Should Chris Culliver apologize?

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Schumpeters-Ghost. Show Schumpeters-Ghost's posts

    Re: Should Chris Culliver apologize?

    In response to RockScully's comment:

    No.  It means both.   It means the right to practice any relgion you wish without fear of persectuion, but also not to allow any one religion to supersede law.

     Hence, Jefferson's own words to keep them separate. It's reciprocal. That's why it's so general, v.s. it specifcially saying what you are implying.

    You're wrong.

    The whole concept of why this country was founded was because Puritans were being discriminated against by other Christian sects in England. Get it? This means they knew anyone could make an argument that any relgious group in power within goverment, could shape law to discriminate, JUST like in England. They didn't want to happen here.

     




    Hey brainwashed leftwinger...  point to the part of the constitution that talks about separation of church and state.

    You won't find it. 

    After that - look at the 10th ammendment and see if you can understand what "reserved to the states and the people" means.

    You won't understand that either.

    Like most leftists - you are a totalitarian - anxious for decrees from the your leftist leaders rather than respectful of the rule of law. 

    People like you - nutcases who are willing to use federal power to force cultural revolution (Hello Mao! How many million will you murder?) - you are the peoel the founders feared the most. 

     

     

     

     

     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Schumpeters-Ghost. Show Schumpeters-Ghost's posts

    Re: Should Chris Culliver apologize?

    In response to RockScully's comment:

    He doesn't get that heterosexuals, while feeling it's not natural to them, also can understand why those who aren't heterosexual feel natural being homosexual.

    It is what it is.

    There's a reason why it exists.

    Maybe their god up there in the sky did it to mess with them. lol

     




    Maybe science should seek a cure? 

     

     

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. This post has been removed.

     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from pcmIV. Show pcmIV's posts

    Re: Should Chris Culliver apologize?

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

     

    Just STOP with the spin BS. If gays didn't care if people accepted them morally they wouldn't be lobbying for any derogatory mention of them as being a hate crime, LMAO.

    It's OBVIOUS they want to be accepted as "normal" and moral equals.

    I don't care. Go be gay. Dance in the streets. I don't hate them. I don't dislike them. I wish them the best. But don't tell me they don't have an agenda to try and force others to say they are morally viable.

     



    I am not spinning anything.  Of course gays want to be accepted as "normal" and moral equals.  Who the        f uck wouldn't?  What you continue to fail to understand is that they are making a legal argument to be treated equally under the LAW.  Would they like if that meant over the long term it resulted in more people treating them as moral equals?  Of course, but that isn't grounds for denying the legitimate legal argument.  If you equate the legal institution of marriage as morally viable then that is your f'ing problem.  Do you think people who were morally opposed to interracial marriage changed their minds when it was legalized?  Of course not.  By your logic we shouldn't have abolished slavery since black people clearly wanted to be treated as moral equals even though the argument was about equality under the law.  You are the king of spin and non-sequiturs.

     

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Schumpeters-Ghost. Show Schumpeters-Ghost's posts

    Re: Should Chris Culliver apologize?

    In response to RockScully's comment:

    Dummy, it's not literally in the Consitution word for word, but Thomas Jefferson, you know, one of the dudes who WROTE the Constitution uses those words to EXPLAIN the 1st amendment and what it means.




    I think you are an inch deep on this subject and should probably tread lightly before it gets worse for you.

    For example - James Madison wrote the constitution.  You thought Jefferson did?  Wow.  Are you a high school student.

    Secondly - go back and see which of teh original 13 states had OFFICIAL RELIGIONS after the adoption of teh constitution.  It is going to be very troubling for you to find out that some state govenments had OFFICIAL RELIGIONS, the federal constitution notwithstanding.

    Yes - this will be shocking to you - but you are buried under leftist ignorance - and shock treatment is what you need.

    A coupe other tips for you - in internet debate - the first person to make a Hitler reference is admitting he has lost the argument.  That is you and you've done it multiple times - but it reveals only more ignorance on your part. 

    Also - the first peson to start correcting grammar is also admitting they have lost the argument - - again that is you.

    Look I know your angry.  You are bitter and angry.  You are determined to defend the honor of your lesbian sister.  Unfortunately, you are not defending her honor - you are making a fool of yourself.

    Calling other people dummy while proudly stating Jefferson wrote the constitution!

    I am laughing at you.  Really laughing loud and hard.

     
  21. This post has been removed.

     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from pcmIV. Show pcmIV's posts

    Re: Should Chris Culliver apologize?

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:

    But they ARE treated equally under the law. A gay man has exactly the same rights as a heterosexual man. The fact they want to shack up with another man instead of a woman is unfortunate for them, but does not constitute them being treated any differently under the law.



    Prior to 1967 using this line of argument one could argue that everyone had the same right to marry someone of their race and the fact that some people wanted to marry someone from another race is unfortunate for them, but does not constitute being treated any differently under the law.  Too bad this argument got shot down by the Supreme Court in Loving v. Virginia and interracial marriage was legalized.  You lose.

     

     
Sections
Shortcuts