Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
God makes the rules not little man!!!!====God let them go ahead into every sort of sex sin, and do whatever they wanted toyes, vile and sinful things with each others bodies. {snipped because blah blah blah}
Incorrect.
Same-sex couples are indeed qualified to participate in the marriage law of all 50 states.
States consequently lack the authority to deny American citizens their civil liberties, as one is a citizen of the United States first and foremost, and a resident of his respective state subordinate to that. And the rights of American citizens are safeguarded by the Federal Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, trumping the laws of states and local jurisdictions in accordance with Article VI of the Constitution.
Moreover, unlike the right of same-sex couples to equal protection of the law, there is no right to be granted a license to drive, or to be a lifeguard.
Same-sex couples DO NOT HAVE equal protection of the law.
At least you’re consistent at being wrong:
When sexuality finds overt expression in intimate conduct with another person, the conduct can be but one element in a personal bond that is more enduring. The liberty protected by the Constitution allows homosexual persons the right to make this choice.
Equality of treatment and the due process right to demand respect for conduct protected by the substantive guarantee of liberty are linked in important respects, and a decision on the latter point advances both interests. If protected conduct is made criminal and the law which does so remains unexamined for its substantive validity, its stigma might remain even if it were not enforceable as drawn for equal protection reasons. When homosexual conduct is made criminal by the law of the State, that declaration in and of itself is an invitation to subject homosexual persons to discrimination both in the public and in the private spheres.
LAWRENCE V. TEXAS
Consequently same-sex couples are in fact entitled to equal protection of the law, including the right to access marriage law they’re eligible to participate in, as Federal and state courts have ruled pursuant to 14th Amendment jurisprudence.
Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins
No, PruneYard Shopping Center v. Robins concerned 5th Amendment Taking Clause jurisprudence, not the First Amendment or the right to free speech.
And it concerned the relationship between the government, in this case the state of California, and residents of that state, the private property owners, where the owners of the shopping center filed suit to challenge the constitutionality of the measure allowing students access to their property to solicit signatures for their petition:
The determination of whether a state law unlawfully infringes a landowner’s property in violation of the taking clause requires an examination of whether the restriction on private property forces some people alone to bear public burdens which, in all fairness and justice, should be born by the public as a whole. This includes inquiring into such factors as the character of the governmental action, its economic impact, and its interference with reasonable investment-backed expectations.
PruneYard Shopping Center v. Robins | Casebriefs
Again, the rights enshrined in the Bill of Rights pertain solely to the relationship between government and those governed; where conflicts between two private parties are not subject to Constitutional restrictions.
HGTV is not a ‘government,’ it lacks the authority to exact punitive measures against individuals it seeks to silence, as a government is able to do. That is indeed the purpose of the Bill of Rights, to act as a countermeasure against the authority of the state, allowing the people to seek relief in the courts to address government overreach when one’s civil liberties are in fact violated.
This is what the owners of the PruneYard Shopping Center did, when they believed the California measure violated their 5th Amendment right to do with their private property as they saw fit.
You're wrong again. HGTV doesn't HAVE TO BE a govt. The Pruneyard isn't a govt either, yet the SCOTUS ruled against them, in favor of the free speech rights of the people who wished to speak on the Pruneyard's turf.
Likewise, the Bebham brothers have the right to say whatever they wish, and cannot be silenced by HGTV or any other private entity. They could file suit, using the Pruneyard case as a ----- ( I forgot the word).
I don't care what people choose to do with their lives. BUT, that goes for both sides.
Stop the fascist bs.
This is democracy, not fascism.
Maps of State Laws & Policies | Resources | Human Rights Campaign
The United States is a Constitutional Republic, not a democracy or fascist state, where citizens of the Republic are subject solely to the rule of law, not men; as men are incapable of ruling justly – state measures denying same-sex couples access to marriage law is proof of that.
And in our Republic one’s civil liberties are not subject to majority rule, as the majority lacks the authority to determine who will or will not have his civil liberties.
I think the Churches need to ask themselves, do they want to be the last refuge of homophobia?
I'm guessing, probably not, in the long run, when in 50 years, gay marriage is going to be as accepted as straight marriage and people will be scratching their heads wondering what the big deal was.
My question to you would be:
Are you willing to do away with the 1st Amendment to ensure that they aren't?
Your question is ignorant demagoguery, having nothing to do with the issue being addressed, as no one is advocating religious institutions be compelled to do anything, where same-sex couples’ right to access marriage law is a 14th Amendment issue, in no way involving the First Amendment – equal protection jurisprudence applies only to the state, not private individuals or organizations.
You and other Christians who wish to belong to a church preaching a doctrine of ignorance and hate will always be at liberty to do so.
I think the Churches need to ask themselves, do they want to be the last refuge of homophobia?
I'm guessing, probably not, in the long run, when in 50 years, gay marriage is going to be as accepted as straight marriage and people will be scratching their heads wondering what the big deal was.
My question to you would be:
Are you willing to do away with the 1st Amendment to ensure that they aren't?
Your question is ignorant demagoguery, having nothing to do with the issue being addressed, as no one is advocating religious institutions be compelled to do anything, where same-sex couples’ right to access marriage law is a 14th Amendment issue, in no way involving the First Amendment – equal protection jurisprudence applies only to the state, not private individuals or organizations.
You and other Christians who wish to belong to a church preaching a doctrine of ignorance and hate will always be at liberty to do so.
No, PruneYard Shopping Center v. Robins concerned 5th Amendment Taking Clause jurisprudence, not the First Amendment or the right to free speech.
And it concerned the relationship between the government, in this case the state of California, and residents of that state, the private property owners, where the owners of the shopping center filed suit to challenge the constitutionality of the measure allowing students access to their property to solicit signatures for their petition:
Again, the rights enshrined in the Bill of Rights pertain solely to the relationship between government and those governed; where conflicts between two private parties are not subject to Constitutional restrictions.
HGTV is not a government, it lacks the authority to exact punitive measures against individuals it seeks to silence, as a government is able to do. That is indeed the purpose of the Bill of Rights, to act as a countermeasure against the authority of the state, allowing the people to seek relief in the courts to address government overreach when ones civil liberties are in fact violated.
This is what the owners of the PruneYard Shopping Center did, when they believed the California measure violated their 5th Amendment right to do with their private property as they saw fit.
You're wrong again. HGTV doesn't HAVE TO BE a govt. The Pruneyard isn't a govt either, yet the SCOTUS ruled against them, in favor of the free speech rights of the people who wished to speak on the Pruneyard's turf.
Likewise, the Bebham brothers have the right to say whatever they wish, and cannot be silenced by HGTV or any other private entity. They could file suit, using the Pruneyard case as a ----- ( I forgot the word).
The Benham Brothers have no right, legal or Constitutional, to a freaking TV show. Nor do the Duckers, nor Paula Deen, nor do you or I.
But they do have morals clauses in their contracts. Oops.
Is this the NFL WE WANT????????????Fathers and young sons WATCHING the NFL draft program on national TV saw sam kissing his little white boyfriend on national TV = pretty sick stuff to explain to your 10 year old son===just say its a SICK,SICK world we now live in Jonniee!!!! SICK
You're wrong again. HGTV doesn't HAVE TO BE a govt. The Pruneyard isn't a govt either, yet the SCOTUS ruled against them, in favor of the free speech rights of the people who wished to speak on the Pruneyard's turf.
Likewise, the Bebham brothers have the right to say whatever they wish, and cannot be silenced by HGTV or any other private entity. They could file suit, using the Pruneyard case as a ----- ( I forgot the word).
The Benham Brothers have no right, legal or Constitutional, to a freaking TV show. Nor do the Duckers, nor Paula Deen, nor do you or I.
But they do have morals clauses in their contracts. Oops.
The right in question isn't to a TV show, it is to speak freely, away from the HGTV domain, which was denied, by the TV show being cancelled.
Oh shut the hell up, you f'n asshole. I've already refuted you 3 times. Yo'reu not saying a damn thing here, except blowing hot air around. Go home and play checkers. I'm not going to waste my time, continually refuting your ignorant and assinine posts.The Benham Brothers have no right, legal or Constitutional, to a freaking TV show. Nor do the Duckers, nor Paula Deen, nor do you or I.
But they do have morals clauses in their contracts. Oops.
The right in question isn't to a TV show, it is to speak freely, away from the HGTV domain, which was denied, by the TV show being cancelled.
Nonsense.
There is no right in question, the issue of rights pertain only to the relationship between the government and those governed; the show being canceled or the brothers being dismissed in no way violates their rights, as HGTV has no authority to seek to restrict the right to free speech as it is not a government authorized to do so and absent the program there are ample other avenues for the brothers to freely express their ignorance and hate concerning gay Americans.
<H3>After Posting Negative Tweets about Michael Sam, NFL Player Fined, Excused from Team
*theblaze.com ^
Miami Dolphins safety Don Jones was fined an undisclosed amount Sunday and will undergo educational training after sending a negative tweet about Michael Sam, the first openly gay player to be selected in the NFL draft. Shortly after the St. Louis Rams took Sam in the seventh round Saturday, Jones tweeted OMG and Horrible. The tweets were taken down a short time later. Jones apologized for his comments Sunday and described them as inappropriate. The Dolphins said Jones has been excused from all team activities until he completes training related to his comments....
</H3>
<H3>After Posting Negative Tweets about Michael Sam, NFL Player Fined, Excused from Team
*theblaze.com ^
Miami Dolphins safety Don Jones was fined an undisclosed amount Sunday and will undergo educational training after sending a negative tweet about Michael Sam, the first openly gay player to be selected in the NFL draft. Shortly after the St. Louis Rams took Sam in the seventh round Saturday, Jones tweeted OMG and Horrible. The tweets were taken down a short time later. Jones apologized for his comments Sunday and described them as inappropriate. The Dolphins said Jones has been excused from all team activities until he completes training related to his comments....
</H3>
What did the tweet say ?
The Benham Brothers have no right, legal or Constitutional, to a freaking TV show. Nor do the Duckers, nor Paula Deen, nor do you or I.
But they do have morals clauses in their contracts. Oops.
The right in question isn't to a TV show, it is to speak freely, away from the HGTV domain, which was denied, by the TV show being cancelled.
Nonsense.
There is no right in question, the issue of rights pertain only to the relationship between the government and those governed; the show being canceled or the brothers being dismissed in no way violates their rights, as HGTV has no authority to seek to restrict the right to free speech as it is not a government authorized to do so and absent the program there are ample other avenues for the brothers to freely express their ignorance and hate concerning gay Americans.
Yes you use it all the timeBenham Brothers Speak Out About Being Fired From HGTV
omg! INSIDER 3:34 mins
A media firestorm has caused HGTV to fire the Benham brothers, who were supposed to host the new show "Flip It Forward." And they're claiming that they were let go because of their faith. The brothers are devout Christians who were hoping to turn their house-flipping experience into a hit show. David Benham can be heard making anti-gay remarks in videos online, and protested in front of abortion clinics last year. One of the brothers was called an anti-gay, anti-abortion extremist. But it seems like fans of HGTV aren't happy with the situation, causing #FlipThisDecision to be tweeted over a million times. "The Insider" spoke to the brothers about the situation. David said, "The gay agenda isn't forcing it down my throat, but what it is doing is it's demanding that I remain silent if I disagree with it." Check out this video to see more from the Benham Brothers, and tune in to "The Insider With Yahoo" for the latest in entertainment news.
https://celebrity.yahoo.com/video/benham-brothers-speak-being-fired-223837670.html
Victimization.....so typical.
No it wasn't nor should it ever be. Good lord what did they teach you in civics?
It is fascism caused by the forced democracy....This country was not founded to be a democracy. It was founded to be a constitutional republic......
More often described as a democratic republic. So what ? Democracy is the main idea, and that is just what we have in 2/3 of America, wherin discrimination against queers is the law, either by state law, or by the absence of any state law prohibiting it. the land
