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.
Pretty fucking retarded. He pointed out the government provides you rights (though protects is more accurate). Leaving the logical conclusion being the government provides the same protection under the law for everyone, not just heterosexuals.Just because he can lick his own balls doesn't mean nature thought he deserved that. The only rights you have are what the government provides, and you can get enforced. Nature and God can't help you out on that in the slightest.No my little infant, they don't. In nature you have no rights, not a single one, and she couldn't care less whether you live or die.Our rights come from nature, but that doesn't stop government from violating them.
Try taking a bone away from a dog and then tell me he doesn't believe in rights.
If that's true, then no injustice is done to gays by not allowing them to marry.
Turds like you never think out the logical conclusions of your moron theories.
Mine is not a theory, mine is reality, and that's not what it says dummy.However, your theory says slavery didn't violate anyone's rights.
Pretty fucking retarded. He pointed out the government provides you rights (though protects is more accurate). Leaving the logical conclusion being the government provides the same protection under the law for everyone, not just heterosexuals.Just because he can lick his own balls doesn't mean nature thought he deserved that. The only rights you have are what the government provides, and you can get enforced. Nature and God can't help you out on that in the slightest.No my little infant, they don't. In nature you have no rights, not a single one, and she couldn't care less whether you live or die.Our rights come from nature, but that doesn't stop government from violating them.
Try taking a bone away from a dog and then tell me he doesn't believe in rights.
If that's true, then no injustice is done to gays by not allowing them to marry.
Turds like you never think out the logical conclusions of your moron theories.
Mine is not a theory, mine is reality, and that's not what it says dummy.However, your theory says slavery didn't violate anyone's rights.
No my little infant, they don't. In nature you have no rights, not a single one, and she couldn't care less whether you live or die.Our rights come from nature, but that doesn't stop government from violating them.
Try taking a bone away from a dog and then tell me he doesn't believe in rights.
Nonsense. For example, if a gay person works for that baker, they could sue for emotional distress in the workplace, even though their name didn't appear on the cake.Not to mention, a baker exposes themselves to lawsuits if they write hateful, discriminatory messages on a cake. You can't force bakers to be bigots.The moron in the OP's 1st Amendment rights cannot be imposed on the baker's 1st Amendment rights.
As a baker she complied by baking the cake. She even offered to help the hatemonger write his bile. But PA laws do not require her to do his dirty work.
When the original baker refused to make a cake for the gay wedding all he needed to do was to bake the cake and let them put whatever topping they wanted on it. He violated PA laws by refusing to even bake them a cake.
In this instance she was in compliance by baking the "bible shaped" cakes.
So I don't see her losing this on PA grounds myself.
That's pure idiocy. Unless they name specific persons, there is no cause for a tort.
Agreed. All children have equal rights to have a mother and a father incentivized by states to be in their home as parental role models.
Also, all children have equal rights to live in a state where behaviors are regulated by the majority. If anything-goes "marriage equality" happens, let it be state by state after a consensus deliberation, as Windsor 2013 mandates.
All children also have the right to a judicial federal appelate system where judges underneath SCOTUS respect and abide by SCOTUS' Findings on a specific question of law until SCOTUS notifies them otherwise on the merits of any challenge to those current Findings.
Holyfuckingshit!Pretty fucking retarded. He pointed out the government provides you rights (though protects is more accurate). Leaving the logical conclusion being the government provides the same protection under the law for everyone, not just heterosexuals.Just because he can lick his own balls doesn't mean nature thought he deserved that. The only rights you have are what the government provides, and you can get enforced. Nature and God can't help you out on that in the slightest.No my little infant, they don't. In nature you have no rights, not a single one, and she couldn't care less whether you live or die.
Try taking a bone away from a dog and then tell me he doesn't believe in rights.
If that's true, then no injustice is done to gays by not allowing them to marry.
Turds like you never think out the logical conclusions of your moron theories.
Where is it written that government must provide the same protection to everyone? If government chooses to give some people more rights than others, how can you claim that is unjust? After all, you deny the proposition that anyone has a natural right to be treated equally.
However, I know I'm wasting my time pointing out the contradiction in your theory of rights because you're just too stupid to get it. The point has already gone over your head once. I know from experience that it you'll respond like a dear caught in the headlights every time I explain it.
Just because he can lick his own balls doesn't mean nature thought he deserved that. The only rights you have are what the government provides, and you can get enforced. Nature and God can't help you out on that in the slightest.No my little infant, they don't. In nature you have no rights, not a single one, and she couldn't care less whether you live or die.Our rights come from nature, but that doesn't stop government from violating them.
Try taking a bone away from a dog and then tell me he doesn't believe in rights.
If that's true, then no injustice is done to gays by not allowing them to marry.
Turds like you never think out the logical conclusions of your moron theories.
No, that's my theory because that's utterly idiotic. And they don't have a "right" by God or nature to be treated equally but under our laws granting us rights they are supposed to be unless some compelling reason can be found for them being unequal.If government passes laws that are not equal, then no injustice is done. That's your theory.
So before the 14th Amendment was passed, no injustice was being done to slaves.
You have to be a major loon to believe that. All the morons who defend Lincoln claim the Civil War was justified because slavery was such a heinous violation of human rights. However, your theory says slavery didn't violate anyone's rights.
You perverts are ruining a moral society.Well I was forced to, so now we will have kids with blood parents in society as normal. Thanks to liberals.Who said I hate, I disagree there is a difference. I was wanting to compromise, but you couldn't have that.So you want to claim you don't hate anyone, but you just hate to see certain types of people have equal rights.
Yes, that's so much nicer...
No you weren't. Besides, why do we have to 'compromise' when it comes to gay rights?
Are you willing to 'compromise' your own rights?
You have a remarkable capacity for making posts that make no sense.
Holyfuckingshit!Pretty fucking retarded. He pointed out the government provides you rights (though protects is more accurate). Leaving the logical conclusion being the government provides the same protection under the law for everyone, not just heterosexuals.Just because he can lick his own balls doesn't mean nature thought he deserved that. The only rights you have are what the government provides, and you can get enforced. Nature and God can't help you out on that in the slightest.Try taking a bone away from a dog and then tell me he doesn't believe in rights.
If that's true, then no injustice is done to gays by not allowing them to marry.
Turds like you never think out the logical conclusions of your moron theories.
Where is it written that government must provide the same protection to everyone? If government chooses to give some people more rights than others, how can you claim that is unjust? After all, you deny the proposition that anyone has a natural right to be treated equally.
However, I know I'm wasting my time pointing out the contradiction in your theory of rights because you're just too stupid to get it. The point has already gone over your head once. I know from experience that it you'll respond like a dear caught in the headlights every time I explain it.
The Constitution is not just a goddamn piece of paper...
nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
No, that's my theory because that's utterly idiotic. And they don't have a "right" by God or nature to be treated equally but under our laws granting us rights they are supposed to be unless some compelling reason can be found for them being unequal.If government passes laws that are not equal, then no injustice is done. That's your theory.
So before the 14th Amendment was passed, no injustice was being done to slaves.
You have to be a major loon to believe that. All the morons who defend Lincoln claim the Civil War was justified because slavery was such a heinous violation of human rights. However, your theory says slavery didn't violate anyone's rights.
Well that may be what the moron's claim- but not the rest of us.
Of course the moron's who attack Lincoln say that slavery had nothing to do with the Confederate slave states attempt to secede from the United States.
Baker refuses wedding cake for gay couple = Discrimination.
Baker refuses cake for homophobe = Not discrimination.
this has become the Homophobes last desperate stand.
We will fight them in the bakeries, we will fight them in the photography studios...
You're a raging imbecile. You asked where it's written the government must provide equal protection to all and I showed you where. Your whiney complaints since only reflect on your inability to learn.Holyfuckingshit!Pretty fucking retarded. He pointed out the government provides you rights (though protects is more accurate). Leaving the logical conclusion being the government provides the same protection under the law for everyone, not just heterosexuals.Just because he can lick his own balls doesn't mean nature thought he deserved that. The only rights you have are what the government provides, and you can get enforced. Nature and God can't help you out on that in the slightest.
If that's true, then no injustice is done to gays by not allowing them to marry.
Turds like you never think out the logical conclusions of your moron theories.
Where is it written that government must provide the same protection to everyone? If government chooses to give some people more rights than others, how can you claim that is unjust? After all, you deny the proposition that anyone has a natural right to be treated equally.
However, I know I'm wasting my time pointing out the contradiction in your theory of rights because you're just too stupid to get it. The point has already gone over your head once. I know from experience that it you'll respond like a dear caught in the headlights every time I explain it.
The Constitution is not just a goddamn piece of paper...
nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
As I indicted previously, my point went right over your head. Those bright things you're looking at is an oncoming car.
You're a raging imbecile. You asked where it's written the government must provide equal protection to all and I showed you where. Your whiney complaints since only reflect on your inability to learn.Holyfuckingshit!Pretty fucking retarded. He pointed out the government provides you rights (though protects is more accurate). Leaving the logical conclusion being the government provides the same protection under the law for everyone, not just heterosexuals.If that's true, then no injustice is done to gays by not allowing them to marry.
Turds like you never think out the logical conclusions of your moron theories.
Where is it written that government must provide the same protection to everyone? If government chooses to give some people more rights than others, how can you claim that is unjust? After all, you deny the proposition that anyone has a natural right to be treated equally.
However, I know I'm wasting my time pointing out the contradiction in your theory of rights because you're just too stupid to get it. The point has already gone over your head once. I know from experience that it you'll respond like a dear caught in the headlights every time I explain it.
The Constitution is not just a goddamn piece of paper...
nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
As I indicted previously, my point went right over your head. Those bright things you're looking at is an oncoming car.
Yep. They're desperate to intimidate and punish, and they just don't need to take it this far.I think gay marriage advocates may be overplaying their hand.
Baker refuses wedding cake for gay couple = Discrimination.
Baker refuses cake for homophobe = Not discrimination.
The baker didn't refuse to make a cake for a homophobe. He agreed to make any cake the guy wanted. What he refused to do is write what the homophobe wanted written. But provided the frosting bag for the customer to use and write it themselves.
