Alabama Counties Stop Issuing Marriage Licenses

[AugmentedDog]

I've always wondered why it is you need a license to get married in the first place?

You don't. Gays were marrying for decades without one. However, the marriage license comes with rights, benefits and privileges.

Still confusing rights with privileges, I see.

And once again, it's all about the money.

Nope...there are benefits and privileges associated with the fundamental right to marry.

There are benefits and privileges that are associated to marriage. But there is no fundamental right to marry... .

Marriage is an institution which is set upon a set of standards, or conditions... not the least of which is that Marriage is the Joining of One Man and One Woman. The conditions spread underneath that foundation speak to the other conditions which provide that anyone can marry as long as they meet the fundamental standard and are not already kin... thus no parent can marry a child, no siblings can marry, no one may marry another species etc.

The supreme evil that is Left think, having erroneously claimed Marriage as a FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT, have just erased ALL OF THOSE STANDARDS... all of which stood for sound reason. And because of that you have now affirmatively INJURED THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES. As you did through the idiocy underneath ROE. So that's two strikes... You as a people have no set serious injury upon us TWICE.

Take a quick guess on what Nature considers to be the end of the contest, before the field changes and the means to strike is squelched, setting you to purely defensive means.

(Someone help her figure this out. And perhaps you need to show her how she's unleashed evil upon those intent upon using children for their sexual gratification and that its only a matter of time before Hillary or some other lesbian hag is found again crying for the emancipation of children and for government to provide OUR CHILDREN with 'EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAW', which will allow for Children to make decisions in their own lives... not the least of which will be, legally recognized consent regarding sex. And how may strikes that will be... and how all of the weeping and gnashing of their collective tooth, will not help them stay offensive... as they lack the means to offend a people who no longer have a desire to tolerate your pitiful little cult.)

The "standards" you hold so dear aren't even standards in the bible.
Try again.

 

[guno]

What the pin heads can't understand, even if alabama stopped all marriages , people who get married outside of alabama and move back in are married in the eyes of the law

In the eyes of the law, but not God. Big difference.

Your dead god on two sticks is not the law, and the law is what matters

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Oh, so unless the religion follows the tenets of Christianity, it is a cult? LMAO! Oh that would be fun to watch you try to do.

Yep... That's about the size of it. A religion serves God... A cult serves its own subjective needs, which is a manifestation of evil.

You're free to believe otherwise, but before this is over, that ain't going to mean much. A line has been crossed and you have not even begun to understand what that means.

We'll not be 'trying' anything... we will be doing. And we look for ward to your contest. We actually prefer it when evil struggles. Because it drags it out... makes it last longer.

 

[Bfgrn]

Americans (Conservatives) did not and DO NOT oppose Rights for Black People...

We recognize that Black people have the same rights that we have... we simply did not support the idea that THE GOVERNMENT IS EMPOWERED TO GIVE RIGHTS TO ANYONE.

Which is what the "Civil Rights" do... the idea is that Black people owe their rights to the government.

That was wrong in the mid 60s, it's wrong today and it will always be wrong, because Black people have ALWAYS had the same rights as everyone else. They simply were not provided the means to exercise those rights because SOME PEOPLE felt that THEIR OWN SUBJECTIVE NEEDS SUPERSEDED THE RIGHTS OF THOSE BLACK PEOPLE.

Do you live on the planet earth?

Conservatives DEFINITELY and DEFIANTLY opposed rights for black people...especially in the south where Jim Crow laws and blatant discrimination was prevalent.

Report to the American People on Civil Rights 11 June 1963 - John F. Kennedy Presidential Library Museum


Good evening my fellow citizens:

This afternoon, following a series of threats and defiant statements, the presence of Alabama National Guardsmen was required on the University of Alabama to carry out the final and unequivocal order of the United States District Court of the Northern District of Alabama. That order called for the admission of two clearly qualified young Alabama residents who happened to have been born Negro.

That they were admitted peacefully on the campus is due in good measure to the conduct of the students of the University of Alabama, who met their responsibilities in a constructive way.

I hope that every American, regardless of where he lives, will stop and examine his conscience about this and other related incidents. This Nation was founded by men of many nations and backgrounds. It was founded on the principle that all men are created equal, and that the rights of every man are diminished when the rights of one man are threatened.

Today we are committed to a worldwide struggle to promote and protect the rights of all who wish to be free. And when Americans are sent to Viet-Nam or West Berlin, we do not ask for whites only. It ought to be possible, therefore, for American students of any color to attend any public institution they select without having to be backed up by troops.

It ought to be possible for American consumers of any color to receive equal service in places of public accommodation, such as hotels and restaurants and theaters and retail stores, without being forced to resort to demonstrations in the street, and it ought to be possible for American citizens of any color to register to vote in a free election without interference or fear of reprisal.

It ought to be possible, in short, for every American to enjoy the privileges of being American without regard to his race or his color. In short, every American ought to have the right to be treated as he would wish to be treated, as one would wish his children to be treated. But this is not the case.

The Negro baby born in America today, regardless of the section of the Nation in which he is born, has about one-half as much chance of completing a high school as a white baby born in the same place on the same day, one-third as much chance of completing college, one-third as much chance of becoming a professional man, twice as much chance of becoming unemployed, about one-seventh as much chance of earning $10,000 a year, a life expectancy which is 7 years shorter, and the prospects of earning only half as much.

This is not a sectional issue. Difficulties over segregation and discrimination exist in every city, in every State of the Union, producing in many cities a rising tide of discontent that threatens the public safety. Nor is this a partisan issue. In a time of domestic crisis men of good will and generosity should be able to unite regardless of party or politics. This is not even a legal or legislative issue alone. It is better to settle these matters in the courts than on the streets, and new laws are needed at every level, but law alone cannot make men see right.

We are confronted primarily with a moral issue. It is as old as the scriptures and is as clear as the American Constitution.

The heart of the question is whether all Americans are to be afforded equal rights and equal opportunities, whether we are going to treat our fellow Americans as we want to be treated. If an American, because his skin is dark, cannot eat lunch in a restaurant open to the public, if he cannot send his children to the best public school available, if he cannot vote for the public officials who will represent him, if, in short, he cannot enjoy the full and free life which all of us want, then who among us would be content to have the color of his skin changed and stand in his place? Who among us would then be content with the counsels of patience and delay?

One hundred years of delay have passed since President Lincoln freed the slaves, yet their heirs, their grandsons, are not fully free. They are not yet freed from the bonds of injustice. They are not yet freed from social and economic oppression. And this Nation, for all its hopes and all its boasts, will not be fully free until all its citizens are free.

We preach freedom around the world, and we mean it, and we cherish our freedom here at home, but are we to say to the world, and much more importantly, to each other that this is the land of the free except for the Negroes; that we have no second-class citizens except Negroes; that we have no class or caste system, no ghettoes, no master race except with respect to Negroes?

Now the time has come for this Nation to fulfill its promise. The events in Birmingham and elsewhere have so increased the cries for equality that no city or State or legislative body can prudently choose to ignore them.

The fires of frustration and discord are burning in every city, North and South, where legal remedies are not at hand. Redress is sought in the streets, in demonstrations, parades, and protests which create tensions and threaten violence and threaten lives.

We face, therefore, a moral crisis as a country and as a people. It cannot be met by repressive police action. It cannot be left to increased demonstrations in the streets. It cannot be quieted by token moves or talk. It is time to act in the Congress, in your State and local legislative body and, above all, in all of our daily lives.

It is not enough to pin the blame on others, to say this is a problem of one section of the country or another, or deplore the fact that we face. A great change is at hand, and our task, our obligation, is to make that revolution, that change, peaceful and constructive for all.

Those who do nothing are inviting shame as well as violence. Those who act boldly are recognizing right as well as reality.

Next week I shall ask the Congress of the United States to act, to make a commitment it has not fully made in this century to the proposition that race has no place in American life or law. The Federal judiciary has upheld that proposition in the conduct of its affairs, including the employment of Federal personnel, the use of Federal facilities, and the sale of federally financed housing.

But there are other necessary measures which only the Congress can provide, and they must be provided at this session. The old code of equity law under which we live commands for every wrong a remedy, but in too many communities, in too many parts of the country, wrongs are inflicted on Negro citizens and there are no remedies at law. Unless the Congress acts, their only remedy is in the street.

I am, therefore, asking the Congress to enact legislation giving all Americans the right to be served in facilities which are open to the public--hotels, restaurants, theaters, retail stores, and similar establishments.

This seems to me to be an elementary right. Its denial is an arbitrary indignity that no American in 1963 should have to endure, but many do.

I have recently met with scores of business leaders urging them to take voluntary action to end this discrimination and I have been encouraged by their response, and in the last 2 weeks over 75 cities have seen progress made in desegregating these kinds of facilities. But many are unwilling to act alone, and for this reason, nationwide legislation is needed if we are to move this problem from the streets to the courts.

I am also asking the Congress to authorize the Federal Government to participate more fully in lawsuits designed to end segregation in public education. We have succeeded in persuading many districts to desegregate voluntarily. Dozens have admitted Negroes without violence. Today a Negro is attending a State-supported institution in every one of our 50 States, but the pace is very slow.

Too many Negro children entering segregated grade schools at the time of the Supreme Court's decision 9 years ago will enter segregated high schools this fall, having suffered a loss which can never be restored. The lack of an adequate education denies the Negro a chance to get a decent job.

The orderly implementation of the Supreme Court decision, therefore, cannot be left solely to those who may not have the economic resources to carry the legal action or who may be subject to harassment.

Other features will also be requested, including greater protection for the right to vote. But legislation, I repeat, cannot solve this problem alone. It must be solved in the homes of every American in every community across our country.

In this respect I want to pay tribute to those citizens North and South who have been working in their communities to make life better for all. They are acting not out of a sense of legal duty but out of a sense of human decency.

Like our soldiers and sailors in all parts of the world they are meeting freedom's challenge on the firing line, and I salute them for their honor and their courage.

My fellow Americans, this is a problem which faces us all--in every city of the North as well as the South. Today there are Negroes unemployed, two or three times as many compared to whites, inadequate in education, moving into the large cities, unable to find work, young people particularly out of work without hope, denied equal rights, denied the opportunity to eat at a restaurant or lunch counter or go to a movie theater, denied the right to a decent education, denied almost today the right to attend a State university even though qualified. It seems to me that these are matters which concern us all, not merely Presidents or Congressmen or Governors, but every citizen of the United States.

This is one country. It has become one country because all of us and all the people who came here had an equal chance to develop their talents.

We cannot say to 10 percent of the population that you can't have that right; that your children cannot have the chance to develop whatever talents they have; that the only way that they are going to get their rights is to go into the streets and demonstrate. I think we owe them and we owe ourselves a better country than that.

Therefore, I am asking for your help in making it easier for us to move ahead and to provide the kind of equality of treatment which we would want ourselves; to give a chance for every child to be educated to the limit of his talents.

As I have said before, not every child has an equal talent or an equal ability or an equal motivation, but they should have an equal right to develop their talent and their ability and their motivation, to make something of themselves.

We have a right to expect that the Negro community will be responsible, will uphold the law, but they have a right to expect that the law will be fair, that the Constitution will be color blind, as Justice Harlan said at the turn of the century.

This is what we are talking about and this is a matter which concerns this country and what it stands for, and in meeting it I ask the support of all our citizens.

Thank you very much.

 

[Asclepias]

Oh, so unless the religion follows the tenets of Christianity, it is a cult? LMAO! Oh that would be fun to watch you try to do.

Yep... That's about the size of it. A religion serves God... A cult serves its own subjective needs, which is a manifestation of evil.

You're free to believe otherwise, but before this is over, that ain't going to mean much. A line has been crossed and you have not even begun to understand what that means.

We'll not be 'trying' anything... we will be doing. And we look for ward to your contest. We actually prefer it when evil struggles. Because it drags it out... makes it last longer.

Stop flailing. You sound like a fool.

 

[HappyJoy]

Oh, so unless the religion follows the tenets of Christianity, it is a cult? LMAO! Oh that would be fun to watch you try to do.

Yep... That's about the size of it. A religion serves God... A cult serves its own subjective needs, which is a manifestation of evil.

You're free to believe otherwise, but before this is over, that ain't going to mean much. A line has been crossed and you have not even begun to understand what that means.

We'll not be 'trying' anything... we will be doing. And we look for ward to your contest. We actually prefer it when evil struggles. Because it drags it out... makes it last longer.

So, when gay marriage is still legal in 10 years and you've been paying taxes into such an evil regime which would make you culpable, what are you going to do about it?

 

[AugmentedDog]

Oh, so unless the religion follows the tenets of Christianity, it is a cult? LMAO! Oh that would be fun to watch you try to do.

Yep... That's about the size of it.

You're free to believe otherwise, but before this is over, that ain't going to mean much. A line has been crossed and you have not even begun to understand what that means.

We'll not be 'trying' anything... we will be doing. And we look for ward to your contest. We actually prefer it when evil struggles. Because it drags it out... makes it last longer.

That's about the size of it???
Really???
The man you call Jesus might disagree, as he was a Jew.

 

[WinterBorn]

Oh, so unless the religion follows the tenets of Christianity, it is a cult? LMAO! Oh that would be fun to watch you try to do.

Yep... That's about the size of it. A religion serves God... A cult serves its own subjective needs, which is a manifestation of evil.

You're free to believe otherwise, but before this is over, that ain't going to mean much. A line has been crossed and you have not even begun to understand what that means.

We'll not be 'trying' anything... we will be doing. And we look for ward to your contest. We actually prefer it when evil struggles. Because it drags it out... makes it last longer.

I guess that whole idea of freedom of religion is only good when it is your religion? Nice.

No, you and your ilk will not do anything. You'll make noise for a little while. And then you will quietly go along with the rules. And in 50 years you will claim you were part of the force that gained gays access to marriage.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

The "standards" you hold so dear aren't even standards in the bible.
Try again.

ROFLMNAO! Now isn't that PRECIOUS?

Does anyone else enjoy getting scriptural indoctrination from Atheists, as much as I do?

I can't seem to get my fill of it. And the best part is, they never seem to tire of it... so it's like a perpetual motion of satisfaction.

 

[guno]

Oh, so unless the religion follows the tenets of Christianity, it is a cult? LMAO! Oh that would be fun to watch you try to do.

Yep... That's about the size of it. A religion serves God... A cult serves its own subjective needs, which is a manifestation of evil.

You're free to believe otherwise, but before this is over, that ain't going to mean much. A line has been crossed and you have not even begun to understand what that means.

We'll not be 'trying' anything... we will be doing. And we look for ward to your contest. We actually prefer it when evil struggles. Because it drags it out... makes it last longer.

So, when gay marriage is still legal in 10 years and you've been paying taxes into such an evil regime which would make you culpable, what are you going to do about it?

We should change those christian fundy madrasas into museum or libraries

 

[HappyJoy]

Oh, so unless the religion follows the tenets of Christianity, it is a cult? LMAO! Oh that would be fun to watch you try to do.

Yep... That's about the size of it. A religion serves God... A cult serves its own subjective needs, which is a manifestation of evil.

You're free to believe otherwise, but before this is over, that ain't going to mean much. A line has been crossed and you have not even begun to understand what that means.

We'll not be 'trying' anything... we will be doing. And we look for ward to your contest. We actually prefer it when evil struggles. Because it drags it out... makes it last longer.

So, when gay marriage is still legal in 10 years and you've been paying taxes into such an evil regime which would make you culpable, what are you going to do about it?

We should change those christian fundy madrasas into museum or libraries

Yep, I want to ensure that the right wing position today is clear as a bell in the coming years.

 

[HappyJoy]

Yea I was alive back then. I was a Kennedy Democrat who supported the civil rights movement. Not a conservative who supported Jim Crow laws, racial segregation or participated in lynchings.

Liberals did not belong to the KKK...that is the sole property of conservatives from both parties.

Isn't it wonderful how delusion just sews itself in and out of reality.

Americans (Conservatives) did not and DO NOT oppose Rights for Black People...

We recognize that Black people have the same rights that we have... we simply did not support the idea that THE GOVERNMENT IS EMPOWERED TO GIVE RIGHTS TO ANYONE.

Which is what the "Civil Rights" do... the idea is that Black people owe their rights to the government.

That was wrong in the mid 60s, it's wrong today and it will always be wrong, because Black people have ALWAYS had the same rights as everyone else. They simply were not provided the means to exercise those rights because SOME PEOPLE felt that THEIR OWN SUBJECTIVE NEEDS SUPERSEDED THE RIGHTS OF THOSE BLACK PEOPLE.

Now... today, at this very moment there are human beings RIGHT HERE IN THE US, who are without a voice, who possess no means to defend themselves and are so innocent that they have never committed a single offense against anyone, never said a negative word against anyone and whose very existence is predicated upon the trustworthiness of ONE PERSON.

That person is their own mother.

Now... of the two competing sets of Ideas; That of the Ideological Left which rejects the very existence of "Objectivity" wherein HUMAN RIGHTS were discovered, or that of the Philosophical Right, which observes, recognizes, respects, defends and adheres TO the laws of nature that govern human behavior... all of which rest upon the premise which our founding fathers declared: All men are created equal ... that 'we are endowed by our Creator with certain, inalienable rights ... '. These principles declared through the Charter of American Principle, which ITSELF is WHOLLY REJECTED BY THE IDEOLOGICAL LEFT AS BEING EVEN RELEVANT TO "MODERN AMERICA"...

Which would you say is entrenched today behind the IDEA that THE MOTHER OF MOST INNOCENT, WHOLLY DEFENSELESS HUMAN LIFE HAS "THE RIGHT" TO KILL IT... if that life represents an inconvenience to her subjective needs. And what's more, she can willfully engage in sexual intercourse as often as she wants and kill as many of her children as she dam' well pleases and that is because of: THE IDEOLOGICAL LEFT, OKA: The Democrats, Independent, Moderate, Liberal, Progressive, Socialists... AKA: The Communists.

.

.

.

Now friends and Readers... IF a people will murder their own children, what would it be that would prohibit those same people from killin' your black ass, either quickly by rope or slowly by a life of servitude, or BOTH? And by what delusion would a sane person trust such a people, whose subjective needs, sets you and your race or your sexual kink as temporally 'needed'?

This is proof that somebody should have been on birth control.

 

[Asclepias]

Yea I was alive back then. I was a Kennedy Democrat who supported the civil rights movement. Not a conservative who supported Jim Crow laws, racial segregation or participated in lynchings.

Liberals did not belong to the KKK...that is the sole property of conservatives from both parties.

Isn't it wonderful how delusion just sews itself in and out of reality.

Americans (Conservatives) did not and DO NOT oppose Rights for Black People...

We recognize that Black people have the same rights that we have... we simply did not support the idea that THE GOVERNMENT IS EMPOWERED TO GIVE RIGHTS TO ANYONE.

Which is what the "Civil Rights" do... the idea is that Black people owe their rights to the government.

That was wrong in the mid 60s, it's wrong today and it will always be wrong, because Black people have ALWAYS had the same rights as everyone else. They simply were not provided the means to exercise those rights because SOME PEOPLE felt that THEIR OWN SUBJECTIVE NEEDS SUPERSEDED THE RIGHTS OF THOSE BLACK PEOPLE.

Now... today, at this very moment there are human beings RIGHT HERE IN THE US, who are without a voice, who possess no means to defend themselves and are so innocent that they have never committed a single offense against anyone, never said a negative word against anyone and whose very existence is predicated upon the trustworthiness of ONE PERSON.

That person is their own mother.

Now... of the two competing sets of Ideas; That of the Ideological Left which rejects the very existence of "Objectivity" wherein HUMAN RIGHTS were discovered, or that of the Philosophical Right, which observes, recognizes, respects, defends and adheres TO the laws of nature that govern human behavior... all of which rest upon the premise which our founding fathers declared: All men are created equal ... that 'we are endowed by our Creator with certain, inalienable rights ... '. These principles declared through the Charter of American Principle, which ITSELF is WHOLLY REJECTED BY THE IDEOLOGICAL LEFT AS BEING EVEN RELEVANT TO "MODERN AMERICA"...

Which would you say is entrenched today behind the IDEA that THE MOTHER OF MOST INNOCENT, WHOLLY DEFENSELESS HUMAN LIFE HAS "THE RIGHT" TO KILL IT... if that life represents an inconvenience to her subjective needs. And what's more, she can willfully engage in sexual intercourse as often as she wants and kill as many of her children as she dam' well pleases and that is because of: THE IDEOLOGICAL LEFT, OKA: The Democrats, Independent, Moderate, Liberal, Progressive, Socialists... AKA: The Communists.

.

.

.

Now friends and Readers... IF a people will murder their own children, what would it be that would prohibit those same people from killin' your black ass, either quickly by rope or slowly by a life of servitude, or BOTH? And by what delusion would a sane person trust such a people, whose subjective needs, sets you and your race or your sexual kink as temporally 'needed'?

I'm guessing you have finally completely lost your mind after a few months of false starts.

 

[The Rabbi]

So you also conclude that Paul's writings in the book of Romans concerning homosexuality, are "opinions" and not doctrine? Have you even read the Bible?

Yes, I do and yes, I've read your bible.
I am not, nor ever have been a Christian. I respect your right to believe what you will. That doesn't mean I accept your beliefs.

See the issue is that while you dont agree with him you also dont accept that he has a right to those beliefs.

You can't read very well, can you?
I clearly stated that I Do respect his right to believe what he will.

Are you OK with a baker refusing to bake a cake for a gay wedding?

No more than I would be OK with a business refusing to serve someone on racial grounds.
When you open a business to the public, you are open to The Public.

OK then I was correct: You dont really think people are entitled to their beliefs.
Thanks for clarifying.

 

[Bfgrn]

I've always wondered why it is you need a license to get married in the first place?

You don't. Gays were marrying for decades without one. However, the marriage license comes with rights, benefits and privileges.

Still confusing rights with privileges, I see.

And once again, it's all about the money.

Nope...there are benefits and privileges associated with the fundamental right to marry.

There are benefits and privileges that are associated to marriage. But there is no fundamental right to marry... .

Marriage is an institution which is set upon a set of standards, or conditions... not the least of which is that Marriage is the Joining of One Man and One Woman. The conditions spread underneath that foundation speak to the other conditions which provide that anyone can marry as long as they meet the fundamental standard and are not already kin... thus no parent can marry a child, no siblings can marry, no one may marry another species etc.

The supreme evil that is Left think, having erroneously claimed Marriage as a FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT, have just erased ALL OF THOSE STANDARDS... all of which stood for sound reason. And because of that you have now affirmatively INJURED THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES. As you did through the idiocy underneath ROE. So that's two strikes... You as a people have no set serious injury upon us TWICE.

Take a quick guess on what Nature considers to be the end of the contest, before the field changes and the means to strike is squelched, setting you to purely defensive means.

(Someone help her figure this out. And perhaps you need to show her how she's unleashed evil upon those intent upon using children for their sexual gratification and that its only a matter of time before Hillary or some other lesbian hag is found again crying for the emancipation of children and for government to provide OUR CHILDREN with 'EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAW', which will allow for Children to make decisions in their own lives... not the least of which will be, legally recognized consent regarding sex. And how may strikes that will be... and how all of the weeping and gnashing of their collective tooth, will not help them stay offensive... as they lack the means to offend a people who no longer have a desire to tolerate your pitiful little cult.)

No standards have been erased. For heterosexual couples NOTHING has changed one iota. And right wing turds like you can continue your hate filled propaganda without being asked to sacrifice anything at all.

This is not a subtraction, it is an addition. It is no longer legal to exclude gays from the marriage rights you and I have. A GOOD thing, and a more perfect union...

 

[Carla_Danger]

I've always wondered why it is you need a license to get married in the first place?

You don't. Gays were marrying for decades without one. However, the marriage license comes with rights, benefits and privileges.

Still confusing rights with privileges, I see.

And once again, it's all about the money.

Nope...there are benefits and privileges associated with the fundamental right to marry.

There are benefits and privileges that are associated to marriage. But there is no fundamental right to marry... .

Marriage is an institution which is set upon a set of standards, or conditions... not the least of which is that Marriage is the Joining of One Man and One Woman. The conditions spread underneath that foundation speak to the other conditions which provide that anyone can marry as long as they meet the fundamental standard and are not already kin... thus no parent can marry a child, no siblings can marry, no one may marry another species etc.

The supreme evil that is Left think, having erroneously claimed Marriage as a FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT, have just erased ALL OF THOSE STANDARDS... all of which stood for sound reason. And because of that you have now affirmatively INJURED THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES. As you did through the idiocy underneath ROE. So that's two strikes... You as a people have no set serious injury upon us TWICE.

Take a quick guess on what Nature considers to be the end of the contest, before the field changes and the means to strike is squelched, setting you to purely defensive means.

(Someone help her figure this out. And perhaps you need to show her how she's unleashed evil upon those intent upon using children for their sexual gratification and that its only a matter of time before Hillary or some other lesbian hag is found again crying for the emancipation of children and for government to provide OUR CHILDREN with 'EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAW', which will allow for Children to make decisions in their own lives... not the least of which will be, legally recognized consent regarding sex. And how may strikes that will be... and how all of the weeping and gnashing of their collective tooth, will not help them stay offensive... as they lack the means to offend a people who no longer have a desire to tolerate your pitiful little cult.)

ISIS welcomes you. They feel as you do, and have just as much say in this case...

That was funny!

 

[The Rabbi]

You understand that does not refute what I wrote, right?

You understand you posted a link that was older than mine. Your link is no longer valid, mine "trumps" yours.

OK so the answer to my question is "No" you do not understand you failed to refute what I wrote.

Your link didn't refute mine. Mine, being much more recent, certainly trumps yours. Economically, Alabama is doing far worse than California.

You still don't get it.

I get that you were wrong. California is doing much better than Alabama economically.

Doubling down on stupid.
smh.

 

[AugmentedDog]

The "standards" you hold so dear aren't even standards in the bible.
Try again.

ROFLMNAO! Now isn't that PRECIOUS?

Does anyone else enjoy getting scriptural indoctrination from Atheists, as much as I do?

I can't seem to get my fill of it. And the best part is, they never seem to tire of it... so it's like a perpetual motion of satisfaction.

Make baseless assumptions much?
Oh, that's right, you've been doing that all along!
I am not an atheist, but you have exposed yourself as a fool.

 

[HappyJoy]

Yes, I do and yes, I've read your bible.
I am not, nor ever have been a Christian. I respect your right to believe what you will. That doesn't mean I accept your beliefs.

See the issue is that while you dont agree with him you also dont accept that he has a right to those beliefs.

You can't read very well, can you?
I clearly stated that I Do respect his right to believe what he will.

Are you OK with a baker refusing to bake a cake for a gay wedding?

No more than I would be OK with a business refusing to serve someone on racial grounds.
When you open a business to the public, you are open to The Public.

OK then I was correct: You dont really think people are entitled to their beliefs.
Thanks for clarifying.

The baker clearly is entitled to their beliefs, they aren't necessarily entitled to act on them. You open a business to the public, you don't get to decide who the public is.

 

[Asclepias]

You understand you posted a link that was older than mine. Your link is no longer valid, mine "trumps" yours.

OK so the answer to my question is "No" you do not understand you failed to refute what I wrote.

Your link didn't refute mine. Mine, being much more recent, certainly trumps yours. Economically, Alabama is doing far worse than California.

You still don't get it.

I get that you were wrong. California is doing much better than Alabama economically.

Doubling down on stupid.
smh.

Yes you seem to like doubling down on stupid. Glad you finally admitted it to yourself and announced it to the world..