Marriage Beliefs: Honesty, can't we ADMIT we have political differences in bias and beliefs???

[Cecilie1200]

It doesn't matter what you all "believe". The fact is that PA laws...FEDERAL laws I might add, have been found Constitutional. You can challenge them again. Good luck.

I shall definitely save this post for the next time we discuss some court ruling you don't like.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Business is required to justify a profit (motive) for every transaction to the bottom line.

Sorry, that was a bit random. What, and who, are you addressing?

Not random at all, if you have some clue and some Cause.

You're still babbling. If you feel like actually making some sort of sense, let me know.

 

[Cecilie1200]

What do you mean by "beliefs"?

Quote function. Try it.

 

[Cecilie1200]

What do you mean by "beliefs"?

She's referring to those things which you profess, but which you have no means to sustain..., which is to say those things which are not real, thus are not true..., those things which exist only in the perverse reasoning of the disordered mind.

An example would be the 'belief' that homosexuality does not deviate from the human physiological norm... and that a need on your part represents an obligation on the part of another to part with their property, that your right to speak freely, in no way obligates you to speak only of that which you can sustain through soundly reasoned constructs, and other such nonsense as that.

Was he talking to me?

 

[martybegan]

Business is required to justify a profit (motive) for every transaction to the bottom line.

Sorry, that was a bit random. What, and who, are you addressing?

Not random at all, if you have some clue and some Cause.

You're still babbling. If you feel like actually making some sort of sense, let me know.

I have called him on it as well. Either he's some troll's sock, or he really is as dense as lead.

 

[martybegan]

It doesn't matter what you all "believe". The fact is that PA laws...FEDERAL laws I might add, have been found Constitutional. You can challenge them again. Good luck.

I shall definitely save this post for the next time we discuss some court ruling you don't like.

Good luck with that. Seawytch confuses things being constitutional, and things being right. She also confuses things she wants with things that are rights.

 

[danielpalos]

Federal PA laws have withstood Constitutional challenge.

Aren't you a state's rights guy?

Yeah, we all know how much respect leftists have for "withstood Constitutional challenge" when it's something they don't agree with. Don't even try it on with us.

Why? While I may disagree with a SCOTUS ruling, I don't pretend those rulings aren't valid.

PA laws ARE constitutional. You're free to try again though.

Dear Seawytch
The problem is you can't enforce PA laws in a way that violates other Constitutional protections.

In the cases of beliefs about homosexuality and orientation, there is a factor of spirituality involved which is faith based. Neither side can prove their beliefs are the truth in all cases, both sides are faith based and neither has to be proven right or wrong -- they both have equal rights to their beliefs.

Since both sides are equal, to protect both from lawsuits or discrimination, it is best to keep such people separated. It is not considered discrimination to keep Republicans from voting in a Democratic primary, or women to stay out of the men's restroom. It is agreed to keep those separated.

There is no reason not to agree to keep ppl separated from each other who have such conflicting beliefs it will cause a fight. instead of blaming either side for having conflicting beliefs, just blame the conflict for keeping them separated. That way nobody is judged, faulted or punished for their religious or spiritual beliefs.

I believe Persons of religion should file for not-for-profit status if they prefer Religion to Capitalism in public venues.

So you feel that the First Amendment protections regarding freedom and religion and the exercise thereof should be removed, or at least radically revised and restricted? Did you want to do away with any of the other provisions in that Amendment as well, or is it just religious people you want to oppress?

I was very clear and concise the first time.

I believe Persons of religion should file for not-for-profit status if they prefer Religion to Capitalism in public venues.

Don't blame me simply because You choose to be clueless and Causeless.

 

[Seawytch]

Federal PA laws have withstood Constitutional challenge.

Aren't you a state's rights guy?

Yeah, we all know how much respect leftists have for "withstood Constitutional challenge" when it's something they don't agree with. Don't even try it on with us.

Why? While I may disagree with a SCOTUS ruling, I don't pretend those rulings aren't valid.

PA laws ARE constitutional. You're free to try again though.

Yes, it's all about you personally.

Interesting deflection. Can't address the point, obviously.

PA laws have been in effect since title II of the CRA. They've been challenged (the FEDERAL ones) and found to be Constitutional. You're free to challenge them or support having them challenged again. Good luck.

No deflection. I addressed your point, which was about YOU. The only correct response for that is that it's NOT about you personally, and get over yourself.

Furthermore, "they've been found Constitutional" is NOT a response to the point that leftists only give a fuck about "found Constitutional" when they agree with it.

So let's get back to the point that's actually being ignored: leftists only consider challenges to the law "settled" when they get the court decision they want.

Challenges are settled until there's another challenge. PA laws have been found Constitutional at the Federal level. Federal PA laws at that, not these state and local laws that protect gays.

Anyone is free to challenge them at any time. Good luck.

 

[Seawytch]

It doesn't matter what you all "believe". The fact is that PA laws...FEDERAL laws I might add, have been found Constitutional. You can challenge them again. Good luck.

I shall definitely save this post for the next time we discuss some court ruling you don't like.

By all means. I don't like Citizens United, but it is the law of the land until challenged or changed. I'm supporting either, but I don't pretend the rulings aren't valid because I don't like them.

 

[Seawytch]

We allow people with closely held religious beliefs avoid serving in the Military, but let a baker claim that his/her closely held religious beliefs preempt him from baking a cake for a bunch of fags?

dimocraps are the scum of the earth

Now, be fair. Leftists don't want people to be exempt from military service for their religious beliefs, either.

So you don't think there's a difference between required military service and voluntarily opening a business in the public sphere?

What I don't think is that there's any difference in the exercise of freedom of conscience in any sphere of endeavor whatsoever.

The law does make a distinction so far.

Make up your mind. You asked me what I thought, and I told you. "The law says" is not a response to the topic of my thoughts, which YOU brought up.

You're right. Thanks for your opinion, which is divorced from the law.

I also think the leftists are outraged by the very idea that people HAVE religious beliefs at all, let alone that such beliefs are given space for exercise.

Any supporting evidence? You know the US is like 75% Christian, right?

I listen to them talk. Sure, leftists LOVE to tell you that they're Christians too, but that doesn't stop them from treating the actual expression and exercise of religious belief in public as though it were dirty and offensive, like taking a shit on the sidewalk (unless it's a leftist Wall Street occupier taking the shit; then that's BETTER than being religious in public).

Howard Dean left his church over the "deep spiritual tenet" of a bike path, for crying out loud. Does that sound to you like someone who takes his alleged Christianity seriously?

I see you like to paint with a broad brush. "Leftists" cannot have religious convictions...well because Howard Dean.

Expressions of religious belief in public are fine. Prothlesize your heart out on a street corner or start your own megachurch...don't care. In some places, PA laws protect gays just like they protect Christians in all 50 states. In those locations, your religion doesn't matter a hill of beans if you're trying to break the law.

 

[kaz]

It doesn't matter what you all "believe". The fact is that PA laws...FEDERAL laws I might add, have been found Constitutional. You can challenge them again. Good luck.

I shall definitely save this post for the next time we discuss some court ruling you don't like.

Don't bother, she won't get it

 

[kaz]

Make up your mind. You asked me what I thought, and I told you. "The law says" is not a response to the topic of my thoughts, which YOU brought up.

You're right. Thanks for your opinion, which is divorced from the law

So now you're against opposing the law? You mean like when you started advocating gay marriage? No, wait, it isn't like that...

 

[Seawytch]

Make up your mind. You asked me what I thought, and I told you. "The law says" is not a response to the topic of my thoughts, which YOU brought up.

You're right. Thanks for your opinion, which is divorced from the law

So now you're against opposing the law? You mean like when you started advocating gay marriage? No, wait, it isn't like that...

Hey Kaz, why don't you accuse me of a reading comprehension problem. That would be ironic.

I'm all for you opposing PA laws. I think you should call your Congressman today and tell him or her that you want Title II of the Civil Rights Act struck down. Shall I get you the number?

 

[kaz]

Make up your mind. You asked me what I thought, and I told you. "The law says" is not a response to the topic of my thoughts, which YOU brought up.

You're right. Thanks for your opinion, which is divorced from the law

So now you're against opposing the law? You mean like when you started advocating gay marriage? No, wait, it isn't like that...

Hey Kaz, why don't you accuse me of a reading comprehension problem. That would be ironic.

I'm all for you opposing PA laws. I think you should call your Congressman today and tell him or her that you want Title II of the Civil Rights Act struck down. Shall I get you the number?

Begging the question

 

[Seawytch]

Make up your mind. You asked me what I thought, and I told you. "The law says" is not a response to the topic of my thoughts, which YOU brought up.

You're right. Thanks for your opinion, which is divorced from the law

So now you're against opposing the law? You mean like when you started advocating gay marriage? No, wait, it isn't like that...

Hey Kaz, why don't you accuse me of a reading comprehension problem. That would be ironic.

I'm all for you opposing PA laws. I think you should call your Congressman today and tell him or her that you want Title II of the Civil Rights Act struck down. Shall I get you the number?

Begging the question

That should be your tagline, really.

I'm not against opposing the law Kaz. I fully support you and all the other Bigots {cough} libertarians "letting the free market decide"...but you gotta get rid of that pesky Title II first.

Have fun storming the castle!

 

[kaz]

Make up your mind. You asked me what I thought, and I told you. "The law says" is not a response to the topic of my thoughts, which YOU brought up.

You're right. Thanks for your opinion, which is divorced from the law

So now you're against opposing the law? You mean like when you started advocating gay marriage? No, wait, it isn't like that...

Hey Kaz, why don't you accuse me of a reading comprehension problem. That would be ironic.

I'm all for you opposing PA laws. I think you should call your Congressman today and tell him or her that you want Title II of the Civil Rights Act struck down. Shall I get you the number?

Begging the question

That should be your tagline, really.

I'm not against opposing the law Kaz. I fully support you and all the other Bigots {cough} libertarians "letting the free market decide"...but you gotta get rid of that pesky Title II first.

Have fun storming the castle!

For it to be my "tagline" it would have to be up to me what fallacy you commit and it's not.

I've told you my position on that many times. You ignore my position and repeat yours. When you want to have a discussion, here's a tip. That isn't how it works.

In the meantime, the CDC is studying your illness, let's all hope they come up with a cure. Can you imagine the day there are no gays? What a glorious day that will be. Well, except for bakers, apparently you people really, really love cake

 

[Seawytch]

You're right. Thanks for your opinion, which is divorced from the law

So now you're against opposing the law? You mean like when you started advocating gay marriage? No, wait, it isn't like that...

Hey Kaz, why don't you accuse me of a reading comprehension problem. That would be ironic.

I'm all for you opposing PA laws. I think you should call your Congressman today and tell him or her that you want Title II of the Civil Rights Act struck down. Shall I get you the number?

Begging the question

That should be your tagline, really.

I'm not against opposing the law Kaz. I fully support you and all the other Bigots {cough} libertarians "letting the free market decide"...but you gotta get rid of that pesky Title II first.

Have fun storming the castle!

For it to be my "tagline" it would have to be up to me what fallacy you commit and it's not.

I've told you my position on that many times. You ignore my position and repeat yours. When you want to have a discussion, here's a tip. That isn't how it works.

In the meantime, the CDC is studying your illness, let's all hope they come up with a cure. Can you imagine the day there are no gays? What a glorious day that will be. Well, except for bakers, apparently you people really, really love cake

Yes Mr. Married Man...we all know you're "libertarian" position on being married and possessing a civil marriage license like yours.

 

[kaz]

So now you're against opposing the law? You mean like when you started advocating gay marriage? No, wait, it isn't like that...

Hey Kaz, why don't you accuse me of a reading comprehension problem. That would be ironic.

I'm all for you opposing PA laws. I think you should call your Congressman today and tell him or her that you want Title II of the Civil Rights Act struck down. Shall I get you the number?

Begging the question

That should be your tagline, really.

I'm not against opposing the law Kaz. I fully support you and all the other Bigots {cough} libertarians "letting the free market decide"...but you gotta get rid of that pesky Title II first.

Have fun storming the castle!

For it to be my "tagline" it would have to be up to me what fallacy you commit and it's not.

I've told you my position on that many times. You ignore my position and repeat yours. When you want to have a discussion, here's a tip. That isn't how it works.

In the meantime, the CDC is studying your illness, let's all hope they come up with a cure. Can you imagine the day there are no gays? What a glorious day that will be. Well, except for bakers, apparently you people really, really love cake

Yes Mr. Married Man...we all know you're "libertarian" position on being married and possessing a civil marriage license like yours.

Yes, my marriage is an actual marriage. The only kind, between a man and a woman. You being "married" is just playing house, God does not recognize it as anything but the abomination that it is:


Leviticus 18:22: You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination

Leviticus 20:13If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them

Then there is Jesus:

Mark 7:20-23: What comes out of you is what defiles you. For from within, out of your hearts, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly. All these evils come from inside and defile you

He loves everyone, except the gays

1 Corintians. 6:9-10: Do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God

You're there with thieves, the greedy, slanderers and swindlers. There is no "kingdom of God." I do hope they cure you in time

 

[Seawytch]

That is toats adorbs Kaz. What do Grimms Fairy Tales say?

 

[rightwinger]

Hey Kaz, why don't you accuse me of a reading comprehension problem. That would be ironic.

I'm all for you opposing PA laws. I think you should call your Congressman today and tell him or her that you want Title II of the Civil Rights Act struck down. Shall I get you the number?

Begging the question

That should be your tagline, really.

I'm not against opposing the law Kaz. I fully support you and all the other Bigots {cough} libertarians "letting the free market decide"...but you gotta get rid of that pesky Title II first.

Have fun storming the castle!

For it to be my "tagline" it would have to be up to me what fallacy you commit and it's not.

I've told you my position on that many times. You ignore my position and repeat yours. When you want to have a discussion, here's a tip. That isn't how it works.

In the meantime, the CDC is studying your illness, let's all hope they come up with a cure. Can you imagine the day there are no gays? What a glorious day that will be. Well, except for bakers, apparently you people really, really love cake

Yes Mr. Married Man...we all know you're "libertarian" position on being married and possessing a civil marriage license like yours.

Yes, my marriage is an actual marriage. The only kind, between a man and a woman. You being "married" is just playing house, God does not recognize it as anything but the abomination that it is:


Leviticus 18:22: You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination

Leviticus 20:13If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them

Then there is Jesus:

Mark 7:20-23: What comes out of you is what defiles you. For from within, out of your hearts, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, greed, malice, deceit, lewdness, envy, slander, arrogance and folly. All these evils come from inside and defile you

He loves everyone, except the gays

1 Corintians. 6:9-10: Do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God

You're there with thieves, the greedy, slanderers and swindlers. There is no "kingdom of God." I do hope they cure you in time

What does the Bible have to do with the execution of our laws?