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

[rightwinger]

Nah, they were forbidden to deny a license to same sex couples. There is no where on the application to identify sexuality.

And if a gay man applied for a license with a lesbian, non problemo.

What a ridiculous claim

 

[Blues Man]

"By your logic because you are a republican you must agree with everything ALL republicans do."

Your words say you're a liar.

See I notice you don't quote the entire post where I said you have included me in groups of people who burn churches and threaten judges because you erroneously believe I am a democrat and that's what democrats do. Why don't you include that part in your quote?

Because it's true?

 

[HeyNorm]

What a ridiculous claim

What is?

 

[easyt65]

See I notice you don't quote the entire post where I said you have included me in groups of people who burn churches and threaten judges because you erroneously believe I am a democrat and that's what democrats do. Why don't you include that part in your quote?

Because it's true?

I have mo problem with what I said. Anyone who would falsely accuse someone then deny their own quote is apt to do those things, I would guess.

You said you did not falsely accuse me, which was a lie. So how am I suppose to believe you don't do those things just based on your say so?

Its just a vicious circle...

 

[Blues Man]

I have mo problem with what I said. Anyone who would falsely accuse someone then deny their own quote is apt to do those things, I would guess.

You said you did not falsely accuse me, which was a lie. So how am I suppose to believe you don't do those things just based on your say so?

Its just a vicious circle...

I made no accusation. I told you that is my opinion of your character. And you have done nothing to make me change my mind.

You have included me in the company of church burners and other violent people more than once in this thread all because you think I am a democrat and according to you those are the kind of things democrats do therefore I must do them too.

 

[easyt65]

I made no accusation. I told you that is my opinion of your character.

Then your opinion isn't worth shit because you were proven wrong repeatedly, like your attempt to insinuate I supported what happened on J6.


You should stick to telling people what you believe instead of trying to speak for me because you suck at it.

 

[HeyNorm]

What is?

rightwinger

Well?

 

[Blues Man]

Then your opinion isn't worth shit because you were proven wrong repeatedly, like your attempt to insinuate I supported what happened on J6.


You should stick to telling people what you believe instead of trying to speak for me because you suck at it.

You have offered no proof of anything.

But I see you have deflected the topic because you are not able to actually prove any of your points.

 

[rightwinger]

rightwinger

Well?

Your assertion of a lesbian marrying a gay man

 

[HeyNorm]

Your assertion of a lesbian marrying a gay man

Why? Can you prove it’s never happened?

Oh wait……

She's A Lesbian, He's Gay, And Their 33-Year Marriage Will Change Your Perception Of Love

"Life is nothing if not an interesting adventure."

www.huffpost.com

 

[easyt65]

You have offered no proof of anything.

Lie, deny, and justify...

Are you SURE you're not a Democrat?

 

[Blues Man]

Lie, deny, and justify...

Are you SURE you're not a Democrat?

WHat proof have you offered that you do not condone violence?

Your word?

No that's fucking funny

 

[easyt65]

WHat proof have you offered that you do not condone violence?

For one, lil' snowflake, I have never condoned what happened on J6 as you seemingly tried to insinuate I did .

Ya know, I have better things to do that spend all day participating in your attempt yo make you feel better about yourself after you were caught falsely accusing me and then trying to spin it as that isn't what you did.

I'm going to get back to the topic.

If you want empathy, tell it to your significant other or fellow snowflakes.

If you want absolution, go tell it to a priest.

If you want your conscience cleared, go tell your psychiatrist.

But you and I are done here.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Again I am not a democrat and I unlike you do not condone violence.

Abortion is violence.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

I understand that the minority should be treated no differently from the majority, but the minority should not have more rights than the majority. What liberals want is special treatment for us, we just want to be left alone. We do not want to conquer society with our version of morality. Equality, not submission. Coexistence, not subversion.

Greetings! I find your postings very interesting and unusual. I am especially curious about one thing that you said. But before I get into that, let me say this. I am a straight male of a certain age and consider myself a strong advocate and ally of LGBT people . So please know that my question is in no way intended to disparage you or to undermine your views. I do however want to understand them better. Specifically, you say that you think that liberals ( that would be me) want special treatment for gays. I am left wondering what that special treatment that you think that we want for you is. I hear references to “special treatment “ or special rights coming from those who do not think that you should have the same rights, but I never heard it from a gay person who wants equal rights. So I am a bit confused. Please explain.

 

[Dragonlady]

Lie, deny, and justify...

Are you SURE you're not a Democrat?

You've just described yourself - lie, deny, and justify.

 

[Flopper]

That ALL states MUST recognize same-sex MARRIAGES is found NO WHERE in the U.S. Constitution, & such a forced mandate on Religious persons and institutions poses a threat to religious freedom!

"Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito said Monday that Obergefell v. Hodges, the Supreme Court case that mandated all states recognize same-sex marriages, is "found nowhere in the text" of the Constitution and threatens "the religious liberty of the many Americans who believe that marriage is a sacred institution between one man and one woman."

"The statement was written by Thomas and joined by Alito about the case of Kim Davis, a former Kentucky county clerk who said she would not give same-sex couples marriage licenses. The two justices said they agreed with the consensus of the court that it should not take Davis' case, but only because it did not "cleanly present" the "important questions about the scope of our decision in Obergefell."

Thomas and Alito dissented from the original Obergefell decision and their statement Monday could indicate that they would vote to overturn it if presented the chance."



"Obergefell enables courts and governments to brand religious adherents who believe that marriage is between one man and one woman as bigots, making their religious liberty concerns that much easier to dismiss," he wrote. "In other words, Obergefell was read to suggest that being a public official with traditional Christian values was legally tantamount to invidious discrimination toward homosexuals."

Just because you have a deep RELIGIOUS conviction regarding marriage being between a man and a woman and does not include same-sex marriages does NOT make one a Bigot or Homophobe and protects that religious belief / conviction.

Thomas added: "This assessment flows directly from Obergefell’s language, which characterized such views as 'disparag[ing]' homosexuals and 'diminish[ing] their personhood' through '[d]ignitary wounds.'"

Justices Thomas, Alito slam Obergefell same-sex marriage decision as Supreme Court denies Kim Davis case

The statement was written by Thomas and joined by Alito about the case of Kim Davis, a former Kentucky county clerk who said she would not give same-sex couples marriage licenses.

www.foxnews.com

 

[Flopper]

You get dumber every day Easy. The Supreme Court, ruled on a 7-2 basis, that Kim Davis has no legal right to refuse to give marriage licences to gay people and that Davis cannot try to impose her religious beliefs on people in the State where she lives, or anywhere else, and the Court recently ruled overwhelming in favour of gay rights.

Thomas and Alito's dissent reads like right wing bullshit, not well considered law.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

That ALL states MUST recognize same-sex MARRIAGES is found NO WHERE in the U.S. Constitution, & such a forced mandate on Religious persons and institutions poses a threat to religious freedom!

"Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito said Monday that Obergefell v. Hodges, the Supreme Court case that mandated all states recognize same-sex marriages, is "found nowhere in the text" of the Constitution and threatens "the religious liberty of the many Americans who believe that marriage is a sacred institution between one man and one woman."

"The statement was written by Thomas and joined by Alito about the case of Kim Davis, a former Kentucky county clerk who said she would not give same-sex couples marriage licenses. The two justices said they agreed with the consensus of the court that it should not take Davis' case, but only because it did not "cleanly present" the "important questions about the scope of our decision in Obergefell."

Thomas and Alito dissented from the original Obergefell decision and their statement Monday could indicate that they would vote to overturn it if presented the chance."



"Obergefell enables courts and governments to brand religious adherents who believe that marriage is between one man and one woman as bigots, making their religious liberty concerns that much easier to dismiss," he wrote. "In other words, Obergefell was read to suggest that being a public official with traditional Christian values was legally tantamount to invidious discrimination toward homosexuals."

Just because you have a deep RELIGIOUS conviction regarding marriage being between a man and a woman and does not include same-sex marriages does NOT make one a Bigot or Homophobe and protects that religious belief / conviction.

Thomas added: "This assessment flows directly from Obergefell’s language, which characterized such views as 'disparag[ing]' homosexuals and 'diminish[ing] their personhood' through '[d]ignitary wounds.'"

Justices Thomas, Alito slam Obergefell same-sex marriage decision as Supreme Court denies Kim Davis case

The statement was written by Thomas and joined by Alito about the case of Kim Davis, a former Kentucky county clerk who said she would not give same-sex couples marriage licenses.

www.foxnews.com

All states must reccognize opposite sex marriage is found no where in the US Constitution Marrige of any sort is found no where in the US Constitutiom.

HOWEVER, since the begining, marriage for heterosexuals has been treated as a rigth while it was denied to homoexuals. That is discriniation and a denial of equal protetion under the law.

Your religious beliefs have nothing to do with what other believe or how they live. Live your life and let others live theirs and you won't be branded bigot

I can only imaging the howling –much coming from conservatives who are married and enjoying all of the perks that go with it- if a state decided not to recognize heterosexual marriage

 

[easyt65]

All states must reccognize opposite sex marriage is found no where in the US Constitutiom. Marrige of any sort is found no where in the US Constitutiom.

HOWEVER, since the begining, marriage for heterosexuals has been treated as a righ while it ws denied to homoexuals. That is discriniation and a denial of equal protetion under the law.

Your religious beliefs have nothing to do with what other believe or how they live. Live your life and let others live theirs and you won't be branded bigot

I can only imaging the howling –much coming from conservatives who are married and enjoying all of the perks that go with it- if a state decided not to recognize heterosexual marriage

You (and every triggered snowflake on this board) must have missed my post where I said I don't care if state / federal governments give same sex couples the same rights and benefits as heterosexual couples, where I stated what people do in their own bedrooms, who they choose to spend their livees with is their own business that does not concern or bother me. Noone needs my or any other person's permission or acceptance to live their lives, anyway.

Half of the day and posts to me have been from ignorant letist snowflakes falsely accusing me of things, creating false narrarives, and falsely trying to tell ME what I believe / think / feel. Why should you be any different?!

My advice to such people is take a breath, turn down the 'triggered emotion', actually read and pay attention to what others say, spend more time telling people what YOU think inatead of telling them what they think / believe.

And if you still want to falsely accuse me or try to ignorantky speak for me 'you' can f* off. Just brcause 'you' say it doesn't make it true, nor does it mean I care what 'you' have to say.

Merry Christmas, and have a great rest of your day.