I Was Right All Along! Johns Hopkins Research: No Evidence People Are Born Gay or Transgender

[Dan Stubbs]

As I've surmised for years. Nobody is born gay. John's Hopkins Research has vindicated me. No! Weak minded people let themselves be seduced by Satan and then become his disciples living out perverted dangerous homosexual lifestyles putting young kids lives in danger, especially when same sex married couples adopt them for their sexual pleasure. Homosexuality is not inate, it is learned. Science has spoken! Now President Trump should sign an executive order making it mandatory for gays to have conversion therapy so they can return to normal and find God.

Johns Hopkins Research: No Evidence People Are Born Gay Or Transgender

Just a group of Guys who hate females and had bad experience with their Mothers sleeping with them.

 

[martybegan]

Wrong, he doesn't just disagree, the work violated his deeply held religious convictions. That's also in the Constitution and the gov't should not be able to FORCE you to do that, not even to do business.

I think the baker has an excellent chance with this Supreme Court.

See Employment Division,Dept. of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990)

Employment Division v. Smith

All persons, no matter of what their beliefs are, must obey generally applicable laws.

Allowing exceptions to every state law or regulation affecting religion "would open the prospect of constitutionally required exemptions from civic obligations of almost every conceivable kind."
​

Justice Antonin Scalia

Your theory would create social chaos, with the adult population among 320+ people each going his or her own way, each guided only by a personal belief.

Personally, I don't want to see horse-drawn buggies on the beltway.

So would you be in favor of forcing Islamonazi butchers to sell bacon and pork?

Sure, its against their religion, but tough shit, eh?

The government isn't forcing the baker to sell anything. It says IF YOU ALREADY MAKE WEDDING CAKES, you must sell them to EVERYONE. Period. What is so hard about that?

They don't want to participate in SSM wedding ceremonies. Where is the government benefit in forcing them to do so or ruining them?

The government simply enforces the law; if they didn't, we would have anarchy. Being religious doesn't make you special. You cannot break the law because of it.

So Southern States were just enforcing Plessey and Jim Crow?

Sorry, but allowing a Religious exemption for a non-critical, non-timely, contracted service will not result in anarchy. Forcing them to bake or else, however is a pretty good step towards tyranny.

The whole point is they SHOULDN'T have to break the law, because the law in questions shouldn't be applied to them.

Cripes, you are just as tone deaf as body when it comes to running behind the law's skirt.

 

[mdk]

All these tears over fags getting married are simply delicious. I lap them up like a fine bourbon.

 

[martybegan]

So would you be in favor of forcing Islamonazi butchers to sell bacon and pork?

Sure, its against their religion, but tough shit, eh?

The government isn't forcing the baker to sell anything. It says IF YOU ALREADY MAKE WEDDING CAKES, you must sell them to EVERYONE. Period. What is so hard about that?

They don't want to participate in SSM wedding ceremonies. Where is the government benefit in forcing them to do so or ruining them?

I've already told you the answer to both questions at least twice and no matter how many times you ask, the answers are not going to change.

No, you have told me YOUR benefit, fucking with people you don't like.There is ZERO government benefit beyond regulating butthurt in the matter of a non-essential, non-timely, contracted service.

And sorry, but butthurt isn't a compelling government interest, for either side.

Who is butthurt? Who do you think I don't like? You are projecting, I think.

Well the gay couple are, and technically the baker is as well. On one hand the gay couple has to do extra work and probably had their feelings hurt.

On the other forcing the baker to bake the cake is making them choose between their livelihood and their morals.

Only one of these scenarios has a major life impact, i.e. the choice between your morals and your living.

 

[martybegan]

Wrong, he doesn't just disagree, the work violated his deeply held religious convictions. That's also in the Constitution and the gov't should not be able to FORCE you to do that, not even to do business.

I think the baker has an excellent chance with this Supreme Court.

See Employment Division,Dept. of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990)

Employment Division v. Smith

All persons, no matter of what their beliefs are, must obey generally applicable laws.

Allowing exceptions to every state law or regulation affecting religion "would open the prospect of constitutionally required exemptions from civic obligations of almost every conceivable kind."
​

Justice Antonin Scalia

Your theory would create social chaos, with the adult population among 320+ people each going his or her own way, each guided only by a personal belief.

Personally, I don't want to see horse-drawn buggies on the beltway.

lol
Ok, How about people have the decency not to try and force their views on other people through business? Why force someone to To do something they obviously object to? But then again you are a control freak... It’s a control freak thing I do not understand

"Decency" has nothing to do with it. Nobody tried to force any view on anyone. He has/had a business license. He had quite an elaborate website. Even on it, he did not indicate that the service that he was offering was restricted to certain members of the public. It was a general invitation to patronize his business. He did not do anything at all to warn the public of his religious proclivities. All that happened was that his violation of anti-discrimination laws was reported through the established procedure.

The couple did nothing wrong, and they are blameless in this matter. I notice that the anti-LGBT types always try to flip the blame onto LGBTs, which is BS. This guy failed in his responsibilities.

Again, just because you sell something doesn't mean you lose your Right to Free Exercise.

Sorry, but just going to another baker is the right move here, unless you have an axe to grind.

We know YOU have an axe to grind, a tiny, little useless axe to grind.

I don't have an axe to grind. I wish they had just gone to another baker, too, but I see the point in making it an issue, as well. It's a really tough case; I can see both sides. The S.C. doesn't want to touch it with a ten foot pole, and they probably won't.

Then why demand government enforce thousands of dollars in fines for not baking a cake?

It is a really easy case, in this instance the good or service is contracted, non-timely, and non-essential.

Without compelling government interest, the case goes to the baker.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

All these tears over fags getting married are simply delicious. I lap them up like a fine bourbon.

Fear? Just an eye roll.

It's good along...it could get ugly lol

 

[bodecea]

Wrong, he doesn't just disagree, the work violated his deeply held religious convictions. That's also in the Constitution and the gov't should not be able to FORCE you to do that, not even to do business.

I think the baker has an excellent chance with this Supreme Court.

See Employment Division,Dept. of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990)

Employment Division v. Smith

All persons, no matter of what their beliefs are, must obey generally applicable laws.

Allowing exceptions to every state law or regulation affecting religion "would open the prospect of constitutionally required exemptions from civic obligations of almost every conceivable kind."
​

Justice Antonin Scalia

Your theory would create social chaos, with the adult population among 320+ people each going his or her own way, each guided only by a personal belief.

Personally, I don't want to see horse-drawn buggies on the beltway.

So would you be in favor of forcing Islamonazi butchers to sell bacon and pork?

Sure, its against their religion, but tough shit, eh?

The government isn't forcing the baker to sell anything. It says IF YOU ALREADY MAKE WEDDING CAKES, you must sell them to EVERYONE. Period. What is so hard about that?

A "Gay Wedding" is not a wedding. A wedding is between a man and a broad.

Gay weddings are a bird of a different kind

Pretend

Just as pretend as any religious wedding....pretend.

 

[martybegan]

All these tears over fags getting married are simply delicious. I lap them up like a fine bourbon.

When have I complained about them getting married?

My argument has always been about free exercise in the case of the whole cake thing, and the fact that Obergfell is terrible SC precedent.

Obergfell should have allowed the rednecks to continue to not issue SSM licenses, but to accept licenses from out of State under full faith and credit.

I was happy when NY passed SSM legislatively, that was the right way to do it.

 

[bodecea]

All these tears over fags getting married are simply delicious. I lap them up like a fine bourbon.

Fear? Just an eye roll.

It's good along...it could get ugly lol

It's quite telling when a group of people feel that their marriages have been somehow lessened by gay legal marriage. Not all that solid.

 

[mdk]

All these tears over fags getting married are simply delicious. I lap them up like a fine bourbon.

Fear? Just an eye roll.

It's good along...it could get ugly lol

Tears, not fear. It would be terribly funny if someone actually feared queers getting married.

 

[mdk]

All these tears over fags getting married are simply delicious. I lap them up like a fine bourbon.

When have I complained about them getting married?

My argument has always been about free exercise in the case of the whole cake thing, and the fact that Obergfell is terrible SC precedent.

Obergfell should have allowed the rednecks to continue to not issue SSM licenses, but to accept licenses from out of State under full faith and credit.

I was happy when NY passed SSM legislatively, that was the right way to do it.

Did I say you did, Marty? Nope. I sure didn't.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

All these tears over fags getting married are simply delicious. I lap them up like a fine bourbon.

Fear? Just an eye roll.

It's good along...it could get ugly lol

Tears, not fear. It would be terribly funny if someone actually feared queers getting married.

No tears here. Be "married", be happy and content. It's your life...but I know how it ends

 

[martybegan]

All these tears over fags getting married are simply delicious. I lap them up like a fine bourbon.

When have I complained about them getting married?

My argument has always been about free exercise in the case of the whole cake thing, and the fact that Obergfell is terrible SC precedent.

Obergfell should have allowed the rednecks to continue to not issue SSM licenses, but to accept licenses from out of State under full faith and credit.

I was happy when NY passed SSM legislatively, that was the right way to do it.

Did I say you did, Marty? Nope. I sure didn't.

See, that's what happens when you don't reference people or quote them directly, assumptions are made.

This isn't a NJ rest area, where you can glory hole your way though without actually having to pick and choose an actual person.

 

[mdk]

All these tears over fags getting married are simply delicious. I lap them up like a fine bourbon.

Fear? Just an eye roll.

It's good along...it could get ugly lol

Tears, not fear. It would be terribly funny if someone actually feared queers getting married.

No tears here. Be "married", be happy and content. It's your life...but I know how it ends

I was married long before it become legal, but I know how it ends too...in Halls of Valhalla.

 

[EvilEyeFleegle]

As I've surmised for years. Nobody is born gay. John's Hopkins Research has vindicated me. No! Weak minded people let themselves be seduced by Satan and then become his disciples living out perverted dangerous homosexual lifestyles putting young kids lives in danger, especially when same sex married couples adopt them for their sexual pleasure. Homosexuality is not inate, it is learned. Science has spoken! Now President Trump should sign an executive order making it mandatory for gays to have conversion therapy so they can return to normal and find God.

Johns Hopkins Research: No Evidence People Are Born Gay Or Transgender

I agree. It is 100% personal choice, not an inheritance. Most other folly also is not inherited but is the personal choice of the person engaging in it.

If it's 100% a choice, when did you choose your sexual orientation? What age were you? What do you recall leading to that choice?

I look at it different, bode.

We all start off as Normative- that's our nature, so no decision is needed except if you decide to become a she-male or some other kind of non-binary choice. Back in the day, when Sodomy was a crime, it was euphemistically described as a "crime against nature".

The first city when homosexuality was really gloried was Sodom. They loved sodomy so much, they name their city after the act. Imagine if San Francisco decided to get rid of the religious moniker, and changed their name to "Bumphuck". That's basically what the people of Sodom did.

ROTFLMAO! Or...the act was named for the city..rather than the reverse--of course, for those of us that study history..homosexuality was around long before Sodom...it might surprise you to learn the homosexuality has not always been a crime...in the history of the world....which is far, far longer than the history of Judaism, Christianity or any of the cultural roots of our currant culture.
BTW..Fellatio--between opposite sexes was deemed as a 'crime against nature' as well. While beating and raping your wife was considered not only a man's right..but his Christian prerogative!

Crimes Against Nature Law and Legal Definition | USLegal, Inc.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

All these tears over fags getting married are simply delicious. I lap them up like a fine bourbon.

Fear? Just an eye roll.

It's good along...it could get ugly lol

Tears, not fear. It would be terribly funny if someone actually feared queers getting married.

No tears here. Be "married", be happy and content. It's your life...but I know how it ends

I was married long before it become legal, but I know how it ends too...in Halls of Valhalla.

Lol..no. God is pretty clear on this

 

[Lysistrata]

The baker wasn't "punished," the gay couple were. The baker punished them for their beliefs by refusing to do business with them because he personally does not agree with their lifestyle.
Well la dee dah. No one cares what your personal opinion is when you are doing business with the public. In this country, we're EQUAL.
I feel bad for him, because he has been consistent in his beliefs for years and it isn't just gay cakes he won't make. But I don't see another solution but stepping in and forcing him to follow the rules of equality.

Wrong, he doesn't just disagree, the work violated his deeply held religious convictions. That's also in the Constitution and the gov't should not be able to FORCE you to do that, not even to do business.

I think the baker has an excellent chance with this Supreme Court.

See Employment Division,Dept. of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990)

Employment Division v. Smith

All persons, no matter of what their beliefs are, must obey generally applicable laws.

Allowing exceptions to every state law or regulation affecting religion "would open the prospect of constitutionally required exemptions from civic obligations of almost every conceivable kind."
​

Justice Antonin Scalia

Your theory would create social chaos, with the adult population among 320+ people each going his or her own way, each guided only by a personal belief.

Personally, I don't want to see horse-drawn buggies on the beltway.

So would you be in favor of forcing Islamonazi butchers to sell bacon and pork?

Sure, its against their religion, but tough shit, eh?

Since when is any level of government trying to tell stores what to stock? Your argument makes no sense. A Jewish butcher advertises that kosher meat is available. A Muslim butcher advertises that halal meat is available. Your reference to "Islamonazi butchers" says a lot about you. It's not very mature.

A Christian Baker can advertise that Wedding cakes are available, but not Gay Wedding cakes.

First, this is a violation of universally applicable law. Secondly. he did not advertise any such thing. He instead indulged in false and misleading advertising. Did he expect his prospective customers to be psychic?

 

[SassyIrishLass]

As I've surmised for years. Nobody is born gay. John's Hopkins Research has vindicated me. No! Weak minded people let themselves be seduced by Satan and then become his disciples living out perverted dangerous homosexual lifestyles putting young kids lives in danger, especially when same sex married couples adopt them for their sexual pleasure. Homosexuality is not inate, it is learned. Science has spoken! Now President Trump should sign an executive order making it mandatory for gays to have conversion therapy so they can return to normal and find God.

Johns Hopkins Research: No Evidence People Are Born Gay Or Transgender

I agree. It is 100% personal choice, not an inheritance. Most other folly also is not inherited but is the personal choice of the person engaging in it.

If it's 100% a choice, when did you choose your sexual orientation? What age were you? What do you recall leading to that choice?

I look at it different, bode.

We all start off as Normative- that's our nature, so no decision is needed except if you decide to become a she-male or some other kind of non-binary choice. Back in the day, when Sodomy was a crime, it was euphemistically described as a "crime against nature".

The first city when homosexuality was really gloried was Sodom. They loved sodomy so much, they name their city after the act. Imagine if San Francisco decided to get rid of the religious moniker, and changed their name to "Bumphuck". That's basically what the people of Sodom did.

ROTFLMAO! Or...the act was named for the city..rather than the reverse--of course, for those of us that study history..homosexuality was around long before Sodom...it might surprise you to learn the homosexuality has not always been a crime...in the history of the world....which is far, far longer than the history of Judaism, Christianity or any of the cultural roots of our currant culture.
BTW..Fellatio--between opposite sexes was deemed as a 'crime against nature' as well. While beating and raping your wife was considered not only a man's right..but his Christian prerogative!

Crimes Against Nature Law and Legal Definition | USLegal, Inc.

The point is it's against God's laws. When it's all cut and dried that's what matters

 

[mdk]

All these tears over fags getting married are simply delicious. I lap them up like a fine bourbon.

When have I complained about them getting married?

My argument has always been about free exercise in the case of the whole cake thing, and the fact that Obergfell is terrible SC precedent.

Obergfell should have allowed the rednecks to continue to not issue SSM licenses, but to accept licenses from out of State under full faith and credit.

I was happy when NY passed SSM legislatively, that was the right way to do it.

Did I say you did, Marty? Nope. I sure didn't.

See, that's what happens when you don't reference people or quote them directly, assumptions are made.

This isn't a NJ rest area, where you can glory hole your way though without actually having to pick and choose an actual person.

Or you could just not make assumptions and jump to conclusions. Crazy, I know.

 

[mdk]

All these tears over fags getting married are simply delicious. I lap them up like a fine bourbon.

Fear? Just an eye roll.

It's good along...it could get ugly lol

Tears, not fear. It would be terribly funny if someone actually feared queers getting married.

No tears here. Be "married", be happy and content. It's your life...but I know how it ends

I was married long before it become legal, but I know how it ends too...in Halls of Valhalla.

Lol..no. God is pretty clear on this

Indeed he is.