Texas SC rules state does NOT have to give benefits to homosexual "couples"

[martybegan]

What is "gibberish" about it?

You have to be moral to ask for morality.

Should we ask a Pope for a Contingent of Subject Matter Specialists, to Inquire into the moral Rectitude of Persons alleging to have morals?

Otherwise, we have legal ethics.

Be, specific.

Don't be, incompetent, dear.

GIBBERISH

 

[bodecea]

Where is the drug war in our Constitution, right winger? See how easy and simple it is to play that game.

it's not there, and actually should be given to the States to regulate like alcohol for pot.

There is federal law covering drug laws, and there is no right to drugs in the constittuion.

States have laws regarding public accommodations.

But there is a right to free expression of religion, and that is where PA laws don't win out over something as insignificant as a wedding cake.

Making a cake is "free expression of religion"? Why not not following health laws or safety laws too if someone wants to make up more religious "expressions"?

That will be the argument in front of the SC next term.

Actually religion can override fire code, I got married in a hindu temple, and part of the ceremony is a fire of open flame, something not allowed in the NYC fire code, but an exemption is given for religious reasons.

Health codes can also be modified. Health departments have to allow for kosher or halal slaughter, even if they have codes that require different procedures.

An exemption. You did type that, right? An exemption. Which is something they applied for and got beforehand by explaining an already historically established religious tradition.......right?

Explain the historically established religious tradition in cake baking.

 

[danielpalos]

What is "gibberish" about it?

You have to be moral to ask for morality.

Should we ask a Pope for a Contingent of Subject Matter Specialists, to Inquire into the moral Rectitude of Persons alleging to have morals?

Otherwise, we have legal ethics.

Be, specific.

Don't be, incompetent, dear.

GIBBERISH

In other words, it is to complicated for you. You need to explain why you, (emotionally) feel, it is "gibberish".

Nope, you don't get to "win" by typing words in a string and pretending you have a point.

Either that, or, ENGLISH MOTHERFUCKER, DO YOU SPEAK IT?

Otherwise, you really are just clueless and Causeless, and have, "no morals" for insisting otherwise.

What is "gibberish" about it?

You have to be moral to ask for morality.

Should we ask a Pope for a Contingent of Subject Matter Specialists, to Inquire into the moral Rectitude of Persons alleging to have morals?

Otherwise, we have legal ethics.

Be, specific.

Don't be, incompetent, dear.

 

[martybegan]

it's not there, and actually should be given to the States to regulate like alcohol for pot.

There is federal law covering drug laws, and there is no right to drugs in the constittuion.

States have laws regarding public accommodations.

But there is a right to free expression of religion, and that is where PA laws don't win out over something as insignificant as a wedding cake.

Making a cake is "free expression of religion"? Why not not following health laws or safety laws too if someone wants to make up more religious "expressions"?

That will be the argument in front of the SC next term.

Actually religion can override fire code, I got married in a hindu temple, and part of the ceremony is a fire of open flame, something not allowed in the NYC fire code, but an exemption is given for religious reasons.

Health codes can also be modified. Health departments have to allow for kosher or halal slaughter, even if they have codes that require different procedures.

An exemption. You did type that, right? An exemption. Which is something they applied for and got beforehand by explaining an already historically established religious tradition.......right?

Explain the historically established religious tradition in cake baking.

Or they just decided it was something not worth fighting and didn't try to make the fight.

It's not up to government to decide how a person practices their religion, so your attempted gotcha moment is a moot point.

Free exercise is free exercise, and unless the government can come up with a compelling reason due to an actual harm suffered by the other party, then they should just butt out.

 

[martybegan]

What is "gibberish" about it?

You have to be moral to ask for morality.

Should we ask a Pope for a Contingent of Subject Matter Specialists, to Inquire into the moral Rectitude of Persons alleging to have morals?

Otherwise, we have legal ethics.

Be, specific.

Don't be, incompetent, dear.

GIBBERISH

In other words, it is to complicated for you. You need to explain why you, (emotionally) feel, it is "gibberish".

Nope, you don't get to "win" by typing words in a string and pretending you have a point.

Either that, or, ENGLISH MOTHERFUCKER, DO YOU SPEAK IT?

Otherwise, you really are just clueless and Causeless, and have, "no morals" for insisting otherwise.

THERE is the clueless and causeless crap you are known for.

Gibberish on top of Gibberish.

 

[bodecea]

You have to be moral to ask for morality.

Should we ask a Pope for a Contingent of Subject Matter Specialists, to Inquire into the moral Rectitude of Persons alleging to have morals?

Otherwise, we have legal ethics.

Pure gibberish.

Thank you for ceding the point and the argument, by having nothing but Repeal.

you don't get to press the win button just because you string some words together to make yourself sound smart.

Now how about you devolve to your usual clue and cause bullshit?

How, Irrelevant as a argument. It really is worthless in the non-porn sector.

You have to be moral to ask for morality.

Should we ask a Pope for a Contingent of Subject Matter Specialists, to Inquire into the moral Rectitude of Persons alleging to have morals?

Otherwise, we have legal ethics.

More gibberish.

Much easier to just say that rather than actually WORK to accomplish change if you feel a change needs to be made by repealing what you perceive to be bad law.

 

[bodecea]

States have laws regarding public accommodations.

But there is a right to free expression of religion, and that is where PA laws don't win out over something as insignificant as a wedding cake.

Making a cake is "free expression of religion"? Why not not following health laws or safety laws too if someone wants to make up more religious "expressions"?

That will be the argument in front of the SC next term.

Actually religion can override fire code, I got married in a hindu temple, and part of the ceremony is a fire of open flame, something not allowed in the NYC fire code, but an exemption is given for religious reasons.

Health codes can also be modified. Health departments have to allow for kosher or halal slaughter, even if they have codes that require different procedures.

An exemption. You did type that, right? An exemption. Which is something they applied for and got beforehand by explaining an already historically established religious tradition.......right?

Explain the historically established religious tradition in cake baking.

Or they just decided it was something not worth fighting and didn't try to make the fight.

It's not up to government to decide how a person practices their religion, so your attempted gotcha moment is a moot point.

Free exercise is free exercise, and unless the government can come up with a compelling reason due to an actual harm suffered by the other party, then they should just butt out.

Well, you know all about "not worth fighting" for. Easier to just whine.

 

[danielpalos]

What is "gibberish" about it?

You have to be moral to ask for morality.

Should we ask a Pope for a Contingent of Subject Matter Specialists, to Inquire into the moral Rectitude of Persons alleging to have morals?

Otherwise, we have legal ethics.

Be, specific.

Don't be, incompetent, dear.

GIBBERISH

In other words, it is to complicated for you. You need to explain why you, (emotionally) feel, it is "gibberish".

Nope, you don't get to "win" by typing words in a string and pretending you have a point.

Either that, or, ENGLISH MOTHERFUCKER, DO YOU SPEAK IT?

Otherwise, you really are just clueless and Causeless, and have, "no morals" for insisting otherwise.

THERE is the clueless and causeless crap you are known for.

Gibberish on top of Gibberish.

This why else I don't take the right wing seriously about economics, to the extent it may require, the subjective value of morals.

 

[danielpalos]

Pure gibberish.

Thank you for ceding the point and the argument, by having nothing but Repeal.

you don't get to press the win button just because you string some words together to make yourself sound smart.

Now how about you devolve to your usual clue and cause bullshit?

How, Irrelevant as a argument. It really is worthless in the non-porn sector.

You have to be moral to ask for morality.

Should we ask a Pope for a Contingent of Subject Matter Specialists, to Inquire into the moral Rectitude of Persons alleging to have morals?

Otherwise, we have legal ethics.

More gibberish.

Much easier to just say that rather than actually WORK to accomplish change if you feel a change needs to be made by repealing what you perceive to be bad law.

Nothing but propaganda and rhetoric. Even women in the non-porn sector can do that, for less.

 

[jon_berzerk]

You just have lousy reading comprehension. Why not read some anecdotes on the web?

Punishment Without Crime

Again, I am fully aware of the abuse of asset forfeiture by various law enforcement agencies. I am also aware of the abuse done by human rights councils that forget freedom of religion is also a human right. Trying to say one is worse than the other is not helping anything.

A fine usually means you were found guilty of something.

Yes, guilty of not baking a cake. Again, you don't have to play "which is worse" here.

Bakers who are in it for profit are not in it for morals. It really is that simple. They should be legally required to be not-for-profit if they "want to engage in the socialism of morals over the pursuit of capital profit in public accommodations."

bullshit. Where in the constitution does it say you give up your rights if you want to make money?

no where does it say that

only

hopeful thinking from leftists

 

[danielpalos]

Again, I am fully aware of the abuse of asset forfeiture by various law enforcement agencies. I am also aware of the abuse done by human rights councils that forget freedom of religion is also a human right. Trying to say one is worse than the other is not helping anything.

A fine usually means you were found guilty of something.

Yes, guilty of not baking a cake. Again, you don't have to play "which is worse" here.

Bakers who are in it for profit are not in it for morals. It really is that simple. They should be legally required to be not-for-profit if they "want to engage in the socialism of morals over the pursuit of capital profit in public accommodations."

bullshit. Where in the constitution does it say you give up your rights if you want to make money?

no where does it say that

only

hopeful thinking from leftists

Bakers who are in it for profit are not in it for morals. It really is that simple. They should be legally required to be not-for-profit if they "want to engage in the socialism of morals over the pursuit of capital profit in public accommodations."

 

[Marion Morrison]

It's past time to let Taxus and the rest of the backwards hillbillies go off to form their own country. Maybe the FakeJesusConfederate States of Batshittia. Cons always use government power to strip human beings of rights.

This is against the America way and what the founders intended. Freedom was the foundation of the US. Conservatives now reject this idea and instead view freedom as whatever whim they have today on who they want to treat like human beings and who they don't.

I say fine let them go. Let's break the union up and let the fake Kristians head off to build The Walled-in Compound of Perpetual Preppers. Taxus has been at the forefront the last ten years of wanting to secede from the union, I say let's join them and break it up. The rest of us are tired of having to apologize to the rest of humanity for having the knuckle-draggers in the family.

The majority of CA voted for proposition 8. It passed.

Obama was bound and determined to foist faggotry on the US.

(Probably because he is one)

"Homosexuality isn't about sex, it's about domination."

-Quote from Dennis Hopper in Blue
Velvet.

I have yet to find a clip of that.

 

[Seawytch]

States have laws regarding public accommodations.

But there is a right to free expression of religion, and that is where PA laws don't win out over something as insignificant as a wedding cake.

Making a cake is "free expression of religion"? Why not not following health laws or safety laws too if someone wants to make up more religious "expressions"?

That will be the argument in front of the SC next term.

Actually religion can override fire code, I got married in a hindu temple, and part of the ceremony is a fire of open flame, something not allowed in the NYC fire code, but an exemption is given for religious reasons.

Health codes can also be modified. Health departments have to allow for kosher or halal slaughter, even if they have codes that require different procedures.

An exemption. You did type that, right? An exemption. Which is something they applied for and got beforehand by explaining an already historically established religious tradition.......right?

Explain the historically established religious tradition in cake baking.

Or they just decided it was something not worth fighting and didn't try to make the fight.

It's not up to government to decide how a person practices their religion, so your attempted gotcha moment is a moot point.

Free exercise is free exercise, and unless the government can come up with a compelling reason due to an actual harm suffered by the other party, then they should just butt out.

Nope, it isn't up to the government how someone worships. It is up to them how businesses are licensed and in some places that means you gotta serve the gays AND the blacks. Oh well!

 

[jon_berzerk]

A fine usually means you were found guilty of something.

Yes, guilty of not baking a cake. Again, you don't have to play "which is worse" here.

Bakers who are in it for profit are not in it for morals. It really is that simple. They should be legally required to be not-for-profit if they "want to engage in the socialism of morals over the pursuit of capital profit in public accommodations."

bullshit. Where in the constitution does it say you give up your rights if you want to make money?

no where does it say that

only

hopeful thinking from leftists

Bakers who are in it for profit are not in it for morals. It really is that simple. They should be legally required to be not-for-profit if they "want to engage in the socialism of morals over the pursuit of capital profit in public accommodations."

what a crock of shit

 

[Seawytch]

It's past time to let Taxus and the rest of the backwards hillbillies go off to form their own country. Maybe the FakeJesusConfederate States of Batshittia. Cons always use government power to strip human beings of rights.

This is against the America way and what the founders intended. Freedom was the foundation of the US. Conservatives now reject this idea and instead view freedom as whatever whim they have today on who they want to treat like human beings and who they don't.

I say fine let them go. Let's break the union up and let the fake Kristians head off to build The Walled-in Compound of Perpetual Preppers. Taxus has been at the forefront the last ten years of wanting to secede from the union, I say let's join them and break it up. The rest of us are tired of having to apologize to the rest of humanity for having the knuckle-draggers in the family.

The majority of CA voted for proposition 8. It passed.

And? They wouldn't now.

Obama was bound and determined to foist faggotry on the US.

No, that was us fags that did that. Primarily a woman named Edith Windsor and a man named Jim Obergefell. Obama had little or nothing to do with it. You'll have to use your other pejorative for him.

"Homosexuality isn't about sex, it's about domination."

-Quote from Dennis Hopper in Blue
Velvet.

I have yet to find a clip of that.

No actually, it's about emotional and sexual attraction. You're confusing rape with being gay much the way your "ilk" confuses polygamy, pedophila, bestiality, etc. with being gay. I think it may be the inbreeding that causes the confusion.

 

[bodecea]

It's past time to let Taxus and the rest of the backwards hillbillies go off to form their own country. Maybe the FakeJesusConfederate States of Batshittia. Cons always use government power to strip human beings of rights.

This is against the America way and what the founders intended. Freedom was the foundation of the US. Conservatives now reject this idea and instead view freedom as whatever whim they have today on who they want to treat like human beings and who they don't.

I say fine let them go. Let's break the union up and let the fake Kristians head off to build The Walled-in Compound of Perpetual Preppers. Taxus has been at the forefront the last ten years of wanting to secede from the union, I say let's join them and break it up. The rest of us are tired of having to apologize to the rest of humanity for having the knuckle-draggers in the family.

The majority of CA voted for proposition 8. It passed.

Obama was bound and determined to foist faggotry on the US.

(Probably because he is one)

"Homosexuality isn't about sex, it's about domination."

-Quote from Dennis Hopper in Blue
Velvet.

I have yet to find a clip of that.

The bare majority...much less than voted for Prop 22 only a few years earlier....and this is with millions of outside money and church congregations standing on street corners with their children on Sundays holding up H8 signs.

But that's gone now....just like school segregation is gone...tho there those also wishing that was back.

 

[Marion Morrison]

It's past time to let Taxus and the rest of the backwards hillbillies go off to form their own country. Maybe the FakeJesusConfederate States of Batshittia. Cons always use government power to strip human beings of rights.

This is against the America way and what the founders intended. Freedom was the foundation of the US. Conservatives now reject this idea and instead view freedom as whatever whim they have today on who they want to treat like human beings and who they don't.

I say fine let them go. Let's break the union up and let the fake Kristians head off to build The Walled-in Compound of Perpetual Preppers. Taxus has been at the forefront the last ten years of wanting to secede from the union, I say let's join them and break it up. The rest of us are tired of having to apologize to the rest of humanity for having the knuckle-draggers in the family.

The majority of CA voted for proposition 8. It passed.

And? They wouldn't now.

Obama was bound and determined to foist faggotry on the US.

No, that was us fags that did that. Primarily a woman named Edith Windsor and a man named Jim Obergefell. Obama had little or nothing to do with it. You'll have to use your other pejorative for him.

"Homosexuality isn't about sex, it's about domination."

-Quote from Dennis Hopper in Blue
Velvet.

I have yet to find a clip of that.

No actually, it's about emotional and sexual attraction. You're confusing rape with being gay much the way your "ilk" confuses polygamy, pedophila, bestiality, etc. with being gay. I think it may be the inbreeding that causes the confusion.

I get it, you're a dyke. Bodey is too.

 

[bodecea]

It's past time to let Taxus and the rest of the backwards hillbillies go off to form their own country. Maybe the FakeJesusConfederate States of Batshittia. Cons always use government power to strip human beings of rights.

This is against the America way and what the founders intended. Freedom was the foundation of the US. Conservatives now reject this idea and instead view freedom as whatever whim they have today on who they want to treat like human beings and who they don't.

I say fine let them go. Let's break the union up and let the fake Kristians head off to build The Walled-in Compound of Perpetual Preppers. Taxus has been at the forefront the last ten years of wanting to secede from the union, I say let's join them and break it up. The rest of us are tired of having to apologize to the rest of humanity for having the knuckle-draggers in the family.

The majority of CA voted for proposition 8. It passed.

And? They wouldn't now.

Obama was bound and determined to foist faggotry on the US.

No, that was us fags that did that. Primarily a woman named Edith Windsor and a man named Jim Obergefell. Obama had little or nothing to do with it. You'll have to use your other pejorative for him.

"Homosexuality isn't about sex, it's about domination."

-Quote from Dennis Hopper in Blue
Velvet.

I have yet to find a clip of that.

No actually, it's about emotional and sexual attraction. You're confusing rape with being gay much the way your "ilk" confuses polygamy, pedophila, bestiality, etc. with being gay. I think it may be the inbreeding that causes the confusion.

I get it, you're a dyke. Bodey is too.

And......?

 

[Seawytch]

It's past time to let Taxus and the rest of the backwards hillbillies go off to form their own country. Maybe the FakeJesusConfederate States of Batshittia. Cons always use government power to strip human beings of rights.

This is against the America way and what the founders intended. Freedom was the foundation of the US. Conservatives now reject this idea and instead view freedom as whatever whim they have today on who they want to treat like human beings and who they don't.

I say fine let them go. Let's break the union up and let the fake Kristians head off to build The Walled-in Compound of Perpetual Preppers. Taxus has been at the forefront the last ten years of wanting to secede from the union, I say let's join them and break it up. The rest of us are tired of having to apologize to the rest of humanity for having the knuckle-draggers in the family.

The majority of CA voted for proposition 8. It passed.

And? They wouldn't now.

Obama was bound and determined to foist faggotry on the US.

No, that was us fags that did that. Primarily a woman named Edith Windsor and a man named Jim Obergefell. Obama had little or nothing to do with it. You'll have to use your other pejorative for him.

"Homosexuality isn't about sex, it's about domination."

-Quote from Dennis Hopper in Blue
Velvet.

I have yet to find a clip of that.

No actually, it's about emotional and sexual attraction. You're confusing rape with being gay much the way your "ilk" confuses polygamy, pedophila, bestiality, etc. with being gay. I think it may be the inbreeding that causes the confusion.

I get it, you're a dyke. Bodey is too.

Wow...you sussed that out all by yourself did you? You really have some super power there, bucko. Make sure you only use it for good!

 

[danielpalos]

Yes, guilty of not baking a cake. Again, you don't have to play "which is worse" here.

Bakers who are in it for profit are not in it for morals. It really is that simple. They should be legally required to be not-for-profit if they "want to engage in the socialism of morals over the pursuit of capital profit in public accommodations."

bullshit. Where in the constitution does it say you give up your rights if you want to make money?

no where does it say that

only

hopeful thinking from leftists

Bakers who are in it for profit are not in it for morals. It really is that simple. They should be legally required to be not-for-profit if they "want to engage in the socialism of morals over the pursuit of capital profit in public accommodations."

what a crock of shit

Nothing but emotionalism instead of a valid argument, right wingers. Even chics in the non-porn sector can be as equal, for pay purposes.