Same-Sex Marriage Wins, The Catholic JINOs Go Nutz

[ElNono]

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y64/teyshablue/FB_IMG_1435411416107_zpsaam4jn1x.jpg (http://s3.photobucket.com/user/teyshablue/media/FB_IMG_1435411416107_zpsaam4jn1x.jpg.html)

:lol

[spurraider21]

Obama KICKIN' y'all HATERS sticky asses!
technically speaking, its the gay community with the sticky asses :lmao

[spurraider21]

Bruh, tolerance goes both ways. We can respect each others opinions even if they differ. I'm mostly trolling just to get a rise out of people but I don't like anyone being called a bigot or ignorant just because they don't support gay marriage. We are all free to do as we please but let's not turn into hypocrites just because we disagree on some issues.
tolerance doesn't mean you have to like it. everyone is entitled to their opinions. but you cant say "i'm tolerant! :cry" and then say "they shouldn't be allowed to marry." if you personally dont think gays should marry, thats your opinion and thats fine. nobody is forcing gay marriage upon you, and nobody is taking away your ability to marry a woman. but once you try to insert your opinion into somebody else's lifestyle (by trying to ban gay marriage), you are no longer being tolerant

[boutons_deux]

"but once you try to insert your opinion"

... it's not "opinion", it's evagelical Bible humpers/Taliban trying legistlate the Bible and the hateful ethics, morals on everybody, where they have perversely interpreted the Bible to justify their hate, their excluisveness, much like the gun fellators, NRA/GOA/etc perversely interpret "militia" to mean EVERYONE ALL THE TIME ALL AGES EVERYWHERE BE ARMED TO DEFEND AGAINST THE FEDS.

[spurraider21]

it's an opinion, and you dont agree with it.

thats ok

[TheSanityAnnex]

Is it from a gun forum?
Are you serious?

[ChumpDumper]

Are you serious?It must be from a gun forum. You wouldn't stonewall so seriously were it not.

[spurraider21]

It must be from a gun forum. You wouldn't stonewall so seriously were it not.
http://www.ar15.com/mobile/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=1762684

[spurraider21]

:lmao robdiaz2191

CNN Reported On An ‘ISIS Flag’ At A Gay Pride Event. The Flag Was Actually Of Dildos And Butt Plugs (http://www.brobible.com/life/article/cnn-isis-dildo-butt-plug/)

[Jacob1983]

America is a wimp when it comes to democracy. People yell Murica and put their hands over their hearts during the national anthem yet they're too scared to have nationwide votes on issues. Ireland had a nationwide vote on gay marriage and Scotland had a nationwide vote on independence from the UK. I just don't get it. Oh I know because gay activists would lose a popular vote so they get their way by activist judges.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

:lol sources

its the gay marriage ruling replaced with gun rights. :lol sources

You trying to fumble through things is sad, puto. Its typical that when you copy and paste other people's work you credit them with it. We both know you couldn't come up with that.

You are channelling that an inherent legal right is interchangeable with a license to carry a concealed handgun. What it sounds like is a CCL instructor gun nutter type who has no legal background but is determined to make everything about guns. Nutters don't seem to want to recognize how the courts have defended the right to bear arms and defend oneself as universal similar to how they just defended the right for anyone to choose who their family is.

[Jacob1983]

So were those rainbow lights energy efficient? Were they "green"?

[ChumpDumper]

America is a wimp when it comes to democracy. People yell Murica and put their hands over their hearts during the national anthem yet they're too scared to have nationwide votes on issues. Ireland had a nationwide vote on gay marriage and Scotland had a nationwide vote on independence from the UK. I just don't get it. Oh I know because gay activists would lose a popular vote so they get their way by activist judges.Do you know how the Constitution works?


So were those rainbow lights energy efficient? Were they "green"?LED floods - so yes.

[unleashbaynes]

You think I give a fuck about what you think of me? :lol

I don't think that. It's just a fact.

[RD2191]

:lmao robdiaz2191 (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=42690)

CNN Reported On An ‘ISIS Flag’ At A Gay Pride Event. The Flag Was Actually Of Dildos And Butt Plugs (http://www.brobible.com/life/article/cnn-isis-dildo-butt-plug/)
:lmao

[Silver&Black]

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/47/fa/96/47fa9641a3b327f739e6f1a8dd656d6b.jpg

[Blake]

It would look right if the black guy were working a southern plantation cotton field in chains.

[Silver&Black]

It would look right if the black guy were working a southern plantation cotton field in chains.

Where you from Blake? Texas???

[HI-FI]

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/47/fa/96/47fa9641a3b327f739e6f1a8dd656d6b.jpg
The BlakeDumper combo ?

[Jacob1983]

So when's Obama gonna sign an executive order to close Gitmo and end The Patriot Act and NDAA?


Someone with some sense answer this for me. Do liberals only care about two issues: gay rights and abortion?

[ChumpDumper]

So when's Obama gonna sign an executive order to close Gitmo and end The Patriot Act and NDAA?


Someone with some sense answer this for me. Do liberals only care about two issues: gay rights and abortion?You don't know anything about the Constitution of the United States.

[SupremeGuy]

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-TBpxrwVxY_E/T2lMA_6ZYRI/AAAAAAAAAPY/QZnXG2cNRkc/s1600/head-in-sand.pngWhy doesn't it bother you that muslims are killing homosexuals by the handful? And if it does bother you, why are you so reluctant to discuss it?

Simply because it doesn't fit the anti-Christian narrative that you're trying to push?

[Blake]

Where you from Blake? Texas???

I didn't think i needed the blue font

[Blake]

Why doesn't it bother you that muslims are killing homosexuals by the handful? And if it does bother you, why are you so reluctant to discuss it?

Simply because it doesn't fit the anti-Christian narrative that you're trying to push?

"The*fallacy of relative privation, or*appeal to bigger problems, is an*informal fallacy*in which it is suggested an opponent's arguments should be dismissed or ignored, on the grounds that more important problems exist, despite these issues being often completely unrelated to the subject at hand.

A well-known example of this fallacy is the response "but there are children*starving in Africa," with the implication that any issue less serious is not worthy of discussion......"

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_relative_privation

[RD2191]

The BlakeDumper combo ?
:lmao

[ChumpDumper]

https://thedroidyourelookingfor.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/scarecrow_fire.jpgYour straw man self immolation continues to entertain.

:cry But what about the Muslims? :cry

If you care so much about the treatment homosexuals in the Muslim world, start your own thread about it and tell the world what you intend to do about it.

lol anti-Christian narrative

I rather like many Christians. You probably aren't one of them. This thread is about people like you melting down over gheys getting pieces of paper from the government.

[boutons_deux]

At the grocery store this morning, I saw several marriages totally destroyed exclusively by Constitutionally enabled same-sex marriage.

On the way home, several family homes were falling into rubble for the same reason.

[Clipper Nation]

"The*fallacy of relative privation, or*appeal to bigger problems, is an*informal fallacy*in which it is suggested an opponent's arguments should be dismissed or ignored, on the grounds that more important problems exist, despite these issues being often completely unrelated to the subject at hand.

A well-known example of this fallacy is the response "but there are children*starving in Africa," with the implication that any issue less serious is not worthy of discussion......"

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_relative_privation
You're trying too hard, cucky. Pretty sure Muslims' oppression of homosexuals is extremely related to the subject at hand.

[Shastafarian]

:lmao

:rollin

The homophobe telling other people to get a life has 30,000+ posts and visits a gay marriage thread at 11 pm on a Saturday night. All the fellas turn you down at that "titty" bar?

[ChumpDumper]

You're trying too hard, cucky. Pretty sure Muslims' oppression of homosexuals is extremely related to the subject at hand.Nope.

Feel free to start a thread about it tho.

[Shastafarian]

You're trying too hard, cucky. Pretty sure Muslims' oppression of homosexuals is extremely related to the subject at hand.

Only to the extent that the extremist muslim way of thinking about gays more closely aligns with the homophobes in this thread. And that fact is pretty amusing since those same people seem to be trying to steer the conversation to "why aren't liberals mad blah blah blah". Everyone thinks what extremist muslims are doing is horrendous. It's a strawman argument as it relates to this thread.

[TheSanityAnnex]

http://www.ar15.com/mobile/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=1762684
:lol he already knew where it was from. You ruined the fun of him asking over and over again.

[TheSanityAnnex]

You trying to fumble through things is sad, puto. Its typical that when you copy and paste other people's work you credit them with it. We both know you couldn't come up with that.

You are channelling that an inherent legal right is interchangeable with a license to carry a concealed handgun. What it sounds like is a CCL instructor gun nutter type who has no legal background but is determined to make everything about guns. Nutters don't seem to want to recognize how the courts have defended the right to bear arms and defend oneself as universal similar to how they just defended the right for anyone to choose who their family is.
Every. Single. Time.

[Winehole23]

the institution of marriage isn't as stable and unchanging as aficionados claim:

http://www.amazon.com/Same-Sex-Unions-Premodern-Vintage-ebook/dp/B00DXKJ5HS/?

[Winehole23]

https://now.mmedia.me/lb/en/blogs/565493-pre-islamic-sex-in-the-arabian-peninsula

[MultiTroll]

Originally Posted by HI-FI (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?p=8068075#post8068075)
The BlakeDumper combo ?

:lmao

With the new court ruling and freedoms, soon to be on tv commercials.
Viagra/Cialis etc ED formulas for flamers.

[ChumpDumper]

:lol he already knew where it was from. You ruined the fun of him asking over and over again.The fun was your trying to find ways to not answer.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Every. Single. Time.

Yup. You always try and save face with this routine. We have spoken about trolling still having meaningful intent even if not explicit.

It is interesting that you take pride in your dishonesty. Last time we spoke I learned that everytime you are on here you are by yourself because you are ashamed to show anyone what you do. Bluster is an easy face on the interwebs.

[Aztecfan03]

Yeah, is that from a gun forum?

They would need a certificate to get married in the church anyway.

And yeah, no church is being forced to perform any ceremony.

Not a big step from forcing cake makers to make a cake for a ceremony.

[Aztecfan03]

"The*fallacy of relative privation, or*appeal to bigger problems, is an*informal fallacy*in which it is suggested an opponent's arguments should be dismissed or ignored, on the grounds that more important problems exist, despite these issues being often completely unrelated to the subject at hand.

A well-known example of this fallacy is the response "but there are children*starving in Africa," with the implication that any issue less serious is not worthy of discussion......"

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_relative_privation

but you are replying to something that is not unrelated.

[TheSanityAnnex]

Yup. You always try and save face with this routine. We have spoken about trolling still having meaningful intent even if not explicit.

It is interesting that you take pride in your dishonesty. Last time we spoke I learned that everytime you are on here you are by yourself because you are ashamed to show anyone what you do. Bluster is an easy face on the interwebs.
When post here I am by myself because when people are around me I actually interact with them instead of posting on a message board.

Tell you you what though, I am having a BBQ at my house in a few hours and there will be plenty of people I can show my posts too. How do you show your friends spurstalk when they come to your place and not look like a weirdo?

[Shastafarian]

Not a big step from forcing cake makers to make a cake for a ceremony.

http://www.omniallinfinitude.com/journey7/files/2013/01/Big-step.jpg

[Silver&Black]

I didn't think i needed the blue font

You should have just used a " :cry "

Still, the question still is there. Where are you from Blake?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

When post here I am by myself because when people are around me I actually interact with them instead of posting on a message board.

Tell you you what though, I am having a BBQ at my house in a few hours and there will be plenty of people I can show my posts too. How do you show your friends spurstalk when they come to your place and not look like a weirdo?

I have the capacity to do both. That mutual exclusivity thing again.

Some of the antics on here are hilarious. Narutoboy, mouse carrying on, Nash photoshop then there is some completely off the wall shit. Guys spamming Russian bot spam, our stormfront embassy vs faux black outrage, that weird round and round Xmas and chump had last year, the climate threads, nihilist dissembling groupthink, routine shilling. Then of course its a Spurs forum.

I used to share more often but now that the place has devolved not so much. It is what it is.

[Blake]

You should have just used a " :cry "

Still, the question still is there. Where are you from Blake?

More like a :madrun

I'm in San Antonio

[Blake]

but you are replying to something that is not unrelated.

but they are unrelated

[TheSanityAnnex]

I have the capacity to do both. That mutual exclusivity thing again.

Some of the antics on here are hilarious. Narutoboy, mouse carrying on, Nash photoshop then there is some completely off the wall shit. Guys spamming Russian bot spam, our stormfront embassy vs faux black outrage, that weird round and round Xmas and chump had last year, the climate threads, nihilist dissembling groupthink, routine shilling. Then of course its a Spurs forum.

I used to share more often but now that the place has devolved not so much. It is what it is.
The ribs I've been smoking all day only have a few more hours and friends will be arriving soon. How do you suggest I bring up spurstalk and not look like an idiot? What's a good spurstalk icebreaker?

[Silver&Black]

More like a :madrun

That also would have worked.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

The ribs I've been smoking all day only have a few more hours and friends will be arriving soon. How do you suggest I bring up spurstalk and not look like an idiot? What's a good spurstalk icebreaker?

I never said that you should be able to do so. I said what I talked about pointing out that I had no issue with it. I simply said that you were avoiding the time you spent here and that you come here every day. The reason why I believe this is because you ridicule the notion of talking about what is written here and you post here every day. That implies you spend a lot of time alone. If people were around, you wouldn't be here.

Now discouraging others of talking about your interactions for no good reason is some creepy shit in and of itself. "You cannot tell anyone what we do here." I just like to think that you are projecting personal angst and not being a sociopath. No reason you cannot be both though either.

Enjoy the BBQ, creeper.

[spurraider21]

Not a big step from forcing cake makers to make a cake for a ceremony.
In that ruling the court specifically differentiated between a business establishment and a religious institution

[ChumpDumper]

Not a big step from forcing cake makers to make a cake for a ceremony.Don't be so afraid. They're just gheys.

[LnGrrrR]

Only legal in 20 countries on the Planet. America is backwards

You should list the countries where it is legal, and the countries where it isn't, and see which one you would rather have America emulate.

[LnGrrrR]

I'm sure the same people saying that this will end America are the same people shouting that repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell was going to crater our military...

[Blake]

I'm sure the same people saying that this will end America are the same people shouting that repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell was going to crater our military...

:cry but servicemen were gonna get butt raped in the showers by all the gays

[Xevious]

Years and years of debate... I've yet to hear one decent argument opposing same-sex marriage. What two consenting adults do with each other is no concern of mine.

[boutons_deux]

Years and years of debate... I've yet to hear one decent argument opposing same-sex marriage. What two consenting adults do with each other is no concern of mine.

yep, and pastors have never been FORCED DOWN THEIR THROAT any marriage they didn't want to bless.

right-wing FUD, LIES, Christian Taliban FALSELY claiming persecution, criminalisation, destruction of hetero-marriages and families. Total, utter BULLSHIT. But they repeat it because their ignorant believers love it.

[spurraider21]

do you really think your random capitalization add some flavor to your posts? just makes you seem like you're yelling angrily/emotionally

[Blizzardwizard]

I'm not sure at what point I should feel sorry for all the GOPs squirming like crazy. Heck, even the ones who are pretending they're somewhat in favour of the ruling are starting to lose it.

[boutons_deux]

do you really think your random capitalization add some flavor to your posts? just makes you seem like you're yelling angrily/emotionally

"that's like, just your opinion, man"

[spurraider21]

"that's like, just your opinion, man"
of course its my opinion. thats why i said it

[Kim Jong-il]

So when's Obama gonna sign an executive order to close Gitmo and end The Patriot Act and NDAA?


Someone with some sense answer this for me. Do liberals only care about two issues: gay rights and abortion?
Do conservatives only care about guns and how people use their privates?

[TheSanityAnnex]

I never said that you should be able to do so. I said what I talked about pointing out that I had no issue with it. I simply said that you were avoiding the time you spent here and that you come here every day. The reason why I believe this is because you ridicule the notion of talking about what is written here and you post here every day. That implies you spend a lot of time alone. If people were around, you wouldn't be here.

Now discouraging others of talking about your interactions for no good reason is some creepy shit in and of itself. "You cannot tell anyone what we do here." I just like to think that you are projecting personal angst and not being a sociopath. No reason you cannot be both though either.

Enjoy the BBQ, creeper.
95% of my posts are from my work computer in the afternoon once the markets close. I don't spend weekends on here either, I've got better things to do. Your theory couldn't be further from the truth, you aren't very good at this.

I showed my friends this very thread, they weren't very interested and wondered why I even showed them. I pointed out your posts and they laughed at you for taking all of this so seriously. One even called you a faggot.

[Winehole23]

TSA loves gay-baiting so much he buys it secondhand

[boutons_deux]

Ancient scripture can be a source of higher values and spiritual strength, but any time you in a literal-minded way impose specific legal behavior because of it, you’re committing anachronism. Since this is the case, fundamentalists are always highly selective, trying to impose parts of the scripture on us but conveniently ignoring the parts even they can’t stomach as modern persons.

1. In Exodus 21:10 it is clearly written of the husband: “If he takes another wife to himself, he shall not diminish the food, clothing, or marital rights of the first wife.” This is the same rule as the Qur’an in Islam, that another wife can only be taken if the two are treated equally.

2. Let’s take Solomon, who maintained 300 concubines or sex slaves. 1 Kings 11:3: “He had seven hundred wives of royal birth and three hundred concubines, and his wives led him astray.” Led him astray! That’s all the Bible minded about this situation? Abducting 300 people and keeping them immured for sex? And the objection is only that they had a lot of diverse religions and interested Solomon in them? (By the way, this is proof that he wasn’t Jewish but just a legendary Canaanite polytheist). I think a settled gay marriage is rather healthier than imprisoning 300 people in your house to have sex with at your whim.

3. Not only does the Bible authorize slavery and human trafficking, but it urges slaves to “submit themselves” to their masters. It should be remembered that masters had sexual rights over their property assuming the slave-woman was not betrothed to another, and so this advice is intended for concubines as well as other slaves. And, the Bible even suggests that slaves quietly accept sadism and cruelty from their masters: 1 Peter 2:18: “Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to the good and gentle but also to the cruel.” So a nice gay marriage between two legal equals with no acts of cruelty would be much better than this biblical nightmare.

4. Then there is Abraham, who made a sex slave of his wife’s slave, the Egyptian girl Hagar, and then abandoned her to cruel treatment.
Genesis 16:1-6:


“Now Sarai, Abram’s wife, had borne him no children. But she had an Egyptian slave named Hagar; 2 so she said to Abram, “The Lord has kept me from having children. Go, sleep with my slave; perhaps I can build a family through her.” Abram agreed to what Sarai said. 3 So after Abram had been living in Canaan ten years, Sarai his wife took her Egyptian slave Hagar and gave her to her husband to be his wife. 4 He slept with Hagar, and she conceived. When she knew she was pregnant, she began to despise her mistress. 5 Then Sarai said to Abram, “You are responsible for the wrong I am suffering. I put my slave in your arms, and now that she knows she is pregnant, she despises me. May the Lord judge between you and me.” 6 “Your slave is in your hands,” Abram said. “Do with her whatever you think best.” Then Sarai mistreated Hagar; so she fled from her.

So let’s get this straight. Abraham isn’t said to have married Hagar. Apparently he and Sarah had separate property, because Hagar remains her slave. So he slept with someone else’s slave and got her pregnant. And then when that caused trouble between his wife and her slave, he washed his hands of his property-lover and let his wife mistreat her. As we know from 1 Peter, Hagar was supposed graciously to put up with this, but she was made of fiercer stuff than that, and you really have to root for her in this rather sick family situation.

5. According Mark 12:19, guys, if your brother kicks the bucket, you haveto marry your sister-in-law and knock her up. Since the Bible approved of multiple wives, you have to do this even if you’re already married. If you think in-laws are hard to get along with now, try being married to them.

6. So I don’t think this happens very much, but guys, in biblical marriage you might have to cut your wife’s hand off if she defends you too vigorously. That’s right. Say you’re at a bar and this big bald badass with tats starts smashing your face in. And say your wife likes you and wants to stop the guy from giving you a concussion. Say she reaches down and gets him by the balls. So the Bible would reward her for loyalty and bravery and fast thinking, right?

Nope. Now you have to cut off her hand. I mean have to. You’re not allowed to have a moment of weakness and think about how pretty her fingers are. Off with it, to the wrist
GOP, you think I’m making this up, right?

Deuteronomy 25:11-12: “11 If two men are fighting and the wife of one of them comes to rescue her husband from his assailant, and she reaches out and seizes him by his private parts, 12 you shall cut off her hand. Show her no pity.”


I’m not sure exactly what kind of weird marriage Deuteronomy is recommending, where certain actions taken by they wife to keep herself from being turned into a widow are punished by her husband by chopping off her hand.

7. The Bible doesn’t even approve of marriage at all! 1 Corinthians 7:8 “To the unmarried and the widows I say that it is well for them to remain single as I do.” So contrary to the GOP’s notion that the Bible authorizes only a single kind of marriage, of which it approves, actually it much prefers believers to die out in a single generation. Only the weak and unbiblical get married.

http://www.juancole.com/2015/06/biblical-marriage-between.html

[RD2191]

:lolscripture out of context with no knowledge of what you're reading. I'll school your lame ass later.

[FromWayDowntown]

Scripture is what is is, but it absolutely cannot be the sole basis for legislating in the United States of America unless you just choose to ignore the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.

There can be spiritual objections to all sorts of things. But it's only when the biblical view of a particular act can be coupled with a legitimate public policy justification that laws are appropriate. There are no more legitimate public policy justifications for denying the right to marry to same sex couples. Whatever reasons had been offered in the past have now all been debunked. That leaves only a biblical belief that homosexuality is "wrong" (or, more correctly "sin"). Whether that reading of the Bible is tenable or not from a theological perspective is between a person and his church. Enforcing that Biblical view through law is establishment of religion -- it's the government adopting religious tenets as the sole basis for its action -- that is expressly prohibited by the First Amendment.

This situation is absolutely no different than the circumstance that existed immediately before and after anti-miscegenation laws and prohibitions on interracial marriage were deemed unconstitutional. The basis for resisting interracial marriage was largely posited to be Biblical (and other justifications for such laws were manifestly garbage); the trial court judge in Loving v. Virginia explained that the law against interracial marriage existed because "Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And, but for the interference with his arrangement, there would be no cause for such marriage. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix." Any religious objection to interracial marriage could not justify any state prohibiting such marriages.

The citizens of a State can believe whatever they choose to believe and are free to exercise their religious consciences as they see fit, but they cannot use the machinery of the State to force others to adhere to those beliefs, at least not without a substantial or legitimate non-Biblical justification. That is particularly true where the state's regulation inhibits a fundamental right; marriage has been defined for several generations now as a fundamental right in the United States under the Constitution.

I'm frankly amazed at the number of "Constitutionalists" who have no idea how the Constitution actually functions.

[TheSanityAnnex]

TSA loves gay-baiting so much he buys it secondhand

I've got no problem with gays. WTF are you rambling about?

[boutons_deux]

"This situation is absolutely no different than the circumstance that existed immediately before and after anti-miscegenation laws and prohibitions on interracial marriage were deemed unconstitutional."

The Time Bobby Jindal Waged War On A Local Official's 'Religious Liberty' To Deny Marriage Licenses


Gov. Bobby Jindal's administration has said Louisiana court clerks and other state employees who don't want to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples because of religious objections won't have to do so.

Jindal's office has said the governor's religious freedom executive order as well as state and federal law will protect clerks and state employees who have moral objections to gay marriage and don't feel comfortable handing out licenses to same-sex couples.

"We believe the U.S. Constitution, Louisiana Constitution, Louisiana's Preservation of Religious Freedom Act, as well as our Executive Order prevents government from compelling individuals to violate sincerely held religious beliefs. We will continue to fight to protect religious liberty," said Mike Reed, spokesman for the governor's office.

The Louisiana governor, however, was singing a different tune back in 2009.

That year, a local justice of the peace “refused to issue a marriage license to an interracial couple (http://www.houmatoday.com/article/20091015/ARTICLES/910159860)” because he said he doesn’t “believe in mixing the races that way.” He went on to say that he denied the marriage license out of interest for the wellbeing of children, an argument similar to those marriage equality opponents make today.

Jindal said (http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/10/16/louisiana.interracial.marriage/) at the time that the justice of the peace violated the law and should lose his job:

The actions of a justice of the peace in Louisiana who refused to issue a marriage license to an interracial couple have prompted some top officials, including Gov. Bobby Jindal, to call for his dismissal.

Jindal said the state judiciary committee should review the incident in which Keith Bardwell, justice of the peace for Tangipahoa Parish's 8th Ward, refused to issue a marriage license to Beth Humphrey, 30, and her boyfriend, Terence McKay, 32, both of Hammond.

"This is a clear violation of constitutional rights and federal and state law. ... Disciplinary action should be taken immediately -- including the revoking of his license," the Republican governor said.

When the justice of the peace eventually resigned, Jindal said it was “long overdue (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/louisiana-justice-peace-keith-bardwell-resigns-interracial-marriage-flap-article-1.413838).”

But now Jindal is trying to defend justices of the peace who are refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, citing the same arguments about personal beliefs and the welfare of children and describing himself as a “religious liberty” champion in doing so.

http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/time-bobby-jindal-waged-war-local-officials-religious-liberty-deny-marriage-licenses

Repugs! :lol

[Jacob1983]

Why can't people just shut up about it? You won. You got your way. You are now normal so shut the fuck up and go have a gay wedding.

[boutons_deux]

Why can't people just shut up about it? You won. You got your way. You are now normal so shut the fuck up and go have a gay wedding.

It ain't over. The Bible humpers will keep the issue alive and kickin shit for years.

And next up are employment and commercial protections for LGBT.

[boutons_deux]

Conservative Media Argue Same-Sex Marriage Ruling Creates Constitutional Right To Carry A Gun In Public

Conservative media used the Supreme Court decision affirming that marriage is a fundamental right of all Americans to argue that the Constitution also requires states to recognize concealed carry permits issued by other states.

But the Supreme Court has never held that carrying a gun in public is a fundamental right.

Conservative media and the National Rifle Association (NRA) quickly seized on the decision to draw a parallel with concealed carry reciprocity, a top federal legislative priority (http://thehill.com/regulation/234143-nra-ceo-pushes-for-concealed-carry-legislation) of the NRA. Reciprocity legislation, also known as federally mandated concealed carry (http://everytown.org/article/federally-mandated-concealed-carry-reciprocity/), would force states to recognize permits to carry concealed guns issued by other states, regardless of what the issuing state's standards are (http://everytown.org/documents/2015/02/federally-mandated-concealed-carry-reciprocity.pdf#page=10) for issuing permits.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2015/06/29/conservative-media-argue-same-sex-marriage-ruli/204191

[Spurminator]

Why can't people just shut up about it? You won. You got your way. You are now normal so shut the fuck up and go have a gay wedding.

You're talking to the wrong people if you don't want to hear about it anymore. You should probably be directing some of this pent-up aggression towards the state officials who are grandstanding and preventing the country from moving on.

[Spurminator]

I suppose state officials may also choose not to process divorce filings if it violates their beliefs.

[boutons_deux]

I suppose state officials may also choose not to process divorce filings if it violates their beliefs.

pastors, yes, but court-ordered divorce, no.

[boutons_deux]

Why can't people just shut up about it? You won. You got your way. You are now normal so shut the fuck up and go have a gay wedding.

because ...

Conservatives Are Gearing Up For Fight Of Their Lives After Gay Marriage Ruling

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/bobby-jindal-religious-freedom-gay-marriage-supreme-court?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+tpm-news+%28TPMNews%29

=====================

5 Reasons The GOP Can’t Let Marriage Equality (And Love) Win

1. GOP primary voters still oppose it.

About 6 out of 10 Republican voters oppose same-sex marriage (http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/the-grand-old-partys-future-shock-119484.html), which makes it the mirror opposite of the rest of the country. Support for expanding the institution has doubled among evangelicals since 2001, but with 62 percent of Protestant evangelicals opposing it (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2015/06/11/morning-plum-culture-warriors-to-mount-last-stand-against-gay-marriage/), the GOP base is in the era ofLoving not Obergefell at the dawn of the most competitive GOP primary in generations.
It’s going to be tough to ignore a small but loud minority of the party that thinks 6/26 was their 9/11 (https://twitter.com/LOLGOP/status/614460991636643840).

2. GOP candidates only differ on their degree of outrage.

“I’m glad I’m not on a campaign and don’t have to advise my candidate on how to navigate those three issues this week, because the answers for the primary and the general [elections] are radically different,” Republican strategist Carl Forti told theTimes.

It’s pretty obvious who is playing to the primary on this issue.

Ted Cruz wants clerks to refuse to issue marriage certificates (http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/ted-cruz-backs-county-clerks-denying-marriage-licenses-gays-and-lesbians-0). Bobby Jindal wants to get rid of the Supreme Court (http://dailycaller.com/2015/06/26/jindal-wants-to-get-rid-of-supreme-court-after-gay-marriage-ruling/). Scott Walker wants a constitutional amendment that will allow states to ban same-sex marriage again (http://www.businessinsider.com/scott-walker-calls-for-marriage-amendment-to-constitution-2015-6). Mike Huckabee appears to be calling for armed revolution. “I will not acquiesce to an imperial court any more than our Founders acquiesced to an imperial British monarch,” he wrote on his website. “We must resist and reject judicial tyranny, not retreat.”

But Republican candidates’ problem is that they generally agree on most every issue. They just disagree on the amount of outrage to sputter.

Jeb Bush’s opposition to the ruling concluded, “In a country as diverse as ours, good people who have opposing views should be able to live side by side.” Even that doesn’t mean he can let the issue go, however. He’s just trying to move the argument toward “religious liberty,” which is the right’s ugly new excuse for legal discrimination.

3. “Religious liberty” is a dogwhistle with some English on it.

In a nation where interracial couples (http://historynewsnetwork.org/article/156365) and divorcees have been marrying for centuries, the argument of “religious liberty” never before arose to allow private businesses to deny couples their services. And no religious leader has been ever asked to perform a marriage s/he does not sanction. But apparently LGBT Americans are so offensive that new exemptions need to be invoked to protect “people of faith” from getting any gay on them.

Using exemptions designed to protect individuals from having to violate their own practice of their faith (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/congress-should-amend-the-abused-religious-freedom-restoration-act/2015/06/25/ee6aaa46-19d8-11e5-ab92-c75ae6ab94b5_story.html), conservatives now want religious people to have the right to discriminate based on their judgment of their customers’ moral behavior.

Jeb Bush has strengthened his position in the primary by focusing on this issue, accusing Hillary Clinton of wanting to limit religious belief because she backs policies that — for instance — wouldn’t allow ISIS to sell Yazidi women in Iraq into sexual slavery (http://www.eclectablog.com/2015/06/the-confederate-flag-needs-to-go-for-the-gops-new-southern-strategy.html).

Republicans — some of whom quickly joined cries to remove the Confederate flag after Charleston — get that they need radically better outreach to minorities in this election. Many of them believe that minorities will adopt this “religious liberty” message, an echo of the 2004 Bush campaign against same-sex marriage that saw the party do better with minorities than it has since.





4. Scott Walker (or Mike Huckabee) could win the GOP nomination.

So with Bush, Rubio and other “moderate”-seeming candidates like Carly Fiorina, we’ll be having a veiled discussion on marriage through the lens of religion. But if any of the other contenders win (which I doubt (http://www.nationalmemo.com/gop-base-can-crush-jeb-bush-5-simple-steps/)), marriage will absolutely be a front-and-center issue in the presidential campaign.

If a high-profile case of a fundamentalist baker being — gasp! — paid to bake a cake for a gay couple flares up, every Republican nominee will be forced to speak out on the issue. With the base already keeping Bush and Rubio on a short leash for sometimes, in some ways, backing immigration reform, both will have to respond fiercely — a reaction off-putting to many of the 60 percent of Americans happy with marriage equality.

5. Dead-end causes built the conservative movement.

The mythology of the conservative movement is that opposition to abortion helped galvanize the religious right. But Randall Balmer argues (http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/05/religious-right-real-origins-107133.html#.VZADr4seNe8) that the neural network of the Moral Majority was formed in opposition to desegregation, especially in religious schools. (Expect religious schools wanting to keep both their tax exemptions and their policies discriminating against gay couples to be near the hot center of the right’s frustrations for the next few years.) Either way, opposition to Supreme Court rulings has nourished the hard right and allowed the Republican Party to move further away from the center, even as America steadily becomes more liberal.

If the GOP nominee loses without making marriage an issue, you can bet Christian conservatives will forever argue that that’swhy he or she lost. And will vow never to make that mistake again.

http://www.nationalmemo.com/5-reasons-the-gop-cant-let-marriage-equality-and-love-win/2/

[admiralsnackbar]

[SIZE=3][FONT=arial] because ... Conservatives Are Gearing Up For Fight Of Their Lives After Gay Marriage Ruling http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/bobby-jindal-religious-freedom-gay-marriage-supreme-court?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+tpm-news+%28TPMNews%29 There are voices of dissent among the faithful, though. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/06/28/lindsey-graham-embracing-idea-of-constitutional-amendment-on-marriage-will-hurt-gop-in-2016/

[Jacob1983]

Why can't everyone just admit the truth? The truth is that marriage is a government handout. Gay people wouldn't be bitching if marriage was just a ceremony that gave out no privileges or benefits.

[Blake]

Why can't everyone just admit the truth? The truth is that marriage is a government handout. Gay people wouldn't be bitching if marriage was just a ceremony that gave out no privileges or benefits.

Do you think they have a right to bitch?

[Jacob1983]

I don't see marriage as a right. I think it's a privilege. I also think the government shouldn't be handing out goodies just because you're married.

[RD2191]

It ain't over. The Bible humpers will keep the issue alive and kickin shit for years.

And next up are employment and commercial protections for LGBT.
Are you a faggot?

[vy65]

Do you think they have a right to bitch?

Yeah, exactly, I mean fuck the first amendment right?

[Blake]

I don't see marriage as a right. I think it's a privilege. I also think the government shouldn't be handing out goodies just because you're married.

That didn't answer the question.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

95% of my posts are from my work computer in the afternoon once the markets close. I don't spend weekends on here either, I've got better things to do. Your theory couldn't be further from the truth, you aren't very good at this.

I showed my friends this very thread, they weren't very interested and wondered why I even showed them. I pointed out your posts and they laughed at you for taking all of this so seriously. One even called you a faggot.

95% huh? I guess that means you 'work' for yourself. I don't really care about the specifics.

You post here all day Saturday and Sunday. :lol trying to front that shit here.

You also were trying to protect the second amendment from black people last weekend too. In fact over the past week you have posted over 300 times on this account alone. Thank you for telling us how you rationalize it to yourself or your lying face.

Remember what we have talked about the explicit as facade with intent? mmhm.

[Shastafarian]

http://www.soundonsight.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/AmericanColonel.jpg
Are you a faggot?

[TheSanityAnnex]

95% huh? I guess that means you 'work' for yourself. I don't really care about the specifics.

You post here all day Saturday and Sunday. :lol trying to front that shit here.

You also were trying to protect the second amendment from black people last weekend too. In fact over the past week you have posted over 300 times on this account alone. Thank you for telling us how you rationalize it to yourself or your lying face.

Remember what we have talked about the explicit as facade with intent? mmhm.
"I don't really care about the specifics "...proceeds to count each post throughout the week. :lol You are such a loser.
My friends had you pegged after 5 mins of reading your posts.
1. Takes message board to serious
2. Faggot

[FuzzyLumpkins]

"I don't really care about the specifics "...proceeds to count each post throughout the week. :lol You are such a loser.
My friends had you pegged after 5 mins of reading your posts.
1. Takes message board to serious
2. Faggot

:lol you think this is me being serious. Recall:


Remember what we have talked about the explicit as facade with intent? mmhm.

you do lack empathy though that is obvious.

Over 300 posts is not very specific to me. I guess we just have different standards for things like that.

[LnGrrrR]

95% of my posts are from my work computer in the afternoon once the markets close. I don't spend weekends on here either, I've got better things to do. Your theory couldn't be further from the truth, you aren't very good at this.

I showed my friends this very thread, they weren't very interested and wondered why I even showed them. I pointed out your posts and they laughed at you for taking all of this so seriously. One even called you a faggot.

Your friends sound like wonderful people. Also, LOL at you showing your friends this thread. Good way to show how unserious this thread is to you.

[Infinite_limit]

This thread reeks of "homo love"

[LnGrrrR]

I don't see marriage as a right. I think it's a privilege. I also think the government shouldn't be handing out goodies just because you're married.

The problem with de-incentivizing marriage is that you end up top heavy like Japan...

[boutons_deux]

The problem with de-incentivizing marriage is that you end up top heavy like Japan...

young people are cohabitating, having babies, but not getting married, so the marriage tax break isn't working well.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_SqhhJb_P3Kk/TKODvOt150I/AAAAAAAAM58/v6RMb1Dv2jc/s1600/marriage+rates.png

the biggest marriage disincentives for young people are college loan debt, shitty job and/or shitty job prospects.

[boutons_deux]

There's a giant victim culture temper tantrum coming from the Christian right (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/06/29/1397753/-There-s-a-giant-victim-culture-temper-tantrum-coming-from-the-Christian-right)

Opponents of marriage equality are raising all kinds of dire scenarios about how marriage equality will usher in an era of vicious discrimination against Christians, who will face all sorts of outrageous punishments for merely upholding their religious beliefs. But when they say discrimination and punishment, they're really talking about basic consequences (http://bigstory.ap.org/article/a050a5a384564f858bb7ba8ec2674149/religious-liberty-rallying-cry-after-gay-marriage-ruling), which many on the right feel they should be exempt from.It's true that some religious people and institutions will face choices:


First Amendment protections for worship and clergy are clear. Potential conflicts could arise, however, over religious organizations with some business in the public arena. That category ranges from small religious associations that rent reception halls to the public, to the nation's massive network of faith-based social service agencies that receive millions of dollars in government grants.

But those very scenarios make clear that what we're talking about is facing basic consequences.

You're a religious association that doesn't want to rent to an LGBT wedding? You don't have to, but you might have to give up renting to the public.

You're a faith-based social service agency? Maybe your internal policies will be incompatible with government grants.

The thing is, this isn't a disproportionate penalty. It's a basic consequence.

As marriage equality was argued before the Supreme Court:


[Justice Samuel] Alito noted the high court's 1983 decision to revoke the tax-exemption of Bob Jones University in South Carolina because it barred interracial dating. Alito asked if the government would take such action against religiously affiliated schools that oppose same-sex marriage. [Solicitor General Donald] Verrilli said, "It is certainly going to be an issue. I don't deny that."

Let's focus on the penalty we're talking about here. Bob Jones University lost its tax exemption because it prohibited interracial dating. Its tax exemption. As in, it had to pay taxes. That's the punishment. Not exactly persecution at the level of the Spanish Inquisition.This is how deep the right's culture of victimhood and entitlement goes. They believe they're automatically entitled to tax exemptions and government grants without having to follow the government's rules to get those benefits.

They think if they're not allowed to discriminate and still get every possible government benefit, they're victims. And they're gearing up for a decades-long battle to demand that the government see things their way

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/06/29/1397753/-There-s-a-giant-victim-culture-temper-tantrum-coming-from-the-Christian-right?detail=email

[ChumpDumper]

http://www.cinemablend.com/images/sections/72748/_1435615745.jpg

[boutons_deux]

http://www.gaystarnews.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/400xY/grid-cell-7295-1435434969-5.jpg

http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/one-viewer-thought-nbc-had-changed-its-logo-support-gays280615

Bible humpin, hatin' Arkansas! :lol

[Blake]

young people are cohabitating, having babies, but not getting married, so the marriage tax break isn't working well.

The biggest marriage disincentives for young people are college loan debt, shitty job and/or shitty job prospects.

Seems to me that single parents get better tax breaks/bigger refunds but I'm not totally sure.

And yeah, if a chick comes along that wants to get married but has 100k in college debt, in Texas among a few other states with shared property, that's an extremely huge deterrent to tie the knot with her

[Blake]

http://www.cinemablend.com/images/sections/72748/_1435615745.jpg

:lol

[RD2191]

:lol
How's your ex wife?

[spurraider21]

How's your ex wife?

Ask Tyrone

[RD2191]

:lol

[Blake]

How's your ex wife?

ok I guess

[RD2191]

ok I guess
:lol

[Blake]

You're a strange, butthurt guy.

[RD2191]

You're a strange, butthurt guy.
:lolNo

[Blake]

Oh yeah, you're definitely butthurt. Proof is in your phony lol emoticons.

[RD2191]

:lolWhy would I be butthurt? I'm not the one who got cucked for 2 years without realizing it.

[TheSanityAnnex]

Your friends sound like wonderful people. Also, LOL at you showing your friends this thread. Good way to show how unserious this thread is to you.

LOL @ thinking I'd actually show people at my BBQ a spurstalk thread.

cue the
:cry see you are soooo dishonest :cry

[Blake]

:lolWhy would I be butthurt? I'm not the one who got cucked for 2 years without realizing it.

Lol because I'm always calling you retarded for your ignorant, unintelligent posts.

It's why you call me a cuck in every thread. You're furious.

[Infinite_limit]

Would love to see the ignorant in this thread celebrating in the same manner when their gay son brings home their gay black partner

[ChumpDumper]

Would love to see the ignorant in this thread celebrating in the same manner when their gay son brings home their gay black partnerWhat would you do?

[Xevious]

Would love to see the ignorant in this thread celebrating in the same manner when their gay son brings home their gay black partner
Oh he's black too? What about a gay black midget? Maybe he's Jewish also... let's go all out.

[Clipper Nation]

It's why you call me a cuck in every thread. You're furious.

You're called a cuck because you are one.

[LnGrrrR]

Would love to see the ignorant in this thread celebrating in the same manner when their gay son brings home their gay black partner

Would show he's doing well. Landed a BBC.

[Jacob1983]

If marriage had no government benefits or tax breaks involved, how many people would get married?

Wouldn't the best compromise for gays and bible thumpers to just end government benefits and tax breaks and make marriage benefits an issue for the private sector?

[LnGrrrR]

Hard to say Jacob. I still would have because to me, marriage is personal. Yes, there are certainly some benefits for myself (for instance, the military wouldn't share the cost of moving my wife and I'd have to do that on my own... which would make it much less worthwhile to stay in), but I would've married her regardless. As Boutons noted upthread, more people nowadays are not marrying but still having kids, so maybe there doesn't need to be a government incentive to make babies. *shrug* I'm not educated enough to say for sure one way or the other.

[Trainwreck2100]

If marriage had no government benefits or tax breaks involved, how many people would get married?

Wouldn't the best compromise for gays and bible thumpers to just end government benefits and tax breaks and make marriage benefits an issue for the private sector?

but :cry mah health insurance and :cry mah "hospital visits" would have been the retort to that

[Blake]

You're called a cuck because you are one.

that's false and off topic. You call me a cuck because you're asshurt.

[Dirk Oneanddoneski]

http://www.dailystormer.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Le-Merchant-16.jpg

[Infinite_limit]

http://www.dailystormer.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Le-Merchant-16.jpg
Meanwhile their Jewish cousins in Israel.....

[Infinite_limit]

Would show he's doing well. Landed a BBC.
If you don't have a gay black penis in your mouth, you're a racist

[boutons_deux]

A Tennessee store put up a "no gays allowed" sign — and it's totally legal
http://www.vox.com/2015/7/1/8877903/tennessee-lgbtq-nondiscrimination-law

Southern RACIST Baptists! Confederates! Haters!

[TheSanityAnnex]

A Tennessee store put up a "no gays allowed" sign — and it's totally legal


http://www.vox.com/2015/7/1/8877903/tennessee-lgbtq-nondiscrimination-law

Southern RACIST Baptists! Confederates! Haters!




Their business, their rules. The market will dictate whether or not it was a wise business decision.

[boutons_deux]

Their business, their rules. The market will dictate whether or not it was a wise business decision.

next LGBT battle is to criminalize job and commerce discrimination.

[Blake]

Their business, their rules. The market will dictate whether or not it was a wise business decision.

Probably not for long. I imagine the Civil Rights Act will be redone in the near future.

[FromWayDowntown]

next LGBT battle is to criminalize job and commerce discrimination.

Why criminalize? Racial job and commerce discrimination isn't criminalized; it's regulated, but not as a criminal matter.

[TheSanityAnnex]

next LGBT battle is to criminalize job and commerce discrimination.

More than that actually.

http://www.thenation.com/blog/175015/whats-next-lgbt-movement#

I've got nothing against gays and the handful I know personally just keep to themselves and are not very outspoken on these issues. It seems like it is a small minority of the gay population that is the most vocal demanding everything. After reading this article it sounds like they don't want equal rights and are fighting for more rights.

[boutons_deux]

"they don't want equal rights and are fighting for more rights."

... these "extra" rights are?

[LnGrrrR]

If you don't have a gay black penis in your mouth, you're a racist

So if the black penis doesn't belong to a gay person, you're still racist?

[admiralsnackbar]

So if the black penis doesn't belong to a gay person, you're still racist? Judging by his posting history, I think the intended inference was that if the penis in your mouth is white, you're ok.

[Winehole23]

More than that actually.

http://www.thenation.com/blog/175015/whats-next-lgbt-movement#

I've got nothing against gays and the handful I know personally just keep to themselves and are not very outspoken on these issues. It seems like it is a small minority of the gay population that is the most vocal demanding everything. After reading this article it sounds like they don't want equal rights and are fighting for more rights.Sounds like your sore about gays standing up for their rights vocally the way you stand up for guns vocally. You seem to think gays should pipe down, while implicitly reserving the right to be as loud as you want about anything you want.

BTW, what extra rights are gays asking for in the article? I read it and have no idea what you're talking about.

[Winehole23]

Texas, speaking from both sides of its mouth in the wake of the ruling, defers here:

http://www.texastribune.org/2015/07/01/texas-concedes-legal-challenge-ban-gay-marriage/

[Winehole23]

and here:


As of Wednesday, public employers including Texas agencies, universities and schoolswill allow current and retired gay and lesbian employees to enroll their same-sex spouses in the same benefit programs and services available to opposite-sex couples.

The Teacher Retirement System of Texas, the University of Texas System, the Texas A&M University System and the Employees Retirement System — which oversees benefits for state employees and all other public universities and community colleges — changed their policies days after the U.S. Supreme Court on Friday ruled that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry (http://www.texastribune.org/2015/06/26/supreme-court-ruling-gay-marriage/) and that states must recognize same-sex marriages from other states.http://www.texastribune.org/2015/07/01/spouses-gay-public-employees-eligible-benefits/

[baseline bum]

http://ww4.hdnux.com/photos/33/33/43/7190735/3/960x540.jpg

[boutons_deux]

God apologizes? :lol

obese, ugly, hate-monger, FUD-meister, grifter, GFY

[Jacob1983]

Boutons, I kinda hope a Republican is elected in 2016 and I hope maybe one of the liberal judges on the Supreme Court croaks or is forced to retire due to health reasons and just for people like you, I hope this shit is reversed just to piss people like you off.

That would be hilarious. I would love it.

[boutons_deux]

Boutons, I kinda hope a Republican is elected in 2016 and I hope maybe one of the liberal judges on the Supreme Court croaks or is forced to retire due to health reasons and just for people like you, I hope this shit is reversed just to piss people like you off.

That would be hilarious. I would love it.

Racist, hateful, authoritarian, extremist assholes like you is what makes America The Beautiful

[ChumpDumper]

http://ww4.hdnux.com/photos/33/33/43/7190735/3/960x540.jpgGod's actions that day led directly to incest by one his made men after God killed his wife.

God didn't want any witnesses.

He should apologize to someone for that.

[boutons_deux]

Oregon baker ordered to pay $135,000 in damages to lesbian couple they refused

http://www.rawstory.com/2015/07/oregon-baker-ordered-to-pay-135000-in-damages-to-lesbian-couple-they-refused/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29

[boutons_deux]

‘For the glory of God': Entire staff in Tenn. county clerk’s office resigns over same-sex marriage

http://www.rawstory.com/2015/07/for-the-glory-of-god-entire-staff-in-tenn-county-clerks-office-resigns-over-same-sex-marriage/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29

God told them to hate LGBT. Nice goin', God, your the Man.

[Jacob1983]

Boutons, I'm crossing my fingers a Republican wins in 2016 just for you. You deserve it.

[boutons_deux]

Rick Santorum: Court ruling on marriage equality proves me right about ‘man on dog’

http://www.rawstory.com/2015/07/rick-santorum-court-ruling-on-marriage-equality-proves-me-right-about-man-on-dog/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story% 29

[Blake]

Boutons, I'm crossing my fingers a Republican wins in 2016 just for you. You deserve it.

Did they give you a raise at Target like they did at Walmart?

Srs, you deserve it

[Jacob1983]

Yes I did get a raise. I hope a Republican wins in 2016. Gonna love seeing the tears in the eyes of liberals and Democraps.

[Spurminator]

Yes I did get a raise. I hope a Republican wins in 2016. Gonna love seeing the tears in the eyes of liberals and Democraps.

Don't get your hopes up on that. Set your sights on Democrats realizing in about 2019 that President Hillary Clinton is a DINO Republican, and laugh then.

[Blake]

Yes I did get a raise. I hope a Republican wins in 2016. Gonna love seeing the tears in the eyes of liberals and Democraps.

It's interesting you'd vote for republicans when it's democrats that want to help raise minimum wage jobs like yours up to decent living standards.

I'm not pimping democrat, I'm just sayin.

[boutons_deux]

Jesus Said No Jews On The Supreme Court

http://img.wonkette.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/jesus-constitution.jpg


FACT:

The Supreme Court only has authority to issue decisions conservatives like.

Creating a brand-new-out-of-thin-air law that one can simply say the magic words (http://wonkette.com/553135/here-is-all-the-worst-supreme-court-suck-on-the-hobby-lobby-ruling-for-ladyparts-only) “sincerely held religious beliefs” to deny healthcare to employees, for example. That’s kosher.

Gutting the Voting Rights Act, (http://wonkette.com/520710/supreme-court-update-special-why-are-you-not-drunk-already-everything-is-awful-edition) because we’ve done quite enough already for Colored-Americans, is also dandy.

Permitting the nation’s obscenely rich dudes to purchase politicians (http://wonkette.com/545487/supreme-court-decides-citizens-united-part-two-the-dickening) and call it “free speech” — why, that’s simply what our founders intended.

ANOTHER FACT:

Other Supreme Court decisions do not count because they are tyrannical, illegal, unconstitutional, unbiblical, unfair, and ewwwwwwwww. Feel free to ignore those and refer instead to the higher authority of your choosing, so long as it is American Jesus.

FACT THE THIRD:

Certain justices on the Supreme Court are not permitted (http://wonkette.com/584067/wingnuts-last-ditch-effort-to-make-justices-stay-home-on-gay-marriage-day-shockingly-unsuccessful) to rule on issues of marriage equality, because of how they are biased toward equality, and all their best friends (http://wonkette.com/585895/justice-ruth-bader-ginsburg-smears-constitution-all-over-everyone-at-gay-wedding) are gay. And how they (LESBIAN) have been rumored (LESBIAN) to play softball (LESBIAN), (http://wonkette.com/572987/wingers-demand-ginsburg-kagan-recuse-selves-from-gay-marriage-case-go-play-softball) if you catch our (LESBIAN) drift. This is different from a justice who has a demonstrated bias against equality — by, for example, bemoaning the decriminalization of buttsex — because that’s just common sense.

NEW FACT: No Jews. (http://mediamatters.org/blog/2015/09/11/ia-radio-host-jan-mickelson-justices-kagan-gins/205495)


Judge Roberts should have required two of the members of the Supreme Court to recuse themselves, Kagan and Ginsburg, because both of them had literally presided over same-gender weddings previous to the ruling. […]

In this case, they had a religious motivation for moving forward and conducting same-gender marriage: they are both liberal Jews. No, I’m not saying anything bad, this is a correct assessment of their world view.


Er … uh … um … no. No? Yeah, let’s go with no. Also nope, nuh-uh, and FUCK THAT NOISE with a serrated hunting knife. Whose inflamed bowels sharted this crazy talk? It is Jan Mickelson, another of those right-wing radio hosts in Iowa. (FACT FOR SOME STRANGE REASON: Almost all the right-wing radio hosts live in Iowa. Guess they really enjoy deep-throating fried food sticks.)

Jewishes, as you know, tend to be (http://wonkette.com/554028/i-am-mad-about-a-thing-sweet-sea-parting-moses-dont-tell-jews-how-to-jew) into justice and equality and fightin’ for the little guy (or gal, we are also into feminism) because of our own personal experiences of getting exiled from all the countries and genocided and called BAD Jews for being Jewish and having Traditional Jewish Values, like how war is bad and don’t be A Asshole to other people, only God gets to be A Asshole, it says so in the book. The book.

So, if we make our eyes real blurry, like we’re trying to find the dolphin in one of those magic weird paintings, maybe we can see how Jewish justices might be inclined to not be A Asshole to homosexbian couples, even though there’s a line somewhere about NO BUTTSEXING. But the Court is fudge-packed with Catholics, and aren’t they supposed to believe in not being A Asshole too?

Gosh, this is confusing, and we cannot find the damned dolphin. Show us the dolphin, Jan Mickelson:

They should not have been in a position to decide. They should have recused themselves. Roberts should have required it. And if they were both gone, that ruling would not have advanced the hoax of same-gender marriage because they wouldn’t have had the votes.


OK, now we get it. The Supreme Court should not have ruled on marriage equality, but at least if Chief Justice John Roberts had gotten rid of the Jews, the court’s Christians could have ruled against this equality “hoax.” In an unbiased way.

FINAL FACT IN CONCLUSION:

This is bullshit, obviously. And where are the conservatives so worried about protecting everyone’s religious freedom? Oh, they’re whining about the “criminalization of Christianity” (http://wonkette.com/593711/mike-huckabee-begs-judge-to-send-him-to-jail-make-him-sexy-christian-martyr-too) because the only kind of “religious liberty” that matters is the Jesus kind. Jews need not apply.

http://wonkette.com/593869/jesus-said-no-jews-on-the-supreme-court

[Winehole23]

Crosshairs on Obergefell.

Bonus points for posters who can explain how gay marriage threatens freedom of belief.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EjkcwlAWoAAwJnH?format=png&name=small

[SpursforSix]

Crosshairs on Obergefell.

Bonus points for posters who can explain how gay marriage threatens freedom of belief.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EjkcwlAWoAAwJnH?format=png&name=small

Something involving Jews and Hollywood.

[Trainwreck2100]

http://ww4.hdnux.com/photos/33/33/43/7190735/3/960x540.jpg

Hagee was right though the Coronavirus is our punishment for gay marriage


Is what they'll be saying right around january, but some of them are saying it now

[SnakeBoy]

1507129639680057344

[ElNono]

1507129639680057344

What's that color? "Conservatives will meltdown"?

[ElNono]

1507129639680057344

What's that color? "Conservatives will meltdown"?

[Ef-man]

1507129639680057344

Ask Alan from AZ about the sanctity of marriage being between a woman, hundreds of strangers, and a man in the cuckshed.

He will tell you all about it.

[Winehole23]

Senate might be too busy to get around to voting on it, but the support from Republicans is notable.

1549533344446160897

[DMC]

Cool, now Gays can legally be just as miserable as straights.

[Winehole23]

Cool, now Gays can legally be just as miserable as straights.not if SCOTUS has anything more to say about it.

[Winehole23]

not surprising, but welcome

1549492555741544459