Florist Sued for Refusing Service to Gay Couple Pens Defiant Letter Rejecting Gov’t Settlement Offer

[mdk]

Yes, marriage is controlled by state laws but those laws are subject to certain constitutional guarantees as described in the Windsor ruling. And no, a constitutional amendment is not requited for gay marriage to be legal in all 50 states. Presently 37 out of 50 states are marrying gays without one so that is merely your opinion.

that state by state approach will not work, and it will lead to legalization of multiple marriage and all other forms of human groupings being called marriages.

a constitutional amendment would fix it forever and fix it clearly and precisely.

Gays don't want a vote on an amendment because they know they would lose. They lost twice in the left wing state of california.

The last 4 times gay marriage was voted on, by the public or the state legislators it passed and your side lost.

I really don't have a "side". I think gay marriage is damaging to society, but I am fully willing to abide by the will of a majority of the people. I just want the people to decide, not one or two judges.

You free to believe gay marriage damages society but the public and courts are not buying it. The will of the people is entirely irrelevant if that will is violating the U.S. Constitution. Besides, you cannot even demonstrate how gay marriage damages society.

total horseshit! the constitution was established by the will of the people, every law on our books was established by the will of the people. This is a representative democratic republic. The people and their elected representatives decide what is legal and what is not.

as to damaging society. males and females have different genetic roles in human behavior. Deviating from those genetic roles damages the fabric of socielty. and, I don't care a flip whether you agree with me or not.

Like it or lump it, the will of the people is still subject to certain consitituional guarantees. The people pass laws, the laws get challenged, the courts rule on the merits of the challenge pertaining to the law, and if those laws violate the Constitution or not. That is how our system works.

Allowing gays access to marriage in no way prevents hertosexual males and females from fulfilling their genetic roles. Do think people are going to stop marrying and having children if gays marry? Clearly they are not.

 

[Redfish]

that state by state approach will not work, and it will lead to legalization of multiple marriage and all other forms of human groupings being called marriages.

a constitutional amendment would fix it forever and fix it clearly and precisely.

Gays don't want a vote on an amendment because they know they would lose. They lost twice in the left wing state of california.

The last 4 times gay marriage was voted on, by the public or the state legislators it passed and your side lost.

I really don't have a "side". I think gay marriage is damaging to society, but I am fully willing to abide by the will of a majority of the people. I just want the people to decide, not one or two judges.

You free to believe gay marriage damages society but the public and courts are not buying it. The will of the people is entirely irrelevant if that will is violating the U.S. Constitution. Besides, you cannot even demonstrate how gay marriage damages society.

total horseshit! the constitution was established by the will of the people, every law on our books was established by the will of the people. This is a representative democratic republic. The people and their elected representatives decide what is legal and what is not.

as to damaging society. males and females have different genetic roles in human behavior. Deviating from those genetic roles damages the fabric of socielty. and, I don't care a flip whether you agree with me or not.

Like it or lump it, the will of the people is still subject to certain consitituional guarantees. The people pass laws, the laws get challenged, the courts rule on the merits of the challenge pertaining to the law, and if those laws violate the Constitution or not. That is how our system works.

Allowing gays access to marriage in no way prevents hertosexual males and females from fulfilling their genetic roles. Do think people are going to stop marrying and having children if gays marry? Clearly they are not.

what you say is true. However, what you are missing is that every one of our laws was made by "the will of the people", either by direct vote or by vote of their elected representatives. The constitution was enacted by the will of the people and can be changed by the will of the people.

a majority opinion cannot override existing law, but it can cause that law to be changed.

the people have the authority to decide on the definition of marriage, and should do so to clear this up once and for all.

If the 14th amendment made it clear then we would not be embroiled in this huge controversy right now.

 

[Katzndogz]

The division will just get deeper and wider as Christians start limiting what they broadly offer. It doesn't mean that gays will be able to force artists to perform for them. It means that Christian artists will offer their talent only within the community of Christians.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The division will just get deeper and wider as Christians start limiting what they broadly offer. It doesn't mean that gays will be able to force artists to perform for them. It means that Christian artists will offer their talent only within the community of Christians.

Great, go away. Build your walls, so we can keep you inside them.

 

[bodecea]

that state by state approach will not work, and it will lead to legalization of multiple marriage and all other forms of human groupings being called marriages.

a constitutional amendment would fix it forever and fix it clearly and precisely.

Gays don't want a vote on an amendment because they know they would lose. They lost twice in the left wing state of california.

The last 4 times gay marriage was voted on, by the public or the state legislators it passed and your side lost.

I really don't have a "side". I think gay marriage is damaging to society, but I am fully willing to abide by the will of a majority of the people. I just want the people to decide, not one or two judges.

You free to believe gay marriage damages society but the public and courts are not buying it. The will of the people is entirely irrelevant if that will is violating the U.S. Constitution. Besides, you cannot even demonstrate how gay marriage damages society.

total horseshit! the constitution was established by the will of the people, every law on our books was established by the will of the people. This is a representative democratic republic. The people and their elected representatives decide what is legal and what is not.

as to damaging society. males and females have different genetic roles in human behavior. Deviating from those genetic roles damages the fabric of socielty. and, I don't care a flip whether you agree with me or not.

Like it or lump it, the will of the people is still subject to certain consitituional guarantees. The people pass laws, the laws get challenged, the courts rule on the merits of the challenge pertaining to the law, and if those laws violate the Constitution or not. That is how our system works.

Allowing gays access to marriage in no way prevents hertosexual males and females from fulfilling their genetic roles. Do think people are going to stop marrying and having children if gays marry? Clearly they are not.

Actually, and I've told this story before, there are many who are afraid of that very thing. I heard on the radio years ago, the President of the CWA (Concerned Women of America) state that if gay marriage was legalized women would divorce their husbands in DROVES to marry each other. Now...........................what an interesting thing to say.

 

[bodecea]

The last 4 times gay marriage was voted on, by the public or the state legislators it passed and your side lost.

I really don't have a "side". I think gay marriage is damaging to society, but I am fully willing to abide by the will of a majority of the people. I just want the people to decide, not one or two judges.

You free to believe gay marriage damages society but the public and courts are not buying it. The will of the people is entirely irrelevant if that will is violating the U.S. Constitution. Besides, you cannot even demonstrate how gay marriage damages society.

total horseshit! the constitution was established by the will of the people, every law on our books was established by the will of the people. This is a representative democratic republic. The people and their elected representatives decide what is legal and what is not.

as to damaging society. males and females have different genetic roles in human behavior. Deviating from those genetic roles damages the fabric of socielty. and, I don't care a flip whether you agree with me or not.

Like it or lump it, the will of the people is still subject to certain consitituional guarantees. The people pass laws, the laws get challenged, the courts rule on the merits of the challenge pertaining to the law, and if those laws violate the Constitution or not. That is how our system works.

Allowing gays access to marriage in no way prevents hertosexual males and females from fulfilling their genetic roles. Do think people are going to stop marrying and having children if gays marry? Clearly they are not.

what you say is true. However, what you are missing is that every one of our laws was made by "the will of the people", either by direct vote or by vote of their elected representatives. The constitution was enacted by the will of the people and can be changed by the will of the people.

a majority opinion cannot override existing law, but it can cause that law to be changed.

the people have the authority to decide on the definition of marriage, and should do so to clear this up once and for all.

If the 14th amendment made it clear then we would not be embroiled in this huge controversy right now.

So...change the law then. Do it.

 

[mdk]

The last 4 times gay marriage was voted on, by the public or the state legislators it passed and your side lost.

I really don't have a "side". I think gay marriage is damaging to society, but I am fully willing to abide by the will of a majority of the people. I just want the people to decide, not one or two judges.

You free to believe gay marriage damages society but the public and courts are not buying it. The will of the people is entirely irrelevant if that will is violating the U.S. Constitution. Besides, you cannot even demonstrate how gay marriage damages society.

total horseshit! the constitution was established by the will of the people, every law on our books was established by the will of the people. This is a representative democratic republic. The people and their elected representatives decide what is legal and what is not.

as to damaging society. males and females have different genetic roles in human behavior. Deviating from those genetic roles damages the fabric of socielty. and, I don't care a flip whether you agree with me or not.

Like it or lump it, the will of the people is still subject to certain consitituional guarantees. The people pass laws, the laws get challenged, the courts rule on the merits of the challenge pertaining to the law, and if those laws violate the Constitution or not. That is how our system works.

Allowing gays access to marriage in no way prevents hertosexual males and females from fulfilling their genetic roles. Do think people are going to stop marrying and having children if gays marry? Clearly they are not.

Actually, and I've told this story before, there are many who are afraid of that very thing. I heard on the radio years ago, the President of the CWA (Concerned Women of America) state that if gay marriage was legalized women would divorce their husbands in DROVES to marry each other. Now...........................what an interesting thing to say.

Like WND, I blame the soy sauce.

 

[Silhouette]

The division will just get deeper and wider as Christians start limiting what they broadly offer. It doesn't mean that gays will be able to force artists to perform for them. It means that Christian artists will offer their talent only within the community of Christians.

Then if the Christian proprietors go bankrupt from lack of customers, let THAT be their punishment and not some Rainbow Reicht forcing their dogma down their throats using the courts as a piping bag.

 

[bodecea]

The division will just get deeper and wider as Christians start limiting what they broadly offer. It doesn't mean that gays will be able to force artists to perform for them. It means that Christian artists will offer their talent only within the community of Christians.

Right...it might double from one to two of them....EEEEK!

 

[Katzndogz]

The division will just get deeper and wider as Christians start limiting what they broadly offer. It doesn't mean that gays will be able to force artists to perform for them. It means that Christian artists will offer their talent only within the community of Christians.

Great, go away. Build your walls, so we can keep you inside them.

Then you lose. Your domination is ended. Live and die among your own degenerate kind.

 

[Katzndogz]

The division will just get deeper and wider as Christians start limiting what they broadly offer. It doesn't mean that gays will be able to force artists to perform for them. It means that Christian artists will offer their talent only within the community of Christians.

Right...it might double from one to two of them....EEEEK!

We've already seen that in the futile protests the gay mafia tried to agitate against Chick fil A and Phil Robertson.

 

[Katzndogz]

The division will just get deeper and wider as Christians start limiting what they broadly offer. It doesn't mean that gays will be able to force artists to perform for them. It means that Christian artists will offer their talent only within the community of Christians.

Then if the Christian proprietors go bankrupt from lack of customers, let THAT be their punishment and not some Rainbow Reicht forcing their dogma down their throats using the courts as a piping bag.

Except they don't go bankrupt. Their businesses increase. In every case. That includes Sweet Cakes where gays used actual violence against customers and vendors.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The division will just get deeper and wider as Christians start limiting what they broadly offer. It doesn't mean that gays will be able to force artists to perform for them. It means that Christian artists will offer their talent only within the community of Christians.

Then if the Christian proprietors go bankrupt from lack of customers, let THAT be their punishment and not some Rainbow Reicht forcing their dogma down their throats using the courts as a piping bag.

Except they don't go bankrupt. Their businesses increase. In every case. That includes Sweet Cakes where gays used actual violence against customers and vendors.

No one did anything of the kind, they simply put them out of business and few wanted to be associated with them any longer.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The division will just get deeper and wider as Christians start limiting what they broadly offer. It doesn't mean that gays will be able to force artists to perform for them. It means that Christian artists will offer their talent only within the community of Christians.

Great, go away. Build your walls, so we can keep you inside them.

Then you lose. Your domination is ended. Live and die among your own degenerate kind.

My kind are liberals, like those who founded this nation. Take your paints and your God and get the hell out of it, it wasn't founded for your kind. Until then the more you people go off and hide in caves, the easier it is for us to seal them off.

 

[Katzndogz]

The division will just get deeper and wider as Christians start limiting what they broadly offer. It doesn't mean that gays will be able to force artists to perform for them. It means that Christian artists will offer their talent only within the community of Christians.

Great, go away. Build your walls, so we can keep you inside them.

Then you lose. Your domination is ended. Live and die among your own degenerate kind.

My kind are liberals, like those who founded this nation. Take your paints and your God and get the hell out of it, it wasn't founded for your kind. Until then the more you goes off and hide in caves, the easier it is to seal them off.

It is time for degenerate to throw normal people out of the country. Stop wishful thinking and get with it because we will never be as degenerate as you.

 

[EastCoastLiberal]

Skank. You must be loving all this. Nobody paid this much attention to your threads on AOL.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The division will just get deeper and wider as Christians start limiting what they broadly offer. It doesn't mean that gays will be able to force artists to perform for them. It means that Christian artists will offer their talent only within the community of Christians.

Great, go away. Build your walls, so we can keep you inside them.

Then you lose. Your domination is ended. Live and die among your own degenerate kind.

My kind are liberals, like those who founded this nation. Take your paints and your God and get the hell out of it, it wasn't founded for your kind. Until then the more you goes off and hide in caves, the easier it is to seal them off.

It is time for degenerate to throw normal people out of the country. Stop wishful thinking and get with it because we will never be as degenerate as you.

You will never be liberal, which means you are un-American. It's a liberal nation, move to Jesusland.

 

[Silhouette]

Then if the Christian proprietors go bankrupt from lack of customers, let THAT be their punishment and not some Rainbow Reicht forcing their dogma down their throats using the courts as a piping bag.

Except they don't go bankrupt. Their businesses increase. In every case. That includes Sweet Cakes where gays used actual violence against customers and vendors.

Well I think that was my hidden point. It seems that every time the LGBT jackboots trample another Christian, the numbers of backlash protestors increase.

The free market will settle this question. Let Christians put a sign above their door saying they don't do gay weddings as a matter of faith and principles and let them "lose all that money" when the droves of Christians supporters patronize their courageous and decent shop.

 

[Katzndogz]

The division will just get deeper and wider as Christians start limiting what they broadly offer. It doesn't mean that gays will be able to force artists to perform for them. It means that Christian artists will offer their talent only within the community of Christians.

Then if the Christian proprietors go bankrupt from lack of customers, let THAT be their punishment and not some Rainbow Reicht forcing their dogma down their throats using the courts as a piping bag.

Except they don't go bankrupt. Their businesses increase. In every case. That includes Sweet Cakes where gays used actual violence against customers and vendors.

No one did anything of the kind, they simply put them out of business and few wanted to be associated with them any longer.

Yet their business has tripled once they got away from gay threats.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

The division will just get deeper and wider as Christians start limiting what they broadly offer. It doesn't mean that gays will be able to force artists to perform for them. It means that Christian artists will offer their talent only within the community of Christians.

Then if the Christian proprietors go bankrupt from lack of customers, let THAT be their punishment and not some Rainbow Reicht forcing their dogma down their throats using the courts as a piping bag.

Except they don't go bankrupt. Their businesses increase. In every case. That includes Sweet Cakes where gays used actual violence against customers and vendors.

No one did anything of the kind, they simply put them out of business and few wanted to be associated with them any longer.

Yet their business has tripled once they got away from gay threats.

Very doubtful, since they are now back at home, and it doesn't matter to me if the Hitler Youth for Jesus rush to support your bigots. You keep mentioning that and no one cares.