Trump May Not be a White Supremacist but He is In Fact a Bigot

[The Derp]

Again, don't care about their sincerity, free exercise is free exercise.

Sincerity matters a great deal because they're clearly not objecting to baking cakes over any religious reason...it's their own personal bigotry against gays. You even said it's "what they want to do". Well, what they want to do doesn't matter. I want to have sex with Carla Gugino all day, doesn't mean I have a right to, even if I say it's my religious beliefs after saying it's what I want.

See the thing is, you made the intention clear when you said that not baking gay cakes is something "they want to do". So it's not even about their religion not letting them do it...it's about them not wanting to do it. Hence, an insincere religious freedom argument.

No, you get the vapors over a skull cap. much worse.

I mean, shit, you guys are so hypersensitive that you have to pass anti-Sharia laws because any inking of Islam sends you into a tizzy.

 

[The Derp]

Don't care.

So if you don't care, why the fuck are you responding to this thread, then? Clearly you care quite a bit to make allowances for people to be bigoted, which means you're bigoted. You pretend this is about religion, yet you undermined that point when you said what this is really about is bakers wanting to do (or not do) something. Those were your words. So you belied your entire motivation, and I don't think you even realize you did it. But your arguments this whole time have been like that...you've inadvertently admitted to things when you kept redefining parameters and inventing standards. You realize your original argument was that their motivations for not baking the cakes was one of religion, and now your argument is that their motivations for not baking the cake is one that they simply don't want to do it. Not because of religion, not because of faith, but simply their wants and comforts. Well, fuck that.

You saying its an accommodation doesn't make it so either.
Says the guy who gets the vapors over skullcaps and wants people to hide in their homes when praying. LOL.

Actually, the law says it is. It's not me saying that, it's the law saying that. So it seems like you have once again run afoul of the thing you supposedly cherish the most, the law. They are publicly offering their services on their website, so their business is a public accommodation. How they invoice doesn't change what they are. So you're trying to invent another new standard to apply to this situation, exclusively, all so you don't have to admit to me you're talking out of your ass.

Bra-vo.

 

[The Derp]

No its pointing out your attempt and inflating your opinion of yourself.

You keep changing the standards and the definitions of what your own words and thoughts are. You've done it nearly a dozen times in this thread.

Your argument has migrated so much, it should apply for UNHCR status!

I'm calling you poofy, not gay.

Ah, yet another redefinition. I don't need to do that because you're still a piece of shit. No qualifiers necessary.

 

[martybegan]

Again, don't care about their sincerity, free exercise is free exercise.

Sincerity matters a great deal because they're clearly not objecting to baking cakes over any religious reason...it's their own personal bigotry against gays. You even said it's "what they want to do". Well, what they want to do doesn't matter. I want to have sex with Carla Gugino all day, doesn't mean I have a right to, even if I say it's my religious beliefs after saying it's what I want.

See the thing is, you made the intention clear when you said that not baking gay cakes is something "they want to do". So it's not even about their religion not letting them do it...it's about them not wanting to do it. Hence, an insincere religious freedom argument.

No, you get the vapors over a skull cap. much worse.

I mean, shit, you guys are so hypersensitive that you have to pass anti-Sharia laws because any inking of Islam sends you into a tizzy.

Blah blah blah, you don't like them, blah blah blah.

Where have I supported anti-sharia laws?

 

[martybegan]

Don't care.

So if you don't care, why the fuck are you responding to this thread, then? Clearly you care quite a bit to make allowances for people to be bigoted, which means you're bigoted. You pretend this is about religion, yet you undermined that point when you said what this is really about is bakers wanting to do (or not do) something. Those were your words. So you belied your entire motivation, and I don't think you even realize you did it. But your arguments this whole time have been like that...you've inadvertently admitted to things when you kept redefining parameters and inventing standards. You realize your original argument was that their motivations for not baking the cakes was one of religion, and now your argument is that their motivations for not baking the cake is one that they simply don't want to do it. Not because of religion, not because of faith, but simply their wants and comforts. Well, fuck that.

You saying its an accommodation doesn't make it so either.
Says the guy who gets the vapors over skullcaps and wants people to hide in their homes when praying. LOL.

Actually, the law says it is. It's not me saying that, it's the law saying that. So it seems like you have once again run afoul of the thing you supposedly cherish the most, the law. They are publicly offering their services on their website, so their business is a public accommodation. How they invoice doesn't change what they are. So you're trying to invent another new standard to apply to this situation, exclusively, all so you don't have to admit to me you're talking out of your ass.

Bra-vo.

To waste your time obviously. Trolled hard.

Your understanding of the law is sophomoric at best.

 

[martybegan]

No its pointing out your attempt and inflating your opinion of yourself.

You keep changing the standards and the definitions of what your own words and thoughts are. You've done it nearly a dozen times in this thread.

Your argument has migrated so much, it should apply for UNHCR status!

I'm calling you poofy, not gay.

Ah, yet another redefinition. I don't need to do that because you're still a piece of shit. No qualifiers necessary.

I keep saying the same basic thing, I just find new ways to annoy you doing it.

Poofy Poof.

 

[The Derp]

Whatever man, you keep yourself warm with your hatred and your flimsy justifications to get government to do your dirty work.Dandy.

Are you trying to insult me by calling me "Dandy"? It doesn't work. Thought calling you a whiny little bitch sure seems to get under your skin.

As to the rest; I guess I can't expect you to defend yourself. That's asking too much of a lazy person. I think by now you recongnize that most of what you say is bullshit, that you come up with it on the spot, then try to wiggle around it later on (or just ignore it). Like, you realize you migrated your argument several times on this thread as each time you did, I knocked it down. You went from insisting not baking a cake was "religious exercise", to saying that not baking a cake is merely something "they want to do".

So that's a pretty big void between two thoughts that can't exist in the same place. I think you realized that just now, so you're trying to save face by lobbing halfwit insults at me.

You can call me a Dandy, but you'll always be a piece of shit.

 

[martybegan]

Whatever man, you keep yourself warm with your hatred and your flimsy justifications to get government to do your dirty work.Dandy.

Are you trying to insult me by calling me "Dandy"? It doesn't work. Thought calling you a whiny little bitch sure seems to get under your skin.

As to the rest; I guess I can't expect you to defend yourself. That's asking too much of a lazy person. I think by now you recongnize that most of what you say is bullshit, that you come up with it on the spot, then try to wiggle around it later on (or just ignore it). Like, you realize you migrated your argument several times on this thread as each time you did, I knocked it down. You went from insisting not baking a cake was "religious exercise", to saying that not baking a cake is merely something "they want to do".

So that's a pretty big void between two thoughts that can't exist in the same place. I think you realized that just now, so you're trying to save face by lobbing halfwit insults at me.

You can call me a Dandy, but you'll always be a piece of shit.

Dandy is far less used, and feels quite fresh.

I've engaged your long winded bullshit for about 30 pages now. Feeling quite satisfied with myself.

 

[The Derp]

if they were the only baker for 100 miles, OR all bakers in the area denied service then that might meet the burden of a compelling interest.

None of that matters because discrimination itself is the compelling interest. Just because you don't think it is doesn't mean it's not. In fact, the courts have sided with me on this. I know, I know, you don't accept what the courts say because for all your bluster about the Constitution, you sure seem opposed to the responsibilities of one of the three branches of government.

So here's another example of how your argument eats itself and why you're a garbage person; you say you care about the Constitution, yet you disregard the authority of the courts, which are defined in the Constitution you say you love so much.

That and many other reasons are why you're a piece of shit, and why all your arguments are garbage.

 

[The Derp]

if they were the only baker for 100 miles, OR all bakers in the area denied service then that might meet the burden of a compelling interest. Mind you the bakers rights would still be violated, but it would have potential justification.
And again, your cavalier attitude toward government force when it messes with people you don't like is quite frankly disgusting.
Again, I don't care.

Like, this has gotta be a record for the most tone deaf, ridiculous, oblivious argument ever made:

You say you "love" the Constitution. You say you're only abiding by what the Constitution may (or may not) say about religious liberty. Yet, when the courts are invoked by me, suddenly it's an unfair appeal to authority -even though you are accepting the religious appeal to authority over gay cakes.

But the Constitution sets out that the courts are the authority. That's specifically their role.

So you don't love the Constitution, or you don't know anything about it.

Totally fucking classless.

 

[The Derp]

Not the argument at hand.

LOL! Wrong. Baking cakes is what this is all about. You say you love the Constitution, yet deny the Constitution granting authority to the courts. So you don't love the Constitution, or you don't know anything about it. So this "Constitutional" argument you're making is really one you're making off the top of your head, isn't it?

 

[The Derp]

o waste your time obviously. Trolled hard.

So all you're doing here is trolling people?

Get a fucking life.

Your understanding of the law is sophomoric at best.

You don't even know the Constitution extends authority to the courts. In fact, it's a pretty big fuckin' part of the Constitution...the parts about the Judicial Branch and it's authority, you numbskull. You just make up shit and hope no one calls you on it. Then when they do, you just move the goalposts not because you're trying to be right (that much is fucking obvious) but because you want to save face on a fucking message board.

I mean, really...what's the point of you now? Just to troll people? Get a life.

 

[The Derp]

I keep saying the same basic thing

No, you don't. You say completely different things, even from post to post. Now you're trying, once again, to wiggle your way back into the debate via semantics. And no, you haven't said the same thing. Not even "basically". Your original argument was that these bakers have the right to discriminate because of their religion, and now your argument is these bakers have the right to discriminate because they want to.

That's not "basically" the same. They're two completely different thoughts. What's the same is that the beliefs are bigoted. That hasn't changed, only the justifications have over and over and over and over and over and over and over...

"Basically" you're a piece of shit.

Now that's an effective and accurate use of the word "basically".

 

[The Derp]

is far less used, and feels quite fresh.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised since you come up with half-baked shit off the top of your head, anyway. So from whose post did you steal that? For once, it wasn't one of mine. So....kudos?

I've engaged your long winded bullshit for about 30 pages now. Feeling quite satisfied with myself.

Well, you would probably know all about self-gratification given most of what you believe is masturbatory nonsense anyway.

 

[Correll]

You are the one that made the claim that Christians had not been victims since, I believe being thrown to the lions? or some such shit?.

They're not victims. Not of anything. Christians are the victimizers. They don't hold a monopoly on victimhood. They do hold a monopoly on being whiny little bitches, though.

Sobieski has made a valid counter point to that incorrect claim on your part, and you are, again.

No, he invoked Communists because he knows there's no defense of his or your position on this thread, so it's an attempt to deflect and divert attention away to the real topic we were discussing; the laughable premise of Conservatives and Christians claiming insincerely that baking a cake is an exercise in religion.

The commies victimized a shit load of Christians. Your refusal to admit that, shows that A. you are still being very dishonest or B. also sympathetic to your fellow commies.

 

[Correll]

No, he's certainly right about that. Your hatred of Christians and your desire to jail them and deprive them of open worship

Since when is baking a cake "open worship"? Since never. So stop trying to redefine the parameters and move the goalposts just because your position is shit.

and your desire to commit violence on those you pretend to think are "nazis"...

Oh, I'm not pretending they're Nazis...they are Nazis. You guys were the ones throwing Sieg Heils, chanting "Blood and Soil" and "Jews will not replace us" as you wave your Nazi flags and spread your Nazi bullshit.

You are a lying piece of shit.


How many "nazis" have you punched the face, cocksucker?

 

[Correll]

How many "nazis" have you punched in the face?

Too many to count. Thing is, I'm no boxer nor am I really that much of a fighter. But Nazis have glass jaws so they go down pretty easily.

That does not come across as credible.


You talk tough. But all it boils down to is you getting off watching some big black guy do what you wish you had the balls to do.

 

[GreenBean]

‘ESPN on Tuesday issued a statement disavowing host Jemele Hill’s tweets calling President Donald Trump “a white supremacist,” “a bigot” and “unqualified and unfit to be president.”’

ESPN disavows Jemele Hill's tweets calling Donald Trump a 'white supremacist'

Trump is in fact a bigot – and although ‘qualified’ per the Constitution, Trump is indeed unfit to be president.

 

[Correll]

You are a vile piece of shit.

You're the one hiding behind the skirt of religion because you're too ashamed and chickenshit to admit you're a bigot.

Fucking coward.

Your words are all lies, you commie piece of shit.

 

[The Derp]

he commies victimized a shit load of Christians.

They victimized a lot of people, not exclusively Christians. And Christianity has victimized a lot of people too in its 2,000 year history. That's why I said Christians don't hold a monopoly on victimhood, mostly because they are victimizers more often than not. This cake thing is the latest example of how they're victimizing someone while crying about their own unearned sense of victimhood.

Your refusal to admit that, shows that A. you are still being very dishonest or B. also sympathetic to your fellow commies.

Unlike you with Christian bigotry, I am not nor have not defended Communism. I think the only reason you lay that on me is so you can feel better about yourself for defending bigots. Yeesh. Get over yourself.