Attempts to Roll Back Marriage Equality since the Trump Election.

[EvilCat Breath]

Since Obergefel, the issue of same sex marriage is settled. Now, it's the rights of of those who do not want to embrace perversion for themselves that need to be protected.

No one is going to require you to get 'gay married'.

Just allow people who do not wish to join in their events the freedom to say no.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

A strict constitutional supreme Court will hopefully straighten out gay overreaching and instruct them that they do not control the world.

Now if they will only do that to Christians.

Remember- it hasn't been gays that have spent the last 100 years trying to tell everyone how they can have sex, and who they can marry or not marry- that has been the Christians- trying to 'control the world'

I have not noticed Christians suing bakers and florists for not accepting Christianity.

 

[Picaro]

I see the Pedo-Friendlies still fear losing their ability to accumulate personal kiddie harems. Sick freaks, all of them.

I see bigots like you trying to paint homosexuals as pedos- knowing at the same time that you endanger the safety of children doing so.

I see liars like yourself still trying to promote the lie homosexuals are not pedo-friendlies and do indeed need to be kept away from children, and don't give a rat's ass about the safety of children, especially when it might contradict some trendy fashionable nonsense peddled by deviants.

 

[Picaro]

So we should keep vermin like you away from children.

Yes, you should; vermin like me have less than zero tolerance for kiddie rapers and their sick freak show fan bois. You would suffer a lot preying on kids if you are within my reach, a whole lot, so yes, you need to keep to yourselves. You're much safer in SF or NYC, where your ilk are fawned over and admired.

 

[Picaro]

A strict constitutional supreme Court will hopefully straighten out gay overreaching and instruct them that they do not control the world.

Now if they will only do that to Christians.

Remember- it hasn't been gays that have spent the last 100 years trying to tell everyone how they can have sex, and who they can marry or not marry- that has been the Christians- trying to 'control the world'

I have not noticed Christians suing bakers and florists for not accepting Christianity.

Don't see any reports on the gimps going after Muslim bakers. Do they, and if not why not?

 

[Picaro]

Apparently everything Syriously disagrees with must be a lie in her book.

He/she/it/mutant is your typical airhead troll and unprincipled fashionista; whatever the other deviants like is okay with it.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Apparently everything Syriously disagrees with must be a lie in her book.

Oh. It';s a woman obsessed with tiny dicks? I assumed it was a "man."

Most women who talk about men with tiny dicks have loose meatholes.. So let that sink in.

Well, nearly every single one of these Pedo-Friendlies eventually out themselves here as some sort of deviant or other, which is no surprise. there is zero data to back up their fantasy narratives and quite a lot showing they're truly sick gimps. that's why they rely entirely on such fare as the troll Syriously posts. They quit posting to actual 'studies' because some people 'cheat' and actually read the studies and examine the methodologies, so now they're all behind pay walls and we're supposed to just believe what gimps say they say or something.

That is some pretty sick and dishonest shit! You can't just put shit like that out there without backing it up. That is an appeal to ignorance logical fallacy and belligerent hate mongering. Where the fuck is this " data" ? You are a sick, fucking liar.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

A strict constitutional supreme Court will hopefully straighten out gay overreaching and instruct them that they do not control the world.

Now if they will only do that to Christians.

Remember- it hasn't been gays that have spent the last 100 years trying to tell everyone how they can have sex, and who they can marry or not marry- that has been the Christians- trying to 'control the world'

I have not noticed Christians suing bakers and florists for not accepting Christianity.

Just more stupidity! No one is suing anyone for not accepting a religion. The issue is discrimination!

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

A strict constitutional supreme Court will hopefully straighten out gay overreaching and instruct them that they do not control the world.

Now if they will only do that to Christians.

Remember- it hasn't been gays that have spent the last 100 years trying to tell everyone how they can have sex, and who they can marry or not marry- that has been the Christians- trying to 'control the world'

I have not noticed Christians suing bakers and florists for not accepting Christianity.

Don't see any reports on the gimps going after Muslim bakers. Do they, and if not why not?

Maybe, because Muslim bakers, at least in this country, respect the law and the Constitution and, unlike some Christians, understand that you can't impose your religious values on paying customers in a public accommodation. Muslims come from a place where the separation of religion and government is an alien concept - a place where they too can be discriminated against for not strictly adhering to religious doctrine. Maybe, they are more respectful and grateful for living in a place where there is true religious freedom and that they actually understand the meaning of religious freedom.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

So we should keep vermin like you away from children.

Yes, you should; vermin like me have less than zero tolerance for kiddie rapers and their sick freak show fan bois. You would suffer a lot preying on kids if you are within my reach, a whole lot, so yes, you need to keep to yourselves. You're much safer in SF or NYC, where your ilk are fawned over and admired.

Listen you stupid shit. I spent a career fighting child sexual abuse. I know who it is that sexually abuses children . It is not gay men. It is disturbed and angry heterosexual men - kind of like you. They are habitually fixated on children of various ages, or have regressed to that stage due to various stress factors, but they are not homosexuals who are able too have a normal health relationship with a consenting adult. I'm willing to be that you are too stupid and incurious to have ever even looked into the research and data on this. You are too invested in your hatred and bigotry to even want to know the truth. If your bubble were to burst you would be lost.!!

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

I see the Pedo-Friendlies still fear losing their ability to accumulate personal kiddie harems. Sick freaks, all of them.

I see bigots like you trying to paint homosexuals as pedos- knowing at the same time that you endanger the safety of children doing so.

I see liars like yourself still trying to promote the lie homosexuals are not pedo-friendlies and do indeed need to be kept away from children, and don't give a rat's ass about the safety of children, especially when it might contradict some trendy fashionable nonsense peddled by deviants.

The guy who appropriated the rainbow flag was a pedo, Harry Hay.

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

I think PP has a fair point. I know there are faggots who hate pedos... Because they were molested themselves.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

A strict constitutional supreme Court will hopefully straighten out gay overreaching and instruct them that they do not control the world.

Now if they will only do that to Christians.

Remember- it hasn't been gays that have spent the last 100 years trying to tell everyone how they can have sex, and who they can marry or not marry- that has been the Christians- trying to 'control the world'

I have not noticed Christians suing bakers and florists for not accepting Christianity.

Just more stupidity! No one is suing anyone for not accepting a religion. The issue is discrimination!

Discrimination would be if a gay went into a business and was told to leave. That never happened. It's when the business person says they aren't leaving.

In the case of Memories pizza gay activists wanted the business destroyed and there wasn't even a wedding. It was an opinion.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

A strict constitutional supreme Court will hopefully straighten out gay overreaching and instruct them that they do not control the world.

Now if they will only do that to Christians.

Remember- it hasn't been gays that have spent the last 100 years trying to tell everyone how they can have sex, and who they can marry or not marry- that has been the Christians- trying to 'control the world'

I have not noticed Christians suing bakers and florists for not accepting Christianity.

Don't see any reports on the gimps going after Muslim bakers. Do they, and if not why not?

Maybe, because Muslim bakers, at least in this country, respect the law and the Constitution and, unlike some Christians, understand that you can't impose your religious values on paying customers in a public accommodation. Muslims come from a place where the separation of religion and government is an alien concept - a place where they too can be discriminated against for not strictly adhering to religious doctrine. Maybe, they are more respectful and grateful for living in a place where there is true religious freedom and that they actually understand the meaning of religious freedom.

There have been several camera crews going to muslim bakeries for a wedding cake for a same sex wedding. They get told to leave.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

I think PP has a fair point. I know there are faggots who hate pedos... Because they were molested themselves.

That is as stupid as stupid gets. People are not gay because they were molested.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

A strict constitutional supreme Court will hopefully straighten out gay overreaching and instruct them that they do not control the world.

Now if they will only do that to Christians.

Remember- it hasn't been gays that have spent the last 100 years trying to tell everyone how they can have sex, and who they can marry or not marry- that has been the Christians- trying to 'control the world'

I have not noticed Christians suing bakers and florists for not accepting Christianity.

Don't see any reports on the gimps going after Muslim bakers. Do they, and if not why not?

Maybe, because Muslim bakers, at least in this country, respect the law and the Constitution and, unlike some Christians, understand that you can't impose your religious values on paying customers in a public accommodation. Muslims come from a place where the separation of religion and government is an alien concept - a place where they too can be discriminated against for not strictly adhering to religious doctrine. Maybe, they are more respectful and grateful for living in a place where there is true religious freedom and that they actually understand the meaning of religious freedom.

There have been several camera crews going to muslim bakeries for a wedding cake for a same sex wedding. They get told to leave.

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

I think PP has a fair point. I know there are faggots who hate pedos... Because they were molested themselves.

That is as stupid as stupid gets. People are not gay because they were molested.

I didn't say they were. All I said was there are faggots who were molested.

But you have proven my point with that Freudian slip, PP. Most homos have been molested.. And it was by another homo.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Since Obergefel, the issue of same sex marriage is settled. Now, it's the rights of of those who do not want to embrace perversion for themselves that need to be protected.

No actually it isn't. And the reason why it isn't is because of the main beneficiaries of the marriage contract: Children. Children did not have any unique representation at Obergefell for the main benefit they derived from the marriage contract: the guarantee of BOTH a mother and father. You cannot revise contracts in the US without all parties to said contract at the table with unique representation. Worse still, especially contracts cannot be revised to the demise of children that were involved in them. Can't be done. No contract involving children can contain terms onerous to them or terms that strip a vital provision away from them. Cant' be done.

On that point alone Obergefell could be overturned. But worse still, at least one, but probably two Justices were in violation of Capterton v A.T. Massey Coal (2009)'s findings that say no judge can advertise bias towards the outcome of a case in advance of hearing it. Ginsburg went on public media several weeks before the 2015 Hearing and told the world her verdict on Obergefell before she even sat on over it. That case can be overturned on that alone; or at a minimum...reheard with ALL parties to the proposed mandated contract revision having representation there..

Supreme Court decisions do not get revisited and overturned- they do not get 'reheard'.

Now it is possible a new case could come before the court- but no new case will argue your bizarre fictoin of 'contract' law.

Technically, it would take a new case where a challenge was made to a SCOTUS case that returned power of qualifiers for marriage to the states....like one demanding polygamy be legal on all the "logic" of Obergefell. A new SCOTUS would have to merely interpret the states powers differently than Obergefell and in the name of equality of all lifestyles, remand the power of qualifying for marriage back to the states.

There are no such laws guaranteeing a mother and a father. If you think so, then the monster chimera children with neither a mother or a father will totally confuse you.

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

Since Obergefel, the issue of same sex marriage is settled. Now, it's the rights of of those who do not want to embrace perversion for themselves that need to be protected.

No actually it isn't. And the reason why it isn't is because of the main beneficiaries of the marriage contract: Children. Children did not have any unique representation at Obergefell for the main benefit they derived from the marriage contract: the guarantee of BOTH a mother and father. You cannot revise contracts in the US without all parties to said contract at the table with unique representation. Worse still, especially contracts cannot be revised to the demise of children that were involved in them. Can't be done. No contract involving children can contain terms onerous to them or terms that strip a vital provision away from them. Cant' be done.

On that point alone Obergefell could be overturned. But worse still, at least one, but probably two Justices were in violation of Capterton v A.T. Massey Coal (2009)'s findings that say no judge can advertise bias towards the outcome of a case in advance of hearing it. Ginsburg went on public media several weeks before the 2015 Hearing and told the world her verdict on Obergefell before she even sat on over it. That case can be overturned on that alone; or at a minimum...reheard with ALL parties to the proposed mandated contract revision having representation there..

Supreme Court decisions do not get revisited and overturned- they do not get 'reheard'.

Now it is possible a new case could come before the court- but no new case will argue your bizarre fictoin of 'contract' law.

Technically, it would take a new case where a challenge was made to a SCOTUS case that returned power of qualifiers for marriage to the states....like one demanding polygamy be legal on all the "logic" of Obergefell. A new SCOTUS would have to merely interpret the states powers differently than Obergefell and in the name of equality of all lifestyles, remand the power of qualifying for marriage back to the states.

There are no such laws guaranteeing a mother and a father. If you think so, then the monster chimera children with neither a mother or a father will totally confuse you.

The what?

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Now if they will only do that to Christians.

Remember- it hasn't been gays that have spent the last 100 years trying to tell everyone how they can have sex, and who they can marry or not marry- that has been the Christians- trying to 'control the world'

I have not noticed Christians suing bakers and florists for not accepting Christianity.

Don't see any reports on the gimps going after Muslim bakers. Do they, and if not why not?

Maybe, because Muslim bakers, at least in this country, respect the law and the Constitution and, unlike some Christians, understand that you can't impose your religious values on paying customers in a public accommodation. Muslims come from a place where the separation of religion and government is an alien concept - a place where they too can be discriminated against for not strictly adhering to religious doctrine. Maybe, they are more respectful and grateful for living in a place where there is true religious freedom and that they actually understand the meaning of religious freedom.

There have been several camera crews going to muslim bakeries for a wedding cake for a same sex wedding. They get told to leave.

You tube has many videos of,muslim bakeries telling gays to leave. Look at a few.