daughter was run out of your town, had to leave your town cause someone put the scarlet letter on her.

 

[bripat9643]

Apparently what I posted didn't penetrate your thick skull. The Constitution doesn't authorize the federal government to regulate private business, period. That includes so-called "equal protection laws" that regulate private business.

Good god....of course it does

Labor laws, environmental....all impact comerce

Of course it doesn't. That's what the authors of the Constitution intended, not this fascist police state.

The founders intended for future generations to determine the size and scope of government that they would need

No, not really. They intended the federal government to remain small and powerless. They certainly never intended it to regulate every detail of our lives as it does now.

"The best government is that which governs least."

- Thomas Jefferson -​

They never discuss the size of the government and no.......they didn't expect them to be powerless

Do I really need to slap you around again and show you that Jefferson never said that?

Where do you guys make up this shit?

I just quoted Jefferson discussing the size of government, nimrod.

Yeah, please do "slap me around." I'm sure that will be entertaining.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Social Justice Warriors are slimy individuals.

Yeah, I hate those people.

What a ***** eh, wanting to sit in the front of the bus. Damn *******, and their uppity call for equal rights.

Ah, yes, the Ever Popular Bullshit Analogy between the righteous Civil Rights movement of the 20th Century and this judicial-activism -style legitimizing of sexual perversity.

Are you going to assert that civil rights are only to be based on race?

******* someone in the ass is not a civil right. Nor is licking *****.

Get a grip dyke

What practices do you engage in?

Should the government regulate it?

What I do or don't do is not for public consumption or discussion. If I were a ******* queer that would not be an accurate statement. You see, that is the difference

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Are you going to assert that civil rights are only to be based on race?

******* someone in the ass is not a civil right. Nor is licking *****.

Get a grip dyke

I know I've made a valid point when you come on and give personal insults..................only.

So when you dish out the personal insults, what does that prove?

Are you going to assert that civil rights are only to be based on race?

******* someone in the ass is not a civil right. Nor is licking *****.

Get a grip dyke

I know I've made a valid point when you come on and give personal insults..................only.

So when you dish out the personal insults, what does that prove?

We're so mean to you, aren't we?

You're the one who's always crying to the sysops.

What is a sysop? If you mean admin I don't think she is the snitch type. I could be wrong but she strikes me as the stand up type.

 

[g5000]

Those who claimed that mixed marriages were degenerate, were wrong.

Those who claim that homosexuality is degenerate are correct.

One has nothing whatsoever to do with the other.

It's the same bullshit, different decade.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Just to be clear.

I like bodecea. Her lifestyle isn't mine but I have no problem with her at all.

 

[bodecea]

Just to be clear.

I like bodecea. Her lifestyle isn't mine but I have no problem with her at all.

Ditto here.

 

[bripat9643]

******* someone in the ass is not a civil right. Nor is licking *****.

Get a grip dyke

I know I've made a valid point when you come on and give personal insults..................only.

So when you dish out the personal insults, what does that prove?

******* someone in the ass is not a civil right. Nor is licking *****.

Get a grip dyke

I know I've made a valid point when you come on and give personal insults..................only.

So when you dish out the personal insults, what does that prove?

We're so mean to you, aren't we?

You're the one who's always crying to the sysops.

What is a sysop? If you mean admin I don't think she is the snitch type. I could be wrong but she strikes me as the stand up type.

You guessed wrong.

 

[bripat9643]

Just to be clear.

I like bodecea. Her lifestyle isn't mine but I have no problem with her at all.

She's a belligerent queer who thrives on baiting people and almost never posts anything substantive to the forum.