Past time for Republicans to pick a side

[martybegan]

Of course you are discussing force. You want the government to force the baker to adopt your moral code and the moral code of the baker. If not, then what exactly are you advocating? How is forcing the baker to accept the moral code of homosexuals "individualism?"

He's trying to be slick, and failing miserably.

 

[colfax_m]

When the government says bake, or go out of business, or pay $375k in fines, the force is inherent.

No, they are not. They are exercising their individual right to free exercise.

Sorry, but saying homosexuality is sinful and not wanting to bake one cake is not denying anyone their individuality. Forcing the baker to accept homosexuality as moral or ignore their own morals is ignoring the individual rights of the baker.

Your conclusion is invalid, no matter how much you try to make it appear logical.

You’re trying to make this about the government. I’m not. It’s not a discussion about rights. It’s just a philosophical discussion about what individualism means. Individualism is the idea that people can decide for themselves what kind of person they are.

Yes, saying homosexuality is sinful is denying their individuality. It’s saying that the person is wrong for living their life in such a way. The only reason you don’t think so is that you aren’t the one being hit with it. Being gay isn’t part of your approved list of lifestyles that are part of your culture. Therefore, you don’t give a shit.

Because you’re not about individualism. You’re full of shit.

 

[martybegan]

You’re trying to make this about the government. I’m not. It’s not a discussion about rights. It’s just a philosophical discussion about what individualism means. Individualism is the idea that people can decide for themselves what kind of person they are.

Yes, saying homosexuality is sinful is denying their individuality. It’s saying that the person is wrong for living their life in such a way. The only reason you don’t think so is that you aren’t the one being hit with it. Being gay isn’t part of your approved list of lifestyles that are part of your culture. Therefore, you don’t give a shit.

Because you’re not about individualism. You’re full of shit.

No, it isn't. It's an own person's viewpoint, and a viewpoint held by many people of certain religious sects.

And it's not my approval, it's a person like evangelicals or practicing Catholics.

So anyone who thinks homosexuality is sinful is against individual rights, to be for individual rights you have to think homosexual acts are morally right?

 

[colfax_m]

No, it isn't. It's an own person's viewpoint, and a viewpoint held by many people of certain religious sects.

And it's not my approval, it's a person like evangelicals or practicing Catholics.

So anyone who thinks homosexuality is sinful is against individual rights, to be for individual rights you have to think homosexual acts are morally right?

Yes, it is that person’s viewpoint and that viewpoint is one that rejects individuality for people who don’t conform to that person’s culture.

I’m saying that anyone who reject someone else’s sexuality is being anti-individualistic, which is something that happens a LOT on the right despite your bullshit belief that you don’t.

To be someone who supports individuality, you don’t actually have to do anything. Just treat them like you would anyone else.

 

[martybegan]

Yes, it is that person’s viewpoint and that viewpoint is one that rejects individuality for people who don’t conform to that person’s culture.

I’m saying that anyone who reject someone else’s sexuality is being anti-individualistic, which is something that happens a LOT on the right despite your bullshit belief that you don’t.

To be someone who supports individuality, you don’t actually have to do anything. Just treat them like you would anyone else.

That is completely and entirely wrong. It's saying everyone has to think like you do or they are against individual rights.

What about their rights to free exercise?

You aren't talking about individuality, you are talking about acceptance and even endorsement. What everyone has always pushed for is tolerance, but evidently that isn't enough for orwellians such as you.

Your position has zero merit.

 

[colfax_m]

That is completely and entirely wrong. It's saying everyone has to think like you do or they are against individual rights.

What about their rights to free exercise?

You aren't talking about individuality, you are talking about acceptance and even endorsement. What everyone has always pushed for is tolerance, but evidently that isn't enough for orwellians such as you.

Your position has zero merit.

Again, you keep saying stuff about individual rights. This is just a conversation about individualism.

You have every right to be anti-individualism. That’s not the question. The question is who does and doesn’t support individualism.

And no, you don’t have to think like everyone else. In fact, you that’s the point. You don’t have to think that members of the same sex are attractive if you don’t want to. What individualism DOES require is that you don’t think others are wrong for doing so. That’s what you’re missing.

And if you think that religious beliefs are impacted by this, that’s because religion is EXTREMELY anti-individualistic.

 

[Colin norris]

Who told you that?

He was impeached you idiot.
Are you really that dumb?

 

[Colin norris]

Hey Colon:

I have to advise you. If asking whatever it is you think you’re asking is too difficult for a shit processing organ such as you are, then why bother trying to shit it out in the first place?

Sorry, you sphincter (They should have just named you “Anus”). But you were unclear. And you remain a worthless waste of protoplasm. If you imagine you have a good question to ask, you’re probably wrong. But you can ask an intelligent person to help you use those “word” things. Far beyond your skill set otherwise.

Now go away, you hack.

with all due respect,

BackAgain

I have the same respect for you as a dog has for a car tyre.
Name calling doesn't cut it. Stop being childish.

 

[BackAgain]

I have the same respect for you as a dog has for a car tyre.
Name calling doesn't cut it. Stop being childish.

I’m very concerned about your lack of respect, Colon.

 

[Colin norris]

I’m very concerned about your lack of respect, Colon.

You and another 100 million republicans. You'll get over it. Silly pics only cover your inabilities.

 

[BackAgain]

You and another 100 million republicans. You'll get over it. Silly pics only cover your inabilities.

Again. Nobody values your opinions, you twit.

Your posts reveal and reflect your inabilities.

 

[Independent thinker]

Trump says he wanted Pence to overturn the 2020 election and falsely claims it was vice president's 'right'

Former President Donald Trump in a statement Sunday said he wanted then-Vice President Mike Pence to overturn the 2020 presidential election, repeating the false claim that Pence had the power to do so and slamming recent bipartisan efforts to reform the Electoral Count Act.

www.cnn.com

I love the last sentence of this article made by Adam Kinzinger that Republicans have to pick a side, Trump or the Constitution.

They can't have it both ways much as they want to. Trump carries a lot of tarnish with him and some of it rubs off on anyone who associates with him. With the outstanding work being done by the January 6 Committee, Republicans may realize that sooner rather than later.

Bigly!!!

LOL. So you want them to pick Democrats?

 

[lennypartiv]

Stupid OP thinks we haven't picked a side.

 

[Colin norris]

Again. Nobody values your opinions, you twit.

Your posts reveal and reflect your inabilities.

It's not as if vlad hangs to every word you utter dickhead.
Who the fk do you think you are? You guys will not accept criticism as if you know every thing. You voted in a complete buffoon who divided the nation like no other, did nothing to improve the lives of one blackfellas but instead kissed the arse of the North Korean dictator. Now you lot of derelict intellectual vacuums attempt to defend that decision by wanting the arsehole back in power.
You must be kidding.

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

He was impeached you idiot.
Are you really that dumb?

You must be talking about that sham trial Nancy and her fellow leftists put on to smear Trump for votes. You know the one where they had zero proof. You fell for that nonsense? You must be the DMF on the planet.

 

[martybegan]

Again, you keep saying stuff about individual rights. This is just a conversation about individualism.

You have every right to be anti-individualism. That’s not the question. The question is who does and doesn’t support individualism.

And no, you don’t have to think like everyone else. In fact, you that’s the point. You don’t have to think that members of the same sex are attractive if you don’t want to. What individualism DOES require is that you don’t think others are wrong for doing so. That’s what you’re missing.

And if you think that religious beliefs are impacted by this, that’s because religion is EXTREMELY anti-individualistic.

One in the same. If you want to play semantics, find some stooge.

It boils down to you want the person to bake the cake they don't want to, mostly because you are probably an anti-religious bigot, and you try to justify it by some jiggery pokery about individualism.

 

[LAUGHatLEFTISTS]

It's not as if vlad hangs to every word you utter dickhead.
Who the fk do you think you are? You guys will not accept criticism as if you know every thing. You voted in a complete buffoon who divided the nation like no other, did nothing to improve the lives of one blackfellas but instead kissed the arse of the North Korean dictator. Now you lot of derelict intellectual vacuums attempt to defend that decision by wanting the arsehole back in power.
You must be kidding.

Not only did his policies improve the lives of “black fellas”, they improve the lives of all Americans. Even those that have been told it’s all whiteys and republicans fault their entire lives and believe it because they’re unable to think for themselves. Do you know anybody like that?

 

[BackAgain]

It's not as if vlad hangs to every word you utter dickhead.
Who the fk do you think you are? You guys will not accept criticism as if you know every thing. You voted in a complete buffoon who divided the nation like no other, did nothing to improve the lives of one blackfellas but instead kissed the arse of the North Korean dictator. Now you lot of derelict intellectual vacuums attempt to defend that decision by wanting the arsehole back in power.
You must be kidding.

^ Scumsucking asslicker say what?

 

[colfax_m]

One in the same. If you want to play semantics, find some stooge.

It boils down to you want the person to bake the cake they don't want to, mostly because you are probably an anti-religious bigot, and you try to justify it by some jiggery pokery about individualism.

It’s not. Not even a little bit.

What it boils down is that you pretend to want individualism but only for you and those like you. It’s fake. You’re a fake.

 

[bripat9643]

You’re trying to make this about the government. I’m not. It’s not a discussion about rights. It’s just a philosophical discussion about what individualism means. Individualism is the idea that people can decide for themselves what kind of person they are.

Yes, saying homosexuality is sinful is denying their individuality. It’s saying that the person is wrong for living their life in such a way. The only reason you don’t think so is that you aren’t the one being hit with it. Being gay isn’t part of your approved list of lifestyles that are part of your culture. Therefore, you don’t give a shit.

Because you’re not about individualism. You’re full of shit.

Total horseshit. So individualism says you can't believe homosexuality is sinful? That has to be the dumbest idea posted this month.