With Our Victory Of Roe Being Overturned, Next Target--Same Sex Marriage!

I will use small words so you can maybe understand.

The claims against gay marriage can be used against interracial marriage, too.

Clarence Thomas knows this which is why he excluded Loving from his opinion.

He is a hypocrite.

OK, asshat, you got me. Obviously Thomas is trying to overthrow interracial marriage. Picture of Thomas and his wife ...

1656097882331.png
 
You can have three wives and cheat on all three. You can build your wealth by bilking investors and banks. You can steal from the elderly at your fake university. You can build massive cathedrals for gambling. You can hold contests of the flesh and burst into the dressing rooms of underaged girls to catch them naked. You can bear false witness against your opponents on a daily basis.

But if you bake a cake for TH3 GAYZ, Jesus is going to send you to hell.

:auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg:
 

Next Target--Same Sex Marriage!​


Hey look, I don't understand it but gay people exist. Some of them fall in love and want to live together as a couple. That is their business, so they should be allowed CIVIL UNIONS which grants them all legal benefits, but please don't call it a "marriage," as that is a union of a man and woman before God. So I don't see anywhere SCOTUS can address the issue; each state must decide.
 
You can have three wives and cheat on all three. You can build your wealth by bilking investors and banks. You can steal from the elderly at your fake university. You can build massive cathedrals to gambling. You can hold contests of the flesh and burst into the dressing rooms of underaged girls to catch them naked. You can bear false witness against your opponents on a daily basis.

But if you bake a cake for TH3 GAYZ, Jesus is going to send you to hell.

:auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg::auiqs.jpg:

You have serious anger and resentment issues about Christianity. Did someone repeatedly tell you you're going to hell?
 
Hey look, I don't understand it but gay people exist. Some of them fall in love and want to live together as a couple. That is their business, so they should be allowed CIVIL UNIONS which grants them all legal benefits, but please don't call it a "marriage," as that is a union of a man and woman before God. So I don't see anywhere SCOTUS can address the issue; each state must decide.
The states don't get to decide the federal benefits of marriage.
 
You have serious anger and resentment issues about Christianity. Did someone repeatedly tell you you're going to hell?
You could not get everything more wrong if you tried.

It's really sad you aren't even trying to be retarded. You just are.
 
You could not get everything more wrong if you tried.

It's really sad you aren't even trying to be retarded. You just are.

Gotcha, you keep telling other people they are going to hell.

So when did God tell you that you can speak for him?
 
Actually, Trump claimed to be a Presbyterian. Then, while in office, he decided he isn't a Presbyterian any more and declared himself a "non-denominational Christian".


As for your Trump Vaccine conspiracy theories, they are nonsense. You are at much greater risk by not being vaccinated than you are by being vaccinated. Just ask the more than one million who have died from Covid.

He can claim whatever he wants. It's clear to Christians he's not a Christian. But then, we elected a president, not a pastor. It came down to two choices.

You clearly need to educate yourself about the vaccines. It recently came out that the CDC lied about doing follow ups on the VAERS system. They never even looked at it, as suspected. They only admitted this when someone FOIAed it. It is so awful, I wouldn't be shocked if the powers that be crashed the economy to squirrel away from it. Because it is truly the biggest govt debacle I have ever heard about or read about.
 
He can claim whatever he wants. It's clear to Christians he's not a Christian. But then, we elected a president, not a pastor. It came down to two choices.
Actually, there were 18 other more righteous choices during the Republican primaries. Trump never got more than a third of the votes.

If there had been less candidates, Trump would have been wiped out.

The tards chose the least honest, most corrupt, the utmost evil candidate of the bunch.
 
Precisely.

Your red herrings about contracts have nothing to do with it.

The "rights and benefits of heterosexual marriage" are all legal contract rights. Extending health care, tax benefits, and next of kin rights to gay families has no impact on heterosexual marriage or the rights of heterosexual couples whatsoever.

Legalizing gay marriage has had no impact on me whatsoever, except I get to go to a few more weddings of family and friends. But it has meant the world to my gay family and friends. Especially the long time couples who have been married in every way but legallly, for years.
 
Why are people even discussing these two issues in the same breath?

Roe v Wade TAKES AWAY the most vital right a person can possibly have - the right to even live.

Gay marriage EXTENDS rights, instead, by offering gay people the same opportunities as straight.
 
I support traditional marriage and at one time opposed same sex marriage...but it's done and the world didn't come to an end.

No one is being killed or injured by gay marriage...and while I'm never going to be a big fan... I'm not going to support ending it.

You do you... if it ain't hurtin' nobody, it ain't none of my business.
 
Yes, I'm white. My wife (and therefore) kids are not. The thing with g5000 is he's so indignant and NO ONE AGREES WITH HIM.

Note that by the Bill of Rights and the 14th amendment abortion and interracial marriage are completely different.

If I were black instead of white, would man/woman marriage change who I can marry? Yes, so it violates the equal protection clause

If I were gay instead of straight, would man/woman marriage change who I can marry? No, it's Constitutional.

More basic though is no one is arguing against interracial marriage other than the racist g5000. He's arguing on the side of no one. He's the racist here
The legal reasoning behind Loving and Obergefell are identical . You cannot argue against one and not the other
 
Last edited:
  • Thanks
Reactions: kaz

Forum List

Back
Top