Reply With Quote
Such things bring me no satisfaction, I'm an not such a shallow individual that something such as that would be satisfying
The theory of relativity is notated as e=mc squared where squared is the exponent 2 . What do I win Blake?
Such things bring me no satisfaction, I'm an not such a shallow individual that something such as that would be satisfying
I don't see anyone arguing against you on that. But if you're satisfied you won, bravo.
And if satisfaction isn't enough, buy yourself a trophy to remember your victory here over your strawman opponent.
Plz read above I don't feel like paying it again
Well seeing as how you've now got the most posts in this thread, I don't buy that you're satisfied with simply knowing the truth.
I think it's pretty clear you're trying to win to get yourself the satisfaction of being right. You even said as much.
Neh I don't feel like it. I'm satisfied where I'm at in this discussion.
Let's analyze this Blake surely you have some data where post count=some intangible "whatever" you've concluded about me I for one don't see the correlation. Blake I never talked about being right I tales about posting truths
I think it's pretty rational to conclude you're not satisfied with just being right based on your high count in this thread. I might be wrong but I doubt it.
Well I'm telling you the conclusion you came up with its incorrect. You're conclusion is about me, so do you have any thing to support your argument?
Nope. I'm satisfied enough with my opinion.
Can't believe people are still talking about this .
To paraphrase Oliver Wendell Holmes...
She has a cons utional right to her political and religious beliefs.
She doesn't have a cons utional right to be county clerk.
nor to claim consequence-free exceptions to law, based on her religious beliefs.
Should have led worn "in my opinion" then would have saved everyone time
That's what "I think" means
This woman still on the front page of HuffPo. Journalists killed on live TV -- long forgotten.
I said "led with" I don't see "I think" till today and you've been post count smack since yesterday
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/04/us...iage.html?_r=2
Correction: September 3, 2015
Because of an editing error, an earlier version of this article misstated Kim Davis’s political affiliation. She is a Democrat, not a Republican.
Lol, "editing error"
Oh,oh...
Muslim Flight Attendant Refuses to Serve Alcohol- Do Republicans support her?
A Muslim flight attendant says she was suspended by ExpressJet for refusing to serve alcohol in accordance with her Islamic faith.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/05/travel...eat/index.htmlShe wants to do her job without serving alcohol in accordance with her Islamic faith -- just as she was doing before her suspension, her lawyer said.
"What this case comes down to is no one should have to choose between their career and religion and it's in bent upon employers to provide a safe environment where employees can feel they can practice their religion freely,"
The reich wing is going into meltdown...
Do Republicans support her?
of course not. The Repug dog is wagged by the Christian theocracy Taliban tail. The Christian-hated Muslims, above all, aren't included.
Only Christians can invoke their faith for whatever the situation.
otoh, how was she in a job that everybody knows included handling demon Al Cohol?
========
The laws concerning pharmacy employees refusing to serve customers for moral, religious reasons varies from state to state. The list of states that allow refusals are of course deeply red"Legislative and Administrative Responses to Refusals in the Pharmacy
Fewer than half of the states in the country explicitly address the issue of refusals to provide medication to patients in the pharmacy.
Prohibiting or Limiting Refusals
- Existing State Laws and Policies:
- Eight states—CA, IL, ME, MA, NV, NJ, WA, WI—explicitly require pharmacists or pharmacies to provide medication to patients.
- In seven states—AL, DE, NY, NC, OR, PA, TX—pharmacy boards have issued policy statements that allow refusals but prohibit pharmacists from obstructing patient access to medication.
Permitting Refusals
- Existing State Laws and Policies: Six states—AZ, AR, GA, ID, MS, and SD—have laws or regulations that specifically allow pharmacies or pharmacists to refuse for religious or moral reasons without critical protections for patients, such as requirements to refer or transfer prescriptions."
http://www.nwlc.org/resource/pharmacy-refusals-101
Crickets
Boo actually thinks most republicans support that dumb in Kentucky.
And yeah, the flight attendant should be fired too.
What are we supposed to say, Darrin?
Does she vote Dem or Repug?
Obviously her screwed up concept about God vs Caesar is selectively unBiblical to support her hate, and trumps everything, including whatever party she claims to support.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
