Alito Warns: Defenders of Traditional Marriage Now Risk Being Treated as Bigots by Governments,

[The Rabbi]

You are so right. We see the brain dead far right at its worst. NYC has Mac on the run. What an uneven contest It's like me and The Rabbi. Poor Rabbi. Guys go read what the SG said in context.

Yes, Jake. Every exchange between us is like Albert Einstein (me) vs a retarded chimpanzee (you). That's why you're on Ignore.

That shows just how you are foolish. Silly boy.

Ook, oook.

 

[BULLDOG]

The SG did no such thing. Rabbi is lying.

Fuck you, Jakehole.
Are religious colleges at risk if Supreme Court approves same-sex marriage Fox News

All the SG said is that yes it could be a tax issue. Yes it will be an issue just like Bob Jones University's racist policies were a tax issue.

You're such a dishonest turd. If they lose their tax status they essentially cease to exist.
But at least you admit Jake is wrong and I wasnt lying when the SG admitted this.

If they can't follow the law, they need to be gone.

 

[G.T.]

How do you go about "defending traditional marriage?"

Advicating that its the only legal type?

If so, those advocates are looking to change the govt back into enforcing actual bigotry, by law.

The opposite has not been true. Not one person that Ive seen has advocated for the removal of the right to "traditional marry."

Not 1.

 

[The Rabbi]

The SG did no such thing. Rabbi is lying.

Fuck you, Jakehole.
Are religious colleges at risk if Supreme Court approves same-sex marriage Fox News

All the SG said is that yes it could be a tax issue. Yes it will be an issue just like Bob Jones University's racist policies were a tax issue.

You're such a dishonest turd. If they lose their tax status they essentially cease to exist.
But at least you admit Jake is wrong and I wasnt lying when the SG admitted this.

If they can't follow the law, they need to be gone.

Yes, destroy them. That is the Left's intention here. All the posturing about being only about civil rights is a smokescreen.
Thanks for admitting that.

 

[Faun]

The SG did no such thing. Rabbi is lying.

Fuck you, Jakehole.
Are religious colleges at risk if Supreme Court approves same-sex marriage Fox News

Your linked to a biased conservative propaganda site doesn't say what you think it does. When Verrilli said, "I don't deny that," he wasn't speaking about religious colleges being at risk of losing tax exemptions -- he was speaking of it is going to be raised as an issue.

While rightwing Fox hacked up his response in order to dumb down rightwingers, what Verrilli actually said was, "You know, I don’t think I can answer that question without knowing more specifics, but it’s certainly going to be an issue. I don’t deny that. I don’t deny that, Justice Alito. It is –it is going to be an issue."
9In reality, the Solicitor General didn't answer the question. Brain-dead righties don't know that because they get their news from Fox, which manipulated Verrilli's response to the question to make it appear as though he didn't deny it.

You're such dishonest turd:

They point to an exchange between Justice Samuel Alito and the administration's top lawyer, Solicitor General Donald Verrilli. Alito asked if, in the event the Supreme Court holds that there is a constitutional right to same-sex marriage, would religious colleges risk losing their tax-exempt status if they continued to advocate for traditional marriage only.

Verrilli responded, "I don't deny that ... It is going to be an issue."

Yes he cannot predict the future. But he doesnt deny that it will be raised and in light of the Court's opinion not only will it be raised but the objections will be sustained and religious colleges will be branded as racists/bigots/homophobes and action will be taken against them.
The homo activvists will stop at nothing to destroy those who disagree with them. Look at Brendon Eich.
If I hold a ball and drop it it does not require rocket science or prophecy to see that it will hit the ground.

You remain the fathful imbecile Fox News needs you to be. When Verrilli was asked if such a decision would lead to religious colleges losing their tax exempt status if they opposed same-sex marriage and Fox News edited his response to make it appear as though he said he doesn't deny it; when in fact, his answer was that he could not answer that question without knowing more specifics.

Fox News has you so dumbed down, you don't even realize how dumb you are.

 

[BULLDOG]

They are at risk of being treated like bigots because they are.

Noomi, nice to see you again BUT let me point out please that many do not see the attraction of an asshole.

Let's put this on the line here. It's not that people are bigots. It's just that heteros really are not attracted to assholes.

So to try to embrace the gay world is something so foreign to the majority they reject the gay world.

We're talking gay marriage and heteros can't even wrap their brains around that.

Hell's bells ask a poor hetero soul to go thru a "house of dicks" where you have men sucking off men anonymously and you are going to get joe average creeped completely out.

So for crying out loud have some mercy on the poor hetero out there who doesn't "get it". Just because they prefer vaginas shouldn't be a stamp of bigotry.

Why are conservatives so focussed on gay sex? Several of you have posted graphic descriptions of gay sex.

There is a vast difference between anonymous sex and marriage. What gays won this week wasn't the right to go to bathhouses but the right to make a lifetime commitment to the person they love. One would think that heterosexuals can relate to the importance of such a relationship in a person's life.

Your obsession with the lurid details of gay sex, while supposedly being repulsed by it, is creepy.

Mp pme ever denied anyone the ability to make a lifelong commitment. Another lie by the Left.

Civil marriage is a legal commitment. Gays were denied that.

You are a dishonest turd. The claim was they were denied the ability to make a lifetime committment. That is wrong.

A lifetime commitment and a legal commitment aren't necessarily the same thing.

 

[The Rabbi]

How do you go about "defending traditional marriage?"

Advicating that its the only legal type?

If so, those advocates are looking to change the govt back into enforcing actual bigotry, by law.

The opposite has not been true. Not one person that Ive seen has advocated for the removal of the right to "traditional marry."

Not 1.

^^^
Not playing with a full deck.

 

[The Rabbi]

The SG did no such thing. Rabbi is lying.

Fuck you, Jakehole.
Are religious colleges at risk if Supreme Court approves same-sex marriage Fox News

Your linked to a biased conservative propaganda site doesn't say what you think it does. When Verrilli said, "I don't deny that," he wasn't speaking about religious colleges being at risk of losing tax exemptions -- he was speaking of it is going to be raised as an issue.

While rightwing Fox hacked up his response in order to dumb down rightwingers, what Verrilli actually said was, "You know, I don’t think I can answer that question without knowing more specifics, but it’s certainly going to be an issue. I don’t deny that. I don’t deny that, Justice Alito. It is –it is going to be an issue."
9In reality, the Solicitor General didn't answer the question. Brain-dead righties don't know that because they get their news from Fox, which manipulated Verrilli's response to the question to make it appear as though he didn't deny it.

You're such dishonest turd:

They point to an exchange between Justice Samuel Alito and the administration's top lawyer, Solicitor General Donald Verrilli. Alito asked if, in the event the Supreme Court holds that there is a constitutional right to same-sex marriage, would religious colleges risk losing their tax-exempt status if they continued to advocate for traditional marriage only.

Verrilli responded, "I don't deny that ... It is going to be an issue."

Yes he cannot predict the future. But he doesnt deny that it will be raised and in light of the Court's opinion not only will it be raised but the objections will be sustained and religious colleges will be branded as racists/bigots/homophobes and action will be taken against them.
The homo activvists will stop at nothing to destroy those who disagree with them. Look at Brendon Eich.
If I hold a ball and drop it it does not require rocket science or prophecy to see that it will hit the ground.

You remain the fathful imbecile Fox News needs you to be. When Verrilli was asked if such a decision would lead to religious colleges losing their tax exempt status if they opposed same-sex marriage and Fox News edited his response to make it appear as though he said he doesn't deny it; when in fact, his answer was that he could not answer that question without knowing more specifics.

Fox News has you so dumbed down, you don't even realize how dumb you are.

LOL. He didnt deny it would become an issue, which it will.
You lose.

 

[G.T.]

How do you go about "defending traditional marriage?"

Advicating that its the only legal type?

If so, those advocates are looking to change the govt back into enforcing actual bigotry, by law.

The opposite has not been true. Not one person that Ive seen has advocated for the removal of the right to "traditional marry."

Not 1.

^^^
Not playing with a full deck.

^^ not a valid response b.c. is not capable of one.

 

[The Rabbi]

How do you go about "defending traditional marriage?"

Advicating that its the only legal type?

If so, those advocates are looking to change the govt back into enforcing actual bigotry, by law.

The opposite has not been true. Not one person that Ive seen has advocated for the removal of the right to "traditional marry."

Not 1.

^^^
Not playing with a full deck.

^^ not a valid response b.c. is not capable of one.

It was appropriate for the level of insipid idiocy you demonstrated.

 

[BULLDOG]

The SG did no such thing. Rabbi is lying.

Fuck you, Jakehole.
Are religious colleges at risk if Supreme Court approves same-sex marriage Fox News

All the SG said is that yes it could be a tax issue. Yes it will be an issue just like Bob Jones University's racist policies were a tax issue.

You're such a dishonest turd. If they lose their tax status they essentially cease to exist.
But at least you admit Jake is wrong and I wasnt lying when the SG admitted this.

If they can't follow the law, they need to be gone.

Yes, destroy them. That is the Left's intention here. All the posturing about being only about civil rights is a smokescreen.
Thanks for admitting that.

Hard to twist what I said to come up with your interpretation, but I guess that's just what right wingers do.

 

[Faun]

They are at risk of being treated like bigots because they are.

Noomi, nice to see you again BUT let me point out please that many do not see the attraction of an asshole.

Let's put this on the line here. It's not that people are bigots. It's just that heteros really are not attracted to assholes.

So to try to embrace the gay world is something so foreign to the majority they reject the gay world.

We're talking gay marriage and heteros can't even wrap their brains around that.

Hell's bells ask a poor hetero soul to go thru a "house of dicks" where you have men sucking off men anonymously and you are going to get joe average creeped completely out.

So for crying out loud have some mercy on the poor hetero out there who doesn't "get it". Just because they prefer vaginas shouldn't be a stamp of bigotry.

Why are conservatives so focussed on gay sex? Several of you have posted graphic descriptions of gay sex.

There is a vast difference between anonymous sex and marriage. What gays won this week wasn't the right to go to bathhouses but the right to make a lifetime commitment to the person they love. One would think that heterosexuals can relate to the importance of such a relationship in a person's life.

Your obsession with the lurid details of gay sex, while supposedly being repulsed by it, is creepy.

Mp pme ever denied anyone the ability to make a lifelong commitment. Another lie by the Left.

You didn't know she was talking about the lifetime commitment of being legally married??

Just how stupid are you, forum jester ?

 

[JakeStarkey]

The SG did no such thing. Rabbi is lying.

Fuck you, Jakehole.
Are religious colleges at risk if Supreme Court approves same-sex marriage Fox News

All the SG said is that yes it could be a tax issue. Yes it will be an issue just like Bob Jones University's racist policies were a tax issue.

You're such a dishonest turd. If they lose their tax status they essentially cease to exist.
But at least you admit Jake is wrong and I wasnt lying when the SG admitted this.

You have admitted you are wrong. No college is going to lose its tax exempt status because it teaches its form of Bible principles.

 

[G.T.]

How do you go about "defending traditional marriage?"

Advicating that its the only legal type?

If so, those advocates are looking to change the govt back into enforcing actual bigotry, by law.

The opposite has not been true. Not one person that Ive seen has advocated for the removal of the right to "traditional marry."

Not 1.

^^^
Not playing with a full deck.

^^ not a valid response b.c. is not capable of one.

It was appropriate for the level of insipid idiocy you demonstrated.

Fallacial ad hom. Coward's plight, the rabbi must face. I pity your existence.

 

[JakeStarkey]

[You are a dishonest turd. The claim was they were denied the ability to make a lifetime committment. That is wrong.

You lie: a lifetime commitment in marriage.

 

[The Rabbi]

They are at risk of being treated like bigots because they are.

Noomi, nice to see you again BUT let me point out please that many do not see the attraction of an asshole.

Let's put this on the line here. It's not that people are bigots. It's just that heteros really are not attracted to assholes.

So to try to embrace the gay world is something so foreign to the majority they reject the gay world.

We're talking gay marriage and heteros can't even wrap their brains around that.

Hell's bells ask a poor hetero soul to go thru a "house of dicks" where you have men sucking off men anonymously and you are going to get joe average creeped completely out.

So for crying out loud have some mercy on the poor hetero out there who doesn't "get it". Just because they prefer vaginas shouldn't be a stamp of bigotry.

Why are conservatives so focussed on gay sex? Several of you have posted graphic descriptions of gay sex.

There is a vast difference between anonymous sex and marriage. What gays won this week wasn't the right to go to bathhouses but the right to make a lifetime commitment to the person they love. One would think that heterosexuals can relate to the importance of such a relationship in a person's life.

Your obsession with the lurid details of gay sex, while supposedly being repulsed by it, is creepy.

Mp pme ever denied anyone the ability to make a lifelong commitment. Another lie by the Left.

You didn't know she was talking about the lifetime commitment of being legally married??

Just how stupid are you, forum jester ?

LOL. What a spin.
You lose.

 

[The Rabbi]

The SG did no such thing. Rabbi is lying.

Fuck you, Jakehole.
Are religious colleges at risk if Supreme Court approves same-sex marriage Fox News

All the SG said is that yes it could be a tax issue. Yes it will be an issue just like Bob Jones University's racist policies were a tax issue.

You're such a dishonest turd. If they lose their tax status they essentially cease to exist.
But at least you admit Jake is wrong and I wasnt lying when the SG admitted this.

You have admitted you are wrong. No college is going to lose its tax exempt status because it teaches its form of Bible principles.

All your buddies here have advocated exactly that.
You lose.

 

[G.T.]

They are at risk of being treated like bigots because they are.

Noomi, nice to see you again BUT let me point out please that many do not see the attraction of an asshole.

Let's put this on the line here. It's not that people are bigots. It's just that heteros really are not attracted to assholes.

So to try to embrace the gay world is something so foreign to the majority they reject the gay world.

We're talking gay marriage and heteros can't even wrap their brains around that.

Hell's bells ask a poor hetero soul to go thru a "house of dicks" where you have men sucking off men anonymously and you are going to get joe average creeped completely out.

So for crying out loud have some mercy on the poor hetero out there who doesn't "get it". Just because they prefer vaginas shouldn't be a stamp of bigotry.

Why are conservatives so focussed on gay sex? Several of you have posted graphic descriptions of gay sex.

There is a vast difference between anonymous sex and marriage. What gays won this week wasn't the right to go to bathhouses but the right to make a lifetime commitment to the person they love. One would think that heterosexuals can relate to the importance of such a relationship in a person's life.

Your obsession with the lurid details of gay sex, while supposedly being repulsed by it, is creepy.

Mp pme ever denied anyone the ability to make a lifelong commitment. Another lie by the Left.

You didn't know she was talking about the lifetime commitment of being legally married??

Just how stupid are you, forum jester ?

I believe he isna descendant of Stephanie

 

[JakeStarkey]

Who has called for the ending of traditional marriage?

How stupid.

Marriage is marriage.

 

[The Rabbi]

[You are a dishonest turd. The claim was they were denied the ability to make a lifetime committment. That is wrong.

You lie: a lifetime commitment in marriage.

No one is denying anyone a lifetime committment in marriage. Anyone can have any shaman, rabbi, preacher or poet marry them in a lifetime commitment ceremony.