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.
The Redfishes do not vote on that which is good and right when it comes to civil rights, otherwise many of us would be in the concentation camps of the far right reactionaries.
SCOTUS makes these decisions, and the Redfishes will be forced to kneel and confess their error.
wrong, I am all for equality in all things. I fully support the civil rights act, I want gays treated equally and fairly. Where we differ is that I do not believe that a gay union is a marraige or that society should consider gay unions equally acceptable and normal as man/woman marriages.
Thats what I believe, Last time I checked we have the right to our beliefs in this country.
What I find very dangerous is the idea that beliefs can be mandated by the government----------and thats what this whole gay marriage debate really boils down to.
I so would love for the conservatives to show us where in the constitution it says that gay people can't legally get married to the person they love.
I would also like conservatives to show us where in the constitution it says that our government can legally discriminate against gay people.
I would also love to know where in the constitution it says that marriage is between a woman and a man.
First you show us where 4 men and 6 women cannot get married, or a father and daughter cannot bet married.
it gay marriage is constitutionally OK, then so are all other forms of marriage.
So why the bullshit facism then?
Marriage equality is the center position.
A majority favor it
The Equal Protection doctrine of the 14th Amendment will require SCOTUS to extend that right to ALL Americans no matter what state they live in.
So the below will also now be legal in all 50 states as well?
"A New York Magazine interview revealed an 18-year-old woman's plans to marry her long lost father. Next on their to-do list is to move to New Jersey, where incest between adults happens to be legal."
Report Woman Plans To Marry Her Long Lost Father Move To NJ - FOX 29 News Philadelphia WTXF-TV
So why the bullshit facism then?[
In America as well. It doesn't pass when voted on. No amount of think progress polls change that
Marriage Equality passed the last 4 times it was on the General Election Ballot which was 2012. (Maryland, Washington, Maine, and Minnesota)
>>>>
No one said said they couldn't. Its just not legally recognized. They put it to a vote and the people said no and now they are using courts in a facist manner to force acceptance. They are stupid and childish. If they wanted amendment they should do it legislatively instead of judicial fiat. Which only nets them less power because they gave it away on the illusion that people will see them differently.I so would love for the conservatives to show us where in the constitution it says that gay people can't legally get married to the person they love.
I would also like conservatives to show us where in the constitution it says that our government can legally discriminate against gay people.
I would also love to know where in the constitution it says that marriage is between a woman and a man.
Pretty sure that wouldn't stand Constitutionally.if that poll is accurate then why do you on the left object to a national referendum or a constitutional amendment? Why do you object to letting the people speak? Could it be because you know that that poll is bullshit?
Simply because the majority should not be able to vote on what rights the minority should be allowed
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for supper
OMG, I cannot continue to deal with your stupidity. The majority decided on the rights of minorities. And Yes, a majority could limit the rights of a minority, For example, a majority could decide to limit the number of muslim immigrants allowed to enter this country. Minority rights do not include the right to attack and kill the majority.
IF THE CONSTITUTION WAS CHANGED TO READ THAT WAY IT WOULD BE 100% CONSTITUTIONAL. WHAT IS CONSTITUTIONAL IS WHAT IS WRITTEN INTO THE CONSTITUTION, NOT WHAT YOU PERSONALLY BELIEVE.
She is dealing in the real world of our Constitution while you are engaging in Constitutional fantasy
Even you would not want to live in the world you propose
Do you deny you are a bigot that is pissing on the rights of gays to life and liberty?Poor effort at deflecting. I must have hit a nerve.Bullshit. What it amounts to is whether bigots like you get to keep pissing on the rights of gays to life and liberty.wrong, I am all for equality in all things. I fully support the civil rights act, I want gays treated equally and fairly. Where we differ is that I do not believe that a gay union is a marraige or that society should consider gay unions equally acceptable and normal as man/woman marriages.
Thats what I believe, Last time I checked we have the right to our beliefs in this country.
What I find very dangerous is the idea that beliefs can be mandated by the government----------and thats what this whole gay marriage debate really boils down to.
you stupidity is showing, better pull your pants up.
nope, not at all. your post got the response that it deserved.
Fascinating.....just the kind of person the Framers wrote the Constitution and the Bill of Rights to protect us from.Pretty sure that wouldn't stand Constitutionally.Simply because the majority should not be able to vote on what rights the minority should be allowed
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for supper
OMG, I cannot continue to deal with your stupidity. The majority decided on the rights of minorities. And Yes, a majority could limit the rights of a minority, For example, a majority could decide to limit the number of muslim immigrants allowed to enter this country. Minority rights do not include the right to attack and kill the majority.
IF THE CONSTITUTION WAS CHANGED TO READ THAT WAY IT WOULD BE 100% CONSTITUTIONAL. WHAT IS CONSTITUTIONAL IS WHAT IS WRITTEN INTO THE CONSTITUTION, NOT WHAT YOU PERSONALLY BELIEVE.
She is dealing in the real world of our Constitution while you are engaging in Constitutional fantasy
Even you would not want to live in the world you propose
that is the world we live you flaming asshole. We vote on rights, we vote on what is right and what is wrong.
there is no magical set or human rights, each society sets its own based on what the majority believe.
and for the last time------------MINORITY RIGHTS WERE ESTABLISHED BY THE MAJORITY.
The Redfishes do not vote on that which is good and right when it comes to civil rights, otherwise many of us would be in the concentation camps of the far right reactionaries.
SCOTUS makes these decisions, and the Redfishes will be forced to kneel and confess their error.
wrong, I am all for equality in all things. I fully support the civil rights act, I want gays treated equally and fairly. Where we differ is that I do not believe that a gay union is a marraige or that society should consider gay unions equally acceptable and normal as man/woman marriages.
Thats what I believe, Last time I checked we have the right to our beliefs in this country.
What I find very dangerous is the idea that beliefs can be mandated by the government----------and thats what this whole gay marriage debate really boils down to.
No one is taking away your right to believe, simply not force others to conform to your religious belief. The argument over marriage equality is secular not religious. You won't have to marry someone of your own sex.
Fascinating.....just the kind of person the Framers wrote the Constitution and the Bill of Rights to protect us from.Pretty sure that wouldn't stand Constitutionally.OMG, I cannot continue to deal with your stupidity. The majority decided on the rights of minorities. And Yes, a majority could limit the rights of a minority, For example, a majority could decide to limit the number of muslim immigrants allowed to enter this country. Minority rights do not include the right to attack and kill the majority.
IF THE CONSTITUTION WAS CHANGED TO READ THAT WAY IT WOULD BE 100% CONSTITUTIONAL. WHAT IS CONSTITUTIONAL IS WHAT IS WRITTEN INTO THE CONSTITUTION, NOT WHAT YOU PERSONALLY BELIEVE.
She is dealing in the real world of our Constitution while you are engaging in Constitutional fantasy
Even you would not want to live in the world you propose
that is the world we live you flaming asshole. We vote on rights, we vote on what is right and what is wrong.
there is no magical set or human rights, each society sets its own based on what the majority believe.
and for the last time------------MINORITY RIGHTS WERE ESTABLISHED BY THE MAJORITY.
We're talking about marriage, ya dumb fuck.That isnt a law banning them from fucking other consenting adults. Man up or shut the fuck upThey have been accepted on the SCOTUS docket. Look them up yourself, boy.Show me the law liarNobody could be as dumb as you are pretending to be.What bullshit lies. What law tells others what human adult non family memeber to fuck?Yeah, when the states and / or feds start deciding what types sexual relationships consenting adults can have... they have gone way beyond the scope of government. Authoritarians, what ya gonna do.
Was that a yes or a no?Do you deny you are a bigot that is pissing on the rights of gays to life and liberty?Poor effort at deflecting. I must have hit a nerve.Bullshit. What it amounts to is whether bigots like you get to keep pissing on the rights of gays to life and liberty.
you stupidity is showing, better pull your pants up.
nope, not at all. your post got the response that it deserved.
Pretty sure that wouldn't stand Constitutionally.Simply because the majority should not be able to vote on what rights the minority should be allowed
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for supper
OMG, I cannot continue to deal with your stupidity. The majority decided on the rights of minorities. And Yes, a majority could limit the rights of a minority, For example, a majority could decide to limit the number of muslim immigrants allowed to enter this country. Minority rights do not include the right to attack and kill the majority.
IF THE CONSTITUTION WAS CHANGED TO READ THAT WAY IT WOULD BE 100% CONSTITUTIONAL. WHAT IS CONSTITUTIONAL IS WHAT IS WRITTEN INTO THE CONSTITUTION, NOT WHAT YOU PERSONALLY BELIEVE.
She is dealing in the real world of our Constitution while you are engaging in Constitutional fantasy
Even you would not want to live in the world you propose
that is the world we live you flaming asshole. We vote on rights, we vote on what is right and what is wrong.
there is no magical set or human rights, each society sets its own based on what the majority believe.
and for the last time------------MINORITY RIGHTS WERE ESTABLISHED BY THE MAJORITY.
Fascinating.....just the kind of person the Framers wrote the Constitution and the Bill of Rights to protect us from.Pretty sure that wouldn't stand Constitutionally.
IF THE CONSTITUTION WAS CHANGED TO READ THAT WAY IT WOULD BE 100% CONSTITUTIONAL. WHAT IS CONSTITUTIONAL IS WHAT IS WRITTEN INTO THE CONSTITUTION, NOT WHAT YOU PERSONALLY BELIEVE.
She is dealing in the real world of our Constitution while you are engaging in Constitutional fantasy
Even you would not want to live in the world you propose
that is the world we live you flaming asshole. We vote on rights, we vote on what is right and what is wrong.
there is no magical set or human rights, each society sets its own based on what the majority believe.
and for the last time------------MINORITY RIGHTS WERE ESTABLISHED BY THE MAJORITY.
the founders believed exactly as I believe. They founded this country to escape dictatorial rule, and you fools want to return to that.
Pretty sure that wouldn't stand Constitutionally.Simply because the majority should not be able to vote on what rights the minority should be allowed
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for supper
OMG, I cannot continue to deal with your stupidity. The majority decided on the rights of minorities. And Yes, a majority could limit the rights of a minority, For example, a majority could decide to limit the number of muslim immigrants allowed to enter this country. Minority rights do not include the right to attack and kill the majority.
IF THE CONSTITUTION WAS CHANGED TO READ THAT WAY IT WOULD BE 100% CONSTITUTIONAL. WHAT IS CONSTITUTIONAL IS WHAT IS WRITTEN INTO THE CONSTITUTION, NOT WHAT YOU PERSONALLY BELIEVE.
She is dealing in the real world of our Constitution while you are engaging in Constitutional fantasy
Even you would not want to live in the world you propose
that is the world we live you flaming asshole. We vote on rights, we vote on what is right and what is wrong.
.
The Redfishes do not vote on that which is good and right when it comes to civil rights, otherwise many of us would be in the concentation camps of the far right reactionaries.
SCOTUS makes these decisions, and the Redfishes will be forced to kneel and confess their error.
wrong, I am all for equality in all things. I fully support the civil rights act, I want gays treated equally and fairly. Where we differ is that I do not believe that a gay union is a marraige or that society should consider gay unions equally acceptable and normal as man/woman marriages.
Thats what I believe, Last time I checked we have the right to our beliefs in this country.
What I find very dangerous is the idea that beliefs can be mandated by the government----------and thats what this whole gay marriage debate really boils down to.
No one is taking away your right to believe, simply not force others to conform to your religious belief. The argument over marriage equality is secular not religious. You won't have to marry someone of your own sex.
nope, you on the left want the government to punish anyone who does not believe as the government dictates.
have you read Orwell and Rand? they saw it coming and wrote about it, but you are too stupid to see what is being rammed up your ass.
I am not wrong. You showed one place where a vote passed in the face of many that failed. You are deflecting not ISo why the bullshit facism then?
[Interesting, you don't admit you were wrong - just deflect.]
The court finding unconstitutional laws are - well - unconstitutional isn't fascism.
Actually removing authoritarian controls is the opposite of fascism. Instead of the government deciding who you can Civilly Marry, the decision is left to the individual s in the couple.
>>>>
First there is nolaw banning marrige just the legality of government recognizing it. Second dummy you didnt say marrige you specifically said sleep withWe're talking about marriage, ya dumb fuck.That isnt a law banning them from fucking other consenting adults. Man up or shut the fuck upThey have been accepted on the SCOTUS docket. Look them up yourself, boy.Show me the law liarNobody could be as dumb as you are pretending to be.What bullshit lies. What law tells others what human adult non family memeber to fuck?
