Gorsuch

[TNHarley]

It is bizarre how upset some fucktards get when someone is given the same rights and privileges they enjoy.

I thought he was going to be the greatest SC pick in decades. Instead, he legislated from the bench.
What ever happened to constitutionalists?
Good gawd we are so fucked. Cant find the rule of law ANYWHERE.

He defended the rights of americans. Why is that bad for you

Your answer is in the OP. Try reading. Thanks.

The rights of Americans are now expanded. Why are you threatened by this

Expanded? By taking away private property rights? Do you even know what rights are?
Holy shit

Giving gays and lesbians equal rights does not effect my property or yours

Next

Yes it does affect our property. If I don't want someone on my property, then I don't want them there. The Right to own private property was one of the great hallmarks of our Constitution.

So you believe that you have the right to serve only white people or the people who wear their hair the way you prefer.

Wave your Confederate flag proudly moron

what a childish statement.

Yes if a black man owns a bbq joint and he only wants to serve blacks, that should be his right, its HIS bbq joint.

Not under American law doofus. That is like saying that Prince could deny people to his concerts based on the color of their skin. Your brain needs cleaning

You are stupid. I'm saying that (if he were alive) Prince should be able to hold a black's only concert

Slavery was legal in this country at one time too, so the argument of "well that's the law so that makes it right" is stupid.

When you die after living an ignorant life you will be buried with that ignorance. Tell us about your pointy white hat collection

Sorry to learn that you are too ignorant to take part in an intellectual discussion about my rights as a business owner versus someone else's rights as an employee or customer.

Be careful licking windows.

Actually I own hundreds of businesses Apple being the largest

Sorry to know that you believe that neil Gorsuch is the supreme court

Do try again

Ok j starkey

 

[Porter Rockwell]

You are wrong. The United States Supreme Court legislated from the bench and, at some point, it will be up to the people to hold the high Court responsible for their perversion of the Constitution.

On this point, I respectfully disagree, based on precedent, not that the law itself was constitutional as written (before improper judicial conduct made the law "constitutional").

Unfortunately, as a justice of the Supreme Court SHOULD do, Gorsuch had no choice but to hold the way he did, based on bullshit decisions made by prior courts who refused to uphold the Constitution and themselves took a big fat shit on it. Because of those prior holdings, Gorsuch's holding was correct, based on the language of the law.

Now, what will result? A whole lot of bullshit.

My guess is that this very old law that should never have been enacted in the first place, or upheld in the past, will have significant portions repealed or revised. It is the poison pill.

.

The United States Supreme Court has a nasty habit of overturning their own decisions. Now, if we go back to the original rulings and how this would have been decided based on that, you get a different result. So, do you think the United States Supreme Court can only reverse their own rulings if it benefits the "living Constitution" model?

 

[ColtMadeMenEqual]

Actually I own hundreds of businesses Apple being the largest

Sorry to know that you believe that neil Gorsuch is the supreme court

Do try again

Ok j starkey
[/QUOTE]


LULZ how is someone gonna claim that they own Apple with a straight face?

 

[Billiejeens]

I thought he was going to be the greatest SC pick in decades. Instead, he legislated from the bench.
What ever happened to constitutionalists?
Good gawd we are so fucked. Cant find the rule of law ANYWHERE.

He defended the rights of americans. Why is that bad for you

No, he corrupted and perverted the law to further the agenda of special interests.

Behavior is NOT an inherent part of people.

Gorsuch did not vote alone doofus

Try again

I don't think that you are comprehending.

Everyone expects the Left Wing Loons to be activists.
So those people are a non-story.
The story is that someone who was not thought to be an activist - may have been.

Catch On?

Neil defended the rights of gays to live the life they chose. This is the America I choose to live in.

Enjoy festering in your hate

So your not catching on

 

[esalla]

I thought he was going to be the greatest SC pick in decades. Instead, he legislated from the bench.
What ever happened to constitutionalists?
Good gawd we are so fucked. Cant find the rule of law ANYWHERE.

He defended the rights of americans. Why is that bad for you

No, he corrupted and perverted the law to further the agenda of special interests.

Behavior is NOT an inherent part of people.

Gorsuch did not vote alone doofus

Try again

I don't think that you are comprehending.

Everyone expects the Left Wing Loons to be activists.
So those people are a non-story.
The story is that someone who was not thought to be an activist - may have been.

Catch On?

Neil defended the rights of gays to live the life they chose. This is the America I choose to live in.

Enjoy festering in your hate

So your not catching on

Wrong again, I have fully caught on that you are a homophobe and that you believe delusionaly that the supreme court has to do what you say.

Enjoy pulling the rest of your hair out

 

[Billiejeens]

I thought he was going to be the greatest SC pick in decades. Instead, he legislated from the bench.
What ever happened to constitutionalists?
Good gawd we are so fucked. Cant find the rule of law ANYWHERE.

He defended the rights of americans. Why is that bad for you

No, he corrupted and perverted the law to further the agenda of special interests.

Behavior is NOT an inherent part of people.

Gorsuch did not vote alone doofus

Try again

I don't think that you are comprehending.

Everyone expects the Left Wing Loons to be activists.
So those people are a non-story.
The story is that someone who was not thought to be an activist - may have been.

Catch On?

Neil defended the rights of gays to live the life they chose. This is the America I choose to live in.

Enjoy festering in your hate

So your not catching on

Wrong again, I have fully caught on that you are a homophobe and that you believe delusionaly that the supreme court has to do what you say.

Enjoy pulling the rest of your hair out

Factually false

 

[esalla]

I thought he was going to be the greatest SC pick in decades. Instead, he legislated from the bench.
What ever happened to constitutionalists?
Good gawd we are so fucked. Cant find the rule of law ANYWHERE.

He defended the rights of americans. Why is that bad for you

No, he corrupted and perverted the law to further the agenda of special interests.

Behavior is NOT an inherent part of people.

Gorsuch did not vote alone doofus

Try again

I don't think that you are comprehending.

Everyone expects the Left Wing Loons to be activists.
So those people are a non-story.
The story is that someone who was not thought to be an activist - may have been.

Catch On?

Neil defended the rights of gays to live the life they chose. This is the America I choose to live in.

Enjoy festering in your hate

So your not catching on

Wrong again, I have fully caught on that you are a homophobe and that you believe delusionaly that the supreme court has to do what you say.

Enjoy pulling the rest of your hair out

Factually false

However you are not bright enough to actually list what you claim is wrong

Next fool

 

[Billiejeens]

I thought he was going to be the greatest SC pick in decades. Instead, he legislated from the bench.
What ever happened to constitutionalists?
Good gawd we are so fucked. Cant find the rule of law ANYWHERE.

He defended the rights of americans. Why is that bad for you

No, he corrupted and perverted the law to further the agenda of special interests.

Behavior is NOT an inherent part of people.

Gorsuch did not vote alone doofus

Try again

I don't think that you are comprehending.

Everyone expects the Left Wing Loons to be activists.
So those people are a non-story.
The story is that someone who was not thought to be an activist - may have been.

Catch On?

Neil defended the rights of gays to live the life they chose. This is the America I choose to live in.

Enjoy festering in your hate

So your not catching on

Wrong again, I have fully caught on that you are a homophobe and that you believe delusionaly that the supreme court has to do what you say.

Enjoy pulling the rest of your hair out

Factually false

However you are not bright enough to actually list what you claim is wrong

Next fool

All of it.
Todos.

 

[RealDave]

I thought he was going to be the greatest SC pick in decades. Instead, he legislated from the bench.
What ever happened to constitutionalists?
Good gawd we are so fucked. Cant find the rule of law ANYWHERE.

The Civil Rights A ct of 1964 banned descriminatuion based on several attrib uters.

One of them is sex.

Take your stupid bigoted ass and your stupid bigoted orange President & all hug & kiss each other in Tulsa so you call all get the virtus & drop dead.

 

[WillPower]

Rush warned Newt and his boys not to be taken in by the Swamp cocktail party circuit when they took over Congress in '94. He told them how conservatives are worn down into mush by the Rat social elite, lobbyists, and Wall Street. It's still happening...they got Roberts, they'll get Gorsuch. Oh, they'll still vote the right way on several issues but not the ones the Swamp really wants. The trial lawyers will make millions off homo discrimination suits and donate part of it to their Rat partners in crime. Hardiman would have been a better pick than Gorsuch...he even started driving toward D.C. to fake out the press for Trump. Then with his next choice Trump chose Kavanaugh...whoever is advising the President needs on Court choices needs to go.

 

[esalla]

I thought he was going to be the greatest SC pick in decades. Instead, he legislated from the bench.
What ever happened to constitutionalists?
Good gawd we are so fucked. Cant find the rule of law ANYWHERE.

He defended the rights of americans. Why is that bad for you

No, he corrupted and perverted the law to further the agenda of special interests.

Behavior is NOT an inherent part of people.

Gorsuch did not vote alone doofus

Try again

I don't think that you are comprehending.

Everyone expects the Left Wing Loons to be activists.
So those people are a non-story.
The story is that someone who was not thought to be an activist - may have been.

Catch On?

Neil defended the rights of gays to live the life they chose. This is the America I choose to live in.

Enjoy festering in your hate

So your not catching on

Wrong again, I have fully caught on that you are a homophobe and that you believe delusionaly that the supreme court has to do what you say.

Enjoy pulling the rest of your hair out

Factually false

However you are not bright enough to actually list what you claim is wrong

Next fool

All of it.
Todos.

So you still can't point out any mistake I made.

Yawning

 

[Billiejeens]

I thought he was going to be the greatest SC pick in decades. Instead, he legislated from the bench.
What ever happened to constitutionalists?
Good gawd we are so fucked. Cant find the rule of law ANYWHERE.

The Civil Rights A ct of 1964 banned descriminatuion based on several attrib uters.

One of them is sex.

Take your stupid bigoted ass and your stupid bigoted orange President & all hug & kiss each other in Tulsa so you call all get the virtus & drop dead.

Poor baby
Poor stupid baby

 

[esalla]

I thought he was going to be the greatest SC pick in decades. Instead, he legislated from the bench.
What ever happened to constitutionalists?
Good gawd we are so fucked. Cant find the rule of law ANYWHERE.

The Civil Rights A ct of 1964 banned descriminatuion based on several attrib uters.

One of them is sex.

Take your stupid bigoted ass and your stupid bigoted orange President & all hug & kiss each other in Tulsa so you call all get the virtus & drop dead.

So you refuse to accept that Trump put more women and minorities to work than any previous president.

Yawning

 

[Billiejeens]

Rush warned Newt and his boys not to be taken in by the Swamp cocktail party circuit when they took over Congress in '94. He told them how conservatives are worn down into mush by the Rat social elite, lobbyists, and Wall Street. It's still happening...they got Roberts, they'll get Gorsuch. Oh, they'll still vote the right way on several issues but not the ones the Swamp really wants. The trial lawyers will make millions off homo discrimination suits and donate part of it to their Rat partners in crime. Hardiman would have been a better pick than Gorsuch...he even started driving toward D.C. to fake out the press for Trump. Then with his next choice Trump chose Kavanaugh...whoever is advising the President needs on Court choices needs to go.

Not sure if they "got" Roberts ot he was always Not Good.
It was Bush so - a Rino picked a RINO.

 

[Rye Catcher]

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Yes. All men are created equal. All men have the right to pursue happiness.

If happiness is to be a bigoted asshole, should they not have the right to do so? Or, is the pursuit of happiness only those acts that are correct pursuits of happiness? (correct pursuits being prescribed by government force)

I make no claim that bigoted assholes are quality people. They are NOT.

But, even bigoted assholes have the right to be bigoted assholes, and we have the right to not do business to such assholes.

.

I would make the argument that bigots and assholes are not happy people. By having the right to be bigoted asshole is limited, that limit is when (metaphorically) the bigots fist lands on the nose of another.

there is no requirement to be happy to exercise your rights. Further there is no requirement not be an asshole

And finally if you truly believed your rights ended where another person's started you would argue that you don't have the right to force ANYONE to serve you, or employ you.

Multiple pages and no one can satisfactory explain why a person has a right to work for someone rather than a person having the right to hire whom they want.

Intellectually speaking , if I have a right to enter your business without permission and demand to be served, I have the right to enter your home without permission. What is the difference? There is no difference of course.

"Intellectually speaking"? Drill down on your comment that there is no difference between a home and a business. What you claim is that anyone who wears a religious symbol can be denied service. Is that an illegal act by the owner/manager of the establishment?

Probably not. Would the effected person or persons be within their rights to picket the establishment, go on the Internet and warn others that this establishment is discriminating against Christians, Jews, Muslims or Atheists? You bet. In fact there could be civil consequences, depending on State Civil Codes.

However, an owner/HR of a commercial business which rejects members of the protective class for employment violates the EEOC:

See: Prohibited Employment Policies/Practices | U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

 

[Lysistrata]

Isn't this just a application of the law?

I thought he was going to be the greatest SC pick in decades. Instead, he legislated from the bench.
What ever happened to constitutionalists?
Good gawd we are so fucked. Cant find the rule of law ANYWHERE.

He didn't legislate from the bench. The law was already there. What's it to you, anyway? Is it just that you like picking on other people?

They updated the law. They legislated from the bench. That is beyond their powers. Please think and not just react. Thanks.

I am thinking. Why should the law NOT include discrimination against someone based on sexual orientation?

I'm still confused as to why some Americans have it in for LGBT Americans. You are free to live a heterosexual lifestyle without interference, are you not? What's your beef?

 

[Hossfly]

"To arms! To arms. The nitwits are coming!" One if by land, two if by sea! They're all around us!

 

[WillPower]

"To arms! To arms. The nitwits are coming!" One if by land, two if by sea! They're all around us!

Hey ya old scallywag.....looks like we might get baseball afterall....I'm jonesing for a frozen rope triple down in the RF corner...see what kind of relay keeps the runner from trotting on home. Virus is rampaging through Arizona so I've been layin dog and keeping an eye on the treeline.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

You are wrong. The United States Supreme Court legislated from the bench and, at some point, it will be up to the people to hold the high Court responsible for their perversion of the Constitution.

On this point, I respectfully disagree, based on precedent, not that the law itself was constitutional as written (before improper judicial conduct made the law "constitutional").

Unfortunately, as a justice of the Supreme Court SHOULD do, Gorsuch had no choice but to hold the way he did, based on bullshit decisions made by prior courts who refused to uphold the Constitution and themselves took a big fat shit on it. Because of those prior holdings, Gorsuch's holding was correct, based on the language of the law.

Now, what will result? A whole lot of bullshit.

My guess is that this very old law that should never have been enacted in the first place, or upheld in the past, will have significant portions repealed or revised. It is the poison pill.

.

The United States Supreme Court has a nasty habit of overturning their own decisions. Now, if we go back to the original rulings and how this would have been decided based on that, you get a different result. So, do you think the United States Supreme Court can only reverse their own rulings if it benefits the "living Constitution" model?

You're not wrong. Bullshit holdings need to go. I am just telling you their philosophy of restraint.

.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

"To arms! To arms. The nitwits are coming!" One if by land, two if by sea! They're all around us!

Aye!!!

I be placed in a bewilderment!!!

.