Opponents in LGBT case agree: It's not about wedding cake

[bodecea]

" Every American should be free to choose which art they will create and which art they won't create without fear of being unjustly punished by the government,"

Sounds completely reasonable to me. If homos weren't such narcissistic scum they'd understand and agree.

So...don't be so lazy...work to get PA laws repealed.

 

[bodecea]

Its about treating people as equals. Kind of like Treating blacks as equal before.

Fags aren't my equal.

True. We're better...much better.

 

[bodecea]

Its about treating people as equals. Kind of like Treating blacks as equal before.

Fags aren't my equal.

Very true.
Gays are superior to you.
Farm Animals are superior to you.
Cockroaches are superior to you.

Saying gays are equal to you is an insult to gays.

Lmao! They're not worth a damn. Fags give nothing of value to society. And when they go, shriveled up dying from the new super strain of AIDS that drugs can't even treat....that is the only time they have ever done anything good for society.

Only good fag is a dead fag.

Thank you for clearing putting out evidence that we are better than you.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Do you take pride in your bigotry? People who hate other people they do not know, choose to suppress the rights of those who are different. The one exception is homophobia, a condition usually a result of:

1. Persons who have experimented (gay curious) and enjoyed the experience and thus hate themselves for it;
2. Or, were molested at a young age and hate themselves for enjoying it.

Which one are you?

So, the extreme hatred that you have toward those who hold to basic standards of morality and decency. Does this mean that you harbor some self-hating pull toward decency yourself? Did you experiment with acting like amoral, decent person, find you liked it, and now hate yourself for it? Did someone force you to do something decent,and you hate yourself for liking it?

Or is it only your sick sexual perversions, that one cannot find repugnant without somehow harboring some secret, self-loathing affinity for it?

None of the above, but I enjoy reading a post which is nothing more than flattery. You get an "F" for Plagiarism.

For the Record:

Opinion | Homophobic? Maybe You’re Gay

So, then, what is it about homosexuality, that sets it apart from all other forms of madness and evil, such that one who dares to call it out for what it truly is, can be taken to mean that the one who does so must somehow harbor a secret, self-loathing affinity for that madness and evil? And why doesn't it work the other way, as I had previously suggested—that your extreme hatred of basic standards of morality and decency is somehow evidence that you harbor a secret, self-loathing affinity for morality and decency?

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

Its about treating people as equals. Kind of like Treating blacks as equal before.

Fags aren't my equal.

Very true.
Gays are superior to you.
Farm Animals are superior to you.
Cockroaches are superior to you.

Saying gays are equal to you is an insult to gays.

Lmao! They're not worth a damn. Fags give nothing of value to society. And when they go, shriveled up dying from the new super strain of AIDS that drugs can't even treat....that is the only time they have ever done anything good for society.

Only good fag is a dead fag.

Thank you for clearing putting out evidence that we are better than you.

You're not though. That's the thing.

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

Do you take pride in your bigotry? People who hate other people they do not know, choose to suppress the rights of those who are different. The one exception is homophobia, a condition usually a result of:

1. Persons who have experimented (gay curious) and enjoyed the experience and thus hate themselves for it;
2. Or, were molested at a young age and hate themselves for enjoying it.

Which one are you?

So, the extreme hatred that you have toward those who hold to basic standards of morality and decency. Does this mean that you harbor some self-hating pull toward decency yourself? Did you experiment with acting like amoral, decent person, find you liked it, and now hate yourself for it? Did someone force you to do something decent,and you hate yourself for liking it?

Or is it only your sick sexual perversions, that one cannot find repugnant without somehow harboring some secret, self-loathing affinity for it?

None of the above, but I enjoy reading a post which is nothing more than flattery. You get an "F" for Plagiarism.

For the Record:

Opinion | Homophobic? Maybe You’re Gay

So, then, what is it about homosexuality, that sets it apart from all other forms of madness and evil, such that one who dares to call it out for what it truly is, can be taken to mean that the one who does so must somehow harbor a secret, self-loathing affinity for that madness and evil? And why doesn't it work the other way, as I had previously suggested—that your extreme hatred of basic standards of morality and decency is somehow evidence that you harbor a secret, self-loathing affinity for morality and decency?

Then please explain the virtue of criminalizing homosexuality. Why is that a good idea? Who benefits?

Lawrence v Texas guarantees protection for the PRIVATE acts of sodomy and their practitioners behind closed doors. The resistance you are noticing is when those PRIVATE acts of sodomy demand PUBLIC "rights and privileges" to expose their culture and behaviors to the rest of us, including children at "gay pride parades" where these acts are mimed for everyone to see.

Would you criminalize promiscuity? Are New Orleans Madrid Gras parades, Spring Break and Las Vegas exempted?

Public decency laws already exist. Ever heard of indecent exposure? It's one thing if you're going to be promiscuous in doors, it's another to expose your genitals to children and hump in the streets like stray dogs.

Is promiscuity exclusive to male homosexuals, or homosexuals in general? Can heterosexuals be promiscuous?

Humans can be promiscuous, we also have the ability to not act like the lower beasts and control our behavior, we know right from wrong, we know when something isn't good for us or society as a whole.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Humans can be promiscuous, we also have the ability to not act like the lower beasts and control our behavior, we know right from wrong, we know when something isn't good for us or society as a whole.

I used to think that that was the trait that set humans apart from lesser beasts—the ability to know right from wrong, and to control our behavior accordingly. But now, we are seeing a generation in which a significant portion among us are completely lacking in this trait, and further, openly express contempt for those of us who still have this trait and expect others to have it as well.

 

[OffensivelyOpenMinded]

Humans can be promiscuous, we also have the ability to not act like the lower beasts and control our behavior, we know right from wrong, we know when something isn't good for us or society as a whole.

I used to think that that was the trait that set humans apart from lesser beasts—the ability to know right from wrong,and to control our behavior accordingly. But now, we are seeing a generation in which a significant portion among us are completely lacking in this trait, and further, openly express contempt for those of us who still have this trait and expect others to have it as well.

The "MeMeMe" generation.

 

[Nosmo King]

Do you take pride in your bigotry? People who hate other people they do not know, choose to suppress the rights of those who are different. The one exception is homophobia, a condition usually a result of:

1. Persons who have experimented (gay curious) and enjoyed the experience and thus hate themselves for it;
2. Or, were molested at a young age and hate themselves for enjoying it.

Which one are you?

So, the extreme hatred that you have toward those who hold to basic standards of morality and decency. Does this mean that you harbor some self-hating pull toward decency yourself? Did you experiment with acting like amoral, decent person, find you liked it, and now hate yourself for it? Did someone force you to do something decent,and you hate yourself for liking it?

Or is it only your sick sexual perversions, that one cannot find repugnant without somehow harboring some secret, self-loathing affinity for it?

None of the above, but I enjoy reading a post which is nothing more than flattery. You get an "F" for Plagiarism.

For the Record:

Opinion | Homophobic? Maybe You’re Gay

So, then, what is it about homosexuality, that sets it apart from all other forms of madness and evil, such that one who dares to call it out for what it truly is, can be taken to mean that the one who does so must somehow harbor a secret, self-loathing affinity for that madness and evil? And why doesn't it work the other way, as I had previously suggested—that your extreme hatred of basic standards of morality and decency is somehow evidence that you harbor a secret, self-loathing affinity for morality and decency?

Then please explain the virtue of criminalizing homosexuality. Why is that a good idea? Who benefits?

Lawrence v Texas guarantees protection for the PRIVATE acts of sodomy and their practitioners behind closed doors. The resistance you are noticing is when those PRIVATE acts of sodomy demand PUBLIC "rights and privileges" to expose their culture and behaviors to the rest of us, including children at "gay pride parades" where these acts are mimed for everyone to see.

Would you criminalize promiscuity? Are New Orleans Madrid Gras parades, Spring Break and Las Vegas exempted?

Public decency laws already exist. Ever heard of indecent exposure? It's one thing if you're going to be promiscuous in doors, it's another to expose your genitals to children and hump in the streets like stray dogs.

Is promiscuity exclusive to male homosexuals, or homosexuals in general? Can heterosexuals be promiscuous?

Humans can be promiscuous, we also have the ability to not act like the lower beasts and control our behavior, we know right from wrong, we know when something isn't good for us or society as a whole.

You seem to single out homosexuals due to the promiscuity you perceive. Is that a fair take on your position?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Freedom of religion will trump faggotry. Watch.

You honestly can't see the irony in that statement, can you?

There's no irony in it. Faggotry was punishable by death in many places here when the constitution was written. It was never meant to support or promote faggotry. I think it's hilarious that you don't understand that and follow a revisionist line.

The whole concept of freedom of religion is the concept of individual freedom to live and practice your beliefs unfettered. The irony is that that same concept applies to freedom from discrimination as a homosexual. Individual freedom is individual freedom. Honor it in one corner, honor it in all.

No, the irony is that you seem to think that "freedom from discrimination by individuals" is listed ANYWHERE in the Constitution, as freedom of religion is.

And if you want to talk about "honoring freedom" in one corner by demanding that people be forced to do things that suit you, you're not even ironic. You're hypocritical and fascistic.

You can call me anything you like, but if you could come closer to reality, it might bolster your argument a little more.
The Bill of Rights, which the states insisted on before they would ratify the Constitution, STATES that all men are created equal.
Think about it. It doesn't say that some men deserve to have their lifestyle denigrated and discriminated against, or that only some men are equal. It doesn't mention homosexuality ANYWHERE. All men are equal before the law.
So treat them equally and uphold the laws for all; even if you believe that the other guy is sinning, before the law he is equal and will be treated as such.

Yeah, you keep fooling yourself that "reality" is that you're championing freedom and rights by forcing people to work for those they don't want to, simply because YOU think they should. Pretty sure we fought an entire war to put a stop to that notion.

Where, oh Constitutional scholar, does the Bill of Rights state that all men are created equal? Furthermore, at what point anywhere in the Bill of Rights does it become a restriction on individual people, rather than on government? I'll wait while you look for those things.

You said it yourself: equal BEFORE THE LAW. Not equal "before the private business", not equal "before the neighbors". BEFORE THE LAW.

No one has suggested that criminal penalties should be higher for gay people than for straight, or that transgenders should not be afforded due process or the counsel of an attorney when charged with a crime. But your suggestion that equality before the law means that individual, private citizens have to treat everyone exactly alike in their personal lives is not just ridiculous, it's grotesque. And it remains hypocritical, in that your idea is that only SOME people's rights should be championed at the expense of everyone else's.

So get to answering those questions, if you would please, before you return to telling yourself that my entire post was nothing but calling you names and ignoring every single point in it.

 

[Lysistrata]

I wish that people would stop the stupid madness about LGBTs. There is no reason to go after them to make their lives miserable for no reason, just the insecurity of heterosexuals. We've already got the trumps, moores, gingrichs, sanfords, bartons, and nobody says anything about their promiscuity, immorality. Even if you are a sexually obsessed bible thumper from the south, there is no reason to attack these people. Just accord them the freedom to love and marry whomever they choose and leave them the hell alone.

 

[Cecilie1200]

That's a bit harsh. Why such hysterics over something that has nothing to do with you personally? Live and let live is a time honored way to actually get through this life without have a stroke.

Any rational version of “live and let live” would necessarily have to include refraining from forcing anyone to participate in or give support to that which he finds to be immoral. To abuse the force of law to compel a baker who holds to basic standards of morality and decency, to provide a cake for n immoral, indecent homosexual mockery of a wedding, would not be reconcilable with “live and let live”.

Judging another as immoral and indecent is not "live and let live." Never mind; the concept apparently is way over your head.
Never judge a man 'til you've walked a mile in his shoes.
In this case you can't walk in his shoes, so you don't judge.

Yeah, it actually is. I know it's hard for you to wrap your brain around this concept, but other people can actually think and believe things you don't agree with, and you can just TOTALLY IGNORE THEM. It doesn't affect your ability to live your life unless you insist on making it so.

White supremacists absolutely despise my marriage because my husband is not white . . . or they would, if I made a point of putting myself in their company. But I don't. I don't seek out businesses and organizations run by white supremacists and try to force them to associate with me to make a point, and get my panties all in a ruffle and run off to
court when they refuse to. I ignore them. They go on with their lives, I go on with mine, and that's that. It affects me not in the least that they are judging me for marrying a Chinese man, and it affects them not in the least that I'm judging them as a bunch of ignorant hicks. Which I'm sure YOU judge them as, as well, so that puts paid to your lofty pretensions of "don't judge". I really doubt you spent any time "walking in the shoes" of white supremacists before you decided they were scum.

 

[Cecilie1200]

The Bill of Rights, which the states insisted on before they would ratify the Constitution, STATES that all men are created equal.

Where does it say that in the Bill of Rights? Which of the ten Amendments ratified in 1791 as part of the Bill of Rights says any such thing? I'll even let you include the First Article, which was never ratified, and the Second Article, which wasn't ratified until more than two hundred years later, and is now the Twenty-Seventh Amendment.

I have already been corrected, smarty pants.

And have yet to in any way modify your lofty lecture to include the fact that the premise upon which you based it was just you talking through your hat.

 

[Cecilie1200]

SCOTUS decided 50 years ago

The men who wrote our Constitution decided more than 225 years ago. The Supreme Court has no legitimate authority—though it has illegally usurped the power—to override the Constitution.

Who do you think formed the Supreme Court?

The Supreme Court is fine and all important as long as conservative justices are being appointed. It's only when they make decisions these bigots don't like that they don't deserve any power.

Actually, we think they deserve exactly the same power either way. It just isn't the power you would ascribe to them.

 

[jillian]

Opponents in LGBT case agree: It's not about wedding cake
In a legal case with profound implications for LGBT rights and religion's place in public life, the opposing sides agree on this: It's not about the cake.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

And everyone with a brain left know this is how it should be. It isn't about the cake it is about being " FORCED" ........this is America not N. Korea.

It's been decided already. What implications?

 

[Cecilie1200]

I wish that people would stop the stupid madness about LGBTs. There is no reason to go after them to make their lives miserable for no reason, just the insecurity of heterosexuals. We've already got the trumps, moores, gingrichs, sanfords, bartons, and nobody says anything about their promiscuity, immorality. Even if you are a sexually obsessed bible thumper from the south, there is no reason to attack these people. Just accord them the freedom to love and marry whomever they choose and leave them the hell alone.

First of all, who's going after gays to make their lives miserable? THEY are seeking out people, not the other way around. Most of us would like very much to just forget about them and not have to give a damn what they do, because it's not being waved in our faces every time we turn around, demanding that we must approve of it.

Furthermore, if you think "nobody says anything" about the behavior of people like Roy Moore et al, then you must be living under a rock.

 

[Silhouette]

I wish that people would stop the stupid madness about LGBTs. There is no reason to go after them to make their lives miserable for no reason, just the insecurity of heterosexuals. We've already got the trumps, moores, gingrichs, sanfords, bartons, and nobody says anything about their promiscuity, immorality. Even if you are a sexually obsessed bible thumper from the south, there is no reason to attack these people. Just accord them the freedom to love and marry whomever they choose and leave them the hell alone.

The problem comes when THEY won't leave others alone...

It's been decided already. What implications?

No dear. No, it hasn't ... Cakes, Fakes & Counter-Quakes; Do The Kleins Have A Countersuit Against The Lesbians?

 

[EvilCat Breath]

I wish that people would stop the stupid madness about LGBTs. There is no reason to go after them to make their lives miserable for no reason, just the insecurity of heterosexuals. We've already got the trumps, moores, gingrichs, sanfords, bartons, and nobody says anything about their promiscuity, immorality. Even if you are a sexually obsessed bible thumper from the south, there is no reason to attack these people. Just accord them the freedom to love and marry whomever they choose and leave them the hell alone.

Just as soon as they leave others alone. There would be no court case if same sex couples had not forced specialty services from someone who didn't want to provide that service.

Why don't gays agree to the grand bargain? You leave others alone and others will leave you alone.

 

[Silhouette]

Why don't gays agree to the grand bargain? You leave others alone and others will leave you alone.

I'll tell you why. Because most gays and lesbians believe the false premise that their behaviors make them a protected class under the US Constitution. This is absolutely a false assumption. And, all their short-lived legal victories launched off of that false premise. I get the feeling like that false premise is going to be visited in language in upcoming USSC and lower court decisions in the very near future.

Deviant Behaviors DO NOT = Race

 

[Lysistrata]

Why don't gays agree to the grand bargain? You leave others alone and others will leave you alone.

I'll tell you why. Because most gays and lesbians believe the false premise that their behaviors make them a protected class under the US Constitution. This is absolutely a false assumption. And, all their short-lived legal victories launched off of that false premise. I get the feeling like that false premise is going to be visited in language in upcoming USSC and lower court decisions in the very near future.

Deviant Behaviors DO NOT = Race

Why do you hate people so much? What drives you to be so unhappy?