Gay statists strike again...you will submit!!!!

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

[
And instead you got two entire testimonies which should have been more sufficient to prove that the bible was, indeed, used to justify slavery, segregation and anti miscegenation. And apparently, you weren't even denying that it was (and is).

What does slavery have to do with gay sex and the gay sex culture?

If they can't make the slavery analogy, their argument falls apart. Thats why they keep bringing it up.

uh, no, we bring it up because your main justification for your homophobia is that God says it's bad.

And even though you ignore a whole list of things God says is bad, you want to harp on this one thing.

But the bible says slavery is okay, and people used it to justify slavery right up until the civil war.

nothing you said is true. I am not a homophobe. I have gay friends and relatives and love and respect every one of them. I want them to be able to have a legal binding committment to their same sex partners.

But their union is not, and will never be, a marriage. The gays that I know agree with that, BTW.

Some of my best friends and family are straights....but that does not give straights permission to vote away my civil rights.

What does whether you have the right to marry or not have to do with forcing other people to do business with you?

Here's a DIRECT analogy.

It has been ruled that we have an absolute right to own and carry weapons, yet many businesses are posting signs stating that they don't want to do business with people who are carrying guns. How is that NOT a direct violation of your precious civil rights if you have the right to force people to do business with you?

Hint, you do NOT have the right to force people to do business with you. And frankly if you would accept and acknowledge that fact, you would have the higher moral ground that these nincompoops who for whatever reason believe the government should define marriage.

If you had been paying attention, you would have known that it is not the gays the created Public Accomodation laws....NOR are gays the only people who PA laws affect. Where have you been for the decades such PA laws have been in affect? Why are you crying just now?

As for your analogy....isn't it just "open carry" they object to? Honestly, I expect that kind of thing to end up in the courts soon enough, don't you?

Not really, because most gun owners I know aren't giant pussies intent on forcing other people to fit their agenda

 

[bodecea]

Some of my best friends and family are straights....but that does not give straights permission to vote away my civil rights.

But, through some sort of magic formula, it gives gays the right to demand that government take away everyone else's civil rights.

What civil rights are gays demanding be taken away?

 

[bodecea]

[
And instead you got two entire testimonies which should have been more sufficient to prove that the bible was, indeed, used to justify slavery, segregation and anti miscegenation. And apparently, you weren't even denying that it was (and is).

What does slavery have to do with gay sex and the gay sex culture?

If they can't make the slavery analogy, their argument falls apart. Thats why they keep bringing it up.

uh, no, we bring it up because your main justification for your homophobia is that God says it's bad.

And even though you ignore a whole list of things God says is bad, you want to harp on this one thing.

But the bible says slavery is okay, and people used it to justify slavery right up until the civil war.

nothing you said is true. I am not a homophobe. I have gay friends and relatives and love and respect every one of them. I want them to be able to have a legal binding committment to their same sex partners.

But their union is not, and will never be, a marriage. The gays that I know agree with that, BTW.

Some of my best friends and family are straights....but that does not give straights permission to vote away my civil rights.

What does whether you have the right to marry or not have to do with forcing other people to do business with you?

Here's a DIRECT analogy.

It has been ruled that we have an absolute right to own and carry weapons, yet many businesses are posting signs stating that they don't want to do business with people who are carrying guns. How is that NOT a direct violation of your precious civil rights if you have the right to force people to do business with you?

Hint, you do NOT have the right to force people to do business with you. And frankly if you would accept and acknowledge that fact, you would have the higher moral ground that these nincompoops who for whatever reason believe the government should define marriage.

If you had been paying attention, you would have known that it is not the gays the created Public Accomodation laws....NOR are gays the only people who PA laws affect. Where have you been for the decades such PA laws have been in affect? Why are you crying just now?

As for your analogy....isn't it just "open carry" they object to? Honestly, I expect that kind of thing to end up in the courts soon enough, don't you?

Not really, because most gun owners I know aren't giant pussies intent on forcing other people to fit their agenda

I'm a gun owner.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Cite the case stating gun owners are a protected class. Oh, there hasn't been one? Argument fail.

Let me guess, you think you made a point there.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

But, through some sort of magic formula, it gives gays the right to demand that government take away everyone else's civil rights.

What civil rights are gays demanding be taken away?[/QUOTE]

Freedom of association - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Cite the case stating gun owners are a protected class. Oh, there hasn't been one? Argument fail.

Let me guess, you think you made a point there.

Serious to God, how can someone be so stupid not to understand that giving some groups extra protection is violating the very essence of the COTUS, not to mention the exact words?

Gays want to be separate but equal, just unbelievable

 

[g5000]

Serious to God, how can someone be so stupid not to understand that giving some groups extra protection is violating the very essence of the COTUS, not to mention the exact words?

Gays want to be separate but equal, just unbelievable

This kind of idiocy can only be uttered by a tard.

Here's the tard logic in a simple-to-understand allegory:

HETERO: Give us cash and prizes for being married!

GOVT: Here you go!

GAYS: Give us cash and prizes for being married!

HETERO: Unbelievable. They want special protection!

 

[g5000]

Bigot meltdown in progress.

Nothing to see here, folks. You've just stumbled onto the set of a remake of the George Wallace: Segregation Forever movie.

I recommend the original to see how it will end.

Still off your meds, eh? With perhaps as many as five exceptions, the real story of this thread is the meanderings of intellectual lightweights.

Unlike you, I have seen the end of the movie. I know how it will end for you bigots. Badly.

Spoiler alert:
30 years from now, you will be the one that people will do rhetorical twists and turns to disassociate themselves from just as you are trying to disassociate yourself from the anti-interracial marriage racists and Whites Only lunch counters.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Serious to God, how can someone be so stupid not to understand that giving some groups extra protection is violating the very essence of the COTUS, not to mention the exact words?

Gays want to be separate but equal, just unbelievable

This kind of idiocy can only be uttered by a tard.

Here's the tard logic in a simple-to-understand allegory:

HETERO: Give us cash and prizes for being married!

GOVT: Here you go!

GAYS: Give us cash and prizes for being married!

HETERO: Unbelievable. They want special protection!

Here is what is unbelievable

You don't recognize that

A) I am for taking the word marriage out of ALL government documents

and

B) I am for allowing gays to marry

In the post you quoted I was ONLY speaking about anti discrimination laws.

 

[bodecea]

Cite the case stating gun owners are a protected class. Oh, there hasn't been one? Argument fail.

Let me guess, you think you made a point there.

Serious to God, how can someone be so stupid not to understand that giving some groups extra protection is violating the very essence of the COTUS, not to mention the exact words?

Gays want to be separate but equal, just unbelievable

Why are we just hearing you cry about this now? Why didn't you cry when blacks were given extra protection...when women were given extra protection...when the handicapped were given extra protection...when veterans were given extra protection?

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Cite the case stating gun owners are a protected class. Oh, there hasn't been one? Argument fail.

Let me guess, you think you made a point there.

Serious to God, how can someone be so stupid not to understand that giving some groups extra protection is violating the very essence of the COTUS, not to mention the exact words?

Gays want to be separate but equal, just unbelievable

Why are we just hearing you cry about this now? Why didn't you cry when blacks were given extra protection...when women were given extra protection...when the handicapped were given extra protection...when veterans were given extra protection?

Why are you just now hearing about a lot of things from me now ? Oh that's right, because I just joined


Oh, but thank you for acknowledging that you are asking for extra protections.

 

[bodecea]

Cite the case stating gun owners are a protected class. Oh, there hasn't been one? Argument fail.

Let me guess, you think you made a point there.

Serious to God, how can someone be so stupid not to understand that giving some groups extra protection is violating the very essence of the COTUS, not to mention the exact words?

Gays want to be separate but equal, just unbelievable

Why are we just hearing you cry about this now? Why didn't you cry when blacks were given extra protection...when women were given extra protection...when the handicapped were given extra protection...when veterans were given extra protection?

Why are you just now hearing about a lot of things from me now ? Oh that's right, because I just joined

So you DID complain about those other groups I listed? Where did you complain? Do you have any examples of your written complaints to share with us?

 

[Seawytch]

That's the point you dishonest person. Protected classes are unconstitutional Unless you can explain how giving EXTRA protection to any group is equal protection.

In other words, if I can discriminate against gun owners legally then I should be able to discriminate against gays legally.

The government would have to pass a no discrimination PERIOD law to be constitutional.

.

Except PA laws have withstood constitutional challenge. You knew that, right?

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Cite the case stating gun owners are a protected class. Oh, there hasn't been one? Argument fail.

Let me guess, you think you made a point there.

Serious to God, how can someone be so stupid not to understand that giving some groups extra protection is violating the very essence of the COTUS, not to mention the exact words?

Gays want to be separate but equal, just unbelievable

Why are we just hearing you cry about this now? Why didn't you cry when blacks were given extra protection...when women were given extra protection...when the handicapped were given extra protection...when veterans were given extra protection?

Why are you just now hearing about a lot of things from me now ? Oh that's right, because I just joined

So you DID complain about those other groups I listed? Where did you complain? Do you have any examples of your written complaints to share with us?

Sure, I wrote about them In Huck Finn. You accept fiction as evidence obviously, so that should be good enough for you

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

That's the point you dishonest person. Protected classes are unconstitutional Unless you can explain how giving EXTRA protection to any group is equal protection.

In other words, if I can discriminate against gun owners legally then I should be able to discriminate against gays legally.

The government would have to pass a no discrimination PERIOD law to be constitutional.

.

Except PA laws have withstood constitutional challenge. You knew that, right?

oh and that makes it right or ends the debate? At one time slavery laws were ruled constitutional. You knew that, right?

 

[Seawytch]

What civil rights are gays demanding be taken away?

Freedom of association - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia[/QUOTE]

Ah...only gays are doing that? What about someone's right not to "associate" with blacks, Christians or women? PA laws protect those groups in all 50 states.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

What civil rights are gays demanding be taken away?

Freedom of association - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Ah...only gays are doing that? What about someone's right not to "associate" with blacks, Christians or women? PA laws protect those groups in all 50 states.[/QUOTE]


They are just as wrong if they prevent a black gay disabled woman from discriminating against a white male as they are if they prevent that black male from discriminating against her.

They are unconstitutional as we are given the right to freely associate with whom we choose.

Here's a larger question. why would you want to financially reward someone by doing business with them when they would if not for fear of a fine hang a sign outside saying they don't like you and don't want your money?

 

[Seawytch]

So you DID complain about those other groups I listed? Where did you complain? Do you have any examples of your written complaints to share with us?

He SAYS he called his representative to end all PA laws...but won't tell us what his legislator's response was. (I'm betting laughter).

Even the "libertarian" Rand Paul walked back his opposition to the PA protections in the Civil Rights Act.

 

[Seawytch]

Ah...only gays are doing that? What about someone's right not to "associate" with blacks, Christians or women? PA laws protect those groups in all 50 states.

They are just as wrong if they prevent a black gay disabled woman from discriminating against a white male as they are if they prevent that black male from discriminating against her.

They are unconstitutional as we are given the right to freely associate with whom we choose.

Here's a larger question. why would you want to financially reward someone by doing business with them when they would if not for fear of a fine hang a sign outside saying they don't like you and don't want your money?[/QUOTE]

Again, you do realize that the constitutionality of PA laws has already been challenged and they were not declared unconstitutional, right?

You also realize that the SCOTUS had the opportunity to take up the issue of PA laws this past summer...and declined.

 

[Silhouette]

They are just as wrong if they prevent a black gay disabled woman from discriminating against a white male as they are if they prevent that black male from discriminating against her.

They are unconstitutional as we are given the right to freely associate with whom we choose.

Here's a larger question. why would you want to financially reward someone by doing business with them when they would if not for fear of a fine hang a sign outside saying they don't like you and don't want your money?

Blacks were born black. Women were born women. Gays learned to use the anus as an artificial vagina.

People have a right to reject repugnant behaviors: to not associate with them and to not be required as a matter of law to promote them.