Kim Davis Is Rosa Parks

[playtime]

...Tell a woman she has no right to her own uterus & tell a homogay they cannot marry based on YOUR religious beliefs that it isn't exactly what part of sharia also believes.

You really do not understand the damage that you do to your own cause through the use of such terms as 'Christian Sharia Law' and 'Christian Taliban'.

Delightful.

Delicious.

Helpful to the Opposition, beyond your ability to comprehend.

Keep up the good work.

Thank you.

Sure..... you go with that. You think women aren't listening & watching? You think gays aren't?

 

[Kondor3]

Sure..... you go with that. You think women aren't listening & watching? You think gays aren't?

You really don't get it, do you?

You risk VAST numbers of your fellow countrymen, by using terms such as Christian Sharia Law and Christian Taliban.

You do more damage to your cause and drive more Normal Folk into the Opposition camp with every usage.

======================================

Oh, and by the way, to hell with the gays.

There aren't enough of them to matter, anyway.

Let 'em vote for the other guy... they're going to, anyway.

Who wants the support of a vicious tiny minority of sexual deviants and perverts, insistent upon witch-hunting and ramming their agenda down the throats of the other 97%?

Phukk 'em.

 

[playtime]

Sure..... you go with that. You think women aren't listening & watching? You think gays aren't?

You really don't get it, do you?

Oh, and by the way, to hell with the gays.

Let 'em vote for the other guy.

Phukk 'em.

Who Lindsey Graham?


LOLOLOLOLOL!!!!!

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

A Muslim Quarterback is refusing to touch the Pig skin football lest he go to hell...the QB is also refusing to leave the team or the QB position. The entire season is in jeopardy from the standoff...

 

[playtime]

Sure..... you go with that. You think women aren't listening & watching? You think gays aren't?

You really don't get it, do you?

You risk VAST numbers of your fellow countrymen, by using terms such as Christian Sharia Law and Christian Taliban.

You do more damage to your cause and drive more Normal Folk into the Opposition camp with every usage.

======================================

Oh, and by the way, to hell with the gays.

There aren't enough of them to matter, anyway.

Let 'em vote for the other guy... they're going to, anyway.

Who wants the support of a vicious tiny minority of sexual deviants and perverts, insistent upon witch-hunting and ramming their agenda down the throats of the other 97%?

Phukk 'em.

Your reply is chock full of Freudian slips... why is that?

 

[Kondor3]

...Who Lindsey Graham? LOLOLOLOLOL!!!!!

Are you going to enlighten the audience, by backing up your claim, that Obama had new facts and information at his disposal in 2015, to justify his waffling-away from his 2008 position on Gay Marriage, by articulating or reciting some of those new 'facts' and 'information'?

Or are you as empty of buttressing substance in this context as you are devoid of comprehension about the damage you do to your own cause with disingenuous labels such as Christian Sharia Law and Christian Taliban?

You have no understanding of the latter, so I'm not surprised that you're coming-up empty on reinforcing argument, to support your defense of Obumble's waffling.

Strictly bush-league stuff.

 

[Kondor3]

A Muslim Quarterback is refusing to touch the Pig skin football lest he go to hell...the QB is also refusing to leave the team or the QB position. The entire season is in jeopardy from the standoff...

Burning through four husbands in a heterosexual context is infinitely preferable to engaging in sexual deviancy and perversion (homosexuality).

 

[Kondor3]

...Your reply is chock full of Freudian slips... why is that?

All bullshit and no substance.

Status confirmed.

Now... back to the kiddie table with you... you're bothering the grownups.

 

[playtime]

...Who Lindsey Graham? LOLOLOLOLOL!!!!!

Are you going to enlighten the audience, by backing up your claim, that Obama had new facts and information at his disposal in 2015, to justify his waffling-away from his 2008 position on Gay Marriage, by articulating or reciting some of those new 'facts' and 'information'?

Or are you as empty of buttressing substance in this context as you are devoid of comprehension about the damage you do to your own cause with disingenuous labels such as Christian Sharia Law and Christian Taliban?

You have no understanding of the latter, so I'm not surprised that you're coming-up empty on reinforcing argument, to support your defense of Obumble's waffling.

Strictly bush-league stuff.

I did already in the form of a youtube where he explains the reasons why he believes differently now.

 

[playtime]

...Your reply is chock full of Freudian slips... why is that?

All bullshit and no substance.

Status confirmed.

Now... back to the kiddie table with you... you're bothering the grownups.

I just replied to you again deary regarding Obama... not my fault you overlooked it or outright iggied it.

 

[playtime]

A Muslim Quarterback is refusing to touch the Pig skin football lest he go to hell...the QB is also refusing to leave the team or the QB position. The entire season is in jeopardy from the standoff...

Burning through four husbands in a heterosexual context is infinitely preferable to engaging in sexual deviancy and perversion (homosexuality).

Not when according to her fundie religion... divorce is adultery. And stealing (taking a paycheck for dereliction of duty) is another commandment breach. Face it, she is just as much, if not more of a sinner than a homogay in a loving committed relationship could ever be.

 

[Camp]

...Thinking educated minds will change ideology as facts & new information warrants...

Indeed.

But there is no new 'fact' and 'information' pertaining to homosexuality and its relationship to interests of The People and the Republic, in 2008, versus 2015.

Not one iota.

Perhaps I'm wrong.

It will be easy to prove me wrong, if that's the case.

Simply tell us: What new "fact" and/or what new "information" did Barack Obama become aware-of, in connection with homosexuality, in 2015, that he did not already know in 2008?

We're all waiting with rapt attention, eager to receive this revelation.

And, of course, if no substantive argument-changing "fact" or "information" can be brought to bear in this context, then, it will be safe to assume that you're just playing the Partisan, and serving-up a smokescreen to cover Obumble's waffling and deceiving of the American People in this regard.

The floor is yours.

...Thinking educated minds will change ideology as facts & new information warrants...

Indeed.

But there is no new 'fact' and 'information' pertaining to homosexuality and its relationship to interests of The People and the Republic, in 2008, versus 2015.

Not one iota.

Perhaps I'm wrong.

It will be easy to prove me wrong, if that's the case.

Simply tell us: What new "fact" and/or what new "information" did Barack Obama become aware-of, in connection with homosexuality, in 2015, that he did not already know in 2008?

We're all waiting with rapt attention, eager to receive this revelation.

And, of course, if no substantive argument-changing "fact" or "information" can be brought to bear in this context, then, it will be safe to assume that you're just playing the Partisan, and serving-up a smokescreen to cover Obumble's waffling and deceiving of the American People in this regard.

The floor is yours.

State Supreme Courts began changing the landscape with the Connecticut Supreme Court ruling on September 10, 2008 with it's ruling on the case of Kerrigan v. Comissioner of Public Health. This began a rapid flood of state Supreme Court Rulings in diverse states such as Iowa (Varnum v. Brein) 2009. While state Supreme Courts are declaring state constitutions allow for same sex marriage state legislatures are passing laws that allow it and Governors are signing it into law. The question of whether the marriages will be recognized and whether states have the right to refuse recognition becomes a growing issue. By 2012 it became obvious that the issue would have to be settled by SCOTUS.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

 

[Kondor3]

...Who Lindsey Graham? LOLOLOLOLOL!!!!!

Are you going to enlighten the audience, by backing up your claim, that Obama had new facts and information at his disposal in 2015, to justify his waffling-away from his 2008 position on Gay Marriage, by articulating or reciting some of those new 'facts' and 'information'?

Or are you as empty of buttressing substance in this context as you are devoid of comprehension about the damage you do to your own cause with disingenuous labels such as Christian Sharia Law and Christian Taliban?

You have no understanding of the latter, so I'm not surprised that you're coming-up empty on reinforcing argument, to support your defense of Obumble's waffling.

Strictly bush-league stuff.

I did already in the form of a youtube where he explains the reasons why he believes differently now.

All you did was to serve-up a Self-Excusing Exercise in Political Rhetoric, rather like asking the Accused to conduct the Prosecution.

The challenge here was to reinforce your claim that Obama encountered new "fact" and "information" that would justify such a change of mind.

Neither your postings to-date since that challenge was raised, nor the self-serving sound-byte that you served up on YouTube... none of that identifies nor articulates one single new "fact" or piece of "information" that existed in 2015, that did not exist in 2008, when Obama deceived the American public into thinking he opposed Gay Marriage.

And, given that you cannot serve-up any substantive reinforcement of your claim about new "fact" and "information" coming Obama's way, unknown to him in 2008 when he pronounced in defense of Traditional Marriage and against Gay Marriage, you have failed in your challenge to defend your claim.

Better luck next time.

 

[Kondor3]

...State Supreme Courts began changing the landscape with the Connecticut Supreme Court ruling on September 10, 2008 with it's ruling on the case of Kerrigan v. Comissioner of Public Health. This began a rapid flood of state Supreme Court Rulings in diverse states such as Iowa (Varnum v. Brein) 2009. While state Supreme Courts are declaring state constitutions allow for same sex marriage state legislatures are passing laws that allow it and Governors are signing it into law. The question of whether the marriages will be recognized and whether states have the right to refuse recognition becomes a growing issue. By 2012 it became obvious that the issue would have to be settled by SCOTUS.

1. the challenge was issued to whatshizface, not you

2. he failed

3. you merely serve-up a chronology of various case-outcomes.

4. you serve-up no new "fact" or "information", unknown to Obama in 2008, that would warrant him changing his mind, between 2008 and 2015, in the context of this challenge to whatshizface, to defend his claim about WHY Obumble waffled.

"Fact" and "information" of a substantive nature, sufficient to warrant such a change of mind.

Otherwise, it is entirely appropriate - even wise - to assume that Obama held this opinion all along, and that he deceived the American People into believing otherwise, in his 2008 pronouncements.

Translation: The guy lied his ass off, about his position on all this; one of several lines of bullshit he served-up, in the process of getting himself voted into power.

One more reason not to trust him overly much, and to look forward to January 20, 2017.

 

[playtime]

...Who Lindsey Graham? LOLOLOLOLOL!!!!!

Are you going to enlighten the audience, by backing up your claim, that Obama had new facts and information at his disposal in 2015, to justify his waffling-away from his 2008 position on Gay Marriage, by articulating or reciting some of those new 'facts' and 'information'?

Or are you as empty of buttressing substance in this context as you are devoid of comprehension about the damage you do to your own cause with disingenuous labels such as Christian Sharia Law and Christian Taliban?

You have no understanding of the latter, so I'm not surprised that you're coming-up empty on reinforcing argument, to support your defense of Obumble's waffling.

Strictly bush-league stuff.

I did already in the form of a youtube where he explains the reasons why he believes differently now.

All you did was to serve-up a Self-Excusing Exercise in Political Rhetoric, rather like asking the Accused to conduct the Prosecution.

The challenge here was to reinforce your claim that Obama encountered new "fact" and "information" that would justify such a change of mind.

Neither your postings to-date since that challenge was raised, nor the self-serving sound-byte that you served up on YouTube... none of that identifies nor articulates one single new "fact" or piece of "information" that existed in 2015, that did not exist in 2008, when Obama deceived the American public into thinking he opposed Gay Marriage.

And, given that you cannot serve-up any substantive reinforcement of your claim about new "fact" and "information" coming Obama's way, unknown to him in 2008 when he pronounced in defense of Traditional Marriage and against Gay Marriage, you have failed in your challenge to defend your claim.

Better luck next time.

He did exactly that. The fact that you don't like it doesn't change a thing. Although he believes differently now due to facts & info in his own personal life, but on other levels as well... he didn't bring the case to the SC but he is abiding by the decision no matter what. And again, the law BE the law.... & it's not a matter of me trying to make you agree- it is what it is. Deal with it.

 

[Kondor3]

Sure they can.

They can engage in Civil Disobedience, in the tradition of Sanctuary Cities who violate Federal law every day of the week.

They can also work to overturn such law and related judicial rulings.

 

[TyroneSlothrop]

 

[Kondor3]

...He did exactly that...

Really?

Feel free to serve-up a Time-Index on the video, and to identify and articulate which "facts" and "information" Obama has now, that he did not have in 2008, in support of yhour claim.

 

[Camp]

...State Supreme Courts began changing the landscape with the Connecticut Supreme Court ruling on September 10, 2008 with it's ruling on the case of Kerrigan v. Comissioner of Public Health. This began a rapid flood of state Supreme Court Rulings in diverse states such as Iowa (Varnum v. Brein) 2009. While state Supreme Courts are declaring state constitutions allow for same sex marriage state legislatures are passing laws that allow it and Governors are signing it into law. The question of whether the marriages will be recognized and whether states have the right to refuse recognition becomes a growing issue. By 2012 it became obvious that the issue would have to be settled by SCOTUS.

1. the challenge was issued to whatshizface, not you

2. he failed

3. you merely serve-up a chronology of various case-outcomes.

4. you serve-up no new "fact" or "information", unknown to Obama in 2008, that would warrant him changing his mind, between 2008 and 2015, in the context of this challenge to defend a claim

"Fact" and "information" of a substantive nature, sufficient to warrant such a change of mind.

Otherwise, it is entirely appropriate - even wise - to assume that Obama held this opinion all along, and that he deceived the American People into believing otherwise, in his 2008 pronouncements.

Translation: The guy lied his ass off, about his position on all this; one of several lines of bullshit he served-up, in the process of getting himself voted into power.

One more reason not to trust him overly much, and to look forward to January 20, 2017.

Just admit your claim doesn't hold water and it makes no difference who answered your question, it got answered. It is ridiculous to assume all those state Supreme Court rulings and legislative actions would not come without new and different opinions and viewpoints on the subject that persons with interest in the topic would not examine and analyse. Your contention that nothing happened to changed Obama's outlook is just silly. If nothing else he saw which way the wind was blowing. That doesn't take a weatherman.