Supreme Court justices RIP ruling forcing states to recognize same-sex marriages - 'Threat To Religious Freedom!'

[TheProgressivePatriot]

"Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito said Monday that Obergefell v. Hodges, the Supreme Court case that mandated all states recognize same-sex marriages, is "found nowhere in the text" of the Constitution and threatens "the religious liberty of the many Americans who believe that marriage is a sacred institution between one man and one woman."

Thomas is a textualist who believes in a strict and ridged interpretation of the Constitution- a philosophy not widely shared among constitutional scholars He believes that the only rights that exist are the enumerated rights, a view which flies in the face of two hundred years of case law and precedents. But you bigots who do not know jack shit about Constitutional law pounce on this as though it was the only truth. Far from it

 

[playtime]

anybody that feels their religious ideology is threatened - must not have a rock solid faith to begin with.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

You (and every triggered snowflake on this board) must have missed my post where I said I don't care if state / federal governments give same sex couples the same rights and benefits as heterosexual couples,

I suppose that I did miss that. Did you say that you believe that they have the right to legal marriage? If so , why are you plastering all of this shit from Clearance Thomas all over the thread?

 

[easyt65]

I suppose that I did miss that.

At least you admit it.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

At least you admit it.

I asked you a question! Do you or do you not support LEGAL, same sex MARRIAGE. If you do , why the shameless promotion of Thomas' viepoint?

 

[easyt65]

I asked you a question! Do you or do you not support LEGAL, same sex MARRIAGE. If you do , why the shameless promotion of Thomas' viepoint?

I answered you.

'Shameless promotion'?
**** you, snowflake.

 

[surada]

I agree with you on this one.

Liberals are not satisfied with this, though. They (seem to) want to force others to accept Same-Sex UNIONS as MARRIAGES, complete with the Christian connotations / inferences of a union of 2 people blessed by God. Since God is opposed to homosexuality this is a huge problem for many in the country, causing huge opposition.

I personally don't care if 2 peoe of the same sex get together, spend their whole lives together, and have every legal benefit as heterosexual married couples.

I have a problem when the govt steps in and attempts to tell someone they must violate their religeous beliefs to bake a wedding cake for a same-sex couple or conduct abortions.

The courts made the right, legal decisions.
- There are other bakeries willing to give you what you want. Go to one of them.
- There are other doctors and hospitals that perform abortions - go to one of them.

Marriage is a contract between consenting adults. If you want the sacrament, you choose that and marry in a church, synagogue etc.

 

[Blues Man]

Abortion is violence.

Your opinion.

 

[easyt65]

Your opinion.

Killing viable babies capable of surviving outside the womb is violence ... and murder. Fact.

 

[Blues Man]

Killing viable babies capable of surviving outside the womb is violence ... and murder. Fact.

A 3 week old fetus is not viable outside of the womb

 

[easyt65]

A 3 week old fetus is not viable outside of the womb

The death cult kills babies in the womb older than 3 weeks, as you know, and they are pushing for abortions through the entire pregnancy, right up until the moment of birth.

Hell, Obama and other Democrats initially supported killing babies fighting to survive outside the womb who had survived a failed abortion attempt.

Fail.

 

[Blues Man]

The death cult kills babies in the womb older than 3 weeks, as you know, and they are pushing for abortions through the entire pregnancy, right up until the moment of birth.

Hell, Obama and other Democrats initially supported killing babies fighting to survive outside the womb who had survived a failed abortion attempt.

Fail.

Less than 1% of abortions occur after 21 weeks. The vast majority of abortions occur before the fetus is viable outside of the womb

You want to ban ALL abortions even the ones that occur BEFORE the fetus is actually viable outside of the womb.

I have always said that viability outside the womb is the cutoff.

 

[easyt65]

Less than 1% of abortions occur after 21 weeks. The vast majority of abortions occur before the fetus is viable outside of the womb

You want to ban ALL abortions even the ones that occur BEFORE the fetus is actually viable outside of the womb.

I have always said that viability outside the womb is the cutoff.

Good for you, but the death cult is still pushing for abortions at any time during the pregnancy.

Got any good explanation for that, other than the acceptable case of the mother's life being in jeopardy?

 

[Blues Man]

Good for you, but the death cult is still pushing for abortions at any time during the pregnancy.

Got any good explanation for that, other than the acceptable case of the mother's life being in jeopardy?

If the life of the mother is danger or in the case of a terminal fetal abnormality is the main reason for late term abortions

 

[easyt65]

If the life of the mother is danger or in the case of a terminal fetal abnormality is the main reason for late term abortions

Still doesn't explain extremists trying to claim a fetus is not a baby until after it is completely outside the womb or arguing for the right to kill a baby outside the womb after a failed abortion based on the initial intent to abort the baby.

I don't think we, rational people, are that far off on agreeing about abortions but that it is the radical extremists on both sides causing the biggest divide / arguments.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

I answered you.

'Shameless promotion'?
**** you, snowflake.

Answer the questions! Are you a coward? Back up you bullshit!

 

[easyt65]

Answer the questions! Are you a coward? Back up you bullshit!

Are you ******* stupid? Obviously you are.

I already answered the question, and calling posting the USSC' remarks on their decision is not 'shameless promotion' ...

...unless you're a snowflake who believes burning down churches, targeting Conservatives, threatening Justices, calling for violence against USSC Justices, and calling for actual insurrection just because you didn't get your way is justifiable.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Are you ******* stupid? Obviously you are.

I already answered the question, and calling posting the USSC' remarks on their decision is not 'shameless promotion' ...

...unless you're a snowflake who believes burning down churches, targeting Conservatives, threatening Justices, calling for violence against USSC Justices, and calling for actual insurrection just because you didn't get your way is justifiable.

Where did you state unequivocally that you support LEGAL same sex MARRIAGE?

 

[Blues Man]

Still doesn't explain extremists trying to claim a fetus is not a baby until after it is completely outside the womb or arguing for the right to kill a baby outside the womb after a failed abortion based on the initial intent to abort the baby.

I don't think we, rational people, are that far off on agreeing about abortions but that it is the radical extremists on both sides causing the biggest divide / arguments.

So you base all you ranting on extremists and not what the reality of the situation is

 

[hadit]

The Church just needs to recognize their own marriages and let the state create its own civil unions. Don't let the state dictate Church policy. But would that satisfy the SJW nutcases?