Supreme Court justices RIP ruling forcing states to recognize same-sex marriages - 'Threat To Religious Freedom!'

[John T. Ford]

Beyond that, they want to force abnormality and immorality on society as a whole, compel everyone to treat abnormal as normal, immoral as moral, and to punish any who refuse to do so.

Isaiah 5:20: Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

Communist Goal #26

26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy."

 

[John T. Ford]

It is a fact. Not an opinion and I keep repeating it because it is not sinking in. The first amendment claim is bullshit. Thomas and Alito are cranks.

Granting the right to marry to gays, and expecting a public official to do her job is not taking a liberty away from anyone. . The first amendment speaks to the ability to practice ones religion . It does not give anyone the right to discriminate or to determine how others should live. Yes I am repeating that too. Deal with it

I don't care what your opinion is.

The SCOTUS Justices are correct.

Clearly Obergefell forced Davis to choose between her religious beliefs and her job.

There is no denying that this was a violation of her 1st Amendment Rights.

Regardless of how many time you deny it.

 

[Unkotare]

Bullshit! You still have not answered the question that I asked several times. How has same sex marriage harmed you personally, or society in general?

Why does it bother you so much that someone does not agree with you on this issue?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

I don't care what your opinion is.

The SCOTUS Justices are correct.

Clearly Obergefell forced Davis to choose between her religious beliefs and her job.

There is no denying that this was a violation of her 1st Amendment Rights.

Regardless of how many time you deny it.

Give it a damned rest, Ford. You are becomming tedious

 

[Unkotare]

Give it a damned rest, Ford. You are becomming [sic] tedious

Is that an 'argument'?

 

[John T. Ford]

Give it a damned rest, Ford. You are becomming tedious

Your refusal/incapability to recognize reality is not me being "tedious".

 

[John T. Ford]

Is that an 'argument'?

It's a concession.

 

[John T. Ford]

Why does it bother you so much that someone does not agree with you on this issue?

I can answer that.

It's because they want normal thinking people to accept that which is abnormal as being normal.

Even they know this will never be yet they continue to try to convince others that it is.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Is that an 'argument'?

I have ginen up arguing with Ford. It is pointless

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Why does it bother you so much that someone does not agree with you on this issue?

It does not bother me in the least bit. I am trying to into his head andfind out what is bothering him.

 

[John T. Ford]

It does not bother me in the least bit. I am trying to into his head andfind out what is bothering him.

There is nothing bothering me.

This is about you being incapable or refusing to acknowledge reality.

 

[Unkotare]

It does not bother me in the least bit. ....

Sorta seems like it does.

 

[Faun]

I don't care what your opinion is.

The SCOTUS Justices are correct.

Clearly Obergefell forced Davis to choose between her religious beliefs and her job.

There is no denying that this was a violation of her 1st Amendment Rights.

Regardless of how many time you deny it.

So what? People have to choose between job and religion all the time. That's not new nor is it unconstitutional. Religious Jews have to make that choice when their job would have them work on Shabbat.

 

[John T. Ford]

So what? People have to choose between job and religion all the time. That's not new nor is it unconstitutional. Religious Jews have to make that choice when their job would have them work on Shabbat.

DO NOT respond to my comments with your single digit IQ nonsense.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Sorta seems like it does.

Bigotry in general bothers me but I don't let these fools get to me and I don''t expect to change any minds

 

[bodecea]

Even if married what recourse do I have and if I was not legally married she would not be my wife. Are you ever not a deranged leftist?

You have lots of legal recourse if you are legally married. Lots of protection on property and child dependency....if not legally married, you may have nothing.

 

[bodecea]

DO NOT respond to my comments with your single digit IQ nonsense.

Yeah...you are PROUD of your double digit IQ, aren't you?

 

[bodecea]

Why not? A priest still has to get state certification to conduct a legal marriage.

And he doesn't have to either....but if he doesn't, he can only do religious marriages. Lots of people get their state certification for legal marriages and NOT religious marriages.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

You have lots of legal recourse if you are legally married. Lots of protection on property and child dependency....if not legally married, you may have nothing.

None. In MA, the mother has all the rights. 100%. Try again.

 

[bodecea]

That has nothing to do with marriage. You cannot remove a person living in your home without a legal eviction from the courts. If your wife kicked you out (which I don't know how a woman would that) the husband simply calls the police and they will make sure you can reenter your home.

If they aren't on the mortgage or lease, it's pretty damn easy to get rid of them....and they get no ownership. You are very naive.