Page 73 of 97 FirstFirst ... 2363717273747583 ... LastLast
Results 721 to 730 of 962

Thread: Rahm: “Chick-fil-A Values Are Not Chicago Values” [W:698]

  1. #721
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,759

    Re: Rahm: “Chick-fil-A Values Are Not Chicago Values” [W:698]

    Quote Originally Posted by megaprogman View Post
    What was the case where the SCOTUS made this ruling?
    Yeah, I'd like to see that case, too.
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

  2. #722
    Sometimes wrong

    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    34,663

    Re: Rahm: “Chick-fil-A Values Are Not Chicago Values” [W:698]

    Quote Originally Posted by HoongLoong View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by HoongLoong View Post
    Critical thought's observation that: "Yeah, your posts don't show much interest in basic logic. " is one of the typical all-embracing lefty negations of Reality that instead of saying "I disagree with you, because of thisa and thata" these bozos accuse one of lack of "logic", or some other deficiency without being able to be specific about it.


    The LIEberrhoidal posts attacking me with retorts like: "I'm not sure how I'm suppose to respond to something that makes absolutely no sense." And, "I just want to see what type of BS you would post so I could prove it wrong then laugh" ......are meaningless petards when they don't have a valid response, as in the first example. And the same with the second example feigning mental ineptitude as in not understanding the obvious, then using one's mental deficiency as an excuse to call the obvious "BS". Pathetic.

    FYI, when the Supreme Court, or any court considers a concept UNCONSTITUTIONAL ,as with the Same Sex Marriage, it simply means that the concept involved does not meet the criteria to be valid for acceptance in the usage it is petitioned for. When something is not valid for accepting it for the usage it was petitioned for it is rejected as a BOGUS proposition.

    If that is something you want to parse, weasel, and rationalize your way out of because it does not suit your bogus line of thinking then go ahead. You might consider using a chair as an apple and not consider that a BOGUS endeavor......I say, go ahead, flaunt your BOGUS activities, make yourself known for what you are.

    And, BTW, it is presumptuous to the point of being ridiculous to assume that every time a person leaves the Forum he is "skedaddling" because the person fears the nonsense he is inundated with.

    Gottago.

    CRITICALTHOUGHT'S RESPONSE:
    Ooooookay. I'm not sure how to respond to your posts because most of the things you say make little if any sense. They just tend to be ramblings where you try to ridicule people who hold opposing views to your own and that just makes you look silly and childish. You don't actually address the arguments. I'll make it simple for you.

    At what point has the current sitting Supreme Court found same sex marriage to be unconstitutional?

    MY RESPONSE TO CRITICALTHOUGHT:
    With reference to your first paragraph:You're modus operandi has been exposed in great detail in my original abovementioned post to you. REREAD IT.

    With reference to your second paragraph: You are desperately trying to deflect the fact that: SCOTUS ruled that Same Sex Marriage is UNCONSTITUTIONAL by asking a ridiculous question such as at what point did they make their decision.

    The important and relevant fact is that SCOTUS ruled that Same Sex Marriage is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. PERIOD !!! As to "at what point has the current sitting Supreme Court found the same sex marriage unconstitutional ?" Answer: When Scalia was tying his shoelaces, Ginsberg was considering a replacement for her douche bag, Kennedy was 1/2 way thru eating his ham sandwich.....you want me to go on ?
    Please cite the case where the SCOTUS said that SSM, when included in state law, is unconstitutional. You have ranted about others "making stuff up" and using BS to back THEIR arguments, but this assertion OF YOURS may take the cake. I await your reply (link prefered). ;-)
    “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself.
    Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman

  3. #723
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Last Seen
    09-24-17 @ 04:38 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    29,261

    Re: Rahm: “Chick-fil-A Values Are Not Chicago Values” [W:698]

    Quote Originally Posted by HoongLoong View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by HoongLoong View Post
    Critical thought's observation that: "Yeah, your posts don't show much interest in basic logic. " is one of the typical all-embracing lefty negations of Reality that instead of saying "I disagree with you, because of thisa and thata" these bozos accuse one of lack of "logic", or some other deficiency without being able to be specific about it.


    The LIEberrhoidal posts attacking me with retorts like: "I'm not sure how I'm suppose to respond to something that makes absolutely no sense." And, "I just want to see what type of BS you would post so I could prove it wrong then laugh" ......are meaningless petards when they don't have a valid response, as in the first example. And the same with the second example feigning mental ineptitude as in not understanding the obvious, then using one's mental deficiency as an excuse to call the obvious "BS". Pathetic.

    FYI, when the Supreme Court, or any court considers a concept UNCONSTITUTIONAL ,as with the Same Sex Marriage, it simply means that the concept involved does not meet the criteria to be valid for acceptance in the usage it is petitioned for. When something is not valid for accepting it for the usage it was petitioned for it is rejected as a BOGUS proposition.

    If that is something you want to parse, weasel, and rationalize your way out of because it does not suit your bogus line of thinking then go ahead. You might consider using a chair as an apple and not consider that a BOGUS endeavor......I say, go ahead, flaunt your BOGUS activities, make yourself known for what you are.

    And, BTW, it is presumptuous to the point of being ridiculous to assume that every time a person leaves the Forum he is "skedaddling" because the person fears the nonsense he is inundated with.

    Gottago.

    CRITICALTHOUGHT'S RESPONSE:
    Ooooookay. I'm not sure how to respond to your posts because most of the things you say make little if any sense. They just tend to be ramblings where you try to ridicule people who hold opposing views to your own and that just makes you look silly and childish. You don't actually address the arguments. I'll make it simple for you.

    At what point has the current sitting Supreme Court found same sex marriage to be unconstitutional?

    MY RESPONSE TO CRITICALTHOUGHT:
    With reference to your first paragraph:You're modus operandi has been exposed in great detail in my original abovementioned post to you. REREAD IT.

    With reference to your second paragraph: You are desperately trying to deflect the fact that: SCOTUS ruled that Same Sex Marriage is UNCONSTITUTIONAL by asking a ridiculous question such as at what point did they make their decision.

    The important and relevant fact is that SCOTUS ruled that Same Sex Marriage is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. PERIOD !!! As to "at what point has the current sitting Supreme Court found the same sex marriage unconstitutional ?" Answer: When Scalia was tying his shoelaces, Ginsberg was considering a replacement for her douche bag, Kennedy was 1/2 way thru eating his ham sandwich.....you want me to go on ?
    WOW that is f'ing hilarious!

  4. #724
    Doesn't go below juicy
    tacomancer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Cleveland
    Last Seen
    05-20-16 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    31,781

    Re: Rahm: “Chick-fil-A Values Are Not Chicago Values” [W:698]

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    Yeah, I'd like to see that case, too.
    One thing we know is that this ruling has to have been made within the last two years, given that the judge in california to be constitutional due to the 14th (I think, can't quite remember) amendment and in no way would have if there was SC precedent.

  5. #725
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Last Seen
    07-19-14 @ 03:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,109

    Re: Rahm: “Chick-fil-A Values Are Not Chicago Values” [W:698]

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    Please cite the case where the SCOTUS said that SSM, when included in state law, is unconstitutional. You have ranted about others "making stuff up" and using BS to back THEIR arguments, but this assertion OF YOURS may take the cake. I await your reply (link prefered). ;-)
    I'm not going to do your homework fer y'all.

    The important and relevant fact is that SCOTUS made the ruling that Same Sex Marriage is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

    The other BS is just a desperate effort to obfuscate and deflect the above ruling.

    I don't play silly games. You're welcome to do that without me.
    Last edited by HoongLoong; 07-28-12 at 08:12 PM.

  6. #726
    Doesn't go below juicy
    tacomancer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Cleveland
    Last Seen
    05-20-16 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    31,781

    Re: Rahm: “Chick-fil-A Values Are Not Chicago Values” [W:698]

    Quote Originally Posted by HoongLoong View Post
    I'm not going to do your homework fer ya.

    The important and relevant fact is that SCOTUS made the ruling that Same Sex Marriage is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

    The other BS is just a desperate effort to obfuscate and deflect the above ruling.

    I don't play silly games.
    debate 101, you need to be able to back up your assertions.

  7. #727
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,822

    Re: Rahm: “Chick-fil-A Values Are Not Chicago Values” [W:698]

    Quote Originally Posted by HoongLoong View Post
    fact is that SCOTUS ruled that Same Sex Marriage is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. PERIOD !!!


    wow that is one of the biggest lies I have seen posted around here and I have seen many.

    Cant wait for you to talk your way out of this lie.
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  8. #728
    Doesn't go below juicy
    tacomancer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Cleveland
    Last Seen
    05-20-16 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    31,781

    Re: Rahm: “Chick-fil-A Values Are Not Chicago Values” [W:698]

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective-J View Post


    wow that is one of the biggest lies I have seen posted around here and I have seen many.

    Cant wait for you to talk your way out of this lie.
    He will try to put people on the defensive by accusing people who disagree with him as being dishonest and evil.

    Basically, he is debating out of this retarded book.

    http://www.amazon.com/Arguing-Idiots.../dp/1416595015
    Last edited by tacomancer; 07-28-12 at 08:29 PM.

  9. #729
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,822

    Re: Rahm: “Chick-fil-A Values Are Not Chicago Values” [W:698]

    Quote Originally Posted by megaprogman View Post
    He will try to put people on the defensive by accusing people who disagree with him as being dishonest and evil. Its a pretty see through tactic.
    yeah I have seen it around here before, I post links and sources and the response I get back is "nu-huh"

    wonder if he realizes that if his lie was true there would be no SSM in the USA but, there is. WHOOOOOOPS lol
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  10. #730
    Global Moderator
    I'm a Jedi Master, Yo

    CaptainCourtesy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    152,759

    Re: Rahm: “Chick-fil-A Values Are Not Chicago Values” [W:698]

    Quote Originally Posted by HoongLoong View Post
    I'm not going to do your homework fer y'all.

    The important and relevant fact is that SCOTUS made the ruling that Same Sex Marriage is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

    The other BS is just a desperate effort to obfuscate and deflect the above ruling.

    I don't play silly games. You're welcome to do that without me.
    You made the claim, you provide the evidence. Debate 101 as has been said. You don't, your point is irrelevant... and since that is the basis of your argument, your entire position is therefore irrelevant.

    So, with that in mind, do you have anything valid to add?
    "Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run

    ====||:-D

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    This is what I hate about politics the most, it turns people in snobbish egotistical self righteous dicks who allow their political beliefs, partisan attitudes, and 'us vs. them' mentality, to force them to deny reality.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    You can't paint everone with the same brush.......It does not work tht way.


    Quote Originally Posted by Wessexman View Post
    See with you around Captain we don't even have to make arguments, as you already know everything .
    Quote Originally Posted by CriticalThought View Post
    Had you been born elsewhere or at a different time you may very well have chosen a different belief system.
    Quote Originally Posted by ernst barkmann View Post
    It a person has faith they dont need to convince another of it, and when a non believer is not interested in listening to the word of the lord, " you shake the dust from your sandels and move on"

Page 73 of 97 FirstFirst ... 2363717273747583 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •