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.
Still a PIG I see. don't you bother asking for tolerance you don't deserve any tolerance.. asswipe.
i dont expect any from Bigots. You people should be wiped from the earth. You are a mistake of nature. If there was a god it should of wiped you out the way of evolution. You literally serve no purpose.
The homo owner of the gay bar is an intolerant bigot. You need to go talk to him so he gets right. The rest of your post is just a typical homo hateful rant.
Still waiting for someone to show me where the constitution states that we all have the *right* to marry any person we so desire.
The SCOTUS was able to see the right to marry:
Loving v Virginia (1967)
Zablocki v Wisconsin (1978)
Turner v Safley (1987)
The way this works is YOU have to come up with a valid reason to deny gays and lesbians this fundamental right. You must have an overriding societal harm in allowing non-familial consenting adult couples the fundamental right to marry. In court, no one has been able to which is why Federal judges keep ruling DOMA unconstitutional.
And let us keep in mind, simplistic mantras that one uses whenever the urge to visit the gay bathhouses become overwhelming are NOT valid legal arguments against legalized equality in civil marriage.
Still waiting for someone to show me where the constitution states that we all have the *right* to marry any person we so desire.
The SCOTUS was able to see the right to marry:
Loving v Virginia (1967)
Zablocki v Wisconsin (1978)
Turner v Safley (1987)
The way this works is YOU have to come up with a valid reason to deny gays and lesbians this fundamental right. You must have an overriding societal harm in allowing non-familial consenting adult couples the fundamental right to marry. In court, no one has been able to which is why Federal judges keep ruling DOMA unconstitutional.
And let us keep in mind, simplistic mantras that one uses whenever the urge to visit the gay bathhouses become overwhelming are NOT valid legal arguments against legalized equality in civil marriage.
The SCOTUS was able to see the right to marry:
Loving v Virginia (1967)
Zablocki v Wisconsin (1978)
Turner v Safley (1987)
The way this works is YOU have to come up with a valid reason to deny gays and lesbians this fundamental right. You must have an overriding societal harm in allowing non-familial consenting adult couples the fundamental right to marry. In court, no one has been able to which is why Federal judges keep ruling DOMA unconstitutional.
And let us keep in mind, simplistic mantras that one uses whenever the urge to visit the gay bathhouses become overwhelming are NOT valid legal arguments against legalized equality in civil marriage.
LOL...no, it certainly isn't.
There are no valid legal arguments. That was obvious in the Prop 8 trial. The proponents of Prop 8 actually had documents of testimony from George "Rent Boy" Rekers.
Keep Your Bachelorette Party Out of My Gay Bar
Some gay guy friends I know have complained about this very thing....would a bar owner be bigoted if they are trying to protect their regular clientele from becoming "props" as the article says?
Marriage is, quite clearly, a fundamental civil right. That has been well established by the Supreme Court on more than one occasion. What is the compelling state reason to deny gay and lesbian couples this fundamental civil right? Where is the overriding harm (that will stand up in court)?
Keep Your Bachelorette Party Out of My Gay Bar
Some gay guy friends I know have complained about this very thing....would a bar owner be bigoted if they are trying to protect their regular clientele from becoming "props" as the article says?
Exactly. He was getting complaints from his regular paying customers, his "bread and butter". It was a business decision couched in a protest against marriage inequality.
Keep Your Bachelorette Party Out of My Gay Bar
Some gay guy friends I know have complained about this very thing....would a bar owner be bigoted if they are trying to protect their regular clientele from becoming "props" as the article says?
Exactly. He was getting complaints from his regular paying customers, his "bread and butter". It was a business decision couched in a protest against marriage inequality.
Well, he also says that he doesn't feel like he should be providing a service for people who get a legal advantage over himself and his regular clientele due to discrimination. I agree with him. Open to bachelorette parties when marriage equality finally comes....if he wants to.
Marriage is, quite clearly, a fundamental civil right. That has been well established by the Supreme Court on more than one occasion. What is the compelling state reason to deny gay and lesbian couples this fundamental civil right? Where is the overriding harm (that will stand up in court)?
The same Argument can be made for Consenting Aged Same Sex Siblings.
Make the Case FOR Homosexual Coupling being Equal to Heterosexual Coupling in Law.
peace...
Marriage is, quite clearly, a fundamental civil right. That has been well established by the Supreme Court on more than one occasion. What is the compelling state reason to deny gay and lesbian couples this fundamental civil right? Where is the overriding harm (that will stand up in court)?
They don't get a legal advantage over him. *Lie*.
Really? They don't get to legally marry either? Who knew.
They don't get a legal advantage over him. *Lie*.
Really? They don't get to legally marry either? Who knew.
Gays can legally marry, just like everybody else.
They choose not to. Their choice.
They don't get a legal advantage over him. *Lie*.
Really? They don't get to legally marry either? Who knew.
Just as bars catering to a straight clientele should not be forced to serve gays. It's called business practice.
