The ACLU gets stuffed, as well they should

[Tresha91203]

The ACLU lost and that is the end of it.

Your ignorance speaks volumes.

I am aware they lost. Do you have any response to my point that they were minding their own business, as you suggest they do?

I have never attacked you or called you names. If you believe I am ignorant, please enlighten me. I am always open to knowledge and constructive criticism. We agree the ACLU should not have won and should have just minded their own business, so why the snark aimed at me?

 

[JakeStarkey]

The ACLU lost and that is the end of it.

Your ignorance speaks volumes.

I am aware they lost. Do you have any response to my point that they were minding their own business, as you suggest they do?

I have never attacked you or called you names. If you believe I am ignorant, please enlighten me. I am always open to knowledge and constructive criticism. We agree the ACLU should not have won and should have just minded their own business, so why the snark aimed at me?

Tresha, let's get your right before you get left, OK.

One, here is what you left out: "They were minding their business (RC hospitals and charity/volunteer organizations). It was the ACLU that ran crying to the government that those catholics wont do what I want! It was the ACLU that was wetting beds. // Roman Catholic organizations will shut down if they are forced to perform abortions on demand or for convenience. If the ACLU gave a shit about the country, instead of their progressive agenda, they would not be pushing like this. The ACLU would rather all that charity disappear completely than be exempt from actions against their religion. I'm pretty sure I can find actual horrible things done to women in the name of other religions, religions who don't give any charity at all much less the amount the RC Church gives, but the ACLU chooses this to pursue. It speaks volumes."

Yes, your comment speaks volumes. If the RC has the right to do XYZ, so does ACLU have the right to question it. Speaks volumes.

 

[Lucy Hamilton]

When one's entire wardrobe consists of small variations on a single theme, one ought occasionally look in a mirror - if only to see how soiled things are.....


View attachment 71085 View attachment 71086 View attachment 71087

In this thread Jake has firmly planted his flag on the Left now, earlier he was very flustered and I imagine he was even stamping his foot....he might have calmed down now, here's Jake's new memo to himself:

 

[JakeStarkey]

Lucy, you are flustered again. I am balanced and nuanced, and willing to live by the court in this ruling. But your nonsense, and that of those who believe they have only the right way, that only you can say what you want and get flummoxed when others contradict simply makes you look like a goose.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Henry, yes, you are soiled as they come because you can't think logically anymore. Our world, the one to which you and I were born, with its exceptionalism and with its horrors (it had both), we are not going back. You are unhappy. I don't care.

The world of white male protestant exceptionalism in the US is over because we make up about 34% of the instead of 55% sixty years ago. It's done. We are younger, darker, and forward looking as a nation. That is the way it is.

The confusion of your type, of Lucy, of the others that somehow you can say what you want without contradiction makes you look silly.

 

[Tresha91203]

The ACLU lost and that is the end of it.

Your ignorance speaks volumes.

I am aware they lost. Do you have any response to my point that they were minding their own business, as you suggest they do?

I have never attacked you or called you names. If you believe I am ignorant, please enlighten me. I am always open to knowledge and constructive criticism. We agree the ACLU should not have won and should have just minded their own business, so why the snark aimed at me?

Tresha, let's get your right before you get left, OK.

One, here is what you left out: "They were minding their business (RC hospitals and charity/volunteer organizations). It was the ACLU that ran crying to the government that those catholics wont do what I want! It was the ACLU that was wetting beds. // Roman Catholic organizations will shut down if they are forced to perform abortions on demand or for convenience. If the ACLU gave a shit about the country, instead of their progressive agenda, they would not be pushing like this. The ACLU would rather all that charity disappear completely than be exempt from actions against their religion. I'm pretty sure I can find actual horrible things done to women in the name of other religions, religions who don't give any charity at all much less the amount the RC Church gives, but the ACLU chooses this to pursue. It speaks volumes."

Yes, your comment speaks volumes. If the RC has the right to do XYZ, so does ACLU have the right to question it. Speaks volumes.

The ACLU was told they have no standing to sue, which means it was not their business. The court told them to butt out. The RC Church was minding its business, but the ACLU was not. Do you read it differently?

 

[JakeStarkey]

The ACLU lost and that is the end of it.

Your ignorance speaks volumes.

I am aware they lost. Do you have any response to my point that they were minding their own business, as you suggest they do?

I have never attacked you or called you names. If you believe I am ignorant, please enlighten me. I am always open to knowledge and constructive criticism. We agree the ACLU should not have won and should have just minded their own business, so why the snark aimed at me?

Tresha, let's get your right before you get left, OK.

One, here is what you left out: "They were minding their business (RC hospitals and charity/volunteer organizations). It was the ACLU that ran crying to the government that those catholics wont do what I want! It was the ACLU that was wetting beds. // Roman Catholic organizations will shut down if they are forced to perform abortions on demand or for convenience. If the ACLU gave a shit about the country, instead of their progressive agenda, they would not be pushing like this. The ACLU would rather all that charity disappear completely than be exempt from actions against their religion. I'm pretty sure I can find actual horrible things done to women in the name of other religions, religions who don't give any charity at all much less the amount the RC Church gives, but the ACLU chooses this to pursue. It speaks volumes."

Yes, your comment speaks volumes. If the RC has the right to do XYZ, so does ACLU have the right to question it. Speaks volumes.

The ACLU was told they have no standing to sue, which means it was not their business. The court told them to butt out. The RC Church was minding its business, but the ACLU was not. Do you read it differently?

The ACLU's business is to mind civil liberties. Do you get that?

The court said for now it is wrong.

 

[Tresha91203]

The ACLU lost and that is the end of it.

Your ignorance speaks volumes.

I am aware they lost. Do you have any response to my point that they were minding their own business, as you suggest they do?

I have never attacked you or called you names. If you believe I am ignorant, please enlighten me. I am always open to knowledge and constructive criticism. We agree the ACLU should not have won and should have just minded their own business, so why the snark aimed at me?

Tresha, let's get your right before you get left, OK.

One, here is what you left out: "They were minding their business (RC hospitals and charity/volunteer organizations). It was the ACLU that ran crying to the government that those catholics wont do what I want! It was the ACLU that was wetting beds. // Roman Catholic organizations will shut down if they are forced to perform abortions on demand or for convenience. If the ACLU gave a shit about the country, instead of their progressive agenda, they would not be pushing like this. The ACLU would rather all that charity disappear completely than be exempt from actions against their religion. I'm pretty sure I can find actual horrible things done to women in the name of other religions, religions who don't give any charity at all much less the amount the RC Church gives, but the ACLU chooses this to pursue. It speaks volumes."

Yes, your comment speaks volumes. If the RC has the right to do XYZ, so does ACLU have the right to question it. Speaks volumes.

The ACLU was told they have no standing to sue, which means it was not their business. The court told them to butt out. The RC Church was minding its business, but the ACLU was not. Do you read it differently?

The ACLU's business is to mind civil liberties. Do you get that?

The court said for now it is wrong.

I read that the court stated ACLU's suit was "dubious." It was clear they had no standing but sued anyway. They wasted our time and money to try to bully a religious organization rather than protect Catholics' civil liberties. They should be protecting those civil liberties, not trying to destroy them. You cannot force a Catholic believer to defy his beliefs in a private faith-based business. That is the opposite of defending civil liberties. This was not a government hospital. This was not PP. This was a Catholic hospital. That makes a huge difference to me.

 

[JakeStarkey]

"Dubious" does not invalidate the ACLU's role. It was not clear, Tresha, until it was decided.

I understand it makes a big difference to you, which does not matter.

 

[Tresha91203]

"Dubious" does not invalidate the ACLU's role. It was not clear, Tresha, until it was decided.

I understand it makes a big difference to you, which does not matter.

"Dubious" does not invalidate the ACLU's role. It was not clear, Tresha, until it was decided.

I understand it makes a big difference to you, which does not matter.

It was clear from the beginning.

“No law requires religious hospitals and medical personnel to commit abortions against their faith and conscience, and, in fact, federal law directly prohibits the government from engaging in such coercion,”

 

[JakeStarkey]

Then let it rest. The court did its role. But no citizen has a right to think he can go about telling another citizen how to do his business without that citizen getting lawfully into his face.

I am Christian, but I don't accept Christians getting to yell but be persecuted when yelled at. No.

 

[Tresha91203]

Then let it rest. The court did its role. But no citizen has a right to think he can go about telling another citizen how to do his business without that citizen getting lawfully into his face.

I am Christian, but I don't accept Christians getting to yell but be persecuted when yelled at. No.

I guess this is the part of your viewpoint I don't understand. It was not the Catholics who were telling anyone to do anything. They were in no one's face and yelled at no one. It was the ACLU who was doing exactly that, telling another how to do his business, and using the threat of force to take civil liberties away from people. They are supposed to be defending civil liberties, so I am having a hard time understanding how you feel (if you do) they were defending civil liberties in any way. Who's civil liberties were they defending?

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Then let it rest. The court did its role. But no citizen has a right to think he can go about telling another citizen how to do his business without that citizen getting lawfully into his face.

I am Christian, but I don't accept Christians getting to yell but be persecuted when yelled at. No.

I guess this is the part of your viewpoint I don't understand. It was not the Catholics who were telling anyone to do anything. They were in no one's face and yelled at no one. It was the ACLU who was doing exactly that, telling another how to do his business, and using the threat of force to take civil liberties away from people. They are supposed to be defending civil liberties, so I am having a hard time understanding how you feel (if you do) they were defending civil liberties in any way. Who's civil liberties were they defending?

Certainly not the babies

 

[JakeStarkey]

An ACLU law suit is not yelling by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[Tresha91203]

My apologies for poor communication. That is not how I meant it. I don't think the ACLU yelled at anyone. This was meant to be independent:

"It was the ACLU who was doing exactly that, telling another how to do his business, and using the threat of force to take civil liberties away from people."

I should have started a new paragraph. It was clear in my head, lol.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Lucy, you are a bed wetter with Sassy. I approved of the judge's decision. Anyone has right to be hetero or homo in public. Who gives a bed wetting if you don't like it.

"Anyone has right to be hetero or homo in public."

So a blow-job in the middle of a grocery store would be considered appropriate to you?

Please don't give the perverts any more ideas. Next queers will demand they can screw each other in public, and if you don't like it. You will be a homophobe.

They already do that there are city parks that are so full of the left overs from gay men fucking that kids can't go there anymore

bed wetters like RGS and jknow and marty and sassy and lucy are hysterical.

You folks want to hit out and but not be hit in return. You are like mudwhistle and pole sitter whining that this used to be a nice conservative site, whatever that meant.

Expect to be dealt with as you deal with others.

Tell that to all the city kids that can not go to city parks because of all the condoms leftover cum and other sex related material left from gay men fucking at night in their parks.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

marty, no one cares what you do in church, but when you are in public you have no more rights than anyone else.

That statement includes gays and other "special" classes that you liberals think deserve special ass treatment. Remind gays they have no right to strip in public have sex in public or be offended when straights get tired of their over the top bullshit.

 

[JakeStarkey]

RGS, you are saying things you can't document. Inner city parks have been bad for sixty years, and the LGBT have nothing to do with it. You are simply whining about growing old and not fitting in anymore.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

RGS, you are saying things you can't document. Inner city parks have been bad for sixty years, and the LGBT have nothing to do with it. You are simply whining about growing old and not fitting in anymore.

Actually I read several articles on the problem one was from a city I used to live in Spokane Washington. The left overs were worse then the drug paraphernalia left by druggies.

 

[JakeStarkey]

RGS, you are saying things you can't document. Inner city parks have been bad for sixty years, and the LGBT have nothing to do with it. You are simply whining about growing old and not fitting in anymore.

Actually I read several articles on the problem one was from a city I used to live in Spokane Washington. The left overs were worse then the drug paraphernalia left by druggies.

Post the article.