Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Oh, look who just woke up and smelled the politics. Welcome to America. Been here long?
The Ends justify the means. You are completely and utterly morally bankrupt, and that has nothing to do with who you are currently buggering.
Wait a minute....let me get this (pardon the pun) straight. I'm morally bankrupt for voting for the guy that still wanted to give me equal rights even though he used to be personally opposed to gay marriage?
Yeah, go with that.
The Ends justify the means. You are completely and utterly morally bankrupt, and that has nothing to do with who you are currently buggering.
Wait a minute....let me get this (pardon the pun) straight. I'm morally bankrupt for voting for the guy that still wanted to give me equal rights even though he used to be personally opposed to gay marriage?
Yeah, go with that.
No, you voted for the guy who lied to get his socially conservative black voters to come out in greater numbers, only to reverse course when he can't get re-elected, under the assumption that said black voters are in the bag, and won't really vote against democrats.
But just wait until some of thier buisnesses get sued for not participating in Gay cerimonies.
The backlash is a comin.
[
Were you born this stupid or do you work at it? The whole topic is business owners, like bakers who make wedding cakes, hall owners who rent reception halls, photographers that take wedding pictures, wedding planners, and the 101 other businesses that specialize in wedding related goods and services being forced by law to include offering these goods and services to sodomites and dykes who get legally married in jurisdictions that have gay "marriage" or get sued for discriminating against them. This has ALREADY happened dumbass, If you are telling bakers they have to bake a wedding cake for two sodomites that are getting married or they get sued, or if you tell a wedding planner that if they turn down two faggots or dykes just because they are faggots or dykes and you don't believe in gay marriage that they can be sued, or if you tell a person that rents out halls for wedding receptions that if they refuse to rent the hall to deviants who wish to celebrate their reception at your hall only because he believes gay marriage is immoral and against his religious beliefs he can be sued, you are forcing them to participate in a gay marriage/wedding. Damn you're an idiot.
If they don't approve of certain kinds of weddings, they shouldn't be in that kind of business.
Seems pretty simple to me.
I would look at it this way. You guys would make horrible businessmen the way you are always on about business.
their money is just as green as the straights, that's the way I look at it.
Wait a minute....let me get this (pardon the pun) straight. I'm morally bankrupt for voting for the guy that still wanted to give me equal rights even though he used to be personally opposed to gay marriage?
Yeah, go with that.
No, you voted for the guy who lied to get his socially conservative black voters to come out in greater numbers, only to reverse course when he can't get re-elected, under the assumption that said black voters are in the bag, and won't really vote against democrats.
But just wait until some of thier buisnesses get sued for not participating in Gay cerimonies.
The backlash is a comin.
Nice little story you've concocted. Does it make you feel better about losing?
Businesses that get sued are sued under public accommodation laws. Repeal those.
Hurry up, I know some crazy religious freaks I want to deny service to.
[quot
So someone who got into the buisiness 30 years ago when this wasnt an issue should just give up thier life's work?
You are one gutless heartless prick.
How is anyone going to be "forced to participate in a gay wedding"? The gay mafia going to shotgun you into attending weddings?
Seriously dude, what on earth are you talking about?
Can ANYONE cite a court case where a church was successfully sued into requiring to perform an interfaith wedding? How about a church that HAD TO marry an interracial couple? Anyone?
Were you born this stupid or do you work at it? The whole topic is business owners, like bakers who make wedding cakes, hall owners who rent reception halls, photographers that take wedding pictures, wedding planners, and the 101 other businesses that specialize in wedding related goods and services being forced by law to include offering these goods and services to sodomites and dykes who get legally married in jurisdictions that have gay "marriage" or get sued for discriminating against them. This has ALREADY happened dumbass, If you are telling bakers they have to bake a wedding cake for two sodomites that are getting married or they get sued, or if you tell a wedding planner that if they turn down two faggots or dykes just because they are faggots or dykes and you don't believe in gay marriage that they can be sued, or if you tell a person that rents out halls for wedding receptions that if they refuse to rent the hall to deviants who wish to celebrate their reception at your hall only because he believes gay marriage is immoral and against his religious beliefs he can be sued, you are forcing them to participate in a gay marriage/wedding. Damn you're an idiot.
Ah, but that's not what you were talking about in your post was it. You specifically said "forced into gay ceremonies" like shotgun weddings.
What you're religiously frothing about are public accommodation laws, not marriage equality. Our being able to legal marry has nothing to do with those.
Best of luck getting them repealed because I want to deny services to right wing religious freaks.
No, you voted for the guy who lied to get his socially conservative black voters to come out in greater numbers, only to reverse course when he can't get re-elected, under the assumption that said black voters are in the bag, and won't really vote against democrats.
But just wait until some of thier buisnesses get sued for not participating in Gay cerimonies.
The backlash is a comin.
Nice little story you've concocted. Does it make you feel better about losing?
Businesses that get sued are sued under public accommodation laws. Repeal those.
Hurry up, I know some crazy religious freaks I want to deny service to.
I would think you would do more poorly than people who didnt want to do gay weddings for religous reasons. Thier holy texts specifically make homosexuality immoral. You just have a grudge.
And I didnt lose on DOMA, i agree that its not a federal issue. We all lost on proposition 8 when a court decided a state can ignore an amendment because they feel like it, and the people who proposed said amendment have no standing to fight it.
But hey, you "won" so it doesnt matter if you gutted the referendum process in achiving your goal. End justifes the means.
This wont bite back at you down the road.....nah....never happen.
[
I would think you would do more poorly than people who didnt want to do gay weddings for religous reasons. Thier holy texts specifically make homosexuality immoral. You just have a grudge.
And I didnt lose on DOMA, i agree that its not a federal issue. We all lost on proposition 8 when a court decided a state can ignore an amendment because they feel like it, and the people who proposed said amendment have no standing to fight it.
But hey, you "won" so it doesnt matter if you gutted the referendum process in achiving your goal. End justifes the means.
This wont bite back at you down the road.....nah....never happen.
Were you born this stupid or do you work at it? The whole topic is business owners, like bakers who make wedding cakes, hall owners who rent reception halls, photographers that take wedding pictures, wedding planners, and the 101 other businesses that specialize in wedding related goods and services being forced by law to include offering these goods and services to sodomites and dykes who get legally married in jurisdictions that have gay "marriage" or get sued for discriminating against them. This has ALREADY happened dumbass, If you are telling bakers they have to bake a wedding cake for two sodomites that are getting married or they get sued, or if you tell a wedding planner that if they turn down two faggots or dykes just because they are faggots or dykes and you don't believe in gay marriage that they can be sued, or if you tell a person that rents out halls for wedding receptions that if they refuse to rent the hall to deviants who wish to celebrate their reception at your hall only because he believes gay marriage is immoral and against his religious beliefs he can be sued, you are forcing them to participate in a gay marriage/wedding. Damn you're an idiot.
Ah, but that's not what you were talking about in your post was it. You specifically said "forced into gay ceremonies" like shotgun weddings.
What you're religiously frothing about are public accommodation laws, not marriage equality. Our being able to legal marry has nothing to do with those.
Best of luck getting them repealed because I want to deny services to right wing religious freaks.
You didn't answer my question, born stupid or work at it? I can see you lack basic reading comprehension skills because I was talking about, and this thread is about, being forced to PARTICIPATE in the ceremony, NOT perform the ceremony, which is the rabbit trail you ran down, but that doesn't answer my question, born that way or work at it? If a wedding photographer is forced under threat of lawsuit to take pictures AT a gay wedding they are being forced to participate in the ceremony. If a hall owner is forced under threat of law suit to rent his hall to homosexual perverts for their reception, they are being forced to participate in the ceremony. Both examples go against their 1st Amendment right that you cannot pass laws that prohibit the free exercise of a person's religion. Is it that you're too stupid to see the difference between participating in and performing the? Or is it that you're such a perverse deviant yourself you just don't give a damn?
Why aren't you railing against Obama for being against gay marriage both times he ran, only to change his mind again? When I mean public accommodation, I mean anyone I find that I would rather not serve, that includes homosexuals. But back to the question. Why aren't you saying anything about Obama's changing stances on gay marriage? I love how you keep calling us bigoted and intolerant. This guy calls your bluff:
Was Obama a ?Bigot 14 Months Ago??: Ralph Reed Confronts Rachel Maddow, Rips Liberal Hypocrisy Over Who Is Labeled Anti-Gay | Video | TheBlaze.com
He wasn't a bigot in 1996, when he was for gay marriage.
Then in 1998, he was undecided so he wasn't only a bigot, but a coward.
Then in 2004 he was against gay marriage for political reasons, so not just a bigot and a coward but a cravenly political animal.
Then in 2006 he was against it because of his faith. So he was a religious bigot.
But when Joe Biden put him on the spot in 2012 and his base were starting to seem a little less than enthusiastic he was suddenly not a bigot anymore. Hallelujah. The One be praised.
Indeed. I love how people can get away with calling us bigots and stuff, they haven't seen who they blindly support. They are the real bigots here. But oh hey, people don't vote for the betterment of their country, they vote for the betterment of themselves.
Ah, but that's not what you were talking about in your post was it. You specifically said "forced into gay ceremonies" like shotgun weddings.
What you're religiously frothing about are public accommodation laws, not marriage equality. Our being able to legal marry has nothing to do with those.
Best of luck getting them repealed because I want to deny services to right wing religious freaks.
You didn't answer my question, born stupid or work at it? I can see you lack basic reading comprehension skills because I was talking about, and this thread is about, being forced to PARTICIPATE in the ceremony, NOT perform the ceremony, which is the rabbit trail you ran down, but that doesn't answer my question, born that way or work at it? If a wedding photographer is forced under threat of lawsuit to take pictures AT a gay wedding they are being forced to participate in the ceremony. If a hall owner is forced under threat of law suit to rent his hall to homosexual perverts for their reception, they are being forced to participate in the ceremony. Both examples go against their 1st Amendment right that you cannot pass laws that prohibit the free exercise of a person's religion. Is it that you're too stupid to see the difference between participating in and performing the? Or is it that you're such a perverse deviant yourself you just don't give a damn?
Go look up public accommodation laws, moron. It's got nothing to do with legal marriage and everything to do with those. Hurry up and get to repealing. I can't wait to tell the Jesus freaks to eat somewhere else!
You didn't answer my question, born stupid or work at it? I can see you lack basic reading comprehension skills because I was talking about, and this thread is about, being forced to PARTICIPATE in the ceremony, NOT perform the ceremony, which is the rabbit trail you ran down, but that doesn't answer my question, born that way or work at it? If a wedding photographer is forced under threat of lawsuit to take pictures AT a gay wedding they are being forced to participate in the ceremony. If a hall owner is forced under threat of law suit to rent his hall to homosexual perverts for their reception, they are being forced to participate in the ceremony. Both examples go against their 1st Amendment right that you cannot pass laws that prohibit the free exercise of a person's religion. Is it that you're too stupid to see the difference between participating in and performing the? Or is it that you're such a perverse deviant yourself you just don't give a damn?
Go look up public accommodation laws, moron. It's got nothing to do with legal marriage and everything to do with those. Hurry up and get to repealing. I can't wait to tell the Jesus freaks to eat somewhere else!
No need to. States cannot pass laws that violate a person's constitutional rights and when these cases, where bakers refuse to make wedding cakes for same sax "marraiges" and when photographers refuse to take pictures at same sex "weddings", or when hall owners refuse to rent their halls to same sex couples for their weddings, etc., etc., etc., start to work their way up through the courts, you'll find they will have the right, on 1st amendment grounds, to stand by their religious beliefs. No need to repeal any laws. I'll go one step further, we'll start to see employers not wanting to offer spousal benefits to same sex "married" couples and those also will work their way through the courts. Personally not a concern of mine since as an employer I won't hire felons, dopers, blacks, atheists or homosexuals in the first place.
[
I would think you would do more poorly than people who didnt want to do gay weddings for religous reasons. Thier holy texts specifically make homosexuality immoral. You just have a grudge.
.
[Personally not a concern of mine since as an employer I won't hire felons, dopers, blacks, atheists or homosexuals in the first place.
Go look up public accommodation laws, moron. It's got nothing to do with legal marriage and everything to do with those. Hurry up and get to repealing. I can't wait to tell the Jesus freaks to eat somewhere else!
No need to. States cannot pass laws that violate a person's constitutional rights and when these cases, where bakers refuse to make wedding cakes for same sax "marraiges" and when photographers refuse to take pictures at same sex "weddings", or when hall owners refuse to rent their halls to same sex couples for their weddings, etc., etc., etc., start to work their way up through the courts, you'll find they will have the right, on 1st amendment grounds, to stand by their religious beliefs. No need to repeal any laws. I'll go one step further, we'll start to see employers not wanting to offer spousal benefits to same sex "married" couples and those also will work their way through the courts. Personally not a concern of mine since as an employer I won't hire felons, dopers, blacks, atheists or homosexuals in the first place.
Apparently there is a need for you to look up the laws 'cause sooner or later odds are you're going to run afoul of it. I doubt someone like you would live in a state with too tolerant of PA laws, but your atheist restriction is in violation of Federal anti discrimination laws, so be careful.
[Personally not a concern of mine since as an employer I won't hire felons, dopers, blacks, atheists or homosexuals in the first place.
Wow...missed the blacks part the first time. You're an all inclusive bigot. You are breaking the law though.
[Personally not a concern of mine since as an employer I won't hire felons, dopers, blacks, atheists or homosexuals in the first place.
Wow...missed the blacks part the first time. You're an all inclusive bigot. You are breaking the law though.
Screw the law. It's MY business and I'll hire who I want to represent MY business. See I don't buy that bs obama's spoon feeding the ignorant. I built my business myself, and I will choose who I hire to represent it and me, and that would not include felons, dopers, drunks, homosexuals, negroes or heathens. Won't hire long haired, ear ring wearing hipsters or blatant liberals either.
Wow...missed the blacks part the first time. You're an all inclusive bigot. You are breaking the law though.
Screw the law. It's MY business and I'll hire who I want to represent MY business. See I don't buy that bs obama's spoon feeding the ignorant. I built my business myself, and I will choose who I hire to represent it and me, and that would not include felons, dopers, drunks, homosexuals, negroes or heathens. Won't hire long haired, ear ring wearing hipsters or blatant liberals either.
Best of luck, bigot. Hope you can afford the lawsuits should your illegal hiring practices be found out.
Wow...missed the blacks part the first time. You're an all inclusive bigot. You are breaking the law though.
Screw the law. It's MY business and I'll hire who I want to represent MY business. See I don't buy that bs obama's spoon feeding the ignorant. I built my business myself, and I will choose who I hire to represent it and me, and that would not include felons, dopers, drunks, homosexuals, negroes or heathens. Won't hire long haired, ear ring wearing hipsters or blatant liberals either.
Best of luck, bigot. Hope you can afford the lawsuits should your illegal hiring practices be found out.
Screw the law. It's MY business and I'll hire who I want to represent MY business. See I don't buy that bs obama's spoon feeding the ignorant. I built my business myself, and I will choose who I hire to represent it and me, and that would not include felons, dopers, drunks, homosexuals, negroes or heathens. Won't hire long haired, ear ring wearing hipsters or blatant liberals either.
