Page 33 of 69 FirstFirst ... 23313233343543 ... LastLast
Results 321 to 330 of 690

Thread: Ban on gay marriage in CA still unclear

  1. #321
    Sage

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

    Re: Ban on gay marriage in CA still unclear

    Quote Originally Posted by conquer View Post
    No, I'm not happy about it, and if you read my message, I am requesting to put it back in it.
    On what basis?

  2. #322
    Dream Walker
    Monk-Eye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Last Seen
    07-17-15 @ 12:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    2,265
    Blog Entries
    10

    Institution Of Liars By Trade

    "Institution Of Liars By Trade"
    Quote Originally Posted by Macintosh View Post
    I cited four Supreme Court cases which directly contradict your idiotic statement that Equal Protection is afforded to citizens only.
    That is blatantly false and absolutely stupid.
    Anyone understands that equal protection is extended to non-citizens (persons) within jurisdiction.
    Do you see that your dishonesty and or mental limitations mean that you cannot be taken seriously?
    Quote Originally Posted by Macintosh View Post
    I also cited a U.N. Resolution delineating those natural rights you say do not exist, drafted and presented to the U.N. by an AMERICAN AMBASSADOR!
    If you are applying the term Natural Rights with a reference to inalienable rights, an appeal to authority will not justify inalienable rights.

    It is pathetic that you promote yourself as a legal expert and lack any background, evident by an apparant void of discerning ability, to understand the myriad of WELL KNOWN AND OBVIOUS CONSIDERATIONS which distinguish between positive law and natural law.
    Quote Originally Posted by Macintosh View Post
    I cited the Missouri School of Law, and an article written by attorney Richard New. Importantly, I quoted the author of the Fourteenth Amendment. All of my sources refuted your sophomoric assertions, and you aren't man enough to admit it. I asked you for one source backing up your assertions and you've failed to present one.
    You present general arguments of conventional opinion.
    And, as with your initial retort, you blatantly lie that contrary arguments simply do not exist.
    You do not accept the precepts of positive law and formation of the collective institution; and, you hide when challenged to defend inalienable rights; you debate cowardly, without providing a defense of obvious requirements, prefering to adhere to nebulous positions.
    To you, opinion trumps reason.

    Quote Originally Posted by Macintosh View Post
    You're a troll. You attempt to stupefy people with complex legal terms and philosophy, contorting actual law to fit your own conclusions. You just didn't expect someone with bona fide legal experience to call bull ****. Once someone did, you resorted to childish attacks. Why don't you get off the computer and go get a real education instead of sifting through Wikipedia blatantly misinterpreting everything you read, molding it into what you want it to mean. People like you disgust me.
    I gave you fair warning not to engage in ad hominem with me; the portfolio of childish attacks is your game but, I am not a pacifist.
    Your drivel stems from a sad self righteous dimentia, which makes you believe you are beyond question; it leads you to comically assert that bafoonery is exceptional brilliance.
    Last edited by Monk-Eye; 11-07-08 at 01:10 PM.

  3. #323
    Advisor Macintosh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Michigan
    Last Seen
    11-18-08 @ 06:01 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    325

    Re: Institution Of Liars By Trade

    Quote Originally Posted by Monk-Eye View Post
    "Institution Of Liars By Trade"
    That is blatantly false and absolutely stupid.
    Anyone understands that equal protection is extended to non-citizens (persons) within jurisdiction.
    Do you see that your dishonesty and or mental limitations mean that you cannot be taken seriously?
    If you are applying the term Natural Rights with a reference to inalienable rights, an appeal to authority will not justify inalienable rights.
    Really? So, you didn't write a nice, long, lame bit about how I could legally murder an illegal immigrant because they are not, in your view, granted Equal Protection? You didn't say to my question, "So, yes, be very ware"? Would you like me to post the link to the post in which you said this, or, will you admit that you're now trying to save face?

    It is pathetic that you promote yourself as a legal expert and lack any background, evident by an apparant void of discerning ability, to understand the myriad of WELL KNOWN AND OBVIOUS CONSIDERATIONS which distinguish between positive law and natural law.
    It's "apparent," not "apparant". And I have - several times now - referenced all of my assertions; you have not. In fact, I believe your last post in the abortion forum was something along the lines of your reasoning has not yet found its way into "mainstream consideration..." Talk about a pathetic excuse for not being able to backup anything you say...

    You present general arguments of conventional opinion.
    And, as with your initial retort, you blatantly lie that contrary arguments simply do not exist.
    I never said contrary arguments do not exist. They're just, well, the minority and have no constitutional foundation whatsoever. That is apparent to anyone with even a slight understanding of Constitutional Law, of which you have none.

    You do not accept the precepts of positive law and formation of the collective institution; and, you hide when challenged to defend inalienable rights; you debate in cowardly in nebulous terms.
    Who the hell was arguing inalienable rights? Equal Protection is what I was arguing, and you damn well know it. You just can't refute my arguments because, well, your logic has not found its way into "mainstream consideration."

    I gave you fair warning not to engage in ad hominem with me; the portfolio of childish attacks is your game but, I am not a pacifist.
    Your drivel stems from a sad self righteous dimentia, which makes you believe you are beyond question; it leads you to comically assert that bafoonery is exceptional brilliance.
    It's "buffoonery," not "bafoonery." It's "dementia," not "dimentia." So, about your brilliance...
    Last edited by Macintosh; 11-07-08 at 01:16 PM.
    "Anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices." - Voltaire

  4. #324
    Student
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Seen
    08-26-17 @ 12:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    192

    Re: Ban on gay marriage in CA still unclear

    I have to thank our African American Christian brothers and sisters. I see the same sex marriage discrimination argument as a twisted rationalization without correlation thus invalid. And the continuous homophobe and bigot name calling as a shame ploy to make the lower end of the intelligence bell curve feel guilty.

    Black voters helped Prop. 8 passage - Sacramento Politics - California Politics | Sacramento Bee

    Snippets from above news link:

    Weston, 44, is one of an overwhelming number 70 percent of black voters in California who voted for Proposition 8 and helped secure its passage, according to exit polling conducted by Edison Media Research and Mitofsky International. African Americans, energized by Barack Obama's presidential bid, boosted their numbers at the polls this year to 10 percent of the state's electorate, up from 6 percent in 2004. "The Obama people were thrilled to turn out high percentages of African Americans, but (Proposition 8) literally wouldn't have passed without those voters," said Gary Dietrich, president of Citizen Voice, a nonpartisan voter awareness organization.

    Opponents of Proposition 8 appealed to voters to reject the measure as discriminatory and unconstitutional. But messages that opponents hoped would strike a chord with minority voters and remind them that interracial marriage once was banned collided with traditional religious views.

    "You listen to the African American pastors, they do not buy that argument," Dietrich said. "They do not believe at all that there is a correlation between civil rights vis--vis blacks and rights for gays."

    Proposition 8, she said, was something talked about "in all the churches."...Mormons, Catholics, Evangelicals, all of them," she said. "We all came together, and we had one common belief in this."
    Last edited by 70s_guy; 11-07-08 at 01:30 PM.

  5. #325
    Student veganshawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    U$A
    Last Seen
    11-11-08 @ 07:36 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    253

    Re: Ban on gay marriage in CA still unclear

    I am going to personally commit myself to making sure that any church that opposes gay marriage has its tax free status revoked. I also am going to organize protests against any hate filled church.

    Just because a lot of blacks voted on the side of ignorance on the issue of gay rights doesn't in any way justify it, the 80% who voted that way are wrong and should be ashamed of themselves, being used as tools by the same white devils who enslaved them and groups like the Mormons who until the 70's still preached they where inferior.

    Same goes to the Hispanics and Latino's who have longed been been under the thumb of the Catholic church, the church whose very same people murdered their ancestors in attempted genocide, they should be ashamed of themselves, why should we care about immigrant rights if they turn around and use their vote to oppress another group?

    Prop H8te is wrong, anyone who supports it is wrong and the fight for gay rights is far from over!
    You're not to be so blind with patriotism that you can't face reality. Wrong is wrong, no matter who does it or says it. -Malcolm X

  6. #326
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Ban on gay marriage in CA still unclear

    Quote Originally Posted by veganshawn View Post
    I am going to personally commit myself to making sure that any church that opposes gay marriage has its tax free status revoked.
    Based on... what?

  7. #327
    Sage

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

    Re: Ban on gay marriage in CA still unclear

    Quote Originally Posted by veganshawn View Post
    I am going to personally commit myself to making sure that any church that opposes gay marriage has its tax free status revoked.
    That goes way over the line for me.

  8. #328
    Student veganshawn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    U$A
    Last Seen
    11-11-08 @ 07:36 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    253

    Re: Ban on gay marriage in CA still unclear

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    Based on... what?
    Charities, Churches and Politics
    You're not to be so blind with patriotism that you can't face reality. Wrong is wrong, no matter who does it or says it. -Malcolm X

  9. #329
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Last Seen
    12-22-08 @ 01:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    947

    Re: Ban on gay marriage in CA still unclear

    This election was an auction of greed and the singular question of "what's in it for me?" Biden even gave us the example of give nothing to charity.

    Why would I support gay rights? I'm not gay. There's nothing supporting equality for gays to me.

    It is very appropriate that the voting blocks that caused Obama's primary and then general election win voted down equality for gays.

    That's a "ha ha."

  10. #330
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Ban on gay marriage in CA still unclear

    Quote Originally Posted by veganshawn View Post
    Merely holding the position that gays should not marry doesnt qualify as politcal campaigning.

Page 33 of 69 FirstFirst ... 23313233343543 ... 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
  •